Toei Animation Co.,Ltd.
Toei Animation Co.,Ltd. (TOEAF) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (TOEAF) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Entertainment Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOEAF | $16.50 | +0.00% | 3.4B | 21.43 | $0.77 | +1.66% |
| UMGNF | $22.93 | +0.02% | 42.7B | 13.95 | $1.67 | +2.56% |
| UNVGY | $11.41 | +0.00% | 42.4B | 13.75 | $0.84 | +2.27% |
| FWONB | $79.00 | +0.00% | 19.7B | -141.07 | -$0.56 | N/A |
| NWSAL | $26.80 | +0.00% | 17.1B | 43.23 | $0.62 | +0.74% |
| BOIVF | $5.70 | -0.35% | 15.9B | 40.75 | $0.14 | +1.62% |
| VIVEF | $10.49 | +2.64% | 10.6B | 22.80 | $0.46 | +0.43% |
| CEVMF | $94.15 | +0.00% | 9B | 26.60 | $3.54 | +2.06% |
| TKCOF | $52.10 | +0.00% | 8.8B | 27.57 | $1.89 | +1.19% |
| CEVMY | $18.70 | -5.33% | 7.2B | 21.25 | $0.88 | +1.59% |
Stock Comparison
TOEAF vs UMGNF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, UMGNF has a market cap of 42.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while UMGNF trades at $22.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas UMGNF's P/E ratio is 13.95. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to UMGNF's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to UMGNF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check UMGNF's competition here
TOEAF vs UNVGY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, UNVGY has a market cap of 42.4B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while UNVGY trades at $11.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas UNVGY's P/E ratio is 13.75. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to UNVGY's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to UNVGY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check UNVGY's competition here
TOEAF vs FWONB Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, FWONB has a market cap of 19.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while FWONB trades at $79.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas FWONB's P/E ratio is -141.07. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to FWONB's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and FWONB have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check FWONB's competition here
TOEAF vs NWSAL Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, NWSAL has a market cap of 17.1B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while NWSAL trades at $26.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas NWSAL's P/E ratio is 43.23. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NWSAL's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and NWSAL have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NWSAL's competition here
TOEAF vs BOIVF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BOIVF has a market cap of 15.9B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BOIVF trades at $5.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BOIVF's P/E ratio is 40.75. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BOIVF's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to BOIVF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check BOIVF's competition here
TOEAF vs VIVEF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, VIVEF has a market cap of 10.6B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while VIVEF trades at $10.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas VIVEF's P/E ratio is 22.80. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VIVEF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and VIVEF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VIVEF's competition here
TOEAF vs CEVMF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CEVMF has a market cap of 9B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CEVMF trades at $94.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CEVMF's P/E ratio is 26.60. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CEVMF's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CEVMF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CEVMF's competition here
TOEAF vs TKCOF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, TKCOF has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while TKCOF trades at $52.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas TKCOF's P/E ratio is 27.57. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to TKCOF's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and TKCOF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TKCOF's competition here
TOEAF vs CEVMY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CEVMY has a market cap of 7.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CEVMY trades at $18.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CEVMY's P/E ratio is 21.25. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CEVMY's ROE of +0.29%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CEVMY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CEVMY's competition here
TOEAF vs MCOIF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, MCOIF has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while MCOIF trades at $6.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas MCOIF's P/E ratio is 40.91. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MCOIF's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to MCOIF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check MCOIF's competition here
TOEAF vs MCHOY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, MCHOY has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while MCHOY trades at $6.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas MCHOY's P/E ratio is 40.63. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MCHOY's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and MCHOY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MCHOY's competition here
TOEAF vs VIVHY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, VIVHY has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while VIVHY trades at $2.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas VIVHY's P/E ratio is -13.39. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VIVHY's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to VIVHY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check VIVHY's competition here
TOEAF vs NANHF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, NANHF has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while NANHF trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas NANHF's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NANHF's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and NANHF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NANHF's competition here
TOEAF vs MHSDF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, MHSDF has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while MHSDF trades at $3.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas MHSDF's P/E ratio is 44.25. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MHSDF's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and MHSDF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MHSDF's competition here
TOEAF vs NNMTF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, NNMTF has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while NNMTF trades at $0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas NNMTF's P/E ratio is 23.75. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NNMTF's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and NNMTF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NNMTF's competition here
TOEAF vs CYFWF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CYFWF has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CYFWF trades at $2.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CYFWF's P/E ratio is 13.89. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CYFWF's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CYFWF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CYFWF's competition here
TOEAF vs ATVDY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ATVDY has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ATVDY trades at $6.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ATVDY's P/E ratio is 10.44. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ATVDY's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ATVDY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ATVDY's competition here
TOEAF vs CYFWY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CYFWY has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CYFWY trades at $16.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CYFWY's P/E ratio is 9.62. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CYFWY's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CYFWY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CYFWY's competition here
