LightInTheBox Holding Co., Ltd.
LightInTheBox Holding Co., Ltd. LITB Peers
See (LITB) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Specialty Retail Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LITB | $1.27 | +8.83% | 11.7M | 10.58 | $0.12 | N/A |
| AMZN | $207.23 | +0.74% | 2.2T | 33.81 | $6.13 | N/A |
| BABA | $119.45 | +3.90% | 287.9B | 13.17 | $9.07 | N/A |
| MELI | $2,569.36 | -1.26% | 130.3B | 63.28 | $40.60 | N/A |
| SE | $168.15 | +1.44% | 99.5B | 116.77 | $1.44 | N/A |
| ORLY | $1,366.68 | -0.39% | 77.9B | 33.54 | $40.75 | N/A |
| CVNA | $345.55 | +1.60% | 74B | 120.82 | $2.86 | N/A |
| AZO | $3,713.92 | -0.91% | 62.1B | 25.15 | $147.67 | N/A |
| CPNG | $28.35 | +0.44% | 51.5B | 202.46 | $0.14 | N/A |
| JD | $33.33 | +2.84% | 48.2B | 8.15 | $4.09 | +2.96% |
Stock Comparison
LITB vs AMZN Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, AMZN has a market cap of 2.2T. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while AMZN trades at $207.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas AMZN's P/E ratio is 33.81. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to AMZN's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to AMZN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BABA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BABA has a market cap of 287.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BABA trades at $119.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BABA's P/E ratio is 13.17. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BABA's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BABA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs MELI Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, MELI has a market cap of 130.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while MELI trades at $2,569.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas MELI's P/E ratio is 63.28. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to MELI's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to MELI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs SE Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, SE has a market cap of 99.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while SE trades at $168.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas SE's P/E ratio is 116.77. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to SE's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to SE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ORLY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ORLY has a market cap of 77.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ORLY trades at $1,366.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ORLY's P/E ratio is 33.54. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ORLY's ROE of -1.65%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to ORLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CVNA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CVNA has a market cap of 74B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CVNA trades at $345.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CVNA's P/E ratio is 120.82. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CVNA's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to CVNA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs AZO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, AZO has a market cap of 62.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while AZO trades at $3,713.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas AZO's P/E ratio is 25.15. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to AZO's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to AZO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CPNG Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CPNG has a market cap of 51.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CPNG trades at $28.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CPNG's P/E ratio is 202.46. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CPNG's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to CPNG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs JD Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, JD has a market cap of 48.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while JD trades at $33.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas JD's P/E ratio is 8.15. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to JD's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to JD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs VIPS Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, VIPS has a market cap of 37B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while VIPS trades at $14.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas VIPS's P/E ratio is 7.46. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to VIPS's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to VIPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs EBAY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, EBAY has a market cap of 35.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while EBAY trades at $77.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas EBAY's P/E ratio is 18.54. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to EBAY's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to EBAY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs PDD Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, PDD has a market cap of 35.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while PDD trades at $99.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas PDD's P/E ratio is 10.72. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to PDD's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to PDD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs TSCO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, TSCO has a market cap of 26.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while TSCO trades at $49.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas TSCO's P/E ratio is 24.55. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to TSCO's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to TSCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ULTA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ULTA has a market cap of 20.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ULTA trades at $465.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ULTA's P/E ratio is 18.20. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ULTA's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to ULTA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs WSM Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, WSM has a market cap of 19.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while WSM trades at $159.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas WSM's P/E ratio is 18.18. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to WSM's ROE of +0.54%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to WSM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CHWY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CHWY has a market cap of 19.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CHWY trades at $47.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CHWY's P/E ratio is 51.97. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CHWY's ROE of +0.97%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to CHWY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs GPC Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, GPC has a market cap of 17.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while GPC trades at $126.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas GPC's P/E ratio is 20.74. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to GPC's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to GPC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CASY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CASY has a market cap of 16.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CASY trades at $448.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CASY's P/E ratio is 31.26. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CASY's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to CASY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BBY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BBY has a market cap of 14.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BBY trades at $69.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BBY's P/E ratio is 17.00. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BBY's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BBY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs DKS Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, DKS has a market cap of 14.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while DKS trades at $176.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas DKS's P/E ratio is 12.63. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to DKS's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to DKS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs GME Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, GME has a market cap of 13.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while GME trades at $29.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas GME's P/E ratio is 90.84. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to GME's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to GME. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CART Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CART has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CART trades at $46.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CART's P/E ratio is 30.38. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CART's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to CART. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs MUSA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, MUSA has a market cap of 8.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while MUSA trades at $422.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas MUSA's P/E ratio is 17.91. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to MUSA's ROE of +0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to MUSA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs FIVE Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, FIVE has a market cap of 6.