AEye, Inc.
AEye, Inc. LIDRW Peers
See (LIDRW) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Parts Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LIDRW | $0.09 | -0.70% | 26M | -0.03 | -$3.22 | N/A |
| APTV-PA | $108.66 | +0.15% | 29.4B | 92.08 | $1.18 | N/A |
| APTV | $68.22 | -0.81% | 14.9B | 11.15 | $6.12 | N/A |
| MBLY | $17.98 | -1.96% | 14.6B | -4.89 | -$3.68 | N/A |
| MGA | $38.61 | +0.42% | 10.9B | 9.63 | $4.01 | +4.98% |
| LKQ | $37.01 | -0.30% | 9.6B | 13.76 | $2.69 | +3.25% |
| ALV | $111.90 | -1.06% | 8.6B | 12.92 | $8.66 | +2.49% |
| ALSN | $94.99 | +0.35% | 8B | 11.00 | $8.64 | +1.09% |
| BWA | $33.48 | -0.39% | 7.4B | 23.56 | $1.42 | +1.31% |
| MOD | $98.50 | -2.80% | 5.2B | 28.80 | $3.42 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
LIDRW vs APTV-PA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, APTV-PA has a market cap of 29.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while APTV-PA trades at $108.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas APTV-PA's P/E ratio is 92.08. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to APTV-PA's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to APTV-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs APTV Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, APTV has a market cap of 14.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while APTV trades at $68.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas APTV's P/E ratio is 11.15. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to APTV's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to APTV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MBLY Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MBLY has a market cap of 14.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MBLY trades at $17.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MBLY's P/E ratio is -4.89. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MBLY's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MBLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MGA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MGA has a market cap of 10.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MGA trades at $38.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MGA's P/E ratio is 9.63. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MGA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MGA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs LKQ Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, LKQ has a market cap of 9.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while LKQ trades at $37.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas LKQ's P/E ratio is 13.76. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to LKQ's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to LKQ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs ALV Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, ALV has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while ALV trades at $111.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas ALV's P/E ratio is 12.92. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to ALV's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to ALV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs ALSN Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, ALSN has a market cap of 8B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while ALSN trades at $94.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas ALSN's P/E ratio is 11.00. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to ALSN's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to ALSN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs BWA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, BWA has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while BWA trades at $33.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas BWA's P/E ratio is 23.56. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to BWA's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to BWA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MOD Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MOD has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MOD trades at $98.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MOD's P/E ratio is 28.80. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MOD's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MOD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs LEA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, LEA has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while LEA trades at $94.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas LEA's P/E ratio is 11.09. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to LEA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to LEA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs GNTX Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, GNTX has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while GNTX trades at $21.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas GNTX's P/E ratio is 12.86. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to GNTX's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to GNTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs QS Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, QS has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while QS trades at $6.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas QS's P/E ratio is -7.38. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to QS's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to QS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs DORM Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, DORM has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while DORM trades at $122.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas DORM's P/E ratio is 17.63. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to DORM's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to DORM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs BC-PA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, BC-PA has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while BC-PA trades at $24.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas BC-PA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to BC-PA's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to BC-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs BC-PB Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, BC-PB has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while BC-PB trades at $24.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas BC-PB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to BC-PB's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to BC-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs GT Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, GT has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while GT trades at $10.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas GT's P/E ratio is 12.35. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to GT's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to GT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs HSAI Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, HSAI has a market cap of 2.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while HSAI trades at $21.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas HSAI's P/E ratio is -2195.00. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to HSAI's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to HSAI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs VC Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, VC has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while VC trades at $93.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas VC's P/E ratio is 8.74. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to VC's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to VC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs DAN Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, DAN has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while DAN trades at $17.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas DAN's P/E ratio is -71.50. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to DAN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to DAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs GTX Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, GTX has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while GTX trades at $10.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas GTX's P/E ratio is 8.21. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to GTX's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to GTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs AEVA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, AEVA has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while AEVA trades at $37.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas AEVA's P/E ratio is -13.40. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to AEVA's ROE of -1.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to AEVA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs PHIN Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, PHIN has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while PHIN trades at $44.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas PHIN's P/E ratio is 25.15. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to PHIN's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to PHIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs ADNT Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, ADNT has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while ADNT trades at $19.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas ADNT's P/E ratio is -6.03. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to ADNT's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to ADNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs FOXF Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, FOXF has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while FOXF trades at $25.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas FOXF's P/E ratio is -4.33. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to FOXF's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to FOXF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs XPEL Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, XPEL has a market cap of 993.