TOEAF vs AIOSF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, AIOSF has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while AIOSF trades at $6.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas AIOSF's P/E ratio is 9.85. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to AIOSF's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and AIOSF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AIOSF's competition here
TOEAF vs JVTSF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, JVTSF has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while JVTSF trades at $2.69.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas JVTSF's P/E ratio is -12.46. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to JVTSF's ROE of -1.65%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and JVTSF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check JVTSF's competition here
TOEAF vs TCLRY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, TCLRY has a market cap of 852.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while TCLRY trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas TCLRY's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to TCLRY's ROE of -2.33%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to TCLRY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check TCLRY's competition here
TOEAF vs CIEZF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CIEZF has a market cap of 671.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CIEZF trades at $1.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CIEZF's P/E ratio is 9.23. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CIEZF's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CIEZF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CIEZF's competition here
TOEAF vs NENTF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, NENTF has a market cap of 637M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while NENTF trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas NENTF's P/E ratio is -14.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NENTF's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and NENTF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NENTF's competition here
TOEAF vs CPXGF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CPXGF has a market cap of 451.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CPXGF trades at $7.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CPXGF's P/E ratio is -16.56. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CPXGF's ROE of +0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CPXGF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CPXGF's competition here
TOEAF vs BORUF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BORUF has a market cap of 417.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BORUF trades at $3.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BORUF's P/E ratio is 12.21. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BORUF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and BORUF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check BORUF's competition here
TOEAF vs IMXCF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, IMXCF has a market cap of 321.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while IMXCF trades at $0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas IMXCF's P/E ratio is 10.56. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to IMXCF's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and IMXCF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check IMXCF's competition here
TOEAF vs CLTFF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CLTFF has a market cap of 247.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CLTFF trades at $2.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CLTFF's P/E ratio is 7.65. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CLTFF's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CLTFF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CLTFF's competition here
TOEAF vs WLDBF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, WLDBF has a market cap of 203M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while WLDBF trades at $0.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas WLDBF's P/E ratio is -7.31. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to WLDBF's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to WLDBF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check WLDBF's competition here
TOEAF vs NENTY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, NENTY has a market cap of 201.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while NENTY trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas NENTY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NENTY's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and NENTY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NENTY's competition here
TOEAF vs CLQDF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CLQDF has a market cap of 197.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CLQDF trades at $20.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CLQDF's P/E ratio is 5.30. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CLQDF's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CLQDF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CLQDF's competition here
TOEAF vs AFCJF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, AFCJF has a market cap of 192.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while AFCJF trades at $10.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas AFCJF's P/E ratio is -4.32. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to AFCJF's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to AFCJF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check AFCJF's competition here
TOEAF vs ICABY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ICABY has a market cap of 107M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ICABY trades at $0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ICABY's P/E ratio is -1.67. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ICABY's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ICABY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ICABY's competition here
TOEAF vs STEAF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, STEAF has a market cap of 87.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while STEAF trades at $0.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas STEAF's P/E ratio is 18.92. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to STEAF's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to STEAF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check STEAF's competition here
TOEAF vs ANGMF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ANGMF has a market cap of 72.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ANGMF trades at $0.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ANGMF's P/E ratio is 17.59. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ANGMF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ANGMF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ANGMF's competition here
TOEAF vs APTTF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, APTTF has a market cap of 69.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while APTTF trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas APTTF's P/E ratio is 3.84. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to APTTF's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and APTTF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check APTTF's competition here
TOEAF vs THBRF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, THBRF has a market cap of 50.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while THBRF trades at $1.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas THBRF's P/E ratio is 20.17. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to THBRF's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and THBRF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check THBRF's competition here
TOEAF vs GULDF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, GULDF has a market cap of 48.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while GULDF trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas GULDF's P/E ratio is -2.33. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to GULDF's ROE of +1.93%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to GULDF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check GULDF's competition here
TOEAF vs GMSQF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, GMSQF has a market cap of 39.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while GMSQF trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas GMSQF's P/E ratio is -1.13. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to GMSQF's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to GMSQF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check GMSQF's competition here
