NewGenIvf Group Limited
NewGenIvf Group Limited NIVFW Peers
See (NIVFW) 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIVFW | $0.03 | +29.87% | 2.2K | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| HCA | $384.13 | +0.69% | 92.4B | 17.06 | $22.52 | +0.70% |
| FMS | $28.51 | -0.49% | 16.7B | 23.76 | $1.20 | +2.42% |
| THC | $171.38 | -0.27% | 15.9B | 10.99 | $15.60 | N/A |
| SOLV | $74.84 | -0.70% | 12.9B | 34.49 | $2.17 | N/A |
| EHC | $121.61 | +0.26% | 12.3B | 25.07 | $4.85 | +0.54% |
| UHS | $189.36 | +0.14% | 12.2B | 10.61 | $17.85 | +0.42% |
| DVA | $137.88 | +0.10% | 10.4B | 13.68 | $10.08 | N/A |
| OSH | $39.00 | +0.08% | 9.5B | -17.65 | -$2.21 | N/A |
| ENSG | $152.38 | +0.45% | 8.8B | 28.75 | $5.30 | +0.16% |
Stock Comparison
NIVFW vs HCA Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, HCA has a market cap of 92.4B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while HCA trades at $384.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HCA's P/E ratio is 17.06. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HCA's ROE of -2.36%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to HCA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs FMS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, FMS has a market cap of 16.7B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while FMS trades at $28.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FMS's P/E ratio is 23.76. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to FMS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to FMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs THC Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, THC has a market cap of 15.9B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while THC trades at $171.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas THC's P/E ratio is 10.99. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to THC's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to THC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SOLV Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SOLV has a market cap of 12.9B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while SOLV trades at $74.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SOLV's P/E ratio is 34.49. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SOLV's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SOLV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs EHC Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, EHC has a market cap of 12.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while EHC trades at $121.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EHC's P/E ratio is 25.07. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to EHC's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to EHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs UHS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, UHS has a market cap of 12.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while UHS trades at $189.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas UHS's P/E ratio is 10.61. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to UHS's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to UHS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs DVA Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, DVA has a market cap of 10.4B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while DVA trades at $137.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DVA's P/E ratio is 13.68. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DVA's ROE of +3.94%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to DVA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs OSH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, OSH has a market cap of 9.5B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas OSH's P/E ratio is -17.65. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to OSH's ROE of +4.64%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to OSH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ENSG Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ENSG has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while ENSG trades at $152.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ENSG's P/E ratio is 28.75. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ENSG's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ENSG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CHE Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CHE has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while CHE trades at $561.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CHE's P/E ratio is 27.71. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CHE's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CHE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs LHCG Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, LHCG has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LHCG's P/E ratio is 82.83. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to LHCG's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to LHCG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs OPCH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, OPCH has a market cap of 5.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while OPCH trades at $31.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas OPCH's P/E ratio is 25.52. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to OPCH's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to OPCH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AMED Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AMED has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AMED trades at $93.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMED's P/E ratio is 34.65. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AMED's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AMED. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SGRY Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SGRY has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while SGRY trades at $23.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SGRY's P/E ratio is -15.16. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SGRY's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SGRY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs LFST Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, LFST has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while LFST trades at $5.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LFST's P/E ratio is -64.83. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to LFST's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to LFST. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ARDT Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ARDT has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while ARDT trades at $14.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ARDT's P/E ratio is 8.84. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ARDT's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ARDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ACHC Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ACHC has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while ACHC trades at $22.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ACHC's P/E ratio is 11.15. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ACHC's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ACHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ADUS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ADUS has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while ADUS trades at $113.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ADUS's P/E ratio is 25.60. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ADUS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ADUS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SEM Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SEM has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while SEM trades at $15.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SEM's P/E ratio is 24.89. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SEM's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SEM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AMEH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AMEH has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMEH's P/E ratio is 39.25. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AMEH's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AMEH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs NHC Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, NHC has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while NHC trades at $105.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NHC's P/E ratio is 15.34. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to NHC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to NHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs BKD Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, BKD has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while BKD trades at $6.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BKD's P/E ratio is -6.43. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BKD's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to BKD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ASTH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ASTH has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while ASTH trades at $25.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ASTH's P/E ratio is 34.60. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ASTH's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ASTH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs BKDT Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, BKDT has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BKDT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BKDT's ROE of -0.96%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to BKDT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs MD Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, MD has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while MD trades at $14.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MD's P/E ratio is -14.08. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to MD's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to MD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs USPH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, USPH has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while USPH trades at $77.