QuantumScape Corporation (QS) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (QS) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Parts Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QS | $7.32 | -4.44% | 4.5B | -10.76 | -$0.68 | N/A |
| APTV-PA | $108.66 | +0.15% | 29.4B | 92.08 | $1.18 | N/A |
| MGA | $66.09 | -0.87% | 18.4B | 27.89 | $2.37 | +3.06% |
| BWA | $73.27 | -3.41% | 15B | 42.60 | $1.72 | +0.95% |
| MOD | $278.18 | +1.07% | 14.7B | 122.01 | $2.28 | N/A |
| APTV | $68.48 | -1.17% | 14.5B | 40.76 | $1.68 | N/A |
| ALSN | $117.91 | +2.10% | 9.8B | 18.34 | $6.43 | +0.98% |
| ALV | $126.14 | -1.63% | 9.4B | 13.59 | $9.28 | +2.79% |
| MBLY | $9.33 | -3.72% | 7.6B | -1.85 | -$5.03 | N/A |
| LEA | $142.16 | -1.87% | 7.1B | 14.23 | $9.99 | +2.19% |
Stock Comparison
QS vs APTV-PA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, APTV-PA has a market cap of 29.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while APTV-PA trades at $108.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas APTV-PA's P/E ratio is 92.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to APTV-PA's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to APTV-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check APTV-PA's competition here
QS vs MGA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MGA has a market cap of 18.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MGA trades at $66.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MGA's P/E ratio is 27.89. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MGA's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MGA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MGA's competition here
QS vs BWA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, BWA has a market cap of 15B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while BWA trades at $73.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas BWA's P/E ratio is 42.60. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to BWA's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BWA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BWA's competition here
QS vs MOD Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MOD has a market cap of 14.7B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MOD trades at $278.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MOD's P/E ratio is 122.01. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MOD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MOD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MOD's competition here
QS vs APTV Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, APTV has a market cap of 14.5B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while APTV trades at $68.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas APTV's P/E ratio is 40.76. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to APTV's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to APTV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check APTV's competition here
QS vs ALSN Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ALSN has a market cap of 9.8B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ALSN trades at $117.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ALSN's P/E ratio is 18.34. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ALSN's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ALSN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ALSN's competition here
QS vs ALV Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ALV has a market cap of 9.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ALV trades at $126.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ALV's P/E ratio is 13.59. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ALV's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ALV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ALV's competition here
QS vs MBLY Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MBLY has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MBLY trades at $9.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MBLY's P/E ratio is -1.85. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MBLY's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MBLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MBLY's competition here
QS vs LEA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, LEA has a market cap of 7.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while LEA trades at $142.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas LEA's P/E ratio is 14.23. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to LEA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to LEA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LEA's competition here
QS vs LKQ Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, LKQ has a market cap of 6.5B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while LKQ trades at $25.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas LKQ's P/E ratio is 12.68. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to LKQ's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to LKQ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LKQ's competition here
QS vs GTX Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GTX has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GTX trades at $32.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GTX's P/E ratio is 19.19. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GTX's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GTX's competition here
QS vs GNTX Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GNTX has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GNTX trades at $24.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GNTX's P/E ratio is 13.96. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GNTX's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GNTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GNTX's competition here
QS vs BC-PA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, BC-PA has a market cap of 4.8B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while BC-PA trades at $74.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas BC-PA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to BC-PA's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BC-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BC-PA's competition here
QS vs DAN Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, DAN has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while DAN trades at $36.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas DAN's P/E ratio is -67.69. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to DAN's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to DAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check DAN's competition here
QS vs DORM Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, DORM has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while DORM trades at $127.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas DORM's P/E ratio is 20.64. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to DORM's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to DORM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check DORM's competition here
QS vs BC-PB Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, BC-PB has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while BC-PB trades at $24.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas BC-PB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to BC-PB's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BC-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BC-PB's competition here
QS vs VGNT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, VGNT has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while VGNT trades at $49.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas VGNT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to VGNT's ROE of +0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to VGNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check VGNT's competition here
QS vs VC Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, VC has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while VC trades at $119.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas VC's P/E ratio is 19.96. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to VC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to VC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check VC's competition here
QS vs PHIN Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, PHIN has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while PHIN trades at $81.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas PHIN's P/E ratio is 22.83. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to PHIN's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to PHIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check PHIN's competition here