TOEAF vs ZUMRF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ZUMRF has a market cap of 35.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ZUMRF trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ZUMRF's P/E ratio is 5.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ZUMRF's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ZUMRF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ZUMRF's competition here
TOEAF vs LGMH Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, LGMH has a market cap of 33.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while LGMH trades at $0.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas LGMH's P/E ratio is -66.66. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to LGMH's ROE of -0.32%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to LGMH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check LGMH's competition here
TOEAF vs OAMCF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, OAMCF has a market cap of 19.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while OAMCF trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas OAMCF's P/E ratio is -2.21. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to OAMCF's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and OAMCF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check OAMCF's competition here
TOEAF vs ASGRF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ASGRF has a market cap of 14.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ASGRF trades at $0.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ASGRF's P/E ratio is -12.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ASGRF's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ASGRF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ASGRF's competition here
TOEAF vs QYOUF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, QYOUF has a market cap of 13.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while QYOUF trades at $0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas QYOUF's P/E ratio is -3.23. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to QYOUF's ROE of +42.62%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and QYOUF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check QYOUF's competition here
TOEAF vs APHP Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, APHP has a market cap of 10.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while APHP trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas APHP's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to APHP's ROE of +2.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to APHP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check APHP's competition here
TOEAF vs MVNC Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, MVNC has a market cap of 9.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while MVNC trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas MVNC's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MVNC's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and MVNC have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MVNC's competition here
TOEAF vs CNWGQ Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CNWGQ has a market cap of 9.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CNWGQ trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CNWGQ's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CNWGQ's ROE of +9.53%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to CNWGQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check CNWGQ's competition here
TOEAF vs XOEEF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, XOEEF has a market cap of 9.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while XOEEF trades at $0.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas XOEEF's P/E ratio is -43.73. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to XOEEF's ROE of -3.96%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to XOEEF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check XOEEF's competition here
TOEAF vs BBOP Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BBOP has a market cap of 8.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BBOP trades at $1.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BBOP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BBOP's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and BBOP have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check BBOP's competition here
TOEAF vs HWAL Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, HWAL has a market cap of 8.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while HWAL trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas HWAL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HWAL's ROE of -0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to HWAL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check HWAL's competition here
TOEAF vs HHSE Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, HHSE has a market cap of 7.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while HHSE trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas HHSE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HHSE's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to HHSE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check HHSE's competition here
TOEAF vs CNNWQ Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CNNWQ has a market cap of 7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CNNWQ trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CNNWQ's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CNNWQ's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to CNNWQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check CNNWQ's competition here
TOEAF vs TRMNF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, TRMNF has a market cap of 5.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while TRMNF trades at $0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas TRMNF's P/E ratio is -1.57. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to TRMNF's ROE of -3.31%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to TRMNF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check TRMNF's competition here
TOEAF vs ENTEF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ENTEF has a market cap of 5.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ENTEF trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ENTEF's P/E ratio is -0.71. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ENTEF's ROE of +23.44%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to ENTEF. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check ENTEF's competition here
TOEAF vs ICABF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ICABF has a market cap of 5M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ICABF trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ICABF's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ICABF's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ICABF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ICABF's competition here
TOEAF vs ABQQD Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ABQQD has a market cap of 3.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ABQQD trades at $0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ABQQD's P/E ratio is 6.92. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ABQQD's ROE of +0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to ABQQD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check ABQQD's competition here
TOEAF vs URBT Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, URBT has a market cap of 3.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while URBT trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas URBT's P/E ratio is -0.30. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to URBT's ROE of +67.97%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and URBT have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check URBT's competition here
TOEAF vs STGZ Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, STGZ has a market cap of 3.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while STGZ trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas STGZ's P/E ratio is 0.43. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to STGZ's ROE of +4.12%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and STGZ have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check STGZ's competition here
TOEAF vs AMFL Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, AMFL has a market cap of 3.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while AMFL trades at $0.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas AMFL's P/E ratio is -0.16. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to AMFL's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to AMFL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check AMFL's competition here
