Lucara Diamond Corp. (LUC.TO) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (LUC.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Other Precious Metals Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LUC.TO | CA$0.16 | +3.33% | 70.3M | 2.68 | CA$0.06 | N/A |
| CDE.TO | CA$22.78 | +0.35% | 23.5B | 45.39 | CA$0.50 | N/A |
| GMIN.TO | CA$39.83 | +5.20% | 9.5B | 20.57 | CA$1.95 | N/A |
| TFPM.TO | CA$42.04 | +4.94% | 8.7B | 24.36 | CA$1.73 | +0.75% |
| CGG.TO | CA$21.90 | +0.23% | 8.5B | 10.96 | CA$1.96 | +2.99% |
| PRU.TO | CA$4.99 | +4.95% | 6.9B | 14.51 | CA$0.35 | +1.82% |
| USA.TO | CA$6.48 | -4.57% | 4.7B | -414.40 | -CA$0.02 | N/A |
| ARIS.TO | CA$20.99 | -1.18% | 4.4B | 13.23 | CA$1.63 | N/A |
| AAUC.TO | CA$32.57 | +1.50% | 4.1B | 23.18 | CA$1.41 | N/A |
| PPTA.TO | CA$29.21 | -2.99% | 3.8B | -16.21 | -CA$1.87 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
LUC.TO vs CDE.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CDE.TO has a market cap of 23.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CDE.TO trades at CA$22.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CDE.TO's P/E ratio is 45.39. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CDE.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CDE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CDE.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs GMIN.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GMIN.TO has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GMIN.TO trades at CA$39.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GMIN.TO's P/E ratio is 20.57. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GMIN.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to GMIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GMIN.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs TFPM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, TFPM.TO has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while TFPM.TO trades at CA$42.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas TFPM.TO's P/E ratio is 24.36. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to TFPM.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to TFPM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check TFPM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs CGG.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CGG.TO has a market cap of 8.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CGG.TO trades at CA$21.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CGG.TO's P/E ratio is 10.96. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CGG.TO's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CGG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CGG.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs PRU.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, PRU.TO has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while PRU.TO trades at CA$4.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas PRU.TO's P/E ratio is 14.51. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to PRU.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to PRU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check PRU.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs USA.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, USA.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while USA.TO trades at CA$6.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas USA.TO's P/E ratio is -414.40. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to USA.TO's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to USA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check USA.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs ARIS.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ARIS.TO has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ARIS.TO trades at CA$20.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ARIS.TO's P/E ratio is 13.23. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ARIS.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ARIS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ARIS.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs AAUC.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, AAUC.TO has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while AAUC.TO trades at CA$32.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas AAUC.TO's P/E ratio is 23.18. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to AAUC.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to AAUC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check AAUC.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs PPTA.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, PPTA.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while PPTA.TO trades at CA$29.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas PPTA.TO's P/E ratio is -16.21. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to PPTA.TO's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to PPTA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check PPTA.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs GTWO.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GTWO.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GTWO.TO trades at CA$9.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GTWO.TO's P/E ratio is -254.41. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GTWO.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to GTWO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GTWO.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs ABRA.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ABRA.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ABRA.TO trades at CA$13.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ABRA.TO's P/E ratio is -35.27. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ABRA.TO's ROE of -0.95%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ABRA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ABRA.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs SIL.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, SIL.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while SIL.TO trades at CA$15.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas SIL.TO's P/E ratio is 18.30. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to SIL.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to SIL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check SIL.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs SLS.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, SLS.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while SLS.TO trades at CA$11.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas SLS.TO's P/E ratio is -44.25. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to SLS.TO's ROE of +0.61%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to SLS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check SLS.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs IAU.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, IAU.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while IAU.TO trades at CA$2.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas IAU.TO's P/E ratio is -8.90. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to IAU.TO's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to IAU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check IAU.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs ASM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ASM.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ASM.TO trades at CA$8.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ASM.TO's P/E ratio is 29.11. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ASM.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ASM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ASM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs MUX.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, MUX.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while MUX.TO trades at CA$24.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas MUX.TO's P/E ratio is 13.97. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to MUX.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to MUX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check MUX.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs GATO.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GATO.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GATO.TO trades at CA$21.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GATO.TO's P/E ratio is 32.22. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GATO.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to GATO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GATO.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs ELE.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ELE.TO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ELE.TO trades at CA$22.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ELE.TO's P/E ratio is -105.20. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ELE.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ELE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ELE.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs GGD.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GGD.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GGD.TO trades at CA$3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GGD.TO's P/E ratio is 20.82. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GGD.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to GGD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GGD.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs LMCU.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, LMCU.