Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS.TO) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (PHYS.TO) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Asset Management Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PHYS.TO | CA$44.08 | -2.02% | 21B | 3.46 | CA$12.73 | N/A |
| BLK.NE | CA$26.75 | -2.69% | 213.5B | 25.72 | CA$1.04 | +2.10% |
| BN.TO | CA$62.91 | +0.08% | 140.5B | 88.61 | CA$0.71 | +0.57% |
| BAM.TO | CA$66.43 | -0.88% | 106.1B | 30.47 | CA$2.18 | +3.87% |
| IGM.TO | CA$80.53 | -1.46% | 18.7B | 16.57 | CA$4.86 | +2.85% |
| PSLV.TO | CA$29.14 | -2.02% | 18.6B | 1.44 | CA$20.27 | N/A |
| VEQT.TO | CA$61.61 | +0.23% | 14.9B | 21.96 | CA$2.80 | +1.23% |
| CEF.TO | CA$60.12 | -1.76% | 11.1B | 2.04 | CA$29.51 | N/A |
| VGRO.TO | CA$47.92 | +0.21% | 10.2B | 21.86 | CA$2.19 | +1.68% |
| FBAL.NE | CA$15.59 | +0.32% | 9B | 18.97 | CA$0.82 | +1.49% |
Stock Comparison
PHYS.TO vs BLK.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, BLK.NE has a market cap of 213.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while BLK.NE trades at CA$26.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas BLK.NE's P/E ratio is 25.72. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to BLK.NE's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to BLK.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check BLK.NE's competition here
PHYS.TO vs BN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, BN.TO has a market cap of 140.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while BN.TO trades at CA$62.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas BN.TO's P/E ratio is 88.61. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to BN.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to BN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check BN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs BAM.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, BAM.TO has a market cap of 106.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while BAM.TO trades at CA$66.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas BAM.TO's P/E ratio is 30.47. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to BAM.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to BAM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check BAM.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs IGM.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, IGM.TO has a market cap of 18.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while IGM.TO trades at CA$80.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas IGM.TO's P/E ratio is 16.57. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to IGM.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to IGM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check IGM.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs PSLV.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, PSLV.TO has a market cap of 18.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while PSLV.TO trades at CA$29.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas PSLV.TO's P/E ratio is 1.44. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to PSLV.TO's ROE of +0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to PSLV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check PSLV.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VEQT.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VEQT.TO has a market cap of 14.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VEQT.TO trades at CA$61.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VEQT.TO's P/E ratio is 21.96. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VEQT.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VEQT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VEQT.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CEF.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CEF.TO has a market cap of 11.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CEF.TO trades at CA$60.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CEF.TO's P/E ratio is 2.04. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CEF.TO's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to CEF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CEF.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VGRO.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VGRO.TO has a market cap of 10.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VGRO.TO trades at CA$47.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VGRO.TO's P/E ratio is 21.86. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VGRO.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VGRO.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VGRO.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FBAL.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FBAL.NE has a market cap of 9B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FBAL.NE trades at CA$15.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FBAL.NE's P/E ratio is 18.97. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FBAL.NE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FBAL.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FBAL.NE's competition here
PHYS.TO vs ONEX.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, ONEX.TO has a market cap of 8.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while ONEX.TO trades at CA$109.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas ONEX.TO's P/E ratio is 9.46. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to ONEX.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to ONEX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check ONEX.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs PMEI-UN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, PMEI-UN.TO has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while PMEI-UN.TO trades at CA$8.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas PMEI-UN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to PMEI-UN.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to PMEI-UN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check PMEI-UN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs ZLB.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, ZLB.TO has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while ZLB.TO trades at CA$61.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas ZLB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to ZLB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to ZLB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check ZLB.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VBAL.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VBAL.TO has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VBAL.TO trades at CA$40.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VBAL.TO's P/E ratio is 21.72. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VBAL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VBAL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VBAL.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FGRO.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FGRO.NE has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FGRO.NE trades at CA$18.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FGRO.NE's P/E ratio is 20.08. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FGRO.NE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FGRO.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FGRO.NE's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CSAV.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CSAV.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CSAV.TO trades at CA$50.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CSAV.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CSAV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to CSAV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CSAV.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CIX.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CIX.TO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CIX.TO trades at CA$31.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CIX.TO's P/E ratio is -15.84. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CIX.TO's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to CIX.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CIX.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs SII.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, SII.TO has a market cap of 4.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while SII.TO trades at CA$165.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas SII.TO's P/E ratio is 36.19. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to SII.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to SII.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check SII.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCUV.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCUV.TO has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCUV.TO trades at CA$27.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCUV.TO's P/E ratio is 17.37. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCUV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCUV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCUV.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs XGD.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, XGD.TO has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while XGD.TO trades at CA$50.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas XGD.TO's P/E ratio is 15.60. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to XGD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to XGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check XGD.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs BBUC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, BBUC.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while BBUC.TO trades at CA$46.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas BBUC.TO's P/E ratio is -67.82. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to BBUC.TO's ROE of -0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to BBUC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check BBUC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CGL.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CGL.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CGL.TO trades at CA$31.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CGL.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CGL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to CGL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CGL.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs EIT-UN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, EIT-UN.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while EIT-UN.TO trades at CA$17.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas EIT-UN.TO's P/E ratio is 7.51. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to EIT-UN.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to EIT-UN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check EIT-UN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs PFMN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, PFMN.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while PFMN.TO trades at CA$16.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas PFMN.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to PFMN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to PFMN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check PFMN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCUQ.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCUQ.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCUQ.TO trades at CA$74.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCUQ.TO's P/E ratio is 27.89. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCUQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCUQ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCUQ.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs LUNR.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, LUNR.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while LUNR.TO trades at CA$20.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas LUNR.TO's P/E ratio is -1997.00. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to LUNR.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to LUNR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check LUNR.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs ZLU.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, ZLU.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while ZLU.TO trades at CA$62.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas ZLU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to ZLU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to ZLU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check ZLU.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs NSCE.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, NSCE.TO has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while NSCE.TO trades at CA$51.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas NSCE.TO's P/E ratio is 20.06. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to NSCE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to NSCE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check NSCE.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCNS.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCNS.NE has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCNS.NE trades at CA$12.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCNS.NE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCNS.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to FCNS.NE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCNS.NE's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CYB.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CYB.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CYB.TO trades at CA$89.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CYB.TO's P/E ratio is 8.39. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CYB.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to CYB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CYB.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs NREA.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, NREA.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while NREA.TO trades at CA$28.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas NREA.TO's P/E ratio is 24.80. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to NREA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to NREA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check NREA.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FIH-U.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FIH-U.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FIH-U.TO trades at CA$17.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FIH-U.TO's P/E ratio is 9.16. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FIH-U.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to FIH-U.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FIH-U.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs UNC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, UNC.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while UNC.TO trades at CA$15.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas UNC.TO's P/E ratio is 4.89. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to UNC.TO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to UNC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check UNC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs GCG-A.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, GCG-A.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while GCG-A.TO trades at CA$67.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas GCG-A.TO's P/E ratio is 9.09. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to GCG-A.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to GCG-A.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check GCG-A.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs GCG.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, GCG.TO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while GCG.TO trades at CA$67.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas GCG.TO's P/E ratio is 9.09. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to GCG.TO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to GCG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check GCG.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs RIIN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, RIIN.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while RIIN.TO trades at CA$24.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas RIIN.TO's P/E ratio is 22.86. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to RIIN.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to RIIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check RIIN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs PFIA.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, PFIA.TO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while PFIA.TO trades at CA$10.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas PFIA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to PFIA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to PFIA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check PFIA.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs EVT.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, EVT.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while EVT.TO trades at CA$23.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas EVT.TO's P/E ratio is 0.47. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to EVT.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to EVT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check EVT.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs DFN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, DFN.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while DFN.TO trades at CA$8.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas DFN.TO's P/E ratio is 4.57. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to DFN.TO's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to DFN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check DFN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs AGF-B.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, AGF-B.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while AGF-B.TO trades at CA$20.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas AGF-B.TO's P/E ratio is 11.77. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to AGF-B.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to AGF-B.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check AGF-B.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs PFLS.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, PFLS.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while PFLS.TO trades at CA$22.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas PFLS.