TOEAF vs HQGE Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, HQGE has a market cap of 3.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while HQGE trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas HQGE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HQGE's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to HQGE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check HQGE's competition here
TOEAF vs LTES Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, LTES has a market cap of 3M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while LTES trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas LTES's P/E ratio is -2.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to LTES's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to LTES. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check LTES's competition here
TOEAF vs BLIAQ Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BLIAQ has a market cap of 2.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BLIAQ trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BLIAQ's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BLIAQ's ROE of +0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to BLIAQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check BLIAQ's competition here
TOEAF vs CAPV Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CAPV has a market cap of 2.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CAPV trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CAPV's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CAPV's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to CAPV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check CAPV's competition here
TOEAF vs ITVI Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, ITVI has a market cap of 2.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while ITVI trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas ITVI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to ITVI's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and ITVI have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check ITVI's competition here
TOEAF vs HOFV Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, HOFV has a market cap of 2.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while HOFV trades at $0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas HOFV's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HOFV's ROE of -1.20%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to HOFV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check HOFV's competition here
TOEAF vs BSEG Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BSEG has a market cap of 2.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BSEG trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BSEG's P/E ratio is 10.87. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BSEG's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and BSEG have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check BSEG's competition here
TOEAF vs EEGI Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, EEGI has a market cap of 1.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while EEGI trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas EEGI's P/E ratio is 0.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to EEGI's ROE of +0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to EEGI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check EEGI's competition here
TOEAF vs UMGP Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, UMGP has a market cap of 1.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while UMGP trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas UMGP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to UMGP's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and UMGP have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check UMGP's competition here
TOEAF vs NETWF Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, NETWF has a market cap of 1.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while NETWF trades at $0.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas NETWF's P/E ratio is -8.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to NETWF's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and NETWF have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check NETWF's competition here
TOEAF vs VYRE Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, VYRE has a market cap of 1.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while VYRE trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas VYRE's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VYRE's ROE of +0.58%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to VYRE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check VYRE's competition here
TOEAF vs IMTV Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, IMTV has a market cap of 1.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while IMTV trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas IMTV's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to IMTV's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and IMTV have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check IMTV's competition here
TOEAF vs HDUP Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, HDUP has a market cap of 947K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while HDUP trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas HDUP's P/E ratio is -1.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HDUP's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and HDUP have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check HDUP's competition here
TOEAF vs AFOM Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, AFOM has a market cap of 925.3K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while AFOM trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas AFOM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to AFOM's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to AFOM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check AFOM's competition here
TOEAF vs RLTR Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, RLTR has a market cap of 709.6K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while RLTR trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas RLTR's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RLTR's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to RLTR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check RLTR's competition here
TOEAF vs SEGI Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, SEGI has a market cap of 685.1K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while SEGI trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas SEGI's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SEGI's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and SEGI have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SEGI's competition here
TOEAF vs WRIT Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, WRIT has a market cap of 542.3K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while WRIT trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas WRIT's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to WRIT's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and WRIT have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check WRIT's competition here
TOEAF vs RWMI Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, RWMI has a market cap of 539.3K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while RWMI trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas RWMI's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RWMI's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and RWMI have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check RWMI's competition here
TOEAF vs BOTY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BOTY has a market cap of 504K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BOTY trades at $0.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BOTY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BOTY's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to BOTY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check BOTY's competition here
TOEAF vs CCLX Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CCLX has a market cap of 499.8K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CCLX trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CCLX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CCLX's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CCLX have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CCLX's competition here
TOEAF vs TAMG Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, TAMG has a market cap of 463.7K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while TAMG trades at $0.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas TAMG's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to TAMG's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and TAMG have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check TAMG's competition here
