Hello Group Inc.

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SPOT has a market cap of 101B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SPOT trades at $485.29.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SPOT's P/E ratio is 39.38. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SPOT's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SPOT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SPOT's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, DASH has a market cap of 76B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while DASH trades at $176.19.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas DASH's P/E ratio is 89.49. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to DASH's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to DASH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check DASH's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, BIDU has a market cap of 46.1B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while BIDU trades at $137.11.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas BIDU's P/E ratio is 12.04. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BIDU's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to BIDU. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check BIDU's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TWTR has a market cap of 41.1B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TWTR trades at $53.70.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TWTR's P/E ratio is 214.80. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TWTR's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to TWTR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TWTR's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, RDDT has a market cap of 28.7B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while RDDT trades at $146.13.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas RDDT's P/E ratio is 57.37. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to RDDT's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to RDDT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check RDDT's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, NBIS has a market cap of 23.5B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while NBIS trades at $107.61.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas NBIS's P/E ratio is 890.18. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NBIS's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to NBIS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check NBIS's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TME has a market cap of 23.3B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TME trades at $15.23.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TME's P/E ratio is 15.05. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TME's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to TME. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TME's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TWLO has a market cap of 17.4B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TWLO trades at $110.96.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TWLO's P/E ratio is 538.81. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TWLO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to TWLO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TWLO's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, YNDX has a market cap of 15.1B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while YNDX trades at $18.94.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas YNDX's P/E ratio is -15.52. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to YNDX's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to YNDX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check YNDX's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, PINS has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while PINS trades at $16.77.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas PINS's P/E ratio is 29.14. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to PINS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to PINS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check PINS's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, Z has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while Z trades at $45.55.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas Z's P/E ratio is 505.11. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to Z's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to Z. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check Z's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ZG has a market cap of 11B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ZG trades at $45.54.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ZG's P/E ratio is 504.67. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ZG's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ZG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ZG's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SNAP has a market cap of 8.7B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SNAP trades at $5.00.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SNAP's P/E ratio is -19.02. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SNAP's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SNAP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SNAP's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, JOYY has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while JOYY trades at $61.98.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas JOYY's P/E ratio is -29.93. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to JOYY's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to JOYY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check JOYY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, DJT has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while DJT trades at $10.57.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas DJT's P/E ratio is -24.07. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to DJT's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to DJT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check DJT's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, DJTWW has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while DJTWW trades at $5.73.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas DJTWW's P/E ratio is -12.79. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to DJTWW's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to DJTWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check DJTWW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, WB has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while WB trades at $10.01.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas WB's P/E ratio is 5.82. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to WB's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to WB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check WB's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, NN has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while NN trades at $16.82.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas NN's P/E ratio is -14.47. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NN's ROE of +48.60%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to NN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check NN's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, YY has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while YY trades at $41.55.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas YY's P/E ratio is -0.81. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to YY's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to YY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check YY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GENI has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GENI trades at $6.41.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GENI's P/E ratio is -12.74. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GENI's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to GENI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GENI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, YELP has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while YELP trades at $21.48.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas YELP's P/E ratio is 9.49. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to YELP's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to YELP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check YELP's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, OPRA has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while OPRA trades at $12.40.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas OPRA's P/E ratio is 13.66. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to OPRA's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to OPRA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check OPRA's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TBLA has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TBLA trades at $3.28.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TBLA's P/E ratio is 42.50. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TBLA's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to TBLA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TBLA's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, NNAVW has a market cap of 957.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while NNAVW trades at $7.00.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas NNAVW's P/E ratio is -5.30. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NNAVW's ROE of +48.60%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to NNAVW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check NNAVW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GIBO has a market cap of 800.9M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GIBO trades at $1.62.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GIBO's P/E ratio is -0.16. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GIBO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to GIBO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GIBO's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, KIND has a market cap of 761.