NewGenIvf Group Limited (NIVF) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (NIVF) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Medical - Care Facilities Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIVF | $1.33 | +1.53% | 252.1K | 0.66 | $2.03 | N/A |
| HCA | $410.61 | -2.95% | 91.1B | 14.17 | $28.96 | +0.73% |
| THC | $206.26 | -1.23% | 17.8B | 11.96 | $17.24 | N/A |
| DVA | $230.72 | -1.53% | 14.8B | 19.67 | $11.73 | N/A |
| SOLV | $75.18 | -1.44% | 13B | 12.05 | $6.24 | N/A |
| FMS | $23.94 | -1.07% | 12.9B | 9.50 | $2.52 | +3.60% |
| EHC | $110.25 | -0.42% | 10.9B | 19.38 | $5.69 | +0.69% |
| ENSG | $169.93 | -0.55% | 9.9B | 24.64 | $6.90 | +0.15% |
| UHS | $156.43 | -3.00% | 9.8B | 6.94 | $22.54 | +0.51% |
| OSH | $39.00 | +0.08% | 9.5B | -17.65 | -$2.21 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
NIVF vs HCA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, HCA has a market cap of 91.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while HCA trades at $410.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas HCA's P/E ratio is 14.17. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to HCA's ROE of -1.23%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to HCA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check HCA's competition here
NIVF vs THC Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, THC has a market cap of 17.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while THC trades at $206.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas THC's P/E ratio is 11.96. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to THC's ROE of +0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to THC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check THC's competition here
NIVF vs DVA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, DVA has a market cap of 14.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while DVA trades at $230.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas DVA's P/E ratio is 19.67. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to DVA's ROE of -1.33%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to DVA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check DVA's competition here
NIVF vs SOLV Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, SOLV has a market cap of 13B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while SOLV trades at $75.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas SOLV's P/E ratio is 12.05. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to SOLV's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to SOLV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check SOLV's competition here
NIVF vs FMS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, FMS has a market cap of 12.9B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while FMS trades at $23.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas FMS's P/E ratio is 9.50. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to FMS's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to FMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check FMS's competition here
NIVF vs EHC Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, EHC has a market cap of 10.9B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while EHC trades at $110.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas EHC's P/E ratio is 19.38. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to EHC's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to EHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check EHC's competition here
NIVF vs ENSG Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ENSG has a market cap of 9.9B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ENSG trades at $169.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ENSG's P/E ratio is 24.64. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ENSG's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to ENSG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ENSG's competition here
NIVF vs UHS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, UHS has a market cap of 9.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while UHS trades at $156.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas UHS's P/E ratio is 6.94. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to UHS's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to UHS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check UHS's competition here
NIVF vs OSH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, OSH has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while OSH trades at $39.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas OSH's P/E ratio is -17.65. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to OSH's ROE of +4.64%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to OSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check OSH's competition here
NIVF vs CHE Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CHE has a market cap of 6.4B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CHE trades at $479.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CHE's P/E ratio is 22.19. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CHE's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CHE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CHE's competition here
NIVF vs LHCG Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, LHCG has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while LHCG trades at $169.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas LHCG's P/E ratio is 82.83. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to LHCG's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to LHCG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check LHCG's competition here
NIVF vs MMED Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, MMED has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while MMED trades at $15.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas MMED's P/E ratio is -9.69. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to MMED's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to MMED. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check MMED's competition here
NIVF vs LFST Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, LFST has a market cap of 4.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while LFST trades at $10.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas LFST's P/E ratio is 167.12. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to LFST's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to LFST. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check LFST's competition here
NIVF vs BKD Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, BKD has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while BKD trades at $15.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas BKD's P/E ratio is -25.89. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to BKD's ROE of +401.19%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to BKD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check BKD's competition here
NIVF vs OPCH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, OPCH has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while OPCH trades at $21.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas OPCH's P/E ratio is 12.48. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to OPCH's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to OPCH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check OPCH's competition here
NIVF vs AMED Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AMED has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AMED trades at $100.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AMED's P/E ratio is 39.30. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AMED's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AMED. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AMED's competition here
NIVF vs NHC Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, NHC has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while NHC trades at $211.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas NHC's P/E ratio is 30.45. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to NHC's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to NHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check NHC's competition here
NIVF vs ACHC Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ACHC has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ACHC trades at $30.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ACHC's P/E ratio is 15.45. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ACHC's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to ACHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ACHC's competition here
NIVF vs ASTH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ASTH has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ASTH trades at $46.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ASTH's P/E ratio is 31.27. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ASTH's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to ASTH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ASTH's competition here
NIVF vs MD Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, MD has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while MD trades at $26.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas MD's P/E ratio is 12.51. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to MD's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to MD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check MD's competition here