TOEAF vs WEBB Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, WEBB has a market cap of 389.8K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while WEBB trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas WEBB's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to WEBB's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and WEBB have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check WEBB's competition here
TOEAF vs CEXE Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, CEXE has a market cap of 260.3K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while CEXE trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas CEXE's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to CEXE's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and CEXE have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check CEXE's competition here
TOEAF vs RIVU Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, RIVU has a market cap of 244.9K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while RIVU trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas RIVU's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to RIVU's ROE of -2.64%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and RIVU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check RIVU's competition here
TOEAF vs MIKP Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, MIKP has a market cap of 222.7K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while MIKP trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas MIKP's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MIKP's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and MIKP have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MIKP's competition here
TOEAF vs PLFX Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, PLFX has a market cap of 212.7K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while PLFX trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas PLFX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to PLFX's ROE of +2.12%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and PLFX have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check PLFX's competition here
TOEAF vs VGTL Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, VGTL has a market cap of 205.8K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while VGTL trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas VGTL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VGTL's ROE of +0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and VGTL have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check VGTL's competition here
TOEAF vs DTTVY Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, DTTVY has a market cap of 190.8K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while DTTVY trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas DTTVY's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to DTTVY's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and DTTVY have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check DTTVY's competition here
TOEAF vs EVLI Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, EVLI has a market cap of 169K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while EVLI trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas EVLI's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to EVLI's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to EVLI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check EVLI's competition here
TOEAF vs MLFB Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, MLFB has a market cap of 148.8K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while MLFB trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas MLFB's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to MLFB's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and MLFB have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check MLFB's competition here
TOEAF vs VNUE Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, VNUE has a market cap of 116.1K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while VNUE trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas VNUE's P/E ratio is -2.95. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to VNUE's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to VNUE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check VNUE's competition here
TOEAF vs SNMN Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, SNMN has a market cap of 112.9K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while SNMN trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas SNMN's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SNMN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and SNMN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SNMN's competition here
TOEAF vs BOTYD Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BOTYD has a market cap of 87.1K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BOTYD trades at $0.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BOTYD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BOTYD's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF is less volatile compared to BOTYD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TOEAF.Check BOTYD's competition here
TOEAF vs SVSN Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, SVSN has a market cap of 64.7K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while SVSN trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas SVSN's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SVSN's ROE of +1.86%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and SVSN have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SVSN's competition here
TOEAF vs HOMU Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, HOMU has a market cap of 62.5K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while HOMU trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas HOMU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to HOMU's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and HOMU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check HOMU's competition here
TOEAF vs GBHL Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, GBHL has a market cap of 57.1K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while GBHL trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas GBHL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to GBHL's ROE of -0.26%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and GBHL have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check GBHL's competition here
TOEAF vs AMRU Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, AMRU has a market cap of 47.2K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while AMRU trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas AMRU's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to AMRU's ROE of -2.41%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and AMRU have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check AMRU's competition here
TOEAF vs BLIBQ Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BLIBQ has a market cap of 42.8K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BLIBQ trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BLIBQ's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BLIBQ's ROE of +0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and BLIBQ have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check BLIBQ's competition here
TOEAF vs BRSE Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, BRSE has a market cap of 33.9K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while BRSE trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas BRSE's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to BRSE's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and BRSE have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check BRSE's competition here
TOEAF vs XSPT Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, XSPT has a market cap of 33.3K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while XSPT trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas XSPT's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to XSPT's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and XSPT have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check XSPT's competition here
TOEAF vs SONG Comparison February 2026
TOEAF plays a significant role within the Communication Services sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TOEAF stands at 3.4B. In comparison, SONG has a market cap of 24.7K. Regarding current trading prices, TOEAF is priced at $16.50, while SONG trades at $4.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TOEAF currently has a P/E ratio of 21.43, whereas SONG's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TOEAF's ROE is +0.16%, compared to SONG's ROE of +4.51%. Regarding short-term risk, TOEAF and SONG have similar daily volatility (0.00).Check SONG's competition here