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while KIND trades at $1.99.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas KIND's P/E ratio is -8.29. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to KIND's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to KIND. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check KIND's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ANGIV has a market cap of 680.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ANGIV trades at $15.76.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ANGIV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ANGIV's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to ANGIV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ANGIV's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, NXDR has a market cap of 654.8M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while NXDR trades at $1.74.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas NXDR's P/E ratio is -10.44. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NXDR's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to NXDR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check NXDR's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ATHM has a market cap of 626.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ATHM trades at $20.99.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ATHM's P/E ratio is 11.91. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ATHM's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to ATHM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ATHM's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, WSHP has a market cap of 577.9M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while WSHP trades at $41.00.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas WSHP's P/E ratio is -16.33. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to WSHP's ROE of -1.99%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to WSHP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check WSHP's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SSTK has a market cap of 571.2M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SSTK trades at $15.49.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SSTK's P/E ratio is 9.29. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SSTK's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SSTK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SSTK's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, EVER has a market cap of 565.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while EVER trades at $14.41.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas EVER's P/E ratio is 10.68. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to EVER's ROE of +0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to EVER. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check EVER's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GRPN has a market cap of 532.3M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GRPN trades at $12.96.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GRPN's P/E ratio is -3.69. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GRPN's ROE of -7.26%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to GRPN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GRPN's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, MAX has a market cap of 514.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while MAX trades at $7.67.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas MAX's P/E ratio is -392.00. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MAX's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to MAX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check MAX's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, FVRR has a market cap of 431.2M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while FVRR trades at $11.32.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas FVRR's P/E ratio is 19.46. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to FVRR's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to FVRR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check FVRR's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, PERI has a market cap of 372.8M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while PERI trades at $9.10.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas PERI's P/E ratio is -33.33. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to PERI's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to PERI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check PERI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ANGI has a market cap of 362.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ANGI trades at $8.08.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ANGI's P/E ratio is 8.94. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ANGI's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ANGI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ANGI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TTGT has a market cap of 344.2M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TTGT trades at $4.81.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TTGT's P/E ratio is -0.33. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TTGT's ROE of -1.08%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to TTGT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TTGT's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, JFIN has a market cap of 336M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while JFIN trades at $6.39.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas JFIN's P/E ratio is 1.39. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to JFIN's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to JFIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check JFIN's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GETY has a market cap of 308.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GETY trades at $0.74.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GETY's P/E ratio is -3.37. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GETY's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to GETY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GETY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ZH has a market cap of 279.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ZH trades at $3.52.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ZH's P/E ratio is 23.37. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ZH's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ZH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ZH's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, OB has a market cap of 258.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while OB trades at $2.74.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas OB's P/E ratio is -3.97. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to OB's ROE of -0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to OB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check OB's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SMWB has a market cap of 239.9M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SMWB trades at $2.57.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SMWB's P/E ratio is -7.72. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SMWB's ROE of -1.37%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SMWB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SMWB's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TRUE has a market cap of 225.9M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TRUE trades at $2.54.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TRUE's P/E ratio is -12.10. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TRUE's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to TRUE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TRUE's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TRVG has a market cap of 204.3M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TRVG trades at $2.99.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TRVG's P/E ratio is 16.11. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TRVG's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to TRVG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TRVG's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, THRY has a market cap of 169.9M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while THRY trades at $3.80.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas THRY's P/E ratio is 7.80. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to THRY's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to THRY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check THRY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, AREN has a market cap of 159M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while AREN trades at $3.31.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas AREN's P/E ratio is 4.47. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to AREN's ROE of -1.78%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to AREN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check AREN's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, DOYU has a market cap of 158.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while DOYU trades at $5.38.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas DOYU's P/E ratio is -5.48. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to DOYU's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to DOYU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check DOYU's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, PODC has a market cap of 67M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while PODC trades at $2.64.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas PODC's P/E ratio is -16.60. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to PODC's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to PODC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check PODC's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, CCG has a market cap of 64M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while CCG trades at $0.78.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas CCG's P/E ratio is -15.80. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CCG's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to CCG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check CCG's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, MNY has a market cap of 59.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while MNY trades at $1.38.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas MNY's P/E ratio is -2.51. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MNY's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to MNY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check MNY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, IZEA has a market cap of 57.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while IZEA trades at $3.43.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas IZEA's P/E ratio is -17.74. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to IZEA's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to IZEA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check IZEA's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, BODI has a market cap of 56.8M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while BODI trades at $8.30.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas BODI's P/E ratio is -1.29. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BODI's ROE of -1.76%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to BODI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check BODI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, BODY has a market cap of 55.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while BODY trades at $8.14.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas BODY's P/E ratio is -0.39. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BODY's ROE of +1.80%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to BODY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check BODY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SEAT has a market cap of 49.8M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SEAT trades at $7.40.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SEAT's P/E ratio is -0.27. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SEAT's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SEAT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SEAT's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, UPXI has a market cap of 43.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while UPXI trades at $0.67.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas UPXI's P/E ratio is -0.73. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to UPXI's ROE of -3.45%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to UPXI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check UPXI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ZDGE has a market cap of 42.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ZDGE trades at $3.28.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ZDGE's P/E ratio is -36.22. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ZDGE's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ZDGE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ZDGE's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ILLR has a market cap of 39.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ILLR trades at $0.25.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ILLR's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ILLR's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ILLR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ILLR's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SCOR has a market cap of 39.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SCOR trades at $7.71.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SCOR's P/E ratio is -1.44. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SCOR's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SCOR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SCOR's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, EGLX has a market cap of 38.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while EGLX trades at $0.25.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas EGLX's P/E ratio is -0.76. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to EGLX's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to EGLX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check EGLX's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TC has a market cap of 34.9M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TC trades at $12.14.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TC's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TC's ROE of +2.75%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to TC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TC's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, IACVV has a market cap of 34.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while IACVV trades at $0.43.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas IACVV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to IACVV's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to IACVV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check IACVV's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, NAMI has a market cap of 33.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while NAMI trades at $0.49.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas NAMI's P/E ratio is -8.18. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to NAMI's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to NAMI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check NAMI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, BZFD has a market cap of 30.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while BZFD trades at $0.82.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas BZFD's P/E ratio is -0.89. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BZFD's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to BZFD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check BZFD's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LTRPA has a market cap of 20.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LTRPA trades at $0.26.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LTRPA's P/E ratio is -0.11. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LTRPA's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to LTRPA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LTRPA's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LTRPB has a market cap of 20.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LTRPB trades at $0.25.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LTRPB's P/E ratio is -0.11. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LTRPB's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to LTRPB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LTRPB's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LYL has a market cap of 15.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LYL trades at $0.50.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LYL's P/E ratio is -0.65. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LYL's ROE of -1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to LYL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LYL's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, HRYU has a market cap of 15.2M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while HRYU trades at $0.29.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas HRYU's P/E ratio is -3.60. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to HRYU's ROE of -0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to HRYU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check HRYU's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LIZI has a market cap of 14.8M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LIZI trades at $2.80.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LIZI's P/E ratio is 3.04. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LIZI's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to LIZI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LIZI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, FAZEW has a market cap of 14.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while FAZEW trades at $0.01.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas FAZEW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to FAZEW's ROE of +5.60%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to FAZEW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check FAZEW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, FAZE has a market cap of 14.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while FAZE trades at $0.18.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas FAZE's P/E ratio is -1.52. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to FAZE's ROE of +5.60%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to FAZE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check FAZE's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LKCO has a market cap of 10.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LKCO trades at $0.81.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LKCO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LKCO's ROE of -6.87%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to LKCO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LKCO's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, KRKR has a market cap of 6.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while KRKR trades at $3.87.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas KRKR's P/E ratio is -1.15. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to KRKR's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to KRKR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check KRKR's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LCFY has a market cap of 6.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LCFY trades at $4.16.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LCFY's P/E ratio is -2.35. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LCFY's ROE of -1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to LCFY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LCFY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, CRTD has a market cap of 5.