Lundin Gold Inc.
Lundin Gold Inc. (LUG.TO) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (LUG.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Gold Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LUG.TO | CA$87.06 | -0.64% | 21.1B | 16.77 | CA$5.19 | +5.65% |
| NGT.TO | CA$116.00 | -1.06% | 127.4B | 15.20 | CA$7.63 | +0.59% |
| AEM.TO | CA$244.94 | +0.04% | 122.7B | 16.77 | CA$14.61 | +0.94% |
| ABX.TO | CA$56.88 | +1.16% | 95.3B | 11.42 | CA$4.98 | +2.07% |
| WPM.TO | CA$175.43 | +0.40% | 79.7B | 32.19 | CA$5.45 | +0.55% |
| FNV.TO | CA$311.23 | +0.52% | 60B | 31.99 | CA$9.73 | +0.70% |
| 0ABX.L | CA$29.58 | +1.34% | 50.9B | 16.34 | CA$1.81 | +3.93% |
| K.TO | CA$39.52 | +0.43% | 47.3B | 12.24 | CA$3.23 | +0.47% |
| AGI.TO | CA$54.13 | -0.18% | 22.7B | 15.64 | CA$3.46 | +0.29% |
| EDV.TO | CA$80.50 | -0.84% | 19.5B | 16.81 | CA$4.79 | +2.47% |
Stock Comparison
LUG.TO vs NGT.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, NGT.TO has a market cap of 127.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while NGT.TO trades at CA$116.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas NGT.TO's P/E ratio is 15.20. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to NGT.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to NGT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check NGT.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AEM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AEM.TO has a market cap of 122.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AEM.TO trades at CA$244.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AEM.TO's P/E ratio is 16.77. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AEM.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to AEM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AEM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ABX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ABX.TO has a market cap of 95.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ABX.TO trades at CA$56.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ABX.TO's P/E ratio is 11.42. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ABX.TO's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to ABX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ABX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs WPM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, WPM.TO has a market cap of 79.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while WPM.TO trades at CA$175.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas WPM.TO's P/E ratio is 32.19. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to WPM.TO's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to WPM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check WPM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs FNV.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, FNV.TO has a market cap of 60B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while FNV.TO trades at CA$311.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas FNV.TO's P/E ratio is 31.99. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to FNV.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to FNV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check FNV.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs 0ABX.L Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, 0ABX.L has a market cap of 50.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while 0ABX.L trades at CA$29.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas 0ABX.L's P/E ratio is 16.34. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to 0ABX.L's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to 0ABX.L. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check 0ABX.L's competition here
LUG.TO vs K.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, K.TO has a market cap of 47.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while K.TO trades at CA$39.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas K.TO's P/E ratio is 12.24. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to K.TO's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to K.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check K.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AGI.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AGI.TO has a market cap of 22.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AGI.TO trades at CA$54.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AGI.TO's P/E ratio is 15.64. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AGI.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to AGI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AGI.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs EDV.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, EDV.TO has a market cap of 19.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while EDV.TO trades at CA$80.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas EDV.TO's P/E ratio is 16.81. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to EDV.TO's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to EDV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check EDV.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs NCM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, NCM.TO has a market cap of 18.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while NCM.TO trades at CA$20.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas NCM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.21. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to NCM.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to NCM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check NCM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs IMG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, IMG.TO has a market cap of 13.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while IMG.TO trades at CA$23.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas IMG.TO's P/E ratio is 9.83. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to IMG.TO's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to IMG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check IMG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs EQX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, EQX.TO has a market cap of 13.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while EQX.TO trades at CA$16.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas EQX.TO's P/E ratio is 33.27. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to EQX.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to EQX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check EQX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs NGD.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, NGD.TO has a market cap of 9.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while NGD.TO trades at CA$12.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas NGD.TO's P/E ratio is 8.22. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to NGD.TO's ROE of +0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to NGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check NGD.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs OR.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, OR.TO has a market cap of 9.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while OR.TO trades at CA$49.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas OR.TO's P/E ratio is 26.65. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to OR.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to OR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check OR.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs OGC.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, OGC.TO has a market cap of 9.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while OGC.TO trades at CA$40.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas OGC.TO's P/E ratio is 9.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to OGC.TO's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to OGC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check OGC.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ELD.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ELD.TO has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ELD.TO trades at CA$43.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ELD.TO's P/E ratio is 10.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ELD.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to ELD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ELD.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SSRM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SSRM.TO has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SSRM.TO trades at CA$41.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SSRM.TO's P/E ratio is 11.62. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SSRM.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SSRM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SSRM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs BTO.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, BTO.TO has a market cap of 8.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while BTO.TO trades at CA$6.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas BTO.TO's P/E ratio is 12.31. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to BTO.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to BTO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check BTO.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs DPM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, DPM.TO has a market cap of 8.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while DPM.TO trades at CA$45.