NIVF vs SGRY Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, SGRY has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while SGRY trades at $16.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas SGRY's P/E ratio is 42.31. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to SGRY's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to SGRY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check SGRY's competition here
NIVF vs AVAH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AVAH has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AVAH trades at $9.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AVAH's P/E ratio is 14.10. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AVAH's ROE of +2.41%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AVAH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AVAH's competition here
NIVF vs SEM Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, SEM has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while SEM trades at $16.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas SEM's P/E ratio is 15.43. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to SEM's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to SEM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check SEM's competition here
NIVF vs ADUS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ADUS has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ADUS trades at $106.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ADUS's P/E ratio is 16.51. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ADUS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to ADUS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ADUS's competition here
NIVF vs AGL Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AGL has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AGL trades at $111.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AGL's P/E ratio is -10.92. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AGL's ROE of -1.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AGL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AGL's competition here
NIVF vs AMEH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AMEH has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AMEH trades at $40.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AMEH's P/E ratio is 39.25. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AMEH's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AMEH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AMEH's competition here
NIVF vs HCSG Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, HCSG has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while HCSG trades at $23.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas HCSG's P/E ratio is 19.11. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to HCSG's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to HCSG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check HCSG's competition here
NIVF vs INNV Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, INNV has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while INNV trades at $11.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas INNV's P/E ratio is -128.00. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to INNV's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to INNV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check INNV's competition here
NIVF vs ARDT Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ARDT has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ARDT trades at $10.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ARDT's P/E ratio is 6.20. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ARDT's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to ARDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ARDT's competition here
NIVF vs PNTG Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, PNTG has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while PNTG trades at $39.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas PNTG's P/E ratio is 31.87. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to PNTG's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to PNTG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check PNTG's competition here
NIVF vs CMPS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CMPS has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CMPS trades at $13.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CMPS's P/E ratio is -8.46. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CMPS's ROE of -1.51%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CMPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CMPS's competition here
NIVF vs AMN Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AMN has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AMN trades at $32.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AMN's P/E ratio is 10.66. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AMN's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AMN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AMN's competition here
NIVF vs BKDT Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, BKDT has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while BKDT trades at $77.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas BKDT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to BKDT's ROE of +401.19%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to BKDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check BKDT's competition here
NIVF vs USPH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, USPH has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while USPH trades at $70.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas USPH's P/E ratio is 27.03. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to USPH's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to USPH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check USPH's competition here
NIVF vs FSHCX Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, FSHCX has a market cap of 901.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while FSHCX trades at $121.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas FSHCX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to FSHCX's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to FSHCX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check FSHCX's competition here
NIVF vs TALK Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TALK has a market cap of 874.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TALK trades at $5.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TALK's P/E ratio is 769.91. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TALK's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to TALK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TALK's competition here
NIVF vs TALKW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TALKW has a market cap of 871.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TALKW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TALKW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TALKW's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to TALKW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TALKW's competition here
NIVF vs SNDA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, SNDA has a market cap of 800.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while SNDA trades at $40.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas SNDA's P/E ratio is -7.41. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to SNDA's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to SNDA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check SNDA's competition here
NIVF vs GMRS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, GMRS has a market cap of 710M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while GMRS trades at $15.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas GMRS's P/E ratio is 6.91. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to GMRS's ROE of +1.01%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to GMRS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check GMRS's competition here
NIVF vs EHAB Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, EHAB has a market cap of 706.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while EHAB trades at $13.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas EHAB's P/E ratio is -197.14. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to EHAB's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to EHAB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check EHAB's competition here
NIVF vs TOIIW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TOIIW has a market cap of 640.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TOIIW trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TOIIW's P/E ratio is -0.18. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TOIIW's ROE of +3.27%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to TOIIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TOIIW's competition here
NIVF vs TOI Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TOI has a market cap of 564.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TOI trades at $5.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TOI's P/E ratio is -15.69. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TOI's ROE of +3.27%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to TOI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TOI's competition here
NIVF vs CYH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CYH has a market cap of 503.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CYH trades at $3.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CYH's P/E ratio is 4.90. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CYH's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CYH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CYH's competition here