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to PFLS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to PFLS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check PFLS.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs XRE.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, XRE.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while XRE.TO trades at CA$17.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas XRE.TO's P/E ratio is 15.68. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to XRE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to XRE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check XRE.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CGI.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CGI.TO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CGI.TO trades at CA$52.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CGI.TO's P/E ratio is 4.24. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CGI.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to CGI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CGI.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CVG.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CVG.TO has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CVG.TO trades at CA$75.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CVG.TO's P/E ratio is 14.52. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CVG.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to CVG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CVG.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs HCAL.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, HCAL.TO has a market cap of 969.5M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while HCAL.TO trades at CA$48.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas HCAL.TO's P/E ratio is 18.59. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to HCAL.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to HCAL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check HCAL.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs SEC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, SEC.TO has a market cap of 963.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while SEC.TO trades at CA$398.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas SEC.TO's P/E ratio is 2.24. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to SEC.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to SEC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check SEC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs TQSM.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, TQSM.TO has a market cap of 934.5M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while TQSM.TO trades at CA$29.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas TQSM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.99. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to TQSM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to TQSM.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check TQSM.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FTN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FTN.TO has a market cap of 910M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FTN.TO trades at CA$11.88.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FTN.TO's P/E ratio is 4.59. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FTN.TO's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to FTN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FTN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VCNS.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VCNS.TO has a market cap of 898.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VCNS.TO trades at CA$33.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VCNS.TO's P/E ratio is 21.60. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VCNS.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VCNS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VCNS.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs LBS.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, LBS.TO has a market cap of 880.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while LBS.TO trades at CA$14.87.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas LBS.TO's P/E ratio is 2.83. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to LBS.TO's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to LBS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check LBS.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCCV.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCCV.TO has a market cap of 843.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCCV.TO trades at CA$23.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCCV.TO's P/E ratio is 15.91. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCCV.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCCV.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCCV.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VBU.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VBU.TO has a market cap of 798.3M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VBU.TO trades at CA$22.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VBU.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VBU.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VBU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VBU.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs 0P0000VGMF.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, 0P0000VGMF.TO has a market cap of 791.1M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while 0P0000VGMF.TO trades at CA$17.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas 0P0000VGMF.TO's P/E ratio is 22.33. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to 0P0000VGMF.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to 0P0000VGMF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check 0P0000VGMF.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs BK.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, BK.TO has a market cap of 730.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while BK.TO trades at CA$16.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas BK.TO's P/E ratio is 3.79. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to BK.TO's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to BK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check BK.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs BK-PA.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, BK-PA.TO has a market cap of 724.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while BK-PA.TO trades at CA$10.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas BK-PA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to BK-PA.TO's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to BK-PA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check BK-PA.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs QRC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, QRC.TO has a market cap of 694.2M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while QRC.TO trades at CA$13.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas QRC.TO's P/E ratio is 1.54. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to QRC.TO's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to QRC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check QRC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCCQ.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCCQ.TO has a market cap of 688.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCCQ.TO trades at CA$51.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCCQ.TO's P/E ratio is 20.19. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCCQ.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCCQ.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCCQ.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FFN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FFN.TO has a market cap of 685.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FFN.TO trades at CA$10.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FFN.TO's P/E ratio is 3.72. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FFN.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FFN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FFN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs SPPP.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, SPPP.TO has a market cap of 655.4M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while SPPP.TO trades at CA$18.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas SPPP.TO's P/E ratio is 2.62. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to SPPP.TO's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to SPPP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check SPPP.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs ZRE.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, ZRE.TO has a market cap of 635.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while ZRE.TO trades at CA$24.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas ZRE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to ZRE.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to ZRE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check ZRE.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FTN-PA.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FTN-PA.TO has a market cap of 622.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FTN-PA.TO trades at CA$10.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FTN-PA.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FTN-PA.TO's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FTN-PA.