QS vs HSAI Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, HSAI has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while HSAI trades at $18.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas HSAI's P/E ratio is 38.42. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to HSAI's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HSAI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HSAI's competition here
QS vs BGSI Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, BGSI has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while BGSI trades at $100.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas BGSI's P/E ratio is 152.53. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to BGSI's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BGSI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BGSI's competition here
QS vs ADNT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ADNT has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ADNT trades at $21.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ADNT's P/E ratio is 33.80. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ADNT's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ADNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ADNT's competition here
QS vs GT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GT has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GT trades at $5.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GT's P/E ratio is -0.81. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GT's ROE of -0.58%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GT's competition here
QS vs AEVA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, AEVA has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while AEVA trades at $22.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas AEVA's P/E ratio is -8.98. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to AEVA's ROE of +6.92%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to AEVA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AEVA's competition here
QS vs XPEL Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, XPEL has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while XPEL trades at $45.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas XPEL's P/E ratio is 23.99. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to XPEL's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to XPEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check XPEL's competition here
QS vs HYLN Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, HYLN has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while HYLN trades at $6.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas HYLN's P/E ratio is -21.13. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to HYLN's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to HYLN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HYLN's competition here
QS vs THRM Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, THRM has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while THRM trades at $36.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas THRM's P/E ratio is 49.82. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to THRM's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to THRM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check THRM's competition here
QS vs PLOW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, PLOW has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while PLOW trades at $46.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas PLOW's P/E ratio is 20.74. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to PLOW's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to PLOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check PLOW's competition here
QS vs AXL Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, AXL has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while AXL trades at $8.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas AXL's P/E ratio is 23.30. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to AXL's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to AXL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AXL's competition here
QS vs SMP Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, SMP has a market cap of 875.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while SMP trades at $39.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas SMP's P/E ratio is 10.57. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to SMP's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SMP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SMP's competition here
QS vs FOXF Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, FOXF has a market cap of 760.3M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while FOXF trades at $18.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas FOXF's P/E ratio is -2.53. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to FOXF's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to FOXF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check FOXF's competition here
QS vs DCH Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, DCH has a market cap of 745.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while DCH trades at $6.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas DCH's P/E ratio is -8.40. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to DCH's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to DCH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check DCH's competition here
QS vs GTXAP Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GTXAP has a market cap of 557.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GTXAP trades at $8.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GTXAP's P/E ratio is 4.44. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GTXAP's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GTXAP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GTXAP's competition here
QS vs MLR Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MLR has a market cap of 556.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MLR trades at $48.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MLR's P/E ratio is 36.45. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MLR's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MLR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MLR's competition here
QS vs CPS Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, CPS has a market cap of 522.5M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while CPS trades at $29.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas CPS's P/E ratio is -13.56. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to CPS's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CPS's competition here
QS vs ALLG Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ALLG has a market cap of 496.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ALLG trades at $1.82.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ALLG's P/E ratio is -3.96. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ALLG's ROE of +4.17%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to ALLG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ALLG's competition here
QS vs MNRO Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MNRO has a market cap of 440.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MNRO trades at $14.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MNRO's P/E ratio is 488.67. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MNRO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MNRO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MNRO's competition here
QS vs ECX Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ECX has a market cap of 415.5M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ECX trades at $1.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ECX's P/E ratio is -8.27. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ECX's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ECX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ECX's competition here
QS vs SES Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, SES has a market cap of 393.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while SES trades at $1.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas SES's P/E ratio is -4.91. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to SES's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to SES. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SES's competition here
QS vs STRT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, STRT has a market cap of 324M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while STRT trades at $77.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas STRT's P/E ratio is 12.79. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to STRT's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to STRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check STRT's competition here
