Las Vegas Sands Corp.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, FLUT has a market cap of 41.42B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while FLUT trades at $234.45.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas FLUT's P/E ratio is 976.88. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to FLUT's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to FLUT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PDYPY has a market cap of 36.73B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PDYPY trades at $103.75.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PDYPY's P/E ratio is -494.05. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PDYPY's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PDYPY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PDYPF has a market cap of 36.29B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PDYPF trades at $205.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PDYPF's P/E ratio is -476.74. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PDYPF's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PDYPF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ARLUF has a market cap of 25.30B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ARLUF trades at $40.56.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ARLUF's P/E ratio is 30.73. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ARLUF's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to ARLUF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, DKNG has a market cap of 18.11B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while DKNG trades at $36.23.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas DKNG's P/E ratio is -34.50. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to DKNG's ROE of -0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to DKNG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GXYYY has a market cap of 17.19B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GXYYY trades at $19.65.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GXYYY's P/E ratio is 15.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GXYYY's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GXYYY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SCHYY has a market cap of 16.09B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SCHYY trades at $19.88.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SCHYY's P/E ratio is 15.41. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SCHYY's ROE of +3.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to SCHYY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SCHYF has a market cap of 14.97B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SCHYF trades at $1.85.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SCHYF's P/E ratio is 14.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SCHYF's ROE of +3.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SCHYF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EVGGF has a market cap of 14.03B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EVGGF trades at $68.62.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EVGGF's P/E ratio is 10.27. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EVGGF's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to EVGGF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EVVTY has a market cap of 14.03B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EVVTY trades at $68.25.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EVVTY's P/E ratio is 10.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EVVTY's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to EVVTY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GXYEF has a market cap of 13.34B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GXYEF trades at $3.05.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GXYEF's P/E ratio is 11.73. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GXYEF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GXYEF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, WYNN has a market cap of 9.19B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while WYNN trades at $87.93.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas WYNN's P/E ratio is 23.51. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to WYNN's ROE of -2.66%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to WYNN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MGM has a market cap of 8.86B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MGM trades at $32.57.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MGM's P/E ratio is 14.54. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MGM's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to MGM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GOFPY has a market cap of 8.32B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GOFPY trades at $11.60.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GOFPY's P/E ratio is 15.26. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GOFPY's ROE of +0.80%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GOFPY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LTRCF has a market cap of 7.36B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LTRCF trades at $3.31.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LTRCF's P/E ratio is 27.58. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LTRCF's ROE of +1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to LTRCF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GRKZF has a market cap of 7.35B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GRKZF trades at $20.50.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GRKZF's P/E ratio is 13.49. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GRKZF's ROE of +0.80%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GRKZF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LNW has a market cap of 6.88B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LNW trades at $81.49.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LNW's P/E ratio is 22.14. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LNW's ROE of +0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to LNW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CHDN has a market cap of 6.86B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CHDN trades at $95.04.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CHDN's P/E ratio is 16.91. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CHDN's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to CHDN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LFDJF has a market cap of 6.78B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LFDJF trades at $36.69.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LFDJF's P/E ratio is 15.03. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LFDJF's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to LFDJF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GIGNY has a market cap of 6.38B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GIGNY trades at $26.40.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GIGNY's P/E ratio is 14.27. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GIGNY's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GIGNY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GIGNF has a market cap of 6.28B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GIGNF trades at $0.52.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GIGNF's P/E ratio is 13.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GIGNF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GIGNF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMVHF has a market cap of 6.15B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMVHF trades at $9.62.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMVHF's P/E ratio is -10.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMVHF's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GMVHF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MCHVF has a market cap of 6.00B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MCHVF trades at $1.58.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MCHVF's P/E ratio is 9.88. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MCHVF's ROE of +18.95%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to MCHVF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMVHY has a market cap of 5.93B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMVHY trades at $9.27.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMVHY's P/E ratio is -9.86. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMVHY's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GMVHY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BYD has a market cap of 5.85B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BYD trades at $71.83.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BYD's P/E ratio is 11.78. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BYD's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BYD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CZR has a market cap of 5.83B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CZR trades at $28.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CZR's P/E ratio is -25.48. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CZR's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to CZR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MTN has a market cap of 5.39B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MTN trades at $144.39.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MTN's P/E ratio is 21.05. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MTN's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to MTN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SGMS has a market cap of 5.28B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SGMS trades at $58.07.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SGMS's P/E ratio is 30.71. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SGMS's ROE of +0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SGMS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SGHC has a market cap of 4.25B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SGHC trades at $8.49.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SGHC's P/E ratio is 33.94. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SGHC's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SGHC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, WYNMY has a market cap of 3.80B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while WYNMY trades at $7.16.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas WYNMY's P/E ratio is 9.68. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to WYNMY's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to WYNMY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, HGV has a market cap of 3.57B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while HGV trades at $38.94.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas HGV's P/E ratio is 121.69. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to HGV's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to HGV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PYTCY has a market cap of 3.56B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PYTCY trades at $23.20.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PYTCY's P/E ratio is 55.24. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PYTCY's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to PYTCY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, WYNMF has a market cap of 3.56B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while WYNMF trades at $0.68.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas WYNMF's P/E ratio is 9.71. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to WYNMF's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to WYNMF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, IGT has a market cap of 3.48B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while IGT trades at $17.22.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas IGT's P/E ratio is 30.21. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to IGT's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to IGT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SKXJF has a market cap of 3.03B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SKXJF trades at $13.80.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SKXJF's P/E ratio is 8.47. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SKXJF's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SKXJF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BMRMF has a market cap of 3.02B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BMRMF trades at $123.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BMRMF's P/E ratio is 25.47. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BMRMF's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BMRMF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GEBHY has a market cap of 2.93B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GEBHY trades at $3.81.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GEBHY's P/E ratio is 14.11. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GEBHY's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GEBHY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GEBEY has a market cap of 2.85B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GEBEY trades at $0.59.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GEBEY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GEBEY's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GEBEY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GEBHF has a market cap of 2.70B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GEBHF trades at $0.70.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GEBHF's P/E ratio is 14.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GEBHF's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GEBHF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RSI has a market cap of 2.69B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RSI trades at $11.75.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RSI's P/E ratio is 130.50. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RSI's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to RSI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RRR has a market cap of 2.67B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RRR trades at $44.40.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RRR's P/E ratio is 17.08. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RRR's ROE of +1.30%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to RRR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, KNDGF has a market cap of 2.65B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while KNDGF trades at $12.26.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas KNDGF's P/E ratio is 49.04. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to KNDGF's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to KNDGF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PENN has a market cap of 2.36B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PENN trades at $15.64.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PENN's P/E ratio is -7.63. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PENN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PENN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, VAC has a market cap of 2.24B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while VAC trades at $64.70.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas VAC's P/E ratio is 11.53. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to VAC's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to VAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMALF has a market cap of 2.15B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMALF trades at $0.38.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMALF's P/E ratio is 38.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMALF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GMALF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BLBRF has a market cap of 1.95B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BLBRF trades at $0.17.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BLBRF's P/E ratio is 17.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BLBRF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BLBRF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SJMHY has a market cap of 1.93B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SJMHY trades at $0.96.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SJMHY's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SJMHY's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SJMHY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SJMHF has a market cap of 1.92B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SJMHF trades at $0.27.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SJMHF's P/E ratio is -27.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SJMHF's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SJMHF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMALY has a market cap of 1.83B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMALY trades at $8.06.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMALY's P/E ratio is 31.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMALY's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GMALY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, NGCRF has a market cap of 1.77B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while NGCRF trades at $0.40.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas NGCRF's P/E ratio is 20.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to NGCRF's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to NGCRF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PLYA has a market cap of 1.65B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PLYA trades at $13.44.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PLYA's P/E ratio is 26.35. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PLYA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to PLYA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MCRI has a market cap of 1.48B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MCRI trades at $80.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MCRI's P/E ratio is 20.21. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MCRI's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to MCRI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, NGCRY has a market cap of 1.48B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while NGCRY trades at $20.04.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas NGCRY's P/E ratio is 13.45. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to NGCRY's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to NGCRY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PYTCF has a market cap of 1.41B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PYTCF trades at $4.60.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PYTCF's P/E ratio is 21.90. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PYTCF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PYTCF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BVHBB has a market cap of 1.34B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BVHBB trades at $72.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BVHBB's P/E ratio is 22.57. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BVHBB's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to BVHBB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EVRI has a market cap of 1.22B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EVRI trades at $14.05.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EVRI's P/E ratio is 82.65. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EVRI's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to EVRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BVH has a market cap of 1.00B. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BVH trades at $75.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BVH's P/E ratio is 20.05. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BVH's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to BVH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, NGMS has a market cap of 998.21M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while NGMS trades at $29.45.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas NGMS's P/E ratio is -81.81. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to NGMS's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to NGMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, TACBY has a market cap of 972.18M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while TACBY trades at $0.75.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas TACBY's P/E ratio is 18.75. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to TACBY's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to TACBY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ACEL has a market cap of 964.06M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ACEL trades at $11.39.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ACEL's P/E ratio is 23.24. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ACEL's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to ACEL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, TABCF has a market cap of 914.50M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while TABCF trades at $0.40.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas TABCF's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to TABCF's ROE of -0.84%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to TABCF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MLCO has a market cap of 849.61M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MLCO trades at $5.99.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MLCO's P/E ratio is 59.90. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MLCO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to MLCO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BJSAF has a market cap of 806.08M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BJSAF trades at $0.60.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BJSAF's P/E ratio is 35.34. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BJSAF's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BJSAF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, IRLTY has a market cap of 784.35M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while IRLTY trades at $1.10.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas IRLTY's P/E ratio is 12.22. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to IRLTY's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to IRLTY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MDEVF has a market cap of 734.19M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MDEVF trades at $0.49.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MDEVF's P/E ratio is -6.93. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MDEVF's ROE of -7.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to MDEVF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MDEVY has a market cap of 726.47M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MDEVY trades at $2.40.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MDEVY's P/E ratio is -7.06. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MDEVY's ROE of -7.29%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to MDEVY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GDEN has a market cap of 722.21M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GDEN trades at $27.32.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GDEN's P/E ratio is 15.98. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GDEN's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GDEN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, IRLTF has a market cap of 664.51M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while IRLTF trades at $1.10.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas IRLTF's P/E ratio is 110.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to IRLTF's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to IRLTF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SKYZF has a market cap of 581.48M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SKYZF trades at $0.76.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SKYZF's P/E ratio is -6.95. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SKYZF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SKYZF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, TPGH-UN has a market cap of 580.34M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while TPGH-UN trades at $11.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas TPGH-UN's P/E ratio is -1000.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to TPGH-UN's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to TPGH-UN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RANKF has a market cap of 501.22M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RANKF trades at $1.07.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RANKF's P/E ratio is 11.89. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RANKF's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to RANKF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, AGS has a market cap of 500.47M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while AGS trades at $12.13.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas AGS's P/E ratio is 10.11. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to AGS's ROE of +0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to AGS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MCHVY has a market cap of 493.27M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MCHVY trades at $18.70.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MCHVY's P/E ratio is 10.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MCHVY's ROE of +18.95%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to MCHVY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GAMB has a market cap of 475.21M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GAMB trades at $13.67.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GAMB's P/E ratio is 16.27. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GAMB's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GAMB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BALY has a market cap of 456.69M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BALY trades at $11.23.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BALY's P/E ratio is -0.96. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BALY's ROE of -2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BALY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PBKOF has a market cap of 387.96M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PBKOF trades at $14.33.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PBKOF's P/E ratio is 15.41. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PBKOF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PBKOF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CDRO has a market cap of 373.80M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CDRO trades at $8.19.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CDRO's P/E ratio is -10.92. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CDRO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to CDRO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, KMBIF has a market cap of 329.59M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while KMBIF trades at $11.56.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas KMBIF's P/E ratio is 19.94. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to KMBIF's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to KMBIF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EHGRF has a market cap of 315.37M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EHGRF trades at $0.11.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EHGRF's P/E ratio is -0.22. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EHGRF's ROE of -1.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to EHGRF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EIHDF has a market cap of 313.67M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EIHDF trades at $0.70.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EIHDF's P/E ratio is -1.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EIHDF's ROE of +2.23%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to EIHDF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PDSSF has a market cap of 304.92M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PDSSF trades at $0.29.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PDSSF's P/E ratio is 7.25. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PDSSF's ROE of +0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PDSSF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, AGTEF has a market cap of 232.20M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while AGTEF trades at $0.02.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas AGTEF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to AGTEF's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to AGTEF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, INSE has a market cap of 209.86M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while INSE trades at $7.80.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas INSE's P/E ratio is 3.51. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to INSE's ROE of -1.08%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to INSE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, AINSF has a market cap of 203.76M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while AINSF trades at $0.61.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas AINSF's P/E ratio is 10.08. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to AINSF's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to AINSF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PBTHF has a market cap of 199.03M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PBTHF trades at $0.60.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PBTHF's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PBTHF's ROE of -0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to PBTHF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MSC has a market cap of 161.86M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MSC trades at $3.36.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MSC's P/E ratio is -6.72. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MSC's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to MSC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GHIFF has a market cap of 149.71M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GHIFF trades at $7.16.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GHIFF's P/E ratio is 10.69. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GHIFF's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GHIFF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PSDMF has a market cap of 146.93M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PSDMF trades at $0.50.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PSDMF's P/E ratio is 12.50. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PSDMF's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to PSDMF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MALDF has a market cap of 146.35M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MALDF trades at $0.02.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MALDF's P/E ratio is -2.36. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MALDF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to MALDF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, PMKRF has a market cap of 124.39M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while PMKRF trades at $0.54.