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas USPH's P/E ratio is 35.48. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to USPH's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to USPH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AVAH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AVAH has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AVAH trades at $5.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AVAH's P/E ratio is 183.67. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AVAH's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AVAH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs HCSG Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, HCSG has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while HCSG trades at $14.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HCSG's P/E ratio is 26.25. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HCSG's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to HCSG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs PNTG Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, PNTG has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while PNTG trades at $29.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PNTG's P/E ratio is 38.88. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to PNTG's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to PNTG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AGL Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AGL has a market cap of 892.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AGL trades at $2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AGL's P/E ratio is -3.48. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AGL's ROE of -0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AGL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AMN Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AMN has a market cap of 807.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AMN trades at $21.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMN's P/E ratio is -4.87. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AMN's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AMN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TALKW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TALKW has a market cap of 556.3M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while TALKW trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TALKW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TALKW's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TALKW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TALK Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TALK has a market cap of 550.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while TALK trades at $3.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TALK's P/E ratio is 164.50. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TALK's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TALK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CYH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CYH has a market cap of 547.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while CYH trades at $3.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CYH's P/E ratio is -1.06. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CYH's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CYH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs EHAB Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, EHAB has a market cap of 546.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while EHAB trades at $10.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas EHAB's P/E ratio is -3.90. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to EHAB's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to EHAB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs INNV Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, INNV has a market cap of 542.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while INNV trades at $4.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas INNV's P/E ratio is -16.75. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to INNV's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to INNV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AUNA Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AUNA has a market cap of 481.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AUNA trades at $6.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AUNA's P/E ratio is 10.00. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AUNA's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AUNA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SNDA Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SNDA has a market cap of 480.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while SNDA trades at $25.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SNDA's P/E ratio is -7.02. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SNDA's ROE of -0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SNDA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CMPS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CMPS has a market cap of 445.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while CMPS trades at $4.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CMPS's P/E ratio is -2.41. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CMPS's ROE of -0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CMPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CCRN Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CCRN has a market cap of 423.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while CCRN trades at $12.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CCRN's P/E ratio is -23.91. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CCRN's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CCRN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TOIIW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TOIIW has a market cap of 317.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while TOIIW trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TOIIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TOIIW's ROE of -5.10%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TOIIW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AONC Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AONC has a market cap of 315.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AONC trades at $10.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AONC's P/E ratio is -12.13. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AONC's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AONC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AIRS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AIRS has a market cap of 298M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AIRS trades at $5.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AIRS's P/E ratio is -17.48. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AIRS's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AIRS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TOI Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TOI has a market cap of 247.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while TOI trades at $2.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TOI's P/E ratio is -3.96. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TOI's ROE of -5.10%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TOI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CSU Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CSU has a market cap of 223.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CSU's P/E ratio is 0.67. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CSU's ROE of +2.23%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CSU. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs JYNT Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, JYNT has a market cap of 183.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while JYNT trades at $12.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas JYNT's P/E ratio is -120.10. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to JYNT's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to JYNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs DCGO Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, DCGO has a market cap of 151.6M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while DCGO trades at $1.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DCGO's P/E ratio is -153.00. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DCGO's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to DCGO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs BTMD Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, BTMD has a market cap of 146.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while BTMD trades at $3.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BTMD's P/E ratio is 6.60. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BTMD's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to BTMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs KDLYW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, KDLYW has a market cap of 109.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas KDLYW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to KDLYW's ROE of -1.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is less volatile compared to KDLYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs FVE Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, FVE has a market cap of 98.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FVE's P/E ratio is -5.64. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to FVE's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to FVE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs MODV Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, MODV has a market cap of 56.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while MODV trades at $3.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MODV's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to MODV's ROE of +6.87%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is less volatile compared to MODV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ALR Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ALR has a market cap of 44.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ALR's P/E ratio is -1.11. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ALR's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ALR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CCEL Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CCEL has a market cap of 41.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while CCEL trades at $5.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CCEL's P/E ratio is 519.00. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CCEL's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CCEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs IMAC Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, IMAC has a market cap of 33.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IMAC's P/E ratio is -2.27. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to IMAC's ROE of +2.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to IMAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs PIII Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, PIII has a market cap of 21.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while PIII trades at $6.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PIII's P/E ratio is -0.12. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to PIII's ROE of -1.29%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to PIII. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AIH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AIH has a market cap of 15.9M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AIH's P/E ratio is -2.78. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AIH's ROE of +1.16%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AIH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs AMS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, AMS has a market cap of 15.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while AMS trades at $2.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AMS's P/E ratio is 11.24. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to AMS's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to AMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CANO Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CANO has a market cap of 12.4M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CANO's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CANO's ROE of -1.49%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CANO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs FTRP Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, FTRP has a market cap of 9.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas FTRP's P/E ratio is -1.22. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to FTRP's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to FTRP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs MNDR Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, MNDR has a market cap of 5.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while MNDR trades at $1.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MNDR's P/E ratio is -0.30. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to MNDR's ROE of -5.70%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to MNDR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs GBNH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, GBNH has a market cap of 5.5M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GBNH's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to GBNH's ROE of +15.74%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is less volatile compared to GBNH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs RHE Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, RHE has a market cap of 5.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RHE's P/E ratio is -1.79. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to RHE's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to RHE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs ATIP Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, ATIP has a market cap of 3.8M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while ATIP trades at $0.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ATIP's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to ATIP's ROE of +1.77%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to ATIP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs IMACW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, IMACW has a market cap of 1.7M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IMACW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to IMACW's ROE of +2.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is less volatile compared to IMACW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SYRA Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SYRA has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while SYRA trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SYRA's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SYRA's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SYRA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs CCM Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, CCM has a market cap of 1.1M. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while CCM trades at $7.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CCM's P/E ratio is -0.72. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to CCM's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to CCM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs RHE-PA Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, RHE-PA has a market cap of 674.5K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RHE-PA's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to RHE-PA's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to RHE-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs BACK Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, BACK has a market cap of 155.2K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while BACK trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas BACK's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to BACK's ROE of +2.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to BACK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs IONM Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, IONM has a market cap of 149.8K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while IONM trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IONM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to IONM's ROE of +0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is less volatile compared to IONM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs NVOS Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, NVOS has a market cap of 118.4K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while NVOS trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NVOS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to NVOS's ROE of -1.20%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to NVOS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs PIIIW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, PIIIW has a market cap of 33.7K. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, while PIIIW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PIIIW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to PIIIW's ROE of -1.29%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to PIIIW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TLMD Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TLMD has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TLMD's P/E ratio is -1.60. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TLMD's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TLMD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs HNGR Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, HNGR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas HNGR's P/E ratio is 19.71. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to HNGR's ROE of +0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to HNGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TVTY Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TVTY has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TVTY's P/E ratio is 19.06. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TVTY's ROE of +1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TVTY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs DVCR Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, DVCR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DVCR's P/E ratio is 28.34. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DVCR's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to DVCR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs TLMDW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, TLMDW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas TLMDW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to TLMDW's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to TLMDW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs NFH Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, NFH has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas NFH's P/E ratio is -19.75. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to NFH's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to NFH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SLHG Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SLHG has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SLHG's P/E ratio is -1.48. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SLHG's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SLHG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs DCGOW Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, DCGOW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas DCGOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to DCGOW's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to DCGOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.
NIVFW vs SLHGP Comparison
NIVFW plays a significant role within the Healthcare sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NIVFW stands at 2.2K. In comparison, SLHGP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, NIVFW is priced at $0.03, 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.
NIVFW currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SLHGP's P/E ratio is -30.38. In terms of profitability, NIVFW's ROE is -0.39%, compared to SLHGP's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, NIVFW is more volatile compared to SLHGP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NIVFW.