Tidewater Renewables Ltd.
Tidewater Renewables Ltd. (LCFS.TO) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (LCFS.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Renewable Utilities Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCFS.TO | CA$6.99 | +5.59% | 254.5M | 14.56 | CA$0.48 | N/A |
| AQN-PA.TO | CA$25.29 | +1.16% | 19.4B | N/A | N/A | +6.50% |
| BEP-PM.TO | CA$25.33 | +0.00% | 16.6B | -38.32 | -CA$0.66 | +5.97% |
| BEP-PK.TO | CA$25.00 | +0.00% | 16.2B | -37.82 | -CA$0.66 | N/A |
| BEP-UN.TO | CA$44.11 | +1.40% | 12.5B | -129.74 | -CA$0.34 | +4.76% |
| BEPC.TO | CA$54.68 | +0.16% | 8B | -3.05 | -CA$17.92 | +3.80% |
| AQN.TO | CA$8.57 | -0.35% | 6.6B | 23.16 | CA$0.37 | +4.25% |
| NPI.TO | CA$23.26 | -0.04% | 6.1B | -35.78 | -CA$0.65 | +4.65% |
| BLX.TO | CA$36.70 | +0.22% | 3.8B | 611.67 | CA$0.06 | +1.80% |
| RNW.TO | CA$12.48 | +1.13% | 3.3B | 41.60 | CA$0.30 | +7.53% |
Stock Comparison
LCFS.TO vs AQN-PA.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, AQN-PA.TO has a market cap of 19.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while AQN-PA.TO trades at CA$25.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas AQN-PA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AQN-PA.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to AQN-PA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check AQN-PA.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs BEP-PM.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, BEP-PM.TO has a market cap of 16.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while BEP-PM.TO trades at CA$25.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas BEP-PM.TO's P/E ratio is -38.32. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BEP-PM.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to BEP-PM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check BEP-PM.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs BEP-PK.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, BEP-PK.TO has a market cap of 16.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while BEP-PK.TO trades at CA$25.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas BEP-PK.TO's P/E ratio is -37.82. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BEP-PK.TO's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to BEP-PK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check BEP-PK.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs BEP-UN.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, BEP-UN.TO has a market cap of 12.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while BEP-UN.TO trades at CA$44.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas BEP-UN.TO's P/E ratio is -129.74. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BEP-UN.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to BEP-UN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check BEP-UN.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs BEPC.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, BEPC.TO has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while BEPC.TO trades at CA$54.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas BEPC.TO's P/E ratio is -3.05. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BEPC.TO's ROE of -13.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to BEPC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check BEPC.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs AQN.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, AQN.TO has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while AQN.TO trades at CA$8.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas AQN.TO's P/E ratio is 23.16. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AQN.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to AQN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check AQN.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs NPI.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, NPI.TO has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while NPI.TO trades at CA$23.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas NPI.TO's P/E ratio is -35.78. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NPI.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to NPI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check NPI.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs BLX.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, BLX.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while BLX.TO trades at CA$36.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas BLX.TO's P/E ratio is 611.67. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BLX.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to BLX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check BLX.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs RNW.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, RNW.TO has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while RNW.TO trades at CA$12.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas RNW.TO's P/E ratio is 41.60. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RNW.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to RNW.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check RNW.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs INE.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, INE.TO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while INE.TO trades at CA$13.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas INE.TO's P/E ratio is 72.32. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to INE.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to INE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check INE.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs ARR.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, ARR.TO has a market cap of 370.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while ARR.TO trades at CA$12.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas ARR.TO's P/E ratio is -400.00. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ARR.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to ARR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check ARR.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs PIF.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, PIF.TO has a market cap of 257.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while PIF.TO trades at CA$12.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas PIF.TO's P/E ratio is -68.22. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PIF.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to PIF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check PIF.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs SPG.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, SPG.TO has a market cap of 74.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while SPG.TO trades at CA$0.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas SPG.TO's P/E ratio is -4.56. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SPG.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to SPG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check SPG.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs SXI.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, SXI.TO has a market cap of 12M. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while SXI.TO trades at CA$2.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas SXI.TO's P/E ratio is -12.58. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SXI.TO's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to SXI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check SXI.TO's competition here
LCFS.TO vs MOVE.NE Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, MOVE.NE has a market cap of 9M. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while MOVE.NE trades at CA$0.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas MOVE.NE's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MOVE.NE's ROE of -4.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is more volatile compared to MOVE.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check MOVE.NE's competition here
LCFS.TO vs ETX.TO Comparison April 2026
LCFS.TO plays a significant role within the Utilities sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCFS.TO stands at 254.5M. In comparison, ETX.TO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LCFS.TO is priced at CA$6.99, while ETX.TO trades at CA$0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCFS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 14.56, whereas ETX.TO's P/E ratio is 0.52. In terms of profitability, LCFS.TO's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ETX.TO's ROE of +2.45%. Regarding short-term risk, LCFS.TO is less volatile compared to ETX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCFS.TO.Check ETX.TO's competition here