LF Capital Acquisition Corp. II

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CCIV has a market cap of 44.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CCIV trades at $24.25.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CCIV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CCIV's ROE of -1.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CCIV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CCIV's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, PSACU has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while PSACU trades at $17.08.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PSACU's P/E ratio is -108.79. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to PSACU's ROE of -5.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to PSACU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check PSACU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, RTPY has a market cap of 11.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while RTPY trades at $9.91.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RTPY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to RTPY's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to RTPY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check RTPY's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, LVRAW has a market cap of 11.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while LVRAW trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LVRAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to LVRAW's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to LVRAW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check LVRAW's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CMLFU has a market cap of 10.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CMLFU trades at $13.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CMLFU's P/E ratio is -1444.44. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CMLFU's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CMLFU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CMLFU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, PSAC has a market cap of 9.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while PSAC trades at $13.78.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PSAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to PSAC's ROE of -5.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to PSAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check PSAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GRSVU has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GRSVU trades at $11.39.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GRSVU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GRSVU's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW and GRSVU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GRSVU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, APSG has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while APSG trades at $7.39.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas APSG's P/E ratio is 36.95. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to APSG's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to APSG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check APSG's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, RTP has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while RTP trades at $10.03.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RTP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to RTP's ROE of -1.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to RTP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check RTP's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DGNR has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DGNR trades at $9.26.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DGNR's P/E ratio is -308.67. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DGNR's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DGNR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DGNR's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, VTIQ has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while VTIQ trades at $10.07.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VTIQ's P/E ratio is 91.50. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to VTIQ's ROE of +472.81%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to VTIQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check VTIQ's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, VTIQU has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while VTIQU trades at $10.06.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VTIQU's P/E ratio is 100.60. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to VTIQU's ROE of +472.81%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW and VTIQU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VTIQU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, VACQ has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while VACQ trades at $11.57.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VACQ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to VACQ's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to VACQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check VACQ's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SVFC has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SVFC trades at $9.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SVFC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SVFC's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SVFC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SVFC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, VGAC has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while VGAC trades at $10.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VGAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to VGAC's ROE of -1.88%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to VGAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check VGAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CMLT has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CMLT trades at $8.69.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CMLT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CMLT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CMLT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CMLT's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GHVI has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GHVI trades at $14.47.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GHVI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GHVI's ROE of -1.28%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GHVI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GHVI's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, KVSB has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while KVSB trades at $11.12.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas KVSB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to KVSB's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to KVSB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check KVSB's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FTOCU has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FTOCU trades at $11.65.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FTOCU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FTOCU's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FTOCU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FTOCU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, THCBU has a market cap of 3.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while THCBU trades at $12.53.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas THCBU's P/E ratio is -101.87. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to THCBU's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to THCBU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check THCBU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CLII has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CLII trades at $14.36.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CLII's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CLII's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CLII. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CLII's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GRNV has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GRNV trades at $12.95.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GRNV's P/E ratio is -59.68. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GRNV's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GRNV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GRNV's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FRX has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FRX trades at $12.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FRX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FRX's ROE of -1.76%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FRX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FRX's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HOLUU has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HOLUU trades at $13.65.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HOLUU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HOLUU's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HOLUU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HOLUU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SSPK has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SSPK trades at $18.84.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SSPK's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SSPK's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SSPK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SSPK's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FCACU has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FCACU trades at $9.55.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FCACU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FCACU's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FCACU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FCACU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CFVI has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CFVI trades at $12.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CFVI's P/E ratio is -18.55. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CFVI's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CFVI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CFVI's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HOL has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HOL trades at $12.35.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HOL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HOL's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HOL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HOL's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, THCB has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while THCB trades at $10.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas THCB's P/E ratio is -81.30. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to THCB's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to THCB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check THCB's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SOAC has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SOAC trades at $10.62.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SOAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SOAC's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SOAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SOAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DCRBU has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DCRBU trades at $11.15.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DCRBU's P/E ratio is -16.00. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DCRBU's ROE of -0.84%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DCRBU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DCRBU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, IVAN has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while IVAN trades at $7.68.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IVAN's P/E ratio is -698.18. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to IVAN's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to IVAN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check IVAN's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GWAC has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GWAC trades at $10.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GWAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GWAC's ROE of -1.