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while XPEL trades at $35.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas XPEL's P/E ratio is 20.87. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to XPEL's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to XPEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs THRM Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, THRM has a market cap of 873M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while THRM trades at $28.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas THRM's P/E ratio is 17.79. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to THRM's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to THRM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs PLOW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, PLOW has a market cap of 683.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while PLOW trades at $29.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas PLOW's P/E ratio is 10.78. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to PLOW's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to PLOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs SMP Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, SMP has a market cap of 674.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while SMP trades at $30.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas SMP's P/E ratio is 11.89. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to SMP's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to SMP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs ECX Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, ECX has a market cap of 665.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while ECX trades at $2.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas ECX's P/E ratio is -5.86. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to ECX's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to ECX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs GTXAP Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, GTXAP has a market cap of 557.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while GTXAP trades at $8.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas GTXAP's P/E ratio is 4.44. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to GTXAP's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to GTXAP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MLR Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MLR has a market cap of 509.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MLR trades at $44.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MLR's P/E ratio is 9.48. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MLR's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MLR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs ALLG Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, ALLG has a market cap of 496.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while ALLG trades at $1.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas ALLG's P/E ratio is -3.96. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to ALLG's ROE of +4.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to ALLG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs AXL Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, AXL has a market cap of 483M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while AXL trades at $4.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas AXL's P/E ratio is 22.61. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to AXL's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to AXL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MNRO Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MNRO has a market cap of 446.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MNRO trades at $14.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MNRO's P/E ratio is -67.77. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MNRO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MNRO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs CPS Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, CPS has a market cap of 376.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while CPS trades at $21.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas CPS's P/E ratio is -8.32. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to CPS's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to CPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs INVZ Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, INVZ has a market cap of 326.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while INVZ trades at $1.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas INVZ's P/E ratio is -3.57. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to INVZ's ROE of -0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to INVZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs SES Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, SES has a market cap of 324.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while SES trades at $0.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas SES's P/E ratio is -2.96. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to SES's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to SES. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs INVZW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, INVZW has a market cap of 304.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while INVZW trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas INVZW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to INVZW's ROE of -0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to INVZW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs STRT Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, STRT has a market cap of 259.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while STRT trades at $62.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas STRT's P/E ratio is 12.54. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to STRT's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to STRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs HLLY Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, HLLY has a market cap of 238.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while HLLY trades at $2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas HLLY's P/E ratio is -9.55. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to HLLY's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to HLLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs HYLN Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, HYLN has a market cap of 233.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while HYLN trades at $1.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas HYLN's P/E ratio is -4.45. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to HYLN's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to HYLN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MPAA Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MPAA has a market cap of 217.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MPAA trades at $11.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MPAA's P/E ratio is -11.31. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MPAA's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MPAA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs HLLY-WT Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, HLLY-WT has a market cap of 217.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while HLLY-WT trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas HLLY-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to HLLY-WT's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to HLLY-WT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs SRI Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, SRI has a market cap of 195.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while SRI trades at $7.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas SRI's P/E ratio is -10.99. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to SRI's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to SRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs XL Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, XL has a market cap of 164.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while XL trades at $1.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas XL's P/E ratio is -3.21. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to XL's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to XL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs LAZR Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, LAZR has a market cap of 142.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while LAZR trades at $2.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas LAZR's P/E ratio is -0.46. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to LAZR's ROE of +0.84%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to LAZR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs CAAS Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, CAAS has a market cap of 124M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while CAAS trades at $4.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas CAAS's P/E ratio is 4.28. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to CAAS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to CAAS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs KNDI Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, KNDI has a market cap of 96.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while KNDI trades at $1.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas KNDI's P/E ratio is -1.90. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to KNDI's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to KNDI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs GGR Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, GGR has a market cap of 84.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while GGR trades at $0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas GGR's P/E ratio is -0.62. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to GGR's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to GGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs CVGI Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, CVGI has a market cap of 57.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while CVGI trades at $1.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas CVGI's P/E ratio is -1.37. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to CVGI's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to CVGI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs WPRT Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, WPRT has a market cap of 54.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while WPRT trades at $3.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas WPRT's P/E ratio is -5.06. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to WPRT's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to WPRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs SYPR Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, SYPR has a market cap of 50.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while SYPR trades at $2.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas SYPR's P/E ratio is -110.50. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to SYPR's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to SYPR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MKDWW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MKDWW has a market cap of 35.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MKDWW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MKDWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MKDWW's ROE of +1.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MKDWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MKDW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MKDW has a market cap of 31.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MKDW trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MKDW's P/E ratio is -1.45. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MKDW's ROE of +1.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MKDW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs NCNC Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, NCNC has a market cap of 20.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while NCNC trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas NCNC's P/E ratio is -0.70. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to NCNC's ROE of +3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to NCNC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs NCNCW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, NCNCW has a market cap of 20.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while NCNCW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas NCNCW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to NCNCW's ROE of +3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to NCNCW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs LIDR Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, LIDR has a market cap of 19.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while LIDR trades at $1.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas LIDR's P/E ratio is -0.28. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to LIDR's ROE of -1.96%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to LIDR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs ECXWW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, ECXWW has a market cap of 19.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while ECXWW trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas ECXWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to ECXWW's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to ECXWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs AMV Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, AMV has a market cap of 17.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while AMV trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas AMV's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to AMV's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to AMV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs WKSP Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, WKSP has a market cap of 14.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while WKSP trades at $2.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas WKSP's P/E ratio is -0.55. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to WKSP's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to WKSP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs INEO Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, INEO has a market cap of 11.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while INEO trades at $1.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas INEO's P/E ratio is 7.93. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to INEO's ROE of +0.65%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to INEO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs SAG Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, SAG has a market cap of 10.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while SAG trades at $1.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas SAG's P/E ratio is 6.73. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to SAG's ROE of +0.65%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to SAG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs SUP Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, SUP has a market cap of 9.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while SUP trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas SUP's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to SUP's ROE of +0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to SUP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs FRSX Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, FRSX has a market cap of 9M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while FRSX trades at $0.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas FRSX's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to FRSX's ROE of -1.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to FRSX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs CREV Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, CREV has a market cap of 5.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while CREV trades at $2.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas CREV's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to CREV's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to CREV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs GGROW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, GGROW has a market cap of 3.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while GGROW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas GGROW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to GGROW's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to GGROW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs UFAB Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, UFAB has a market cap of 2M. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while UFAB trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas UFAB's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to UFAB's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to UFAB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs WKSPW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, WKSPW has a market cap of 575.3K. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while WKSPW trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas WKSPW's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to WKSPW's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to WKSPW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs CREVW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, CREVW has a market cap of 122.8K. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while CREVW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas CREVW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to CREVW's ROE of -1.47%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to CREVW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs HYZNW Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, HYZNW has a market cap of 15.5K. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while HYZNW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas HYZNW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to HYZNW's ROE of -2.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is less volatile compared to HYZNW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs HZN Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, HZN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while HZN trades at $1.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas HZN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to HZN's ROE of +1.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to HZN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs MTOR Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, MTOR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while MTOR trades at $36.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas MTOR's P/E ratio is 11.97. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to MTOR's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to MTOR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs VNE Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, VNE has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while VNE trades at $36.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas VNE's P/E ratio is -10.74. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to VNE's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to VNE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.
LIDRW vs RMO Comparison
LIDRW plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LIDRW stands at 26M. In comparison, RMO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, LIDRW is priced at $0.09, while RMO trades at $0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LIDRW currently has a P/E ratio of -0.03, whereas RMO's P/E ratio is -0.29. In terms of profitability, LIDRW's ROE is -1.96%, compared to RMO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LIDRW is more volatile compared to RMO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LIDRW.