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas DPM.TO's P/E ratio is 12.95. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to DPM.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to DPM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check DPM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs YRI.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, YRI.TO has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while YRI.TO trades at CA$7.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas YRI.TO's P/E ratio is -5.72. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to YRI.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to YRI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check YRI.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs PRU.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, PRU.TO has a market cap of 7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while PRU.TO trades at CA$5.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas PRU.TO's P/E ratio is 14.42. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to PRU.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to PRU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check PRU.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs KNT.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, KNT.TO has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while KNT.TO trades at CA$24.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas KNT.TO's P/E ratio is 13.69. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to KNT.TO's ROE of +0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to KNT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check KNT.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs OLA.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, OLA.TO has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while OLA.TO trades at CA$16.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas OLA.TO's P/E ratio is 17.08. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to OLA.TO's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to OLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check OLA.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs TXG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, TXG.TO has a market cap of 5.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while TXG.TO trades at CA$58.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas TXG.TO's P/E ratio is 6.85. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to TXG.TO's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to TXG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check TXG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs MAU.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, MAU.TO has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while MAU.TO trades at CA$14.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas MAU.TO's P/E ratio is -54.08. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to MAU.TO's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to MAU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check MAU.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SSL.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SSL.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SSL.TO trades at CA$16.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SSL.TO's P/E ratio is 95.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SSL.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to SSL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SSL.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs NG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, NG.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while NG.TO trades at CA$10.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas NG.TO's P/E ratio is -29.67. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to NG.TO's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to NG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check NG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs WGX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, WGX.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while WGX.TO trades at CA$4.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas WGX.TO's P/E ratio is 18.96. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to WGX.TO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to WGX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check WGX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AAUC.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AAUC.TO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AAUC.TO trades at CA$36.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AAUC.TO's P/E ratio is -25.05. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AAUC.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to AAUC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AAUC.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs CG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CG.TO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CG.TO trades at CA$22.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CG.TO's P/E ratio is 5.37. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CG.TO's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to CG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SEA.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SEA.TO has a market cap of 4.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SEA.TO trades at CA$41.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SEA.TO's P/E ratio is -58.83. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SEA.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to SEA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SEA.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs FVI.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, FVI.TO has a market cap of 4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while FVI.TO trades at CA$12.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas FVI.TO's P/E ratio is 8.72. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to FVI.TO's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to FVI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check FVI.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs WDO.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, WDO.TO has a market cap of 3.9B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while WDO.TO trades at CA$26.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas WDO.TO's P/E ratio is 9.82. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to WDO.TO's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to WDO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check WDO.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ORA.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ORA.TO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ORA.TO trades at CA$45.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ORA.TO's P/E ratio is -40.32. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ORA.TO's ROE of -0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to ORA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ORA.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs CEE.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CEE.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CEE.TO trades at CA$2.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CEE.TO's P/E ratio is 24.80. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CEE.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to CEE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CEE.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SGD.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SGD.TO has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SGD.TO trades at CA$14.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SGD.TO's P/E ratio is -41.58. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SGD.TO's ROE of -0.64%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SGD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SGD.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs CXB.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CXB.TO has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CXB.TO trades at CA$2.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CXB.TO's P/E ratio is 29.90. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CXB.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to CXB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CXB.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs GTWO.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, GTWO.TO has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while GTWO.TO trades at CA$9.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas GTWO.TO's P/E ratio is -243.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to GTWO.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to GTWO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check GTWO.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SXGC.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SXGC.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SXGC.TO trades at CA$9.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SXGC.TO's P/E ratio is -462.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SXGC.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to SXGC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SXGC.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs RUP.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, RUP.