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while LMCU.TO trades at CA$10.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas LMCU.TO's P/E ratio is -260.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to LMCU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to LMCU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check LMCU.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs III.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, III.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while III.TO trades at CA$6.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas III.TO's P/E ratio is -52.27. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to III.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to III.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check III.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs OM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, OM.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while OM.TO trades at CA$1.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas OM.TO's P/E ratio is -21.75. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to OM.TO's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to OM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check OM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs NUAG.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, NUAG.TO has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while NUAG.TO trades at CA$5.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas NUAG.TO's P/E ratio is -159.53. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to NUAG.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to NUAG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check NUAG.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs TLG.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, TLG.TO has a market cap of 681.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while TLG.TO trades at CA$1.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas TLG.TO's P/E ratio is -11.53. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to TLG.TO's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to TLG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check TLG.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs MNO.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, MNO.TO has a market cap of 641.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while MNO.TO trades at CA$1.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas MNO.TO's P/E ratio is -22.02. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to MNO.TO's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to MNO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check MNO.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs FVL.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, FVL.TO has a market cap of 577.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while FVL.TO trades at CA$0.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas FVL.TO's P/E ratio is -689.66. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to FVL.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to FVL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check FVL.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs SLVR.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, SLVR.TO has a market cap of 424.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while SLVR.TO trades at CA$0.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas SLVR.TO's P/E ratio is -58.78. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to SLVR.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to SLVR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check SLVR.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs VOXR.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, VOXR.TO has a market cap of 384.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while VOXR.TO trades at CA$6.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas VOXR.TO's P/E ratio is 14.89. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to VOXR.TO's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to VOXR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check VOXR.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs ASE.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ASE.CN has a market cap of 349.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ASE.CN trades at CA$0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ASE.CN's P/E ratio is -2.38. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ASE.CN's ROE of -13.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ASE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ASE.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ALLI.NE Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ALLI.NE has a market cap of 276.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ALLI.NE trades at CA$1.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ALLI.NE's P/E ratio is -24.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ALLI.NE's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ALLI.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ALLI.NE's competition here
LUC.TO vs PTM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, PTM.TO has a market cap of 238.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while PTM.TO trades at CA$1.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas PTM.TO's P/E ratio is -66.38. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to PTM.TO's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to PTM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check PTM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs HSLV.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, HSLV.CN has a market cap of 230.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while HSLV.CN trades at CA$2.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas HSLV.CN's P/E ratio is -73.33. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to HSLV.CN's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to HSLV.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check HSLV.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ORV.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ORV.TO has a market cap of 207.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ORV.TO trades at CA$1.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ORV.TO's P/E ratio is -83.98. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ORV.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ORV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ORV.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs GENM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GENM.TO has a market cap of 174.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GENM.TO trades at CA$0.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GENM.TO's P/E ratio is -3.88. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GENM.TO's ROE of +0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to GENM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GENM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs XAM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, XAM.TO has a market cap of 163.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while XAM.TO trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas XAM.TO's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to XAM.TO's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to XAM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check XAM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs FURY.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, FURY.TO has a market cap of 146.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while FURY.TO trades at CA$0.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas FURY.TO's P/E ratio is -7.52. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to FURY.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to FURY.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check FURY.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs CCM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CCM.TO has a market cap of 113.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CCM.TO trades at CA$0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CCM.TO's P/E ratio is -29.43. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CCM.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CCM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CCM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs WM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, WM.TO has a market cap of 110M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while WM.TO trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas WM.TO's P/E ratio is -3.09. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to WM.TO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to WM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check WM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs OCG.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, OCG.TO has a market cap of 107.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while OCG.TO trades at CA$0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas OCG.TO's P/E ratio is -6.48. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to OCG.TO's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to OCG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check OCG.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs EMPS.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, EMPS.CN has a market cap of 68.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while EMPS.CN trades at CA$0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas EMPS.CN's P/E ratio is -14.98. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to EMPS.CN's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to EMPS.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check EMPS.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs BLO.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, BLO.CN has a market cap of 65M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while BLO.CN trades at CA$0.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas BLO.CN's P/E ratio is -9.93. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to BLO.CN's ROE of -3.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to BLO.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check BLO.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ESM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ESM.TO has a market cap of 64.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ESM.TO trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ESM.TO's P/E ratio is -8.78. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ESM.TO's ROE of +1.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to ESM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ESM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs ELR.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ELR.TO has a market cap of 62.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ELR.TO trades at CA$0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ELR.TO's P/E ratio is -2.90. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ELR.TO's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ELR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ELR.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs NVLH.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, NVLH.CN has a market cap of 62.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while NVLH.CN trades at CA$0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas NVLH.CN's P/E ratio is -24.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to NVLH.CN's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to NVLH.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check NVLH.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs CUAU.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CUAU.CN has a market cap of 59M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CUAU.CN trades at CA$1.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CUAU.CN's P/E ratio is -117.42. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CUAU.CN's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CUAU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CUAU.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs NVRO.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, NVRO.CN has a market cap of 53.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while NVRO.CN trades at CA$0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas NVRO.CN's P/E ratio is -16.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to NVRO.CN's ROE of +8.97%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to NVRO.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check NVRO.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs DMET.NE Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, DMET.NE has a market cap of 47.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while DMET.NE trades at CA$0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas DMET.NE's P/E ratio is -1.28. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to DMET.NE's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO and DMET.NE have similar daily volatility (6.45).Check DMET.NE's competition here
LUC.TO vs MMET.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, MMET.CN has a market cap of 39.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while MMET.CN trades at CA$0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas MMET.CN's P/E ratio is -2.08. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to MMET.CN's ROE of -0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to MMET.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check MMET.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ESAU.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ESAU.CN has a market cap of 36.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ESAU.CN trades at CA$0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ESAU.CN's P/E ratio is -12.84. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ESAU.CN's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ESAU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ESAU.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs FTEL.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, FTEL.CN has a market cap of 36.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while FTEL.CN trades at CA$0.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas FTEL.CN's P/E ratio is -11.33. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to FTEL.CN's ROE of +3.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to FTEL.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check FTEL.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs PAU.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, PAU.CN has a market cap of 32.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while PAU.CN trades at CA$0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas PAU.CN's P/E ratio is -28.55. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to PAU.CN's ROE of -0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to PAU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check PAU.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ITKO.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ITKO.CN has a market cap of 27.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ITKO.CN trades at CA$0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ITKO.CN's P/E ratio is -7.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ITKO.CN's ROE of -17.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to ITKO.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ITKO.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs LFLR.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, LFLR.CN has a market cap of 24M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while LFLR.CN trades at CA$0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas LFLR.CN's P/E ratio is -2.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to LFLR.CN's ROE of -1.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to LFLR.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check LFLR.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs AUCU.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, AUCU.CN has a market cap of 23.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while AUCU.CN trades at CA$0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas AUCU.CN's P/E ratio is -11.43. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to AUCU.CN's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to AUCU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check AUCU.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs AMC.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, AMC.TO has a market cap of 22.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while AMC.TO trades at CA$0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas AMC.TO's P/E ratio is -1.34. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to AMC.TO's ROE of -0.90%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to AMC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check AMC.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs HTRC.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, HTRC.CN has a market cap of 21.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while HTRC.CN trades at CA$0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas HTRC.CN's P/E ratio is -16.85. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to HTRC.CN's ROE of +0.99%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to HTRC.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check HTRC.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs DIAM.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, DIAM.TO has a market cap of 19.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while DIAM.TO trades at CA$0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas DIAM.TO's P/E ratio is -3.68. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to DIAM.TO's ROE of -0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to DIAM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check DIAM.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs CUPR.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CUPR.CN has a market cap of 18.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CUPR.CN trades at CA$0.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CUPR.CN's P/E ratio is -4.27. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CUPR.CN's ROE of -19.49%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CUPR.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CUPR.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs SLV.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, SLV.CN has a market cap of 14.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while SLV.CN trades at CA$0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas SLV.CN's P/E ratio is -13.07. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to SLV.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to SLV.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check SLV.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs QIM.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, QIM.CN has a market cap of 14.