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while FIVE trades at $121.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas FIVE's P/E ratio is 26.36. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to FIVE's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to FIVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ETSY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ETSY has a market cap of 6.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ETSY trades at $61.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ETSY's P/E ratio is 44.59. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ETSY's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to ETSY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs GLBE Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, GLBE has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while GLBE trades at $33.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas GLBE's P/E ratio is -91.62. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to GLBE's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to GLBE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BBWI Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BBWI has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BBWI trades at $27.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BBWI's P/E ratio is 7.27. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BBWI's ROE of -0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BBWI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs W Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, W has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while W trades at $44.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas W's P/E ratio is -15.60. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to W's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to W. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs RH Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, RH has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while RH trades at $178.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas RH's P/E ratio is 49.24. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to RH's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to RH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs AAP Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, AAP has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while AAP trades at $51.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas AAP's P/E ratio is -5.31. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to AAP's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to AAP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ASO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ASO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ASO trades at $42.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ASO's P/E ratio is 7.47. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ASO's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to ASO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs OZON Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, OZON has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while OZON trades at $11.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas OZON's P/E ratio is -2.61. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to OZON's ROE of +0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to OZON. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs SVV Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, SVV has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while SVV trades at $10.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas SVV's P/E ratio is 76.00. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to SVV's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to SVV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs EYE Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, EYE has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while EYE trades at $20.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas EYE's P/E ratio is -65.28. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to EYE's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to EYE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs RVLV Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, RVLV has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while RVLV trades at $21.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas RVLV's P/E ratio is 31.23. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to RVLV's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to RVLV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs WINA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, WINA has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while WINA trades at $421.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas WINA's P/E ratio is 37.66. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to WINA's ROE of -0.95%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to WINA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs MNSO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, MNSO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while MNSO trades at $18.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas MNSO's P/E ratio is 16.69. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to MNSO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to MNSO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs TA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, TA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while TA trades at $86.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas TA's P/E ratio is 9.03. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to TA's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to TA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs EVGO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, EVGO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while EVGO trades at $3.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas EVGO's P/E ratio is -9.51. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to EVGO's ROE of +0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to EVGO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs EVGOW Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, EVGOW has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while EVGOW trades at $0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas EVGOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to EVGOW's ROE of +0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to EVGOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs TANNI Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, TANNI has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while TANNI trades at $25.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas TANNI's P/E ratio is 35.27. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to TANNI's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to TANNI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs WOOF Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, WOOF has a market cap of 987.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while WOOF trades at $3.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas WOOF's P/E ratio is -9.62. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to WOOF's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to WOOF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs SBH Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, SBH has a market cap of 918.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while SBH trades at $9.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas SBH's P/E ratio is 5.17. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to SBH's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to SBH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs OLPX Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, OLPX has a market cap of 912.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while OLPX trades at $1.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas OLPX's P/E ratio is 68.50. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to OLPX's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to OLPX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs TDUP Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, TDUP has a market cap of 904.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while TDUP trades at $7.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas TDUP's P/E ratio is -26.38. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to TDUP's ROE of -0.98%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to TDUP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs HEPS Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, HEPS has a market cap of 835.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while HEPS trades at $2.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas HEPS's P/E ratio is -18.57. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to HEPS's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to HEPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs RERE Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, RERE has a market cap of 817.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while RERE trades at $2.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas RERE's P/E ratio is 27.28. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to RERE's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to RERE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs OSTK Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, OSTK has a market cap of 768M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while OSTK trades at $16.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas OSTK's P/E ratio is -4.64. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to OSTK's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to OSTK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs LQDT Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, LQDT has a market cap of 762.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while LQDT trades at $24.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas LQDT's P/E ratio is 30.92. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to LQDT's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to LQDT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BBW Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BBW has a market cap of 610.