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FTN-PA.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VBG.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VBG.TO has a market cap of 587.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VBG.TO trades at CA$23.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VBG.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VBG.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VBG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VBG.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FSZ.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FSZ.TO has a market cap of 564M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FSZ.TO trades at CA$5.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FSZ.TO's P/E ratio is 27.84. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FSZ.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to FSZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FSZ.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs 0P00007083.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, 0P00007083.TO has a market cap of 561.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while 0P00007083.TO trades at CA$24.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas 0P00007083.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to 0P00007083.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to 0P00007083.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check 0P00007083.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CAFR.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CAFR.TO has a market cap of 553.1M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CAFR.TO trades at CA$19.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CAFR.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CAFR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to CAFR.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CAFR.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs 0P0001513M.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, 0P0001513M.TO has a market cap of 536.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while 0P0001513M.TO trades at CA$21.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas 0P0001513M.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to 0P0001513M.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to 0P0001513M.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check 0P0001513M.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs ZGI.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, ZGI.TO has a market cap of 513.4M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while ZGI.TO trades at CA$58.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas ZGI.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to ZGI.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to ZGI.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check ZGI.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs DGS.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, DGS.TO has a market cap of 482.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while DGS.TO trades at CA$8.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas DGS.TO's P/E ratio is 3.73. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to DGS.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to DGS.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check DGS.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCCB.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCCB.TO has a market cap of 475.8M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCCB.TO trades at CA$22.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCCB.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCCB.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCCB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCCB.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs MSTE.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, MSTE.TO has a market cap of 440.3M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while MSTE.TO trades at CA$2.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas MSTE.TO's P/E ratio is 3.66. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to MSTE.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to MSTE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check MSTE.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs RIT.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, RIT.TO has a market cap of 431.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while RIT.TO trades at CA$18.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas RIT.TO's P/E ratio is -11.91. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to RIT.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to RIT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check RIT.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs URB.CN Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, URB.CN has a market cap of 430M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while URB.CN trades at CA$9.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas URB.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to URB.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to URB.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check URB.CN's competition here
PHYS.TO vs HFIN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, HFIN.TO has a market cap of 423.8M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while HFIN.TO trades at CA$32.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas HFIN.TO's P/E ratio is 17.56. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to HFIN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to HFIN.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check HFIN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs SBC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, SBC.TO has a market cap of 419.8M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while SBC.TO trades at CA$15.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas SBC.TO's P/E ratio is 3.18. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to SBC.TO's ROE of +0.50%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to SBC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check SBC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs TINF.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, TINF.TO has a market cap of 405.5M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while TINF.TO trades at CA$26.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas TINF.TO's P/E ratio is 22.68. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to TINF.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to TINF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check TINF.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs URB.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, URB.TO has a market cap of 392.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while URB.TO trades at CA$9.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas URB.TO's P/E ratio is 4.02. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to URB.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to URB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check URB.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs URB-A.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, URB-A.TO has a market cap of 388.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while URB-A.TO trades at CA$8.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas URB-A.TO's P/E ratio is 3.53. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to URB-A.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to URB-A.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check URB-A.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs DANC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, DANC.TO has a market cap of 386.4M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while DANC.TO trades at CA$22.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas DANC.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to DANC.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to DANC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check DANC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs CEW.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, CEW.TO has a market cap of 384M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while CEW.TO trades at CA$34.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas CEW.TO's P/E ratio is 17.46. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to CEW.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to CEW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check CEW.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs XBM.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, XBM.TO has a market cap of 382.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while XBM.TO trades at CA$37.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas XBM.TO's P/E ratio is 18.58. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to XBM.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to XBM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check XBM.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs HQU.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, HQU.TO has a market cap of 376.8M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while HQU.TO trades at CA$24.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas HQU.TO's P/E ratio is 35.25. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to HQU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to HQU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check HQU.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs PFAE.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, PFAE.TO has a market cap of 371.3M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while PFAE.TO trades at CA$29.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas PFAE.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to PFAE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to PFAE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check PFAE.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs NGPE.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, NGPE.TO has a market cap of 370.1M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while NGPE.TO trades at CA$46.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas NGPE.TO's P/E ratio is 17.92. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to NGPE.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to NGPE.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check NGPE.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs 0P0001513J.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, 0P0001513J.TO has a market cap of 368.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while 0P0001513J.TO trades at CA$37.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas 0P0001513J.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to 0P0001513J.TO's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to 0P0001513J.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check 0P0001513J.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs NALT.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, NALT.TO has a market cap of 363.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while NALT.TO trades at CA$23.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas NALT.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to NALT.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to NALT.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check NALT.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs VRIF.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, VRIF.TO has a market cap of 359.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while VRIF.TO trades at CA$27.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas VRIF.TO's P/E ratio is 20.13. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to VRIF.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to VRIF.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check VRIF.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs ZFN.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, ZFN.TO has a market cap of 357.2M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while ZFN.TO trades at CA$65.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas ZFN.TO's P/E ratio is 26.15. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to ZFN.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to ZFN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check ZFN.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs QBTC.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, QBTC.TO has a market cap of 355.5M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while QBTC.TO trades at CA$80.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas QBTC.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to QBTC.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to QBTC.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check QBTC.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs URB-A.CN Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, URB-A.CN has a market cap of 354.1M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while URB-A.CN trades at CA$8.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas URB-A.CN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to URB-A.CN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to URB-A.CN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check URB-A.CN's competition here
PHYS.TO vs NNRG.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, NNRG.NE has a market cap of 350.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while NNRG.NE trades at CA$78.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas NNRG.NE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to NNRG.NE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to NNRG.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check NNRG.NE's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FLCD.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FLCD.TO has a market cap of 349M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FLCD.TO trades at CA$23.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FLCD.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FLCD.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FLCD.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FLCD.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs QBTL.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, QBTL.TO has a market cap of 330.6M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while QBTL.TO trades at CA$11.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas QBTL.TO's P/E ratio is 16.25. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to QBTL.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to QBTL.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check QBTL.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs DRMU.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, DRMU.TO has a market cap of 327.5M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while DRMU.TO trades at CA$55.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas DRMU.TO's P/E ratio is 28.05. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to DRMU.TO's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to DRMU.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check DRMU.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs STCK.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, STCK.TO has a market cap of 327.1M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while STCK.TO trades at CA$22.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas STCK.TO's P/E ratio is 4.89. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to STCK.TO's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to STCK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check STCK.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCAM.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCAM.NE has a market cap of 324.5M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCAM.NE trades at CA$16.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCAM.NE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCAM.NE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCAM.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCAM.NE's competition here
PHYS.TO vs RCG-PB.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, RCG-PB.TO has a market cap of 314.7M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while RCG-PB.TO trades at CA$25.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas RCG-PB.TO's P/E ratio is -10.15. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to RCG-PB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to RCG-PB.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check RCG-PB.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs RCG.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, RCG.TO has a market cap of 314.3M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while RCG.TO trades at CA$19.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas RCG.TO's P/E ratio is -27.01. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to RCG.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to RCG.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check RCG.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs SVR.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, SVR.TO has a market cap of 312.2M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while SVR.TO trades at CA$30.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas SVR.TO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to SVR.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is less volatile compared to SVR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check SVR.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs FCVH.TO Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, FCVH.TO has a market cap of 310M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while FCVH.TO trades at CA$24.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas FCVH.TO's P/E ratio is 16.80. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to FCVH.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to FCVH.TO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check FCVH.TO's competition here
PHYS.TO vs RTA.NE Comparison June 2026
PHYS.TO plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, PHYS.TO stands at 21B. In comparison, RTA.NE has a market cap of 306.9M. Regarding current trading prices, PHYS.TO is priced at CA$44.08, while RTA.NE trades at CA$35.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
PHYS.TO currently has a P/E ratio of 3.46, whereas RTA.NE's P/E ratio is 23.29. In terms of profitability, PHYS.TO's ROE is +0.38%, compared to RTA.NE's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, PHYS.TO is more volatile compared to RTA.NE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for PHYS.TO.Check RTA.NE's competition here