NIVF vs VMD Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, VMD has a market cap of 465.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while VMD trades at $12.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas VMD's P/E ratio is 32.81. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to VMD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to VMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check VMD's competition here
NIVF vs MCTA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, MCTA has a market cap of 445.6M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while MCTA trades at $29.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas MCTA's P/E ratio is 419.36. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to MCTA's ROE of -2.33%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to MCTA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check MCTA's competition here
NIVF vs CCRN Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CCRN has a market cap of 426.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CCRN trades at $13.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CCRN's P/E ratio is -188.57. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CCRN's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CCRN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CCRN's competition here
NIVF vs AUNA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AUNA has a market cap of 385.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AUNA trades at $5.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AUNA's P/E ratio is 4.69. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AUNA's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AUNA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AUNA's competition here
NIVF vs AIRS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AIRS has a market cap of 294.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AIRS trades at $4.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AIRS's P/E ratio is -139.33. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AIRS's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AIRS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AIRS's competition here
NIVF vs CSU Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CSU has a market cap of 223.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CSU trades at $33.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CSU's P/E ratio is 0.67. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CSU's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CSU. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CSU's competition here
NIVF vs JYNT Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, JYNT has a market cap of 127.3M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while JYNT trades at $8.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas JYNT's P/E ratio is 89.30. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to JYNT's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to JYNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check JYNT's competition here
NIVF vs BTMD Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, BTMD has a market cap of 99.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while BTMD trades at $2.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas BTMD's P/E ratio is 5.14. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to BTMD's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to BTMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check BTMD's competition here
NIVF vs FVE Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, FVE has a market cap of 98.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while FVE trades at $2.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas FVE's P/E ratio is -5.64. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to FVE's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to FVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check FVE's competition here
NIVF vs KDLYW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, KDLYW has a market cap of 96.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while KDLYW trades at $18.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas KDLYW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to KDLYW's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to KDLYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check KDLYW's competition here
NIVF vs NAKA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, NAKA has a market cap of 65.3M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while NAKA trades at $3.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas NAKA's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to NAKA's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to NAKA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check NAKA's competition here
NIVF vs DCGO Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, DCGO has a market cap of 52.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while DCGO trades at $0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas DCGO's P/E ratio is -0.61. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to DCGO's ROE of -0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to DCGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check DCGO's competition here
NIVF vs ALR Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ALR has a market cap of 44.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ALR trades at $1.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ALR's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ALR's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to ALR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ALR's competition here
NIVF vs IMAC Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, IMAC has a market cap of 33.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while IMAC trades at $1.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas IMAC's P/E ratio is -2.27. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to IMAC's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to IMAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check IMAC's competition here
NIVF vs PIII Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, PIII has a market cap of 33.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while PIII trades at $10.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas PIII's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to PIII's ROE of +1.85%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to PIII. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check PIII's competition here
NIVF vs CCEL Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CCEL has a market cap of 27.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CCEL trades at $3.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CCEL's P/E ratio is -10.40. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CCEL's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CCEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CCEL's competition here
NIVF vs CANO-WT Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CANO-WT has a market cap of 19.3M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CANO-WT trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CANO-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CANO-WT's ROE of -1.49%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to CANO-WT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CANO-WT's competition here
NIVF vs AIH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AIH has a market cap of 15.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AIH trades at $0.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AIH's P/E ratio is -2.78. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AIH's ROE of +1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to AIH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AIH's competition here
NIVF vs CANO Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CANO has a market cap of 12.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CANO trades at $2.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CANO's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CANO's ROE of -1.49%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to CANO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CANO's competition here
NIVF vs FPCG Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, FPCG has a market cap of 10.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while FPCG trades at $1,025.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas FPCG's P/E ratio is 0.09. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to FPCG's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to FPCG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check FPCG's competition here
NIVF vs FTRP Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, FTRP has a market cap of 9.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while FTRP trades at $0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas FTRP's P/E ratio is -1.22. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to FTRP's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to FTRP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check FTRP's competition here
NIVF vs AMS Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AMS has a market cap of 9.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AMS trades at $1.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AMS's P/E ratio is -6.56. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AMS's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AMS's competition here