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while QIM.CN trades at CA$0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas QIM.CN's P/E ratio is -6.16. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to QIM.CN's ROE of -0.94%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to QIM.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check QIM.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs GLM.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GLM.CN has a market cap of 12.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GLM.CN trades at CA$0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GLM.CN's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GLM.CN's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to GLM.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GLM.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs AUAG.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, AUAG.CN has a market cap of 11.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while AUAG.CN trades at CA$0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas AUAG.CN's P/E ratio is 1.28. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to AUAG.CN's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to AUAG.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check AUAG.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs BAD.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, BAD.CN has a market cap of 9.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while BAD.CN trades at CA$0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas BAD.CN's P/E ratio is 3.83. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to BAD.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to BAD.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check BAD.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs PNGC.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, PNGC.CN has a market cap of 9.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while PNGC.CN trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas PNGC.CN's P/E ratio is -20.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to PNGC.CN's ROE of +10.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to PNGC.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check PNGC.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs FNX.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, FNX.CN has a market cap of 8.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while FNX.CN trades at CA$0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas FNX.CN's P/E ratio is -36.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to FNX.CN's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to FNX.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check FNX.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs SIZE.NE Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, SIZE.NE has a market cap of 8.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while SIZE.NE trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas SIZE.NE's P/E ratio is -0.32. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to SIZE.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to SIZE.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check SIZE.NE's competition here
LUC.TO vs IGLD.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, IGLD.CN has a market cap of 8.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while IGLD.CN trades at CA$0.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas IGLD.CN's P/E ratio is -1.38. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to IGLD.CN's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. LUC.TO has daily volatility of 6.45 and IGLD.CN has daily volatility of N/A.Check IGLD.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ATHA.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ATHA.CN has a market cap of 8.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ATHA.CN trades at CA$0.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ATHA.CN's P/E ratio is 2.24. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ATHA.CN's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to ATHA.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ATHA.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs UUU.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, UUU.CN has a market cap of 8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while UUU.CN trades at CA$0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas UUU.CN's P/E ratio is -0.60. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to UUU.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to UUU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check UUU.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ACDX.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ACDX.CN has a market cap of 8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ACDX.CN trades at CA$0.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ACDX.CN's P/E ratio is -43.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ACDX.CN's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ACDX.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ACDX.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs CFE.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CFE.CN has a market cap of 6.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CFE.CN trades at CA$0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CFE.CN's P/E ratio is -9.06. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CFE.CN's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CFE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CFE.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs WDGY.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, WDGY.CN has a market cap of 6.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while WDGY.CN trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas WDGY.CN's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to WDGY.CN's ROE of +1.68%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to WDGY.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check WDGY.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs NSJ.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, NSJ.CN has a market cap of 5.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while NSJ.CN trades at CA$0.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas NSJ.CN's P/E ratio is -27.81. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to NSJ.CN's ROE of +83.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to NSJ.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check NSJ.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs GMO.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GMO.TO has a market cap of 5.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GMO.TO trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GMO.TO's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GMO.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to GMO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GMO.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs LECR.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, LECR.CN has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while LECR.CN trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas LECR.CN's P/E ratio is -133.33. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to LECR.CN's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to LECR.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check LECR.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs MLKM.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, MLKM.CN has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while MLKM.CN trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas MLKM.CN's P/E ratio is -6.54. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to MLKM.CN's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to MLKM.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check MLKM.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs PMS.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, PMS.CN has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while PMS.CN trades at CA$0.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas PMS.CN's P/E ratio is -21.67. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to PMS.CN's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to PMS.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check PMS.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs HML.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, HML.CN has a market cap of 4.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while HML.CN trades at CA$0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas HML.CN's P/E ratio is -0.31. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to HML.CN's ROE of +34.24%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to HML.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check HML.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs MEO.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, MEO.CN has a market cap of 4.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while MEO.CN trades at CA$0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas MEO.CN's P/E ratio is -1.36. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to MEO.CN's ROE of -0.80%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to MEO.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check MEO.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs CDN.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CDN.CN has a market cap of 4.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CDN.CN trades at CA$0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CDN.CN's P/E ratio is -2.08. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CDN.CN's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CDN.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CDN.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs MPVD.TO Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, MPVD.TO has a market cap of 4.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while MPVD.TO trades at CA$0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas MPVD.TO's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to MPVD.TO's ROE of -3.97%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to MPVD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check MPVD.TO's competition here