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GWAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GWAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, LCYAU has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while LCYAU trades at $13.14.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LCYAU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to LCYAU's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW and LCYAU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check LCYAU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FWAA has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FWAA trades at $12.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FWAA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FWAA's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FWAA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FWAA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GSAH has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GSAH trades at $10.54.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GSAH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GSAH's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GSAH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GSAH's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, LCY has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while LCY trades at $12.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LCY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to LCY's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to LCY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check LCY's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FORE has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FORE trades at $9.48.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FORE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FORE's ROE of -9.43%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FORE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FORE's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, RAAC has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while RAAC trades at $9.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RAAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to RAAC's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to RAAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check RAAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SPNV has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SPNV trades at $8.80.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SPNV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SPNV's ROE of -1.36%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SPNV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SPNV's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DNAC has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DNAC trades at $9.28.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DNAC's P/E ratio is -37.72. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DNAC's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DNAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DNAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FAII has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FAII trades at $10.28.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FAII's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FAII's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FAII. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FAII's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DMYI has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DMYI trades at $10.40.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DMYI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DMYI's ROE of -1.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DMYI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DMYI's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, LOKB has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while LOKB trades at $13.38.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LOKB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to LOKB's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to LOKB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check LOKB's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, STPC has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while STPC trades at $9.87.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas STPC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to STPC's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to STPC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check STPC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, MUDS has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while MUDS trades at $10.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MUDS's P/E ratio is 3.39. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to MUDS's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to MUDS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check MUDS's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, MUDSU has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while MUDSU trades at $10.13.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MUDSU's P/E ratio is -1125.56. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to MUDSU's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW and MUDSU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MUDSU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, TINV has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while TINV trades at $11.63.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TINV's P/E ratio is 30.61. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to TINV's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to TINV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check TINV's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, VHCPU has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while VHCPU trades at $10.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VHCPU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to VHCPU's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to VHCPU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check VHCPU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CMII has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CMII trades at $10.63.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CMII's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CMII's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CMII. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CMII's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, APXT has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while APXT trades at $9.94.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas APXT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to APXT's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to APXT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check APXT's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DWAC has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DWAC trades at $49.95.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DWAC's P/E ratio is -73.46. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DWAC's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DWAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DWAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DWACU has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DWACU trades at $61.35.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DWACU's P/E ratio is -451.10. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DWACU's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DWACU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DWACU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, ATHN has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while ATHN trades at $9.59.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ATHN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to ATHN's ROE of +2.24%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to ATHN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check ATHN's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GMII has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GMII trades at $8.37.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GMII's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GMII's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GMII. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GMII's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, MOTV has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while MOTV trades at $10.11.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MOTV's P/E ratio is 55.86. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to MOTV's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to MOTV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check MOTV's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CBAH has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CBAH trades at $10.75.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CBAH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CBAH's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CBAH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CBAH's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GXGXU has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GXGXU trades at $11.63.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GXGXU's P/E ratio is -23.73. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GXGXU's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GXGXU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GXGXU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, AONE has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while AONE trades at $8.56.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AONE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to AONE's ROE of -17.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to AONE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check AONE's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SNPR has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SNPR trades at $9.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SNPR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SNPR's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SNPR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SNPR's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SPFR has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SPFR trades at $8.44.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SPFR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SPFR's ROE of -4.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SPFR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SPFR's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DEH has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DEH trades at $11.57.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DEH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DEH's ROE of -1.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DEH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DEH's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, ROT has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while ROT trades at $10.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ROT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to ROT's ROE of -1.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to ROT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check ROT's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, NGAC has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while NGAC trades at $8.83.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NGAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to NGAC's ROE of -0.58%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to NGAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check NGAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, GXGX has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while GXGX trades at $10.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GXGX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to GXGX's ROE of +5.76%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to GXGX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check GXGX's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HECCU has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HECCU trades at $9.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HECCU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HECCU's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HECCU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HECCU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, ATMR has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while ATMR trades at $10.53.