Black Tusk Resources Inc.
Black Tusk Resources Inc. TUSK.CN Peers
See (TUSK.CN) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Gold Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TUSK.CN | $0.10 | +11.11% | 0 | -0.67 | -$0.15 | N/A |
| NGT.TO | $73.51 | -0.14% | 81.8B | 12.07 | $6.09 | +1.90% |
| AEM.TO | $161.74 | +0.16% | 81.8B | 24.81 | $6.52 | +1.00% |
| WPM.TO | $119.62 | +0.60% | 54.3B | 63.29 | $1.89 | +0.73% |
| ABX.TO | $26.09 | -0.34% | 44.9B | 14.26 | $1.83 | +2.13% |
| FNV.TO | $232.61 | +0.97% | 44.8B | 52.27 | $4.45 | +0.88% |
| K.TO | $20.46 | +1.34% | 25.1B | 15.04 | $1.36 | +0.81% |
| NCM.TO | $20.65 | +2.03% | 18.5B | 17.21 | $1.20 | N/A |
| LUG.TO | $64.18 | +0.86% | 15.5B | 20.84 | $3.08 | +1.91% |
| AGI.TO | $36.43 | +1.03% | 15.3B | 42.36 | $0.86 | +0.28% |
Stock Comparison
TUSK.CN vs NGT.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NGT.TO has a market cap of 81.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NGT.TO trades at $73.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NGT.TO's P/E ratio is 12.07. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NGT.TO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NGT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs AEM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, AEM.TO has a market cap of 81.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while AEM.TO trades at $161.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas AEM.TO's P/E ratio is 24.81. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to AEM.TO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to AEM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs WPM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, WPM.TO has a market cap of 54.3B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while WPM.TO trades at $119.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas WPM.TO's P/E ratio is 63.29. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to WPM.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to WPM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ABX.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ABX.TO has a market cap of 44.9B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ABX.TO trades at $26.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ABX.TO's P/E ratio is 14.26. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ABX.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ABX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs FNV.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, FNV.TO has a market cap of 44.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while FNV.TO trades at $232.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas FNV.TO's P/E ratio is 52.27. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to FNV.TO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to FNV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs K.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, K.TO has a market cap of 25.1B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while K.TO trades at $20.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas K.TO's P/E ratio is 15.04. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to K.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to K.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs NCM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NCM.TO has a market cap of 18.5B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NCM.TO trades at $20.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NCM.TO's P/E ratio is 17.21. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NCM.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NCM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs LUG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, LUG.TO has a market cap of 15.5B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while LUG.TO trades at $64.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas LUG.TO's P/E ratio is 20.84. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to LUG.TO's ROE of +0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to LUG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs AGI.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, AGI.TO has a market cap of 15.3B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while AGI.TO trades at $36.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas AGI.TO's P/E ratio is 42.36. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to AGI.TO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to AGI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs EDV.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, EDV.TO has a market cap of 10.1B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while EDV.TO trades at $42.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas EDV.TO's P/E ratio is -72.45. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to EDV.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to EDV.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs YRI.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, YRI.TO has a market cap of 7.6B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while YRI.TO trades at $7.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas YRI.TO's P/E ratio is -5.72. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to YRI.TO's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to YRI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs OR.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, OR.TO has a market cap of 6.6B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while OR.TO trades at $35.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas OR.TO's P/E ratio is 146.42. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to OR.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to OR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs BTO.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, BTO.TO has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while BTO.TO trades at $4.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas BTO.TO's P/E ratio is -7.09. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to BTO.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to BTO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ELD.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ELD.TO has a market cap of 5.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ELD.TO trades at $27.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ELD.TO's P/E ratio is 12.19. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ELD.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ELD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs IMG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, IMG.TO has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while IMG.TO trades at $9.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas IMG.TO's P/E ratio is 4.58. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to IMG.TO's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to IMG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs NGD.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NGD.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NGD.TO trades at $5.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NGD.TO's P/E ratio is 23.92. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NGD.TO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs OLA.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, OLA.TO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while OLA.TO trades at $14.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas OLA.TO's P/E ratio is 37.68. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to OLA.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to OLA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs PRU.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, PRU.TO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while PRU.TO trades at $3.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas PRU.TO's P/E ratio is 9.28. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to PRU.TO's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to PRU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs OGC.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, OGC.TO has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while OGC.TO trades at $6.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas OGC.TO's P/E ratio is 10.65. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to OGC.TO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to OGC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs EQX.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, EQX.TO has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while EQX.TO trades at $9.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas EQX.TO's P/E ratio is 9.47. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to EQX.TO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to EQX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs TXG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, TXG.TO has a market cap of 3.9B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while TXG.TO trades at $44.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas TXG.TO's P/E ratio is 21.51. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to TXG.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to TXG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SSL.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SSL.TO has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SSL.TO trades at $12.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SSL.TO's P/E ratio is 87.21. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SSL.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SSL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs DPM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, DPM.TO has a market cap of 3.5B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while DPM.TO trades at $21.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas DPM.TO's P/E ratio is 11.52. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to DPM.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to DPM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs KNT.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, KNT.TO has a market cap of 3.4B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while KNT.TO trades at $14.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas KNT.TO's P/E ratio is 13.61. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to KNT.TO's ROE of +0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to KNT.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SSRM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SSRM.TO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SSRM.TO trades at $15.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SSRM.TO's P/E ratio is 27.98. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SSRM.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SSRM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CEE.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CEE.TO has a market cap of 3B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CEE.TO trades at $2.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CEE.TO's P/E ratio is 24.80. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CEE.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN and CEE.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
