Consumer Automotive Finance, Inc.
Consumer Automotive Finance, Inc. NWAU Peers
See (NWAU) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Dealerships Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NWAU | $0.00 | N/A | 175.03M | N/A | -$0.22 | N/A |
| SIETY | $88.90 | +3.88% | 9.44B | 23.96 | $3.71 | +32.36% |
| SIEVF | $168.78 | N/A | 8.96B | 22.72 | $7.43 | +36.57% |
| ZHSHF | $2.56 | N/A | 6.05B | 7.10 | $0.36 | +4.33% |
| ATOGF | $25.00 | N/A | 5.46B | 250.00 | $0.10 | N/A |
| USSJF | $8.17 | N/A | 3.87B | 19.00 | $0.43 | +1.78% |
| ZSHGY | $15.56 | +2.37% | 3.68B | 8.32 | $1.87 | +6.55% |
| IHCPF | $9.16 | -16.75% | 3.54B | 10.53 | $0.87 | +5.41% |
| USSJY | $20.90 | -2.56% | 2.47B | 19.00 | $1.10 | +1.31% |
| CYYHF | $0.27 | N/A | 508.21M | 6.79 | $0.04 | +6.26% |
Stock Comparison
NWAU vs SIETY Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, SIETY has a market cap of 9.44B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while SIETY trades at $88.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SIETY's P/E ratio is 23.96. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to SIETY's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and SIETY have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs SIEVF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, SIEVF has a market cap of 8.96B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while SIEVF trades at $168.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SIEVF's P/E ratio is 22.72. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to SIEVF's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to SIEVF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs ZHSHF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, ZHSHF has a market cap of 6.05B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while ZHSHF trades at $2.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZHSHF's P/E ratio is 7.10. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to ZHSHF's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and ZHSHF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs ATOGF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, ATOGF has a market cap of 5.46B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while ATOGF trades at $25.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ATOGF's P/E ratio is 250.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to ATOGF's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to ATOGF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs USSJF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, USSJF has a market cap of 3.87B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while USSJF trades at $8.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas USSJF's P/E ratio is 19.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to USSJF's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and USSJF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs ZSHGY Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, ZSHGY has a market cap of 3.68B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while ZSHGY trades at $15.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas ZSHGY's P/E ratio is 8.32. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to ZSHGY's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to ZSHGY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs IHCPF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, IHCPF has a market cap of 3.54B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while IHCPF trades at $9.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas IHCPF's P/E ratio is 10.53. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to IHCPF's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to IHCPF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs USSJY Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, USSJY has a market cap of 2.47B. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while USSJY trades at $20.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas USSJY's P/E ratio is 19.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to USSJY's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and USSJY have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs CYYHF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, CYYHF has a market cap of 508.21M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while CYYHF trades at $0.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CYYHF's P/E ratio is 6.79. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to CYYHF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and CYYHF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs KMUXF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, KMUXF has a market cap of 485.26M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while KMUXF trades at $12.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas KMUXF's P/E ratio is 24.84. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to KMUXF's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and KMUXF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs CMEIF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, CMEIF has a market cap of 432.95M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while CMEIF trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CMEIF's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to CMEIF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and CMEIF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs PDGNF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, PDGNF has a market cap of 389.23M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while PDGNF trades at $4.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PDGNF's P/E ratio is 5.77. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to PDGNF's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and PDGNF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs AOCIF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, AOCIF has a market cap of 354.88M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while AOCIF trades at $15.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas AOCIF's P/E ratio is 14.31. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to AOCIF's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to AOCIF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs LKKRF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, LKKRF has a market cap of 308.09M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while LKKRF trades at $0.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LKKRF's P/E ratio is 3.18. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to LKKRF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and LKKRF have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs VTMTF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, VTMTF has a market cap of 281.67M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while VTMTF trades at $0.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas VTMTF's P/E ratio is 12.44. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to VTMTF's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to VTMTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs MVXM Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, MVXM has a market cap of 218.08M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while MVXM trades at $2.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MVXM's P/E ratio is -250.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to MVXM's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and MVXM have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs MTPTF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, MTPTF has a market cap of 151.14M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while MTPTF trades at $1.78.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MTPTF's P/E ratio is -35.60. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to MTPTF's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to MTPTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs CZASF Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, CZASF has a market cap of 33.80M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while CZASF trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CZASF's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to CZASF's ROE of -15.24%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to CZASF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs GBXXY Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, GBXXY has a market cap of 26.22M. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while GBXXY trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas GBXXY's P/E ratio is -0.77. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to GBXXY's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and GBXXY have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs PREC Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, PREC has a market cap of 247505.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while PREC trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas PREC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to PREC's ROE of +0.82%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to PREC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs KXINW Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, KXINW has a market cap of 59137.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while KXINW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas KXINW's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to KXINW's ROE of -1.45%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to KXINW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs RWGI Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, RWGI has a market cap of 24797.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while RWGI trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas RWGI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to RWGI's ROE of -3.60%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and RWGI have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs SPMI Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, SPMI has a market cap of 12766.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while SPMI trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SPMI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to SPMI's ROE of +2.55%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to SPMI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs MTAM Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, MTAM has a market cap of 4995.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while MTAM trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas MTAM's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to MTAM's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and MTAM have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs LASLY Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, LASLY has a market cap of 3257.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while LASLY trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas LASLY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to LASLY's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU and LASLY have similar daily volatility (0.00).
NWAU vs SFTGQ Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, SFTGQ has a market cap of 1700.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while SFTGQ trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas SFTGQ's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to SFTGQ's ROE of -22.22%. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to SFTGQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.
NWAU vs CALIQ Comparison
NWAU plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, NWAU stands at 175.03M. In comparison, CALIQ has a market cap of 484.00. Regarding current trading prices, NWAU is priced at $0.00, while CALIQ trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
NWAU currently has a P/E ratio of N/A, whereas CALIQ's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, NWAU's ROE is +1.44%, compared to CALIQ's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, NWAU is less volatile compared to CALIQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for NWAU.