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while RUP.TO trades at CA$10.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas RUP.TO's P/E ratio is -252.25. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to RUP.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to RUP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check RUP.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs CNL.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CNL.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CNL.TO trades at CA$21.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CNL.TO's P/E ratio is -32.52. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CNL.TO's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to CNL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CNL.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ALK.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ALK.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ALK.TO trades at CA$1.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ALK.TO's P/E ratio is 18.13. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ALK.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to ALK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ALK.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs OSK.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, OSK.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while OSK.TO trades at CA$4.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas OSK.TO's P/E ratio is -489.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to OSK.TO's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to OSK.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check OSK.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs IAU.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, IAU.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while IAU.TO trades at CA$2.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas IAU.TO's P/E ratio is -5.15. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to IAU.TO's ROE of -0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to IAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check IAU.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs MSA.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, MSA.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while MSA.TO trades at CA$5.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas MSA.TO's P/E ratio is 6.16. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to MSA.TO's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to MSA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check MSA.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs RIO.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, RIO.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while RIO.TO trades at CA$3.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas RIO.TO's P/E ratio is 305.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to RIO.TO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to RIO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check RIO.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ORE.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ORE.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ORE.TO trades at CA$2.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ORE.TO's P/E ratio is 12.21. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ORE.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to ORE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ORE.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SBB.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SBB.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SBB.TO trades at CA$2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SBB.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SBB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SBB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SBB.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs KRR.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, KRR.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while KRR.TO trades at CA$6.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas KRR.TO's P/E ratio is 83.75. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to KRR.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to KRR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check KRR.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ATX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ATX.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ATX.TO trades at CA$3.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ATX.TO's P/E ratio is -12.12. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ATX.TO's ROE of -1.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to ATX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ATX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AUXX.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AUXX.V has a market cap of 941.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AUXX.V trades at CA$1.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AUXX.V's P/E ratio is -78.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AUXX.V's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to AUXX.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AUXX.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs GAU.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, GAU.TO has a market cap of 798.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while GAU.TO trades at CA$3.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas GAU.TO's P/E ratio is 20.40. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to GAU.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to GAU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check GAU.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs LGD.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, LGD.TO has a market cap of 745.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while LGD.TO trades at CA$1.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas LGD.TO's P/E ratio is -20.14. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to LGD.TO's ROE of -0.77%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to LGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check LGD.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs PRB.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, PRB.TO has a market cap of 742.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while PRB.TO trades at CA$3.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas PRB.TO's P/E ratio is -30.33. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to PRB.TO's ROE of -0.87%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to PRB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check PRB.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs ITH.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ITH.TO has a market cap of 702M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ITH.TO trades at CA$3.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ITH.TO's P/E ratio is -339.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ITH.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to ITH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ITH.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs FF.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, FF.TO has a market cap of 664.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while FF.TO 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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas FF.TO's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to FF.TO's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to FF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check FF.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AR.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AR.TO has a market cap of 659.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AR.TO trades at CA$0.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AR.TO's P/E ratio is -1.44. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AR.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to AR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AR.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs BSX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, BSX.TO has a market cap of 602.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while BSX.TO trades at CA$1.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas BSX.TO's P/E ratio is -64.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to BSX.TO's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to BSX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check BSX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs FDR.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, FDR.V has a market cap of 583.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while FDR.V trades at CA$5.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas FDR.V's P/E ratio is -38.69. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to FDR.V's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to FDR.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check FDR.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs ASE.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ASE.CN has a market cap of 531.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ASE.CN trades at CA$1.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ASE.CN's P/E ratio is -3.62. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ASE.CN's ROE of -13.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to ASE.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ASE.