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BBW trades at $46.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BBW's P/E ratio is 11.13. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BBW's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BBW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs HNST Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, HNST has a market cap of 558.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while HNST trades at $5.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas HNST's P/E ratio is -253.25. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to HNST's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to HNST. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ODP Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ODP has a market cap of 533.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ODP trades at $17.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ODP's P/E ratio is 13.86. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ODP's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to ODP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ARKO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ARKO has a market cap of 487.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ARKO trades at $4.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ARKO's P/E ratio is 142.50. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ARKO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to ARKO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs HZO Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, HZO has a market cap of 468.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while HZO trades at $21.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas HZO's P/E ratio is 8.91. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to HZO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to HZO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CHPT Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CHPT has a market cap of 408.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CHPT trades at $0.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CHPT's P/E ratio is -1.38. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CHPT's ROE of -1.34%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to CHPT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BNED Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BNED has a market cap of 401.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BNED trades at $11.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BNED's P/E ratio is -0.98. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BNED's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BNED. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BYON Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BYON has a market cap of 369.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BYON trades at $6.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BYON's P/E ratio is -1.37. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BYON's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to BYON. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs FLWS Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, FLWS has a market cap of 312.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while FLWS trades at $4.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas FLWS's P/E ratio is -1.86. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to FLWS's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to FLWS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BARK-WT Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BARK-WT has a market cap of 309.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BARK-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.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BARK-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BARK-WT's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BARK-WT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BWMX Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BWMX has a market cap of 285.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BWMX trades at $7.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BWMX's P/E ratio is -38.25. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BWMX's ROE of +0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BWMX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs FTCH Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, FTCH has a market cap of 254.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while FTCH trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas FTCH's P/E ratio is -0.28. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to FTCH's ROE of +0.86%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to FTCH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs LE Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, LE has a market cap of 244.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while LE trades at $7.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas LE's P/E ratio is 39.55. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to LE's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to LE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BARK Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BARK has a market cap of 237.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BARK trades at $1.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BARK's P/E ratio is -7.56. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BARK's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to BARK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs QRTEA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, QRTEA has a market cap of 213.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while QRTEA trades at $0.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas QRTEA's P/E ratio is -0.51. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to QRTEA's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to QRTEA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs JMIA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, JMIA has a market cap of 202.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while JMIA trades at $3.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas JMIA's P/E ratio is -5.25. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to JMIA's ROE of -1.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to JMIA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs LOGC Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, LOGC has a market cap of 188.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while LOGC trades at $7.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas LOGC's P/E ratio is -9.29. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to LOGC's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to LOGC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BZUN Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BZUN has a market cap of 175.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BZUN trades at $2.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BZUN's P/E ratio is -6.74. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BZUN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BZUN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs VLTA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, VLTA has a market cap of 150M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while VLTA trades at $0.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas VLTA's P/E ratio is -1.30. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to VLTA's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to VLTA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs AKA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, AKA has a market cap of 133.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while AKA trades at $12.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas AKA's P/E ratio is -5.23. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to AKA's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to AKA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs DADA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, DADA has a market cap of 132.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while DADA trades at $2.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas DADA's P/E ratio is -1.89. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to DADA's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to DADA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs QRTEP Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, QRTEP has a market cap of 130M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while QRTEP trades at $39.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas QRTEP's P/E ratio is 120.21. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to QRTEP's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to QRTEP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs GOED Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, GOED has a market cap of 129.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while GOED trades at $1.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas GOED's P/E ratio is 1.81. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to GOED's ROE of -0.94%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to GOED. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs OCG Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, OCG has a market cap of 124.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while OCG trades at $5.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas OCG's P/E ratio is -33.28. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to OCG's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to OCG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs NEGG Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, NEGG has a market cap of 121.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while NEGG trades at $6.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas NEGG's P/E ratio is -2.79. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to NEGG's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to NEGG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs WBUY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, WBUY has a market cap of 105.