TUSK.CN vs WDO.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, WDO.TO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while WDO.TO trades at $18.86.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas WDO.TO's P/E ratio is 15.21. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to WDO.TO's ROE of +0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to WDO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CXB.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CXB.TO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CXB.TO trades at $3.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CXB.TO's P/E ratio is 32.50. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CXB.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CXB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs WGX.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, WGX.TO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while WGX.TO trades at $2.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas WGX.TO's P/E ratio is 14.39. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to WGX.TO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to WGX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ORA.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ORA.TO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ORA.TO trades at $29.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ORA.TO's P/E ratio is -16.52. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ORA.TO's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ORA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs AAUC.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, AAUC.TO has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while AAUC.TO trades at $18.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas AAUC.TO's P/E ratio is -12.05. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to AAUC.TO's ROE of -0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to AAUC.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CG.TO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CG.TO trades at $9.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CG.TO's P/E ratio is 38.44. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CG.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs NG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NG.TO has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NG.TO trades at $5.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NG.TO's P/E ratio is -26.32. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NG.TO's ROE of +1.05%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs OSK.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, OSK.TO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while OSK.TO trades at $4.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas OSK.TO's P/E ratio is -489.50. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to OSK.TO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to OSK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SEA.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SEA.TO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SEA.TO trades at $17.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SEA.TO's P/E ratio is -115.40. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SEA.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SEA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CNL.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CNL.TO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CNL.TO trades at $15.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CNL.TO's P/E ratio is -23.37. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CNL.TO's ROE of -1.14%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CNL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs RUP.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, RUP.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while RUP.TO trades at $5.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas RUP.TO's P/E ratio is -175.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to RUP.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to RUP.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SBB.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SBB.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SBB.TO trades at $2.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SBB.TO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SBB.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SBB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs KRR.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, KRR.TO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while KRR.TO trades at $6.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas KRR.TO's P/E ratio is 83.75. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to KRR.TO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to KRR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs GTWO.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, GTWO.TO has a market cap of 781.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while GTWO.TO trades at $3.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas GTWO.TO's P/E ratio is -81.25. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to GTWO.TO's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to GTWO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs MSA.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, MSA.TO has a market cap of 734.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while MSA.TO trades at $2.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas MSA.TO's P/E ratio is 4.90. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to MSA.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to MSA.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs AR.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, AR.TO has a market cap of 659.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while AR.TO trades at $0.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas AR.TO's P/E ratio is -1.44. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to AR.TO's ROE of -0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to AR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ORE.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ORE.TO has a market cap of 642.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ORE.TO trades at $1.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ORE.TO's P/E ratio is 6.72. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ORE.TO's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ORE.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ASE.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ASE.CN has a market cap of 586.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ASE.CN trades at $1.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ASE.CN's P/E ratio is -5.32. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ASE.CN's ROE of -30.89%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ASE.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs IAU.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, IAU.TO has a market cap of 576.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while IAU.TO trades at $0.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas IAU.TO's P/E ratio is -1.38. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to IAU.TO's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to IAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs PRB.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, PRB.TO has a market cap of 501.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while PRB.TO trades at $2.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas PRB.TO's P/E ratio is -15.37. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to PRB.TO's ROE of -1.13%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to PRB.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs GAU.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, GAU.TO has a market cap of 491.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while GAU.TO trades at $1.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas GAU.TO's P/E ratio is -19.10. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to GAU.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to GAU.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs MND.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, MND.TO has a market cap of 488.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while MND.TO trades at $5.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas MND.TO's P/E ratio is 6.29. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to MND.TO's ROE of +0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to MND.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs FDR.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, FDR.V has a market cap of 438M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while FDR.V trades at $4.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas FDR.V's P/E ratio is -35.38. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to FDR.V's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to FDR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SGD.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SGD.CN has a market cap of 416.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SGD.CN trades at $3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SGD.CN's P/E ratio is -28.64. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SGD.CN's ROE of -0.68%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN and SGD.CN have similar daily volatility (0.00).