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs JAG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, JAG.TO has a market cap of 511.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while JAG.TO trades at CA$5.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas JAG.TO's P/E ratio is -33.28. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to JAG.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to JAG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check JAG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs TRX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, TRX.TO has a market cap of 488.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while TRX.TO trades at CA$1.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas TRX.TO's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to TRX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to TRX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check TRX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs MND.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, MND.TO has a market cap of 483.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while MND.TO trades at CA$5.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas MND.TO's P/E ratio is 6.31. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to MND.TO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to MND.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check MND.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SBI.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SBI.TO has a market cap of 453.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SBI.TO trades at CA$5.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SBI.TO's P/E ratio is 6.11. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SBI.TO's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SBI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SBI.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs VGZ.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, VGZ.TO has a market cap of 443.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while VGZ.TO trades at CA$3.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas VGZ.TO's P/E ratio is -33.78. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to VGZ.TO's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to VGZ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check VGZ.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SGD.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SGD.CN has a market cap of 416.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SGD.CN 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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SGD.CN's P/E ratio is -28.64. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SGD.CN's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SGD.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SGD.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs MOZ.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, MOZ.TO has a market cap of 380M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while MOZ.TO trades at CA$0.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas MOZ.TO's P/E ratio is -16.20. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to MOZ.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to MOZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check MOZ.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs GOLD.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, GOLD.TO has a market cap of 329.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while GOLD.TO trades at CA$1.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas GOLD.TO's P/E ratio is -19.25. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to GOLD.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to GOLD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check GOLD.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs STGO.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, STGO.TO has a market cap of 308.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while STGO.TO trades at CA$1.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas STGO.TO's P/E ratio is 5.08. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to STGO.TO's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to STGO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check STGO.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs LN.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, LN.TO has a market cap of 253.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while LN.TO trades at CA$1.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas LN.TO's P/E ratio is -34.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to LN.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to LN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check LN.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs CBR.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CBR.V has a market cap of 253.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CBR.V trades at CA$0.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CBR.V's P/E ratio is -18.20. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CBR.V's ROE of -1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to CBR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CBR.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs ELO.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ELO.TO has a market cap of 252.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ELO.TO trades at CA$2.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ELO.TO's P/E ratio is -26.37. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ELO.TO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to ELO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ELO.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs DNG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, DNG.TO has a market cap of 250M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while DNG.TO trades at CA$5.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas DNG.TO's P/E ratio is 8.05. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to DNG.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to DNG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check DNG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs NEXG.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, NEXG.V has a market cap of 240.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while NEXG.V trades at CA$1.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas NEXG.V's P/E ratio is -6.41. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to NEXG.V's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to NEXG.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check NEXG.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs GHRT.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, GHRT.V has a market cap of 193.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while GHRT.V trades at CA$1.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas GHRT.V's P/E ratio is -10.42. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to GHRT.V's ROE of -0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to GHRT.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check GHRT.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs STLR.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, STLR.TO has a market cap of 179.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while STLR.TO trades at CA$1.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas STLR.TO's P/E ratio is -9.06. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to STLR.TO's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to STLR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check STLR.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs G.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, G.TO has a market cap of 145.2M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while G.TO trades at CA$1.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas G.TO's P/E ratio is -13.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to G.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to G.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check G.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs XTG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, XTG.TO has a market cap of 133.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while XTG.TO trades at CA$2.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas XTG.TO's P/E ratio is 26.09. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to XTG.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to XTG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check XTG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs TNX.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, TNX.TO has a market cap of 128.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while TNX.TO 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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas TNX.TO's P/E ratio is 46.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to TNX.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to TNX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check TNX.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs CGC.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CGC.V has a market cap of 126.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CGC.V trades at CA$0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CGC.V's P/E ratio is -30.