Quantum International Corp.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, QMIS has a market cap of 30.47B. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while QMIS trades at $0.25.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas QMIS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to QMIS's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to QMIS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GSHN has a market cap of 9.32B. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GSHN trades at $22.70.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GSHN's P/E ratio is -2270.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GSHN's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to GSHN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, KATX has a market cap of 5.48B. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while KATX trades at $2.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas KATX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KATX's ROE of +1.54%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to KATX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CCYC has a market cap of 1.72B. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CCYC trades at $11.25.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CCYC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CCYC's ROE of +4.19%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CCYC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ZSYC has a market cap of 1.01B. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ZSYC trades at $2.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ZSYC's P/E ratio is -2.12. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ZSYC's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ZSYC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, PBAJ has a market cap of 1.00B. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while PBAJ trades at $5.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas PBAJ's P/E ratio is 14.29. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PBAJ's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to PBAJ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WPCBF has a market cap of 700.34M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WPCBF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WPCBF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WPCBF's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to WPCBF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NOTR has a market cap of 570.91M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NOTR trades at $13.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NOTR's P/E ratio is -433.33. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NOTR's ROE of -65.90%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to NOTR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WCHS has a market cap of 531.88M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WCHS trades at $5.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WCHS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WCHS's ROE of +0.92%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to WCHS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, DVTC has a market cap of 490.51M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while DVTC trades at $9.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas DVTC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to DVTC's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to DVTC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, FZRO has a market cap of 346.20M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while FZRO trades at $2.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas FZRO's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FZRO's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to FZRO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, RGLG has a market cap of 342.77M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while RGLG trades at $1.13.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas RGLG's P/E ratio is -0.11. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RGLG's ROE of -1.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to RGLG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CINV has a market cap of 338.60M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CINV trades at $4.55.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CINV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CINV's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CINV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, BTOW has a market cap of 251.16M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while BTOW trades at $1.24.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas BTOW's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BTOW's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to BTOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AMRR has a market cap of 250.61M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AMRR trades at $1.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AMRR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AMRR's ROE of +0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to AMRR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, SCGX has a market cap of 206.86M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while SCGX trades at $11.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas SCGX's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SCGX's ROE of -0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to SCGX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, KAST has a market cap of 164.56M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while KAST trades at $4.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas KAST's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KAST's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to KAST. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, RMGCF has a market cap of 125.46M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while RMGCF trades at $9.82.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas RMGCF's P/E ratio is -20.04. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to RMGCF's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to RMGCF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AOAO has a market cap of 118.29M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AOAO trades at $10.78.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AOAO's P/E ratio is -11.07. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AOAO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to AOAO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, TRFE has a market cap of 101.03M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while TRFE trades at $0.37.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas TRFE's P/E ratio is -1.92. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TRFE's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to TRFE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GRLF has a market cap of 96.68M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GRLF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GRLF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GRLF's ROE of +0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to GRLF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, FSHP has a market cap of 92.88M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while FSHP trades at $10.48.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas FSHP's P/E ratio is 58.22. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FSHP's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to FSHP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NMTT has a market cap of 90.60M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NMTT trades at $1.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NMTT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NMTT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to NMTT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, TGLO has a market cap of 88.30M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while TGLO trades at $0.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas TGLO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TGLO's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to TGLO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WAYS has a market cap of 86.47M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WAYS trades at $4.48.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WAYS's P/E ratio is -49.72. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WAYS's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to WAYS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ATAQF has a market cap of 82.40M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ATAQF trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ATAQF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ATAQF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to ATAQF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WWHC has a market cap of 80.24M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WWHC trades at $0.80.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WWHC's P/E ratio is -2.11. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WWHC's ROE of +1.06%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to WWHC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CHAAW has a market cap of 77.57M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CHAAW trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CHAAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CHAAW's ROE of -2.15%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CHAAW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CMCAF has a market cap of 76.29M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CMCAF trades at $11.40.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CMCAF's P/E ratio is 60.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CMCAF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CMCAF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CREEF has a market cap of 75.05M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CREEF trades at $10.94.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CREEF's P/E ratio is 36.47. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CREEF's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CREEF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CAHO has a market cap of 66.92M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CAHO trades at $1.80.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CAHO's P/E ratio is -180.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CAHO's ROE of +0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CAHO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AASP has a market cap of 65.95M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AASP trades at $6.74.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AASP's P/E ratio is -23.24. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AASP's ROE of -2.70%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to AASP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, USCTF has a market cap of 60.89M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while USCTF trades at $1.35.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas USCTF's P/E ratio is 67.35. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USCTF's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to USCTF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ACBD has a market cap of 59.98M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ACBD trades at $1.43.