NIVF vs MODV Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, MODV has a market cap of 6.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while MODV trades at $0.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas MODV's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to MODV's ROE of +1.36%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to MODV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check MODV's competition here
NIVF vs GBNH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, GBNH has a market cap of 5.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while GBNH trades at $0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas GBNH's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to GBNH's ROE of +15.74%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to GBNH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check GBNH's competition here
NIVF vs RHE Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, RHE has a market cap of 5.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while RHE trades at $2.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas RHE's P/E ratio is -1.79. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to RHE's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to RHE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check RHE's competition here
NIVF vs RHE-PA Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, RHE-PA has a market cap of 5.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while RHE-PA trades at $0.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas RHE-PA's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to RHE-PA's ROE of +2.11%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to RHE-PA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check RHE-PA's competition here
NIVF vs AIDX Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AIDX has a market cap of 3.3M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AIDX trades at $0.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AIDX's P/E ratio is -1.09. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AIDX's ROE of +0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AIDX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AIDX's competition here
NIVF vs IMACW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, IMACW has a market cap of 1.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while IMACW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas IMACW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to IMACW's ROE of +0.73%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to IMACW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check IMACW's competition here
NIVF vs NAKAW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, NAKAW has a market cap of 1.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while NAKAW trades at $0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas NAKAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to NAKAW's ROE of -0.85%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to NAKAW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check NAKAW's competition here
NIVF vs CCM Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, CCM has a market cap of 685.8K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while CCM trades at $4.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas CCM's P/E ratio is -0.32. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to CCM's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to CCM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check CCM's competition here
NIVF vs MNDR Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, MNDR has a market cap of 79.8K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while MNDR trades at $3.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas MNDR's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to MNDR's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to MNDR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check MNDR's competition here
NIVF vs NIVFW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, NIVFW has a market cap of 68.2K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while NIVFW trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas NIVFW's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to NIVFW's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to NIVFW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check NIVFW's competition here
NIVF vs SLHG Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, SLHG has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while SLHG trades at $0.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas SLHG's P/E ratio is -1.48. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to SLHG's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to SLHG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check SLHG's competition here
NIVF vs SLHGP Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, SLHGP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while SLHGP trades at $12.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas SLHGP's P/E ratio is -30.38. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to SLHGP's ROE of -0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to SLHGP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check SLHGP's competition here
NIVF vs TLMD Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TLMD has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TLMD trades at $3.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TLMD's P/E ratio is -1.60. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TLMD's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to TLMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TLMD's competition here
NIVF vs HNGR Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, HNGR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while HNGR trades at $18.72.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas HNGR's P/E ratio is 19.71. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to HNGR's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to HNGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check HNGR's competition here
NIVF vs TVTY Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TVTY has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TVTY trades at $32.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TVTY's P/E ratio is 19.06. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TVTY's ROE of +1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to TVTY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TVTY's competition here
NIVF vs DVCR Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, DVCR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while DVCR trades at $10.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas DVCR's P/E ratio is 28.34. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to DVCR's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to DVCR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check DVCR's competition here
NIVF vs KND Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, KND has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while KND trades at $9.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas KND's P/E ratio is -1.14. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to KND's ROE of -0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to KND. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check KND's competition here
NIVF vs DCGOW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, DCGOW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while DCGOW trades at $1.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas DCGOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to DCGOW's ROE of -0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to DCGOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check DCGOW's competition here
NIVF vs TLMDW Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, TLMDW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while TLMDW trades at $0.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas TLMDW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to TLMDW's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to TLMDW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check TLMDW's competition here
NIVF vs NFH Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, NFH has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while NFH trades at $11.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas NFH's P/E ratio is -19.75. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to NFH's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to NFH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check NFH's competition here
NIVF vs ATIP-WT Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, ATIP-WT has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while ATIP-WT trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas ATIP-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to ATIP-WT's ROE of +2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is less volatile compared to ATIP-WT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check ATIP-WT's competition here
NIVF vs AFAM Comparison July 2026
NIVF plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVF stands at 252.1K. In comparison, AFAM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVF is priced at $1.33, while AFAM trades at $56.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVF currently has a P/E ratio of 0.66, whereas AFAM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVF's ROE is +0.33%, compared to AFAM's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVF is more volatile compared to AFAM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVF.Check AFAM's competition here