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CGC.V's ROE of -4.54%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to CGC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CGC.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs BLLG.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, BLLG.CN has a market cap of 121.4M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while BLLG.CN trades at CA$0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas BLLG.CN's P/E ratio is -16.80. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to BLLG.CN's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to BLLG.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check BLLG.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs SANU.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SANU.CN has a market cap of 120.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SANU.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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SANU.CN's P/E ratio is -28.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SANU.CN's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SANU.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SANU.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs COG.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, COG.TO has a market cap of 114.5M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while COG.TO 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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas COG.TO's P/E ratio is -56.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to COG.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to COG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check COG.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs VEIN.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, VEIN.V has a market cap of 114.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while VEIN.V trades at CA$0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas VEIN.V's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to VEIN.V's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to VEIN.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check VEIN.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs CCM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, CCM.TO has a market cap of 109.1M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while CCM.TO trades at CA$0.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas CCM.TO's P/E ratio is -51.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to CCM.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to CCM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check CCM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AMQ.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AMQ.CN has a market cap of 108.3M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AMQ.CN trades at CA$0.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AMQ.CN's P/E ratio is -70.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AMQ.CN's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to AMQ.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AMQ.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs YARR.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, YARR.V has a market cap of 103.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while YARR.V trades at CA$0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas YARR.V's P/E ratio is -10.25. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to YARR.V's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to YARR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check YARR.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs MAW.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, MAW.TO has a market cap of 102M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while MAW.TO trades at CA$0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas MAW.TO's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to MAW.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to MAW.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check MAW.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs AGC.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, AGC.CN has a market cap of 86.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while AGC.CN trades at CA$0.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas AGC.CN's P/E ratio is -9.71. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to AGC.CN's ROE of +0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to AGC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check AGC.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs ESM.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ESM.TO has a market cap of 81.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ESM.TO 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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ESM.TO's P/E ratio is -18.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ESM.TO's ROE of +1.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to ESM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ESM.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs SIG.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, SIG.CN has a market cap of 80M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while SIG.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.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas SIG.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to SIG.CN's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to SIG.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check SIG.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs NOM.CN Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, NOM.CN has a market cap of 73.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while NOM.CN trades at CA$1.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas NOM.CN's P/E ratio is -9.64. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to NOM.CN's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to NOM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check NOM.CN's competition here
LUG.TO vs HMR.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, HMR.V has a market cap of 64.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while HMR.V trades at CA$0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas HMR.V's P/E ratio is -5.60. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to HMR.V's ROE of -3.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to HMR.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check HMR.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs TML.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, TML.TO has a market cap of 64.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while TML.TO trades at CA$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas TML.TO's P/E ratio is -3.14. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to TML.TO's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to TML.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check TML.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs GPAC.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, GPAC.V has a market cap of 62.8M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while GPAC.V trades at CA$0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas GPAC.V's P/E ratio is -13.67. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to GPAC.V's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to GPAC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check GPAC.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs KLDC.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, KLDC.V has a market cap of 55.7M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while KLDC.V trades at CA$0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas KLDC.V's P/E ratio is -16.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to KLDC.V's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to KLDC.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check KLDC.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs ME.TO Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, ME.TO has a market cap of 50.9M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while ME.TO trades at CA$0.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas ME.TO's P/E ratio is -1.85. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to ME.TO's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is less volatile compared to ME.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check ME.TO's competition here
LUG.TO vs VLC.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, VLC.V has a market cap of 44M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while VLC.V trades at CA$0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas VLC.V's P/E ratio is -21.50. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to VLC.V's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to VLC.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check VLC.V's competition here
LUG.TO vs GSR.V Comparison May 2026
LUG.TO plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, LUG.TO stands at 21.1B. In comparison, GSR.V has a market cap of 40.6M. Regarding current trading prices, LUG.TO is priced at CA$87.06, while GSR.V trades at CA$0.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
LUG.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 16.77, whereas GSR.V's P/E ratio is -0.73. In terms of profitability, LUG.TO's ROE is +0.68%, compared to GSR.V's ROE of -82.95%. Regarding short-term risk, LUG.TO is more volatile compared to GSR.V. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LUG.TO.Check GSR.V's competition here