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ATMR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to ATMR's ROE of +0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to ATMR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check ATMR's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SFTW has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SFTW trades at $11.41.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SFTW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SFTW's ROE of -0.98%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SFTW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SFTW's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, ENFA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while ENFA trades at $9.62.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ENFA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to ENFA's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to ENFA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check ENFA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, ENVI has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while ENVI trades at $8.82.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ENVI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to ENVI's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to ENVI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check ENVI's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DFNS has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DFNS trades at $12.85.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DFNS's P/E ratio is -17.39. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DFNS's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DFNS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DFNS's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, ACTD has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while ACTD trades at $7.60.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ACTD's P/E ratio is -25.50. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to ACTD's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to ACTD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check ACTD's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, VCKA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while VCKA trades at $9.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VCKA's P/E ratio is 100.11. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to VCKA's ROE of +1.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to VCKA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check VCKA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, THMA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while THMA trades at $9.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas THMA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to THMA's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to THMA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check THMA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, LNFA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while LNFA trades at $10.95.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LNFA's P/E ratio is 21.06. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to LNFA's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to LNFA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check LNFA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FTIVU has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FTIVU trades at $14.14.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FTIVU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FTIVU's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FTIVU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FTIVU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, STWO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while STWO trades at $8.21.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas STWO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to STWO's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to STWO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check STWO's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HYACU has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HYACU trades at $10.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HYACU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HYACU's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HYACU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HYACU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FTIV has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FTIV trades at $13.28.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FTIV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FTIV's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FTIV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FTIV's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, AHAC has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while AHAC trades at $10.96.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AHAC's P/E ratio is -72.11. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to AHAC's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to AHAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check AHAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, AMHC has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while AMHC trades at $10.23.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMHC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to AMHC's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to AMHC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check AMHC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HERAW has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HERAW trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HERAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HERAW's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HERAW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HERAW's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HERA has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HERA trades at $10.19.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HERA's P/E ratio is 46.32. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HERA's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HERA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HERA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FGNA has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FGNA trades at $9.97.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FGNA's P/E ratio is -4.35. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FGNA's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to FGNA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check FGNA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, DNAA has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while DNAA trades at $14.07.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DNAA's P/E ratio is -54.53. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to DNAA's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to DNAA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check DNAA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, RACA has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while RACA trades at $10.27.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RACA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to RACA's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to RACA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check RACA's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, TREB has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while TREB trades at $9.45.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TREB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to TREB's ROE of -2.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to TREB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check TREB's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, PACE has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while PACE trades at $11.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PACE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to PACE's ROE of -1.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to PACE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check PACE's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, HERAU has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while HERAU trades at $10.16.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HERAU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to HERAU's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to HERAU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check HERAU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, LSAQ has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while LSAQ trades at $9.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LSAQ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to LSAQ's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to LSAQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check LSAQ's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SRAC has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SRAC trades at $10.97.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SRAC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SRAC's ROE of +3.88%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SRAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SRAC's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, FTPAW has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while FTPAW trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FTPAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to FTPAW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW and FTPAW have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check FTPAW's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, SBG has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while SBG trades at $8.84.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SBG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to SBG's ROE of -2.98%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to SBG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check SBG's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CVII-WT has a market cap of 977.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CVII-WT trades at $0.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CVII-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CVII-WT's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CVII-WT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CVII-WT's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CVII-UN has a market cap of 958.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CVII-UN trades at $10.28.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CVII-UN's P/E ratio is 64.65. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CVII-UN's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CVII-UN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CVII-UN's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, BRPM has a market cap of 944M. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while BRPM trades at $13.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BRPM's P/E ratio is -72.74. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to BRPM's ROE of -2.79%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to BRPM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check BRPM's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CRSAU has a market cap of 937.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CRSAU trades at $10.15.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CRSAU's P/E ratio is -27.21. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CRSAU's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CRSAU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CRSAU's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, CVII has a market cap of 914.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while CVII trades at $9.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CVII's P/E ratio is 999.00. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to CVII's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to CVII. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check CVII's competition here

LFACW plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LFACW stands at 6.7B. In comparison, BCTG has a market cap of 899.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LFACW is priced at $0.28, while BCTG trades at $10.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

LFACW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BCTG's P/E ratio is -204.00. In terms of profitability, LFACW's ROE is +0.01%, compared to BCTG's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LFACW is less volatile compared to BCTG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LFACW.Check BCTG's competition here