QS vs HLLY Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, HLLY has a market cap of 315.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while HLLY trades at $2.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas HLLY's P/E ratio is 13.10. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to HLLY's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HLLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HLLY's competition here
QS vs MPAA Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MPAA has a market cap of 249.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MPAA trades at $13.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MPAA's P/E ratio is 21.29. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MPAA's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to MPAA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MPAA's competition here
QS vs AEVA-WT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, AEVA-WT has a market cap of 227.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while AEVA-WT trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas AEVA-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to AEVA-WT's ROE of +6.92%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to AEVA-WT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AEVA-WT's competition here
QS vs SRI Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, SRI has a market cap of 198.5M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while SRI trades at $7.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas SRI's P/E ratio is -1.78. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to SRI's ROE of -0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SRI's competition here
QS vs CVGI Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, CVGI has a market cap of 187.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while CVGI trades at $5.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas CVGI's P/E ratio is -10.53. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to CVGI's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CVGI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CVGI's competition here
QS vs XL Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, XL has a market cap of 164.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while XL trades at $1.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas XL's P/E ratio is -3.21. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to XL's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to XL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check XL's competition here
QS vs INVZ Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, INVZ has a market cap of 146.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while INVZ trades at $0.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas INVZ's P/E ratio is -1.70. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to INVZ's ROE of -1.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to INVZ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check INVZ's competition here
QS vs CAAS Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, CAAS has a market cap of 133.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while CAAS trades at $4.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas CAAS's P/E ratio is 3.11. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to CAAS's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CAAS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CAAS's competition here
QS vs LIDRW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, LIDRW has a market cap of 81.7M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while LIDRW trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas LIDRW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to LIDRW's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to LIDRW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LIDRW's competition here
QS vs LIDR Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, LIDR has a market cap of 80.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while LIDR trades at $1.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas LIDR's P/E ratio is -1.45. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to LIDR's ROE of -0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to LIDR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LIDR's competition here
QS vs KNDI Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, KNDI has a market cap of 61.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while KNDI trades at $0.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas KNDI's P/E ratio is -0.66. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to KNDI's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to KNDI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check KNDI's competition here
QS vs SYPR Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, SYPR has a market cap of 60.3M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while SYPR trades at $2.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas SYPR's P/E ratio is -6.24. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to SYPR's ROE of -0.54%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SYPR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SYPR's competition here
QS vs GGR Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GGR has a market cap of 59.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GGR trades at $4.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GGR's P/E ratio is -0.86. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GGR's ROE of -0.54%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GGR's competition here
QS vs AIIO Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, AIIO has a market cap of 56M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while AIIO trades at $2.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas AIIO's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to AIIO's ROE of +1.92%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to AIIO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AIIO's competition here
QS vs MKDW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MKDW has a market cap of 36.5M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MKDW trades at $8.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MKDW's P/E ratio is -13.17. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MKDW's ROE of -3.27%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MKDW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MKDW's competition here
QS vs WPRT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, WPRT has a market cap of 31.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while WPRT trades at $1.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas WPRT's P/E ratio is -1.06. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to WPRT's ROE of -0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to WPRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check WPRT's competition here
QS vs ECXWW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ECXWW has a market cap of 20.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ECXWW trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ECXWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ECXWW's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ECXWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ECXWW's competition here
QS vs NCNCW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, NCNCW has a market cap of 20.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while NCNCW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas NCNCW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to NCNCW's ROE of +3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to NCNCW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check NCNCW's competition here
QS vs NCNC Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, NCNC has a market cap of 20.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while NCNC trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas NCNC's P/E ratio is -0.70. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to NCNC's ROE of +3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to NCNC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check NCNC's competition here
QS vs AMV Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, AMV has a market cap of 17.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while AMV trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas AMV's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to AMV's ROE of +2.46%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to AMV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AMV's competition here