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ACBD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ACBD's ROE of +0.78%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ACBD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GWIN has a market cap of 59.84M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GWIN trades at $0.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GWIN's P/E ratio is -0.93. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GWIN's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to GWIN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, IDIG has a market cap of 58.48M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while IDIG trades at $0.08.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas IDIG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to IDIG's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to IDIG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, PTCP has a market cap of 56.70M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while PTCP trades at $2.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas PTCP's P/E ratio is -27.78. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PTCP's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to PTCP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, SSHT has a market cap of 56.05M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while SSHT trades at $0.51.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas SSHT's P/E ratio is -17.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SSHT's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to SSHT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ATMS has a market cap of 55.79M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ATMS trades at $0.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ATMS's P/E ratio is -8.30. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ATMS's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ATMS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, MDWK has a market cap of 53.16M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while MDWK trades at $0.24.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas MDWK's P/E ratio is -24.10. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MDWK's ROE of -1.94%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to MDWK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AVNI has a market cap of 52.84M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AVNI trades at $0.49.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AVNI's P/E ratio is -49.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AVNI's ROE of +0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to AVNI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GGAAF has a market cap of 50.71M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GGAAF trades at $8.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GGAAF's P/E ratio is -133.33. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GGAAF's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to GGAAF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, JMTM has a market cap of 47.97M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while JMTM trades at $5.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas JMTM's P/E ratio is -10.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to JMTM's ROE of +4.24%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to JMTM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, KWAC has a market cap of 46.19M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while KWAC trades at $13.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas KWAC's P/E ratio is -23.75. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KWAC's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to KWAC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, KWACW has a market cap of 46.19M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while KWACW trades at $0.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas KWACW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to KWACW's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to KWACW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WBQNL has a market cap of 37.18M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WBQNL trades at $3.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WBQNL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WBQNL's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to WBQNL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AWCA has a market cap of 36.52M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AWCA trades at $0.09.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AWCA's P/E ratio is -9.49. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AWCA's ROE of -0.75%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to AWCA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CNXX has a market cap of 34.36M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CNXX trades at $1.82.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CNXX's P/E ratio is -8.64. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CNXX's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CNXX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CIIT has a market cap of 32.32M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CIIT trades at $1.96.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CIIT's P/E ratio is -195.50. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CIIT's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to CIIT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, XTPT has a market cap of 29.22M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while XTPT trades at $0.13.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas XTPT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to XTPT's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to XTPT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NPFC has a market cap of 23.94M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NPFC trades at $1.25.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NPFC's P/E ratio is -17.86. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NPFC's ROE of +1.75%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to NPFC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AGSS has a market cap of 22.57M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AGSS trades at $0.24.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AGSS's P/E ratio is -7.93. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AGSS's ROE of +0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to AGSS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CBBB has a market cap of 22.15M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CBBB trades at $0.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CBBB's P/E ratio is -0.87. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBBB's ROE of +10.36%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to CBBB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ADCV has a market cap of 22.03M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ADCV trades at $0.06.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ADCV's P/E ratio is -0.53. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ADCV's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ADCV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, EVTK has a market cap of 21.38M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while EVTK trades at $5.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas EVTK's P/E ratio is -510.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to EVTK's ROE of +1.52%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to EVTK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, XITO has a market cap of 19.77M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while XITO trades at $0.03.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas XITO's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to XITO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to XITO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, FWFW has a market cap of 18.02M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while FWFW trades at $0.61.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas FWFW's P/E ratio is 4.68. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FWFW's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to FWFW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, BOREF has a market cap of 17.50M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while BOREF trades at $3.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas BOREF's P/E ratio is -38.89. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BOREF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to BOREF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GTVI has a market cap of 15.30M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GTVI trades at $0.07.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GTVI's P/E ratio is -3.65. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GTVI's ROE of +0.65%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to GTVI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, STLY has a market cap of 14.51M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while STLY trades at $6.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas STLY's P/E ratio is -33.44. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to STLY's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to STLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, PCMC has a market cap of 14.40M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while PCMC trades at $0.42.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas PCMC's P/E ratio is -2.10. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PCMC's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to PCMC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ELLH has a market cap of 13.45M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ELLH trades at $18.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ELLH's P/E ratio is -6.50. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ELLH's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ELLH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ECGR has a market cap of 13.39M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ECGR trades at $0.80.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ECGR's P/E ratio is -20.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ECGR's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ECGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, USBL has a market cap of 13.09M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while USBL trades at $0.28.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas USBL's P/E ratio is -0.81. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to USBL's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to USBL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ARAT has a market cap of 12.84M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ARAT trades at $0.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ARAT's P/E ratio is -1.67. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ARAT's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to ARAT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, FUNR has a market cap of 12.33M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while FUNR trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas FUNR's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FUNR's ROE of +0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to FUNR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, FCGD has a market cap of 12.09M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while FCGD trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas FCGD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to FCGD's ROE of +1.31%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to FCGD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, BDCM has a market cap of 11.66M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while BDCM trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas BDCM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to BDCM's ROE of +20.18%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to BDCM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, TCRI has a market cap of 11.05M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while TCRI trades at $0.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas TCRI's P/E ratio is -17.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to TCRI's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to TCRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, AZRH has a market cap of 11.00M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while AZRH trades at $0.09.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas AZRH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to AZRH's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to AZRH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WRPT has a market cap of 10.07M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WRPT trades at $0.07.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WRPT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WRPT's ROE of -0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to WRPT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, LWLW has a market cap of 8.09M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while LWLW trades at $0.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas LWLW's P/E ratio is -10.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LWLW's ROE of -5.84%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to LWLW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, SLTN has a market cap of 8.03M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while SLTN trades at $0.08.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas SLTN's P/E ratio is -28.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SLTN's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to SLTN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GIPL has a market cap of 7.82M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GIPL trades at $0.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GIPL's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GIPL's ROE of +3391.68%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to GIPL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ADIA has a market cap of 7.67M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ADIA trades at $0.08.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ADIA's P/E ratio is -0.20. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ADIA's ROE of +1.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ADIA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ITRX has a market cap of 7.42M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ITRX trades at $0.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ITRX's P/E ratio is -2.40. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ITRX's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to ITRX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NGRC has a market cap of 6.64M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NGRC trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NGRC's P/E ratio is -1.07. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NGRC's ROE of +1.72%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to NGRC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NIHL has a market cap of 6.44M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NIHL trades at $0.06.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NIHL's P/E ratio is -1.24. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NIHL's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to NIHL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, XCPT has a market cap of 5.95M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while XCPT trades at $0.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas XCPT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to XCPT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to XCPT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ETER has a market cap of 5.88M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ETER trades at $0.09.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ETER's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ETER's ROE of -0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to ETER. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CHYL has a market cap of 5.66M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CHYL trades at $0.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CHYL's P/E ratio is 10.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CHYL's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to CHYL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, SITS has a market cap of 5.45M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while SITS trades at $0.05.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas SITS's P/E ratio is -0.94. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SITS's ROE of -3.25%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to SITS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CAVG has a market cap of 5.38M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CAVG trades at $0.42.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CAVG's P/E ratio is -3.82. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CAVG's ROE of +1.60%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to CAVG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NTWOW has a market cap of 5.29M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NTWOW trades at $0.22.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NTWOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NTWOW's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to NTWOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, LRGR has a market cap of 5.03M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while LRGR trades at $0.11.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas LRGR's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LRGR's ROE of -0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to LRGR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, PSCO has a market cap of 5.00M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while PSCO trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas PSCO's P/E ratio is -0.25. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PSCO's ROE of +0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to PSCO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ASNB has a market cap of 4.83M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ASNB trades at $0.85.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ASNB's P/E ratio is -0.60. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ASNB's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ASNB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, PVRS has a market cap of 4.73M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while PVRS trades at $0.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas PVRS's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to PVRS's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to PVRS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, MTRI has a market cap of 4.60M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while MTRI trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas MTRI's P/E ratio is 12.50. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to MTRI's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to MTRI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, LNMG has a market cap of 4.53M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while LNMG trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas LNMG's P/E ratio is 0.89. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to LNMG's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to LNMG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, NRCD has a market cap of 4.21M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while NRCD trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas NRCD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to NRCD's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to NRCD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, HKBT has a market cap of 4.03M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while HKBT trades at $0.06.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas HKBT's P/E ratio is 0.23. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HKBT's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to HKBT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, WNFT has a market cap of 3.96M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while WNFT trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas WNFT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to WNFT's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to WNFT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, XSVT has a market cap of 3.91M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while XSVT trades at $0.20.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas XSVT's P/E ratio is -1.24. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to XSVT's ROE of +0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to XSVT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, GDVM has a market cap of 3.83M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while GDVM trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas GDVM's P/E ratio is -0.21. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to GDVM's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to GDVM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, HPIL has a market cap of 3.81M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while HPIL trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas HPIL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to HPIL's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to HPIL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, CBGH has a market cap of 3.71M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while CBGH trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas CBGH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to CBGH's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to CBGH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, ENGA has a market cap of 3.69M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while ENGA trades at $0.16.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas ENGA's P/E ratio is -16.00. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to ENGA's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is more volatile compared to ENGA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.

QUAN plays a significant role within the Financial Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QUAN stands at 2.17M. In comparison, SIPN has a market cap of 3.66M. Regarding current trading prices, QUAN is priced at $0.06, while SIPN trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QUAN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.29, whereas SIPN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QUAN's ROE is +0.09%, compared to SIPN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QUAN is less volatile compared to SIPN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QUAN.