Lancashire Holdings Limited
Lancashire Holdings Limited LCSHF Peers
See (LCSHF) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Insurance - Specialty Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCSHF | $7.59 | N/A | 1.8B | 5.84 | $1.30 | +16.15% |
| MDBPF | $2.77 | N/A | 7.6B | 23.08 | $0.12 | N/A |
| TRRSF | $29.45 | -0.66% | 1.4B | 17.53 | $1.68 | N/A |
| PSKRF | $11.50 | N/A | 948M | 21.30 | $0.54 | +2.35% |
| FACO | $3.19 | -2.45% | 121.7M | 4.76 | $0.67 | N/A |
| ACMTA | $35.00 | N/A | 40.5M | 66.04 | $0.53 | N/A |
| ACMT | $33.00 | N/A | 40.5M | 63.46 | $0.52 | N/A |
| PPHI | $6.95 | N/A | 25.1M | -11.58 | -$0.60 | N/A |
| PMIR | $0.25 | N/A | 518.6K | -0.06 | -$4.50 | N/A |
| MMMM | $0.00 | N/A | 21.7K | N/A | -$0.06 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
LCSHF vs MDBPF Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, MDBPF has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while MDBPF trades at $2.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas MDBPF's P/E ratio is 23.08. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to MDBPF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is less volatile compared to MDBPF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs TRRSF Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, TRRSF has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while TRRSF trades at $29.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas TRRSF's P/E ratio is 17.53. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to TRRSF's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to TRRSF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs PSKRF Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, PSKRF has a market cap of 948M. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while PSKRF trades at $11.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas PSKRF's P/E ratio is 21.30. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to PSKRF's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to PSKRF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs FACO Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, FACO has a market cap of 121.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while FACO trades at $3.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas FACO's P/E ratio is 4.76. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to FACO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to FACO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs ACMTA Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, ACMTA has a market cap of 40.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while ACMTA trades at $35.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas ACMTA's P/E ratio is 66.04. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to ACMTA's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to ACMTA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs ACMT Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, ACMT has a market cap of 40.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while ACMT trades at $33.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas ACMT's P/E ratio is 63.46. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to ACMT's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is less volatile compared to ACMT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs PPHI Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, PPHI has a market cap of 25.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while PPHI trades at $6.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas PPHI's P/E ratio is -11.58. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to PPHI's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to PPHI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs PMIR Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, PMIR has a market cap of 518.6K. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while PMIR trades at $0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas PMIR's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to PMIR's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is less volatile compared to PMIR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs MMMM Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, MMMM has a market cap of 21.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while MMMM trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas MMMM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to MMMM's ROE of +0.90%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to MMMM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs FPLF Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, FPLF has a market cap of 17K. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while FPLF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas FPLF's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to FPLF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is less volatile compared to FPLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs RQIHF Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, RQIHF has a market cap of 3.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while RQIHF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas RQIHF's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to RQIHF's ROE of -1.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is less volatile compared to RQIHF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs TGIC Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, TGIC has a market cap of 2.1K. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while TGIC trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas TGIC's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to TGIC's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to TGIC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs ATHLV Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, ATHLV has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while ATHLV trades at $25.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas ATHLV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to ATHLV's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to ATHLV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.
LCSHF vs SYCRF Comparison
LCSHF plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LCSHF stands at 1.8B. In comparison, SYCRF has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LCSHF is priced at $7.59, while SYCRF trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LCSHF currently has a P/E ratio of 5.84, whereas SYCRF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LCSHF's ROE is +0.18%, compared to SYCRF's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LCSHF is more volatile compared to SYCRF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LCSHF.