LUC.TO vs WBGD.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, WBGD.CN has a market cap of 4.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while WBGD.CN trades at CA$0.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas WBGD.CN's P/E ratio is -1.36. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to WBGD.CN's ROE of +9.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to WBGD.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check WBGD.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ASHL.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ASHL.CN has a market cap of 3.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ASHL.CN trades at CA$0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ASHL.CN's P/E ratio is -1.20. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ASHL.CN's ROE of -1.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to ASHL.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ASHL.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs TMAS.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, TMAS.CN has a market cap of 3.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while TMAS.CN trades at CA$0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas TMAS.CN's P/E ratio is -0.63. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to TMAS.CN's ROE of -1.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to TMAS.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check TMAS.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs ORGN.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, ORGN.CN has a market cap of 3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while ORGN.CN trades at CA$0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas ORGN.CN's P/E ratio is -16.25. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to ORGN.CN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to ORGN.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check ORGN.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs LTHM.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, LTHM.CN has a market cap of 3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while LTHM.CN trades at CA$0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas LTHM.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to LTHM.CN's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to LTHM.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check LTHM.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs COMT.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, COMT.CN has a market cap of 2.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while COMT.CN trades at CA$0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas COMT.CN's P/E ratio is -0.83. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to COMT.CN's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to COMT.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check COMT.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs WMC.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, WMC.CN has a market cap of 2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while WMC.CN trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas WMC.CN's P/E ratio is -11.73. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to WMC.CN's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to WMC.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check WMC.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs NVR.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, NVR.CN has a market cap of 1.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while NVR.CN trades at CA$0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas NVR.CN's P/E ratio is -18.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to NVR.CN's ROE of -1.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to NVR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check NVR.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs CRC.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, CRC.CN has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while CRC.CN trades at CA$0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas CRC.CN's P/E ratio is -3.70. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to CRC.CN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to CRC.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check CRC.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs TAI.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, TAI.CN has a market cap of 1.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while TAI.CN trades at CA$0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas TAI.CN's P/E ratio is 0.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to TAI.CN's ROE of -3.81%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to TAI.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check TAI.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs RGN.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, RGN.CN has a market cap of 1.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while RGN.CN trades at CA$0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas RGN.CN's P/E ratio is -2.37. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to RGN.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to RGN.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check RGN.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs SAND.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, SAND.CN has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while SAND.CN trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas SAND.CN's P/E ratio is -8.50. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to SAND.CN's ROE of +2.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to SAND.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check SAND.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs GLDS.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GLDS.CN has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GLDS.CN trades at CA$0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GLDS.CN's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GLDS.CN's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to GLDS.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GLDS.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs GLDR.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, GLDR.CN has a market cap of 1.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while GLDR.CN trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas GLDR.CN's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to GLDR.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is less volatile compared to GLDR.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check GLDR.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs TGLD.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, TGLD.CN has a market cap of 943.4K. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while TGLD.CN trades at CA$0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas TGLD.CN's P/E ratio is -1.03. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to TGLD.CN's ROE of -2.63%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to TGLD.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check TGLD.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs FABL.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, FABL.CN has a market cap of 869.8K. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while FABL.CN trades at CA$0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas FABL.CN's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to FABL.CN's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to FABL.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check FABL.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs TAUR.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, TAUR.CN has a market cap of 848.7K. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while TAUR.CN trades at CA$0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas TAUR.CN's P/E ratio is -26.63. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to TAUR.CN's ROE of -2.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to TAUR.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check TAUR.CN's competition here
LUC.TO vs AGE.CN Comparison June 2026
LUC.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUC.TO stands at 70.3M. In comparison, AGE.CN has a market cap of 327.4K. Regarding current trading prices, LUC.TO is priced at CA$0.16, while AGE.CN trades at CA$0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUC.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 2.68, whereas AGE.CN's P/E ratio is -1.25. In terms of profitability, LUC.TO's ROE is +0.04%, compared to AGE.CN's ROE of -2.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LUC.TO is more volatile compared to AGE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUC.TO.Check AGE.CN's competition here