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while CRTD trades at $0.54.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas CRTD's P/E ratio is 0.62. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CRTD's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to CRTD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check CRTD's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, QTT has a market cap of 5.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while QTT trades at $0.18.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas QTT's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to QTT's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to QTT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check QTT's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LOV has a market cap of 5.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LOV trades at $0.21.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LOV's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LOV's ROE of -3.41%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to LOV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LOV's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, TBLAW has a market cap of 5.5M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while TBLAW trades at $0.02.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas TBLAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to TBLAW's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to TBLAW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check TBLAW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SEGG has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SEGG trades at $1.18.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SEGG's P/E ratio is -0.16. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SEGG's ROE of -0.90%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SEGG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SEGG's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, LCFYW has a market cap of 4.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while LCFYW trades at $2.10.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas LCFYW's P/E ratio is -32.60. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to LCFYW's ROE of -1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to LCFYW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check LCFYW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ROI has a market cap of 4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ROI trades at $0.12.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ROI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ROI's ROE of -12.44%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ROI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ROI's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, CMCM has a market cap of 3.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while CMCM trades at $5.91.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas CMCM's P/E ratio is -2.82. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to CMCM's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to CMCM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check CMCM's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ONFO has a market cap of 3.3M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ONFO trades at $0.54.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ONFO's P/E ratio is -1.03. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ONFO's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ONFO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ONFO's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ILLRW has a market cap of 2.7M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ILLRW trades at $0.03.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ILLRW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ILLRW's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to ILLRW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ILLRW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, MNYWW has a market cap of 2.4M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while MNYWW trades at $0.06.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas MNYWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to MNYWW's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to MNYWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check MNYWW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, DGLY has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while DGLY trades at $2.59.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas DGLY's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to DGLY's ROE of -1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to DGLY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check DGLY's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, STBX has a market cap of 1.1M. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while STBX trades at $2.11.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas STBX's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to STBX's ROE of -1.27%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to STBX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check STBX's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SEATW has a market cap of 492.3K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SEATW trades at $0.08.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SEATW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SEATW's ROE of -0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to SEATW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SEATW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, FENG has a market cap of 427.9K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while FENG trades at $1.71.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas FENG's P/E ratio is -3.05. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to FENG's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to FENG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check FENG's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SLGG has a market cap of 291.8K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SLGG trades at $0.09.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SLGG's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SLGG's ROE of +11.34%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SLGG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SLGG's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, ONFOW has a market cap of 256.4K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while ONFOW trades at $0.04.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas ONFOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to ONFOW's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to ONFOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check ONFOW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SLE has a market cap of 252.5K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SLE trades at $4.01.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SLE's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SLE's ROE of +6.74%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SLE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SLE's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GIBOW has a market cap of 76.1K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GIBOW trades at $0.03.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GIBOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GIBOW's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to GIBOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GIBOW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GROMW has a market cap of 2.6K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GROMW trades at $0.00.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GROMW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GROMW's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to GROMW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GROMW's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, GROM has a market cap of 1.8K. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while GROM trades at $0.00.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas GROM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to GROM's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to GROM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check GROM's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, PCOM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while PCOM trades at $24.99.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas PCOM's P/E ratio is 166.60. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to PCOM's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to PCOM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check PCOM's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SFUN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SFUN trades at $2.80.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SFUN's P/E ratio is -4.00. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SFUN's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is less volatile compared to SFUN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SFUN's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, SOGO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while SOGO trades at $8.94.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas SOGO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to SOGO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to SOGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check SOGO's competition here

MOMO plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, MOMO stands at 1.2B. In comparison, BLCT has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, MOMO is priced at $6.44, while BLCT trades at $1.54.

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

MOMO currently has a P/E ratio of 10.76, whereas BLCT's P/E ratio is -1.29. In terms of profitability, MOMO's ROE is +0.07%, compared to BLCT's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, MOMO is more volatile compared to BLCT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for MOMO.Check BLCT's competition here