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas PMKRF's P/E ratio is -27.08. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to PMKRF's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to PMKRF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, FLL has a market cap of 112.96M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while FLL trades at $3.14.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas FLL's P/E ratio is -2.71. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to FLL's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to FLL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RCTUF has a market cap of 94.62M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RCTUF trades at $1.90.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RCTUF's P/E ratio is 10.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RCTUF's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to RCTUF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CPHC has a market cap of 87.70M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CPHC trades at $17.38.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CPHC's P/E ratio is 41.38. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CPHC's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to CPHC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GAN has a market cap of 84.32M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GAN trades at $1.82.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GAN's P/E ratio is -10.11. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GAN's ROE of +0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GAN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ARHN has a market cap of 81.10M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ARHN trades at $14.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ARHN's P/E ratio is -66.67. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ARHN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to ARHN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GLXZ has a market cap of 70.07M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GLXZ trades at $2.79.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GLXZ's P/E ratio is -27.90. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GLXZ's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GLXZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CTTMF has a market cap of 46.96M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CTTMF trades at $0.62.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CTTMF's P/E ratio is -1.02. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CTTMF's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to CTTMF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CNTY has a market cap of 46.02M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CNTY trades at $1.50.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CNTY's P/E ratio is -0.36. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CNTY's ROE of -2.35%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to CNTY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CDROW has a market cap of 35.56M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CDROW trades at $0.78.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CDROW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CDROW's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to CDROW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BRRE has a market cap of 20.82M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BRRE trades at $8.50.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BRRE's P/E ratio is -850.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BRRE's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to BRRE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, TBTC has a market cap of 18.33M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while TBTC trades at $3.95.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas TBTC's P/E ratio is 11.62. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to TBTC's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to TBTC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SLNA has a market cap of 16.31M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SLNA trades at $0.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SLNA's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SLNA's ROE of +0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SLNA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LTRYW has a market cap of 15.55M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LTRYW trades at $0.02.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LTRYW's P/E ratio is -0.31. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LTRYW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to LTRYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LTRY has a market cap of 15.49M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LTRY trades at $0.82.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LTRY's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LTRY's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to LTRY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, JKPTF has a market cap of 14.72M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while JKPTF trades at $0.22.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas JKPTF's P/E ratio is -0.86. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to JKPTF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to JKPTF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, TNTAF has a market cap of 11.04M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while TNTAF trades at $0.62.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas TNTAF's P/E ratio is -2.60. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to TNTAF's ROE of -2.83%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to TNTAF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, JPOTF has a market cap of 11.00M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while JPOTF trades at $0.06.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas JPOTF's P/E ratio is -5.80. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to JPOTF's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to JPOTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SPOZF has a market cap of 8.60M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SPOZF trades at $0.86.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SPOZF's P/E ratio is -14.33. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SPOZF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SPOZF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, NWGIW has a market cap of 5.80M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while NWGIW trades at $0.02.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas NWGIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to NWGIW's ROE of -1.56%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to NWGIW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CETMF has a market cap of 4.63M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CETMF trades at $0.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CETMF's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CETMF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to CETMF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RYWCF has a market cap of 3.46M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RYWCF trades at $0.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RYWCF's P/E ratio is -0.56. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RYWCF's ROE of +2.20%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to RYWCF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LTFD has a market cap of 2.96M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LTFD trades at $0.17.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LTFD's P/E ratio is -3.40. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LTFD's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to LTFD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RVRVF has a market cap of 2.83M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RVRVF trades at $0.06.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RVRVF's P/E ratio is -0.89. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RVRVF's ROE of -0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to RVRVF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, RVLCF has a market cap of 2.77M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while RVLCF trades at $0.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas RVLCF's P/E ratio is -0.12. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to RVLCF's ROE of +3.52%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to RVLCF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LUKEF has a market cap of 2.49M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LUKEF trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LUKEF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LUKEF's ROE of -0.92%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to LUKEF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ITMZF has a market cap of 2.42M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ITMZF trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ITMZF's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ITMZF's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to ITMZF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SBET has a market cap of 2.36M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SBET trades at $3.58.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SBET's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SBET's ROE of -1.65%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SBET. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, THRSF has a market cap of 1.93M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while THRSF trades at $0.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas THRSF's P/E ratio is 1.50. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to THRSF's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to THRSF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, FCNE has a market cap of 1.92M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while FCNE trades at $1.77.