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while WBUY trades at $4.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas WBUY's P/E ratio is -0.40. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to WBUY's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to WBUY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs APRN Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, APRN has a market cap of 100M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while APRN trades at $12.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas APRN's P/E ratio is -0.70. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to APRN's ROE of -1.93%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to APRN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs SPWH Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, SPWH has a market cap of 99.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while SPWH trades at $2.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas SPWH's P/E ratio is -2.75. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to SPWH's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to SPWH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs DIBS Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, DIBS has a market cap of 93.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while DIBS trades at $2.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas DIBS's P/E ratio is -4.75. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to DIBS's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to DIBS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs GRWG Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, GRWG has a market cap of 64M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while GRWG trades at $1.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas GRWG's P/E ratio is -1.28. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to GRWG's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to GRWG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs QVCGP Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, QVCGP has a market cap of 55M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while QVCGP trades at $6.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas QVCGP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to QVCGP's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to QVCGP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs NHTC Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, NHTC has a market cap of 54.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while NHTC trades at $4.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas NHTC's P/E ratio is 119.25. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to NHTC's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to NHTC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs QVCGB Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, QVCGB has a market cap of 51.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while QVCGB trades at $30.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas QVCGB's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to QVCGB's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to QVCGB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs PRTS Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, PRTS has a market cap of 51.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while PRTS trades at $0.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas PRTS's P/E ratio is -1.01. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to PRTS's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to PRTS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs QRTEB Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, QRTEB has a market cap of 51.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while QRTEB trades at $2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas QRTEB's P/E ratio is -2.82. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to QRTEB's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to QRTEB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CTIB Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CTIB has a market cap of 48.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CTIB trades at $2.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CTIB's P/E ratio is -26.67. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CTIB's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to CTIB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs HOUR Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, HOUR has a market cap of 44.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while HOUR trades at $1.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas HOUR's P/E ratio is 125.40. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to HOUR's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to HOUR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BBBY Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BBBY has a market cap of 42M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BBBY trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BBBY's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BBBY's ROE of +2.66%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to BBBY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs SSU Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, SSU has a market cap of 36.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while SSU trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas SSU's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to SSU's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to SSU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs YSG Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, YSG has a market cap of 29.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while YSG trades at $6.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas YSG's P/E ratio is -8.06. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to YSG's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to YSG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs TLF Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, TLF has a market cap of 26.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while TLF trades at $3.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas TLF's P/E ratio is 2.09. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to TLF's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to TLF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BGFV Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BGFV has a market cap of 26.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BGFV trades at $1.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BGFV's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BGFV's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to BGFV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs KIRK Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, KIRK has a market cap of 25.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while KIRK trades at $1.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas KIRK's P/E ratio is -0.65. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to KIRK's ROE of -0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to KIRK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs JBDI Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, JBDI has a market cap of 25.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while JBDI trades at $1.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas JBDI's P/E ratio is -25.60. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to JBDI's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to JBDI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs CGTL Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, CGTL has a market cap of 19.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while CGTL trades at $0.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas CGTL's P/E ratio is 4.58. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to CGTL's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to CGTL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs QVCGA Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, QVCGA has a market cap of 17.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while QVCGA trades at $2.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas QVCGA's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to QVCGA's ROE of +4.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to QVCGA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs IPW Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, IPW has a market cap of 15.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while IPW trades at $0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas IPW's P/E ratio is -9.60. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to IPW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to IPW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs BOXD Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, BOXD has a market cap of 14M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while BOXD trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas BOXD's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to BOXD's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is less volatile compared to BOXD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ZOOZ Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ZOOZ has a market cap of 13.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ZOOZ trades at $1.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ZOOZ's P/E ratio is -1.05. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ZOOZ's ROE of -1.98%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to ZOOZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.
LITB vs ZKH Comparison
LITB plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LITB stands at 11.7M. In comparison, ZKH has a market cap of 13.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LITB is priced at $1.27, while ZKH trades at $2.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LITB currently has a P/E ratio of 10.58, whereas ZKH's P/E ratio is -15.55. In terms of profitability, LITB's ROE is +0.19%, compared to ZKH's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LITB is more volatile compared to ZKH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LITB.