TUSK.CN vs MOZ.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, MOZ.TO has a market cap of 380M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while MOZ.TO trades at $0.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas MOZ.TO's P/E ratio is -16.20. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to MOZ.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to MOZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs JAG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, JAG.TO has a market cap of 280M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while JAG.TO trades at $3.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas JAG.TO's P/E ratio is -32.09. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to JAG.TO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to JAG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ITH.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ITH.TO has a market cap of 266.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ITH.TO trades at $1.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ITH.TO's P/E ratio is -42.67. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ITH.TO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ITH.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SBI.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SBI.TO has a market cap of 262.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SBI.TO trades at $2.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SBI.TO's P/E ratio is 5.67. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SBI.TO's ROE of +0.28%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SBI.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs STGO.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, STGO.TO has a market cap of 235.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while STGO.TO trades at $0.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas STGO.TO's P/E ratio is 3.44. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to STGO.TO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to STGO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs VGZ.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, VGZ.TO has a market cap of 225.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while VGZ.TO trades at $1.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas VGZ.TO's P/E ratio is 16.45. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to VGZ.TO's ROE of +0.53%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to VGZ.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs GOLD.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, GOLD.TO has a market cap of 207.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while GOLD.TO trades at $1.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas GOLD.TO's P/E ratio is -7.57. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to GOLD.TO's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to GOLD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs DNG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, DNG.TO has a market cap of 201.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while DNG.TO trades at $4.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas DNG.TO's P/E ratio is 7.69. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to DNG.TO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to DNG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs FF.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, FF.TO has a market cap of 170.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while FF.TO trades at $0.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas FF.TO's P/E ratio is -7.87. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to FF.TO's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to FF.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs LGD.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, LGD.TO has a market cap of 138.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while LGD.TO trades at $0.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas LGD.TO's P/E ratio is -4.36. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to LGD.TO's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to LGD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SANU.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SANU.CN has a market cap of 134.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SANU.CN trades at $0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SANU.CN's P/E ratio is -35.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SANU.CN's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SANU.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs TNX.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, TNX.TO has a market cap of 128.4M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while TNX.TO trades at $0.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas TNX.TO's P/E ratio is 46.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to TNX.TO's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to TNX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs COG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, COG.TO has a market cap of 114.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while COG.TO trades at $0.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas COG.TO's P/E ratio is -56.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to COG.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to COG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs NEXG.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NEXG.V has a market cap of 109.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NEXG.V trades at $0.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NEXG.V's P/E ratio is -2.53. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NEXG.V's ROE of -0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NEXG.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CBR.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CBR.V has a market cap of 106.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CBR.V trades at $0.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CBR.V's P/E ratio is -10.25. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CBR.V's ROE of -1.22%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CBR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs MAW.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, MAW.TO has a market cap of 102M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while MAW.TO trades at $0.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas MAW.TO's P/E ratio is -17.25. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to MAW.TO's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to MAW.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ELO.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ELO.TO has a market cap of 100.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ELO.TO trades at $1.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ELO.TO's P/E ratio is -8.46. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ELO.TO's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ELO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs GHRT.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, GHRT.V has a market cap of 100.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while GHRT.V trades at $0.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas GHRT.V's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to GHRT.V's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to GHRT.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs LN.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, LN.TO has a market cap of 99M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while LN.TO trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas LN.TO's P/E ratio is -12.80. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to LN.TO's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to LN.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs BSX.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, BSX.TO has a market cap of 95.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while BSX.TO trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas BSX.TO's P/E ratio is -6.83. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to BSX.TO's ROE of -0.34%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to BSX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs XTG.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, XTG.TO has a market cap of 94.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while XTG.TO trades at $2.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas XTG.TO's P/E ratio is 29.29. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to XTG.TO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to XTG.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs STLR.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, STLR.TO has a market cap of 93M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while STLR.TO trades at $0.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas STLR.TO's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to STLR.TO's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to STLR.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs G.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, G.TO has a market cap of 85.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while G.TO trades at $1.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas G.TO's P/E ratio is -10.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to G.TO's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to G.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SIG.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SIG.CN has a market cap of 80M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SIG.CN trades at $0.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SIG.CN's P/E ratio is -32.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SIG.CN's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SIG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CCM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CCM.TO has a market cap of 69.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CCM.TO trades at $0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CCM.TO's P/E ratio is -38.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CCM.TO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CCM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs BLLG.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, BLLG.CN has a market cap of 65.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while BLLG.CN trades at $0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas BLLG.CN's P/E ratio is -18.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to BLLG.CN's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to BLLG.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs TML.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, TML.TO has a market cap of 64.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while TML.TO trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas TML.TO's P/E ratio is -3.14. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to TML.TO's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN and TML.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