QS vs SAG Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, SAG has a market cap of 10.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while SAG trades at $1.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas SAG's P/E ratio is 6.73. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to SAG's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SAG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SAG's competition here
QS vs SUP Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, SUP has a market cap of 9.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while SUP trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas SUP's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to SUP's ROE of +1.78%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SUP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SUP's competition here
QS vs FRSX Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, FRSX has a market cap of 7.3M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while FRSX trades at $1.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas FRSX's P/E ratio is -0.15. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to FRSX's ROE of -1.42%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to FRSX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check FRSX's competition here
QS vs INEO Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, INEO has a market cap of 6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while INEO trades at $0.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas INEO's P/E ratio is -20.34. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to INEO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to INEO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check INEO's competition here
QS vs HLLY-WT Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, HLLY-WT has a market cap of 3.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while HLLY-WT trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas HLLY-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to HLLY-WT's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HLLY-WT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HLLY-WT's competition here
QS vs WKSP Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, WKSP has a market cap of 3.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while WKSP trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas WKSP's P/E ratio is -0.24. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to WKSP's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to WKSP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check WKSP's competition here
QS vs UFAB Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, UFAB has a market cap of 2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while UFAB trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas UFAB's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to UFAB's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to UFAB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check UFAB's competition here
QS vs INVZW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, INVZW has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while INVZW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas INVZW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to INVZW's ROE of -1.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to INVZW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check INVZW's competition here
QS vs MKDWW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MKDWW has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MKDWW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MKDWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MKDWW's ROE of -3.27%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MKDWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MKDWW's competition here
QS vs CREV Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, CREV has a market cap of 775.2K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while CREV trades at $0.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas CREV's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to CREV's ROE of +2.58%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CREV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CREV's competition here
QS vs WKSPW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, WKSPW has a market cap of 575.3K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while WKSPW trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas WKSPW's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to WKSPW's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to WKSPW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check WKSPW's competition here
QS vs GGROW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GGROW has a market cap of 121.1K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GGROW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GGROW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GGROW's ROE of -0.54%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to GGROW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GGROW's competition here
QS vs HYZNW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, HYZNW has a market cap of 16.3K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while HYZNW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas HYZNW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to HYZNW's ROE of -0.84%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to HYZNW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HYZNW's competition here
QS vs CREVW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, CREVW has a market cap of 6.6K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while CREVW trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas CREVW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to CREVW's ROE of +2.58%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CREVW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CREVW's competition here
QS vs ACW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, ACW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while ACW trades at $2.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas ACW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to ACW's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ACW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ACW's competition here
QS vs VNE Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, VNE has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while VNE trades at $36.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas VNE's P/E ratio is -10.74. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to VNE's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to VNE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check VNE's competition here
QS vs GTPPP Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, GTPPP has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while GTPPP trades at $75.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas GTPPP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to GTPPP's ROE of -0.58%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GTPPP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GTPPP's competition here
QS vs QTWW Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, QTWW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while QTWW trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas QTWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to QTWW's ROE of -0.74%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to QTWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check QTWW's competition here
QS vs RMO Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, RMO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while RMO trades at $0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas RMO's P/E ratio is -0.29. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to RMO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to RMO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check RMO's competition here
QS vs HZN Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, HZN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while HZN trades at $1.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas HZN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to HZN's ROE of +1.26%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HZN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HZN's competition here
QS vs MTOR Comparison June 2026
QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 4.5B. In comparison, MTOR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $7.32, while MTOR trades at $36.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
QS currently has a P/E ratio of -10.76, whereas MTOR's P/E ratio is 11.97. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.37%, compared to MTOR's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MTOR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MTOR's competition here