Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison

Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance on the CNQ reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MARY.CN stands at 3M. In comparison, APH.TO has a market cap of 54.5B. Regarding current trading prices, MARY.CN is priced at CA$0.07 on the CNQ, while APH.TO trades at CA$22.11.

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

MARY.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -35.00, whereas APH.TO's P/E ratio is 6.31. In terms of profitability, MARY.CN's ROE is +0.32%, compared to APH.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, MARY.CN is less volatile compared to APH.TO. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MARY.CN.Check APH.TO's competition here

Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance on the CNQ reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MARY.CN stands at 3M. In comparison, CLS.TO has a market cap of 36.8B. Regarding current trading prices, MARY.CN is priced at CA$0.07 on the CNQ, while CLS.TO trades at CA$292.16.

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

MARY.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -35.00, whereas CLS.TO's P/E ratio is 21.47. In terms of profitability, MARY.CN's ROE is +0.32%, compared to CLS.TO's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, MARY.CN is less volatile compared to CLS.TO. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MARY.CN.Check CLS.TO's competition here

Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance on the CNQ reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MARY.CN stands at 3M. In comparison, HEAT.CN has a market cap of 17.8M. Regarding current trading prices, MARY.CN is priced at CA$0.07 on the CNQ, while HEAT.CN trades at CA$0.09.

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

MARY.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -35.00, whereas HEAT.CN's P/E ratio is -1.42. In terms of profitability, MARY.CN's ROE is +0.32%, compared to HEAT.CN's ROE of +3.87%. Regarding short-term risk, MARY.CN is less volatile compared to HEAT.CN. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MARY.CN.Check HEAT.CN's competition here

Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance on the CNQ reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MARY.CN stands at 3M. In comparison, ZTE.CN has a market cap of 15.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MARY.CN is priced at CA$0.07 on the CNQ, while ZTE.CN trades at CA$0.41.

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

MARY.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -35.00, whereas ZTE.CN's P/E ratio is 12.82. In terms of profitability, MARY.CN's ROE is +0.32%, compared to ZTE.CN's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, MARY.CN is less volatile compared to ZTE.CN. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MARY.CN.Check ZTE.CN's competition here

Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance on the CNQ reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MARY.CN stands at 3M. In comparison, WIFI.CN has a market cap of 3.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MARY.CN is priced at CA$0.07 on the CNQ, while WIFI.CN trades at CA$0.03.

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

MARY.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -35.00, whereas WIFI.CN's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, MARY.CN's ROE is +0.32%, compared to WIFI.CN's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, MARY.CN is similarly volatile compared to WIFI.CN. This indicates similar risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MARY.CN.Check WIFI.CN's competition here

Mary Agrotechnologies Inc. (CNQ: MARY.CN) plays a significant role within the Technology sector. Its performance on the CNQ reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MARY.CN stands at 3M. In comparison, PHO.TO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, MARY.CN is priced at CA$0.07 on the CNQ, while PHO.TO trades at CA$3.60.

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

MARY.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -35.00, whereas PHO.TO's P/E ratio is 36.36. In terms of profitability, MARY.CN's ROE is +0.32%, compared to PHO.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, MARY.CN is less volatile compared to PHO.TO. This indicates lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MARY.CN.Check PHO.TO's competition here