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas FCNE's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to FCNE's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to FCNE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ELRA has a market cap of 1.72M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ELRA trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ELRA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ELRA's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to ELRA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BRVO has a market cap of 1.67M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BRVO trades at $0.04.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BRVO's P/E ratio is -3.50. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BRVO's ROE of +0.59%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BRVO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMER has a market cap of 1.14M. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMER trades at $0.01.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMER's P/E ratio is -0.88. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMER's ROE of +1.43%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GMER. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SWCC has a market cap of 758750.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SWCC trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SWCC's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SWCC's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SWCC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, BYNEF has a market cap of 693300.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while BYNEF trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas BYNEF's P/E ratio is 0.03. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to BYNEF's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to BYNEF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, SLNAW has a market cap of 526449.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while SLNAW trades at $0.01.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas SLNAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to SLNAW's ROE of +0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to SLNAW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMBL has a market cap of 309415.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMBL trades at $0.27.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMBL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMBL's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GMBL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, WNRS has a market cap of 261056.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while WNRS trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas WNRS's P/E ratio is -0.23. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to WNRS's ROE of +1.39%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to WNRS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, FUNFF has a market cap of 179779.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while FUNFF trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas FUNFF's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to FUNFF's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to FUNFF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, WPFH has a market cap of 155477.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while WPFH trades at $1.39.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas WPFH's P/E ratio is -1.85. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to WPFH's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to WPFH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, VETIF has a market cap of 101223.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while VETIF trades at $0.03.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas VETIF's P/E ratio is -0.43. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to VETIF's ROE of +9.04%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to VETIF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EXPH has a market cap of 99952.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EXPH trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EXPH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EXPH's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to EXPH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMBLP has a market cap of 39340.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMBLP trades at $0.05.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMBLP's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMBLP's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GMBLP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EPGG has a market cap of 29800.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EPGG trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EPGG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EPGG's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to EPGG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, NTGL has a market cap of 18166.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while NTGL trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas NTGL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to NTGL's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to NTGL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EMBR has a market cap of 16123.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EMBR trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EMBR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EMBR's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to EMBR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ELYS has a market cap of 14978.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ELYS trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ELYS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ELYS's ROE of -1.47%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to ELYS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, KNBA has a market cap of 14717.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while KNBA trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas KNBA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to KNBA's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to KNBA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EBET has a market cap of 4494.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EBET trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EBET's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EBET's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to EBET. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CGAM has a market cap of 2507.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CGAM trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CGAM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CGAM's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to CGAM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMBLZ has a market cap of 1338.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMBLZ trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMBLZ's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMBLZ's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GMBLZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GMBLW has a market cap of 1259.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GMBLW trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GMBLW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GMBLW's ROE of +1.62%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GMBLW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ULSP has a market cap of 1057.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ULSP trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ULSP's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ULSP's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to ULSP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, ROBK has a market cap of 612.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while ROBK trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas ROBK's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to ROBK's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to ROBK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, LTTGF has a market cap of 128.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while LTTGF trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas LTTGF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to LTTGF's ROE of +3.33%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to LTTGF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, AMRA has a market cap of 33.00. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while AMRA trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas AMRA's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to AMRA's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to AMRA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, EVGEF comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while EVGEF trades at $0.64.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas EVGEF's P/E ratio is 4.00. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to EVGEF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to EVGEF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, MLCOF comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while MLCOF trades at $0.00.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas MLCOF's P/E ratio is -0.13. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to MLCOF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to MLCOF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GNOG comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GNOG trades at $5.78.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GNOG's P/E ratio is -3.90. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GNOG's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is less volatile compared to GNOG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, GIGI comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while GIGI trades at $2.62.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas GIGI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to GIGI's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to GIGI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.

LVS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, LVS stands at 28.12B. In comparison, CWLDY comparison data is unavailable. Regarding current trading prices, LVS is priced at $39.79, while CWLDY trades at $19.35.

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

LVS currently has a P/E ratio of 22.23, whereas CWLDY's P/E ratio is -27.88. In terms of profitability, LVS's ROE is +0.41%, compared to CWLDY's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, LVS is more volatile compared to CWLDY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for LVS.