TUSK.CN vs HMR.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, HMR.V has a market cap of 63.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while HMR.V trades at $1.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas HMR.V's P/E ratio is -14.43. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to HMR.V's ROE of -5.38%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to HMR.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CGC.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CGC.V has a market cap of 62.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CGC.V trades at $0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CGC.V's P/E ratio is -15.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CGC.V's ROE of +13.62%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CGC.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ESM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ESM.TO has a market cap of 55.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ESM.TO trades at $0.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ESM.TO's P/E ratio is 14.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ESM.TO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ESM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs VEIN.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, VEIN.V has a market cap of 52.7M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while VEIN.V trades at $0.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas VEIN.V's P/E ratio is -2.81. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to VEIN.V's ROE of +1.47%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to VEIN.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs ME.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, ME.TO has a market cap of 50.9M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while ME.TO trades at $0.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas ME.TO's P/E ratio is -1.85. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to ME.TO's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to ME.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs USGD.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, USGD.CN has a market cap of 46M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while USGD.CN trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas USGD.CN's P/E ratio is 10.50. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to USGD.CN's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to USGD.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs NHK.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NHK.TO has a market cap of 39M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NHK.TO trades at $0.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NHK.TO's P/E ratio is -2.60. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NHK.TO's ROE of -0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NHK.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs BNN.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, BNN.CN has a market cap of 38M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while BNN.CN trades at $0.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas BNN.CN's P/E ratio is -3.38. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to BNN.CN's ROE of -11.41%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to BNN.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs NVO.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, NVO.TO has a market cap of 35.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while NVO.TO trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas NVO.TO's P/E ratio is -0.77. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to NVO.TO's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to NVO.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs VLC.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, VLC.V has a market cap of 33.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while VLC.V trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas VLC.V's P/E ratio is -17.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to VLC.V's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN and VLC.V have similar daily volatility (0.00).
TUSK.CN vs VGCX.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, VGCX.TO has a market cap of 32.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while VGCX.TO trades at $0.48.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas VGCX.TO's P/E ratio is 2.09. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to VGCX.TO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to VGCX.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs SGNL.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SGNL.TO has a market cap of 32.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SGNL.TO trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SGNL.TO's P/E ratio is -1.42. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SGNL.TO's ROE of -0.91%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SGNL.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs AMM.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, AMM.TO has a market cap of 30.2M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while AMM.TO trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas AMM.TO's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to AMM.TO's ROE of -1.04%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to AMM.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs GTCH.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, GTCH.CN has a market cap of 29.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while GTCH.CN trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas GTCH.CN's P/E ratio is -11.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to GTCH.CN's ROE of +1.57%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to GTCH.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs GRC.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, GRC.TO has a market cap of 25.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while GRC.TO trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas GRC.TO's P/E ratio is -9.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to GRC.TO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN and GRC.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
TUSK.CN vs VAU.V Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, VAU.V has a market cap of 22.6M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while VAU.V trades at $0.17.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas VAU.V's P/E ratio is -5.67. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to VAU.V's ROE of -1.86%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to VAU.V. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs QIM.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, QIM.CN has a market cap of 20.8M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while QIM.CN trades at $0.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas QIM.CN's P/E ratio is -4.50. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to QIM.CN's ROE of -0.73%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to QIM.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs PME.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, PME.TO has a market cap of 19.1M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while PME.TO trades at $2.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas PME.TO's P/E ratio is 2.36. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to PME.TO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to PME.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs CTOC.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, CTOC.CN has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while CTOC.CN trades at $0.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas CTOC.CN's P/E ratio is -1.71. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to CTOC.CN's ROE of -1.38%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to CTOC.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs YRB.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, YRB.TO has a market cap of 18.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while YRB.TO trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas YRB.TO's P/E ratio is 1.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to YRB.TO's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN and YRB.TO have similar daily volatility (0.00).
TUSK.CN vs SGLD.TO Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, SGLD.TO has a market cap of 17.5M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while SGLD.TO trades at $0.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas SGLD.TO's P/E ratio is 22.00. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to SGLD.TO's ROE of -0.72%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to SGLD.TO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.
TUSK.CN vs AUOZ.CN Comparison
TUSK.CN plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, TUSK.CN stands at 0. In comparison, AUOZ.CN has a market cap of 17.3M. Regarding current trading prices, TUSK.CN is priced at $0.10, while AUOZ.CN trades at $0.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
TUSK.CN currently has a P/E ratio of -0.67, whereas AUOZ.CN's P/E ratio is -7.75. In terms of profitability, TUSK.CN's ROE is -0.59%, compared to AUOZ.CN's ROE of -0.24%. Regarding short-term risk, TUSK.CN is less volatile compared to AUOZ.CN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for TUSK.CN.