Uma Converter Ltd.
Uma Converter Ltd. (UMA.NS) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (UMA.NS) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Packaging & Containers Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UMA.NS | ₹15.45 | -6.65% | 313.2M | 11.62 | ₹1.33 | N/A |
| TIMETECHNO.NS | ₹158.42 | -4.51% | 78.2B | 16.23 | ₹9.76 | +0.79% |
| TIMETECHNO.BO | ₹158.20 | -4.70% | 78.1B | 16.24 | ₹9.74 | +0.79% |
| EPL.NS | ₹205.27 | +3.36% | 65.7B | 16.42 | ₹12.50 | +2.44% |
| EPL.BO | ₹204.95 | +3.09% | 65.6B | 16.40 | ₹12.50 | +2.44% |
| BORORENEW.BO | ₹377.50 | -2.25% | 52.9B | -83.52 | -₹4.52 | N/A |
| BORORENEW.NS | ₹377.00 | -2.45% | 52.9B | -84.15 | -₹4.48 | N/A |
| MAXVIL.NS | ₹216.00 | -0.09% | 31.8B | 189.47 | ₹1.14 | N/A |
| AGI.NS | ₹468.55 | -4.78% | 30.3B | 9.11 | ₹51.45 | N/A |
| AGI.BO | ₹468.55 | -4.69% | 30.3B | 9.11 | ₹51.45 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
UMA.NS vs TIMETECHNO.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TIMETECHNO.NS has a market cap of 78.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TIMETECHNO.NS trades at ₹158.42.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TIMETECHNO.NS's P/E ratio is 16.23. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TIMETECHNO.NS's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TIMETECHNO.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TIMETECHNO.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs TIMETECHNO.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TIMETECHNO.BO has a market cap of 78.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TIMETECHNO.BO trades at ₹158.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TIMETECHNO.BO's P/E ratio is 16.24. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TIMETECHNO.BO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TIMETECHNO.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TIMETECHNO.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs EPL.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, EPL.NS has a market cap of 65.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while EPL.NS trades at ₹205.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas EPL.NS's P/E ratio is 16.42. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EPL.NS's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to EPL.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check EPL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs EPL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, EPL.BO has a market cap of 65.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while EPL.BO trades at ₹204.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas EPL.BO's P/E ratio is 16.40. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EPL.BO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to EPL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check EPL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BORORENEW.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BORORENEW.BO has a market cap of 52.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BORORENEW.BO trades at ₹377.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BORORENEW.BO's P/E ratio is -83.52. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BORORENEW.BO's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BORORENEW.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BORORENEW.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BORORENEW.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BORORENEW.NS has a market cap of 52.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BORORENEW.NS trades at ₹377.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BORORENEW.NS's P/E ratio is -84.15. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BORORENEW.NS's ROE of -0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BORORENEW.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BORORENEW.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs MAXVIL.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, MAXVIL.NS has a market cap of 31.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while MAXVIL.NS trades at ₹216.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas MAXVIL.NS's P/E ratio is 189.47. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to MAXVIL.NS's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to MAXVIL.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check MAXVIL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs AGI.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, AGI.NS has a market cap of 30.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while AGI.NS trades at ₹468.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas AGI.NS's P/E ratio is 9.11. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AGI.NS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to AGI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AGI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs AGI.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, AGI.BO has a market cap of 30.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while AGI.BO trades at ₹468.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas AGI.BO's P/E ratio is 9.11. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AGI.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to AGI.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AGI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs UFLEX.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, UFLEX.NS has a market cap of 24.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while UFLEX.NS trades at ₹334.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas UFLEX.NS's P/E ratio is 8.33. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to UFLEX.NS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to UFLEX.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check UFLEX.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs UFLEX.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, UFLEX.BO has a market cap of 24.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while UFLEX.BO trades at ₹333.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas UFLEX.BO's P/E ratio is 6.17. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to UFLEX.BO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to UFLEX.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check UFLEX.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs TCPLPACK.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TCPLPACK.NS has a market cap of 20.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TCPLPACK.NS trades at ₹2,279.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TCPLPACK.NS's P/E ratio is 18.16. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TCPLPACK.NS's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TCPLPACK.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TCPLPACK.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs TCPLPACK.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TCPLPACK.BO has a market cap of 20.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TCPLPACK.BO trades at ₹2,273.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TCPLPACK.BO's P/E ratio is 18.13. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TCPLPACK.BO's ROE of +0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TCPLPACK.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TCPLPACK.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs MOLDTKPAC.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, MOLDTKPAC.NS has a market cap of 15.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while MOLDTKPAC.NS trades at ₹473.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas MOLDTKPAC.NS's P/E ratio is 22.94. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to MOLDTKPAC.NS's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to MOLDTKPAC.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check MOLDTKPAC.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs MOLDTKPAC.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, MOLDTKPAC.BO has a market cap of 15.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while MOLDTKPAC.BO trades at ₹472.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas MOLDTKPAC.BO's P/E ratio is 22.88. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to MOLDTKPAC.BO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to MOLDTKPAC.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check MOLDTKPAC.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs COSMOFIRST.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, COSMOFIRST.BO has a market cap of 15.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while COSMOFIRST.BO trades at ₹596.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas COSMOFIRST.BO's P/E ratio is 10.67. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to COSMOFIRST.BO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to COSMOFIRST.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check COSMOFIRST.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs COSMOFIRST.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, COSMOFIRST.NS has a market cap of 15.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while COSMOFIRST.NS trades at ₹595.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas COSMOFIRST.NS's P/E ratio is 10.64. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to COSMOFIRST.NS's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to COSMOFIRST.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check COSMOFIRST.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs HUHTAMAKI.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HUHTAMAKI.BO has a market cap of 11.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HUHTAMAKI.BO trades at ₹150.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HUHTAMAKI.BO's P/E ratio is 9.59. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HUHTAMAKI.BO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HUHTAMAKI.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HUHTAMAKI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs HUHTAMAKI.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HUHTAMAKI.NS has a market cap of 11.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HUHTAMAKI.NS trades at ₹149.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HUHTAMAKI.NS's P/E ratio is 9.58. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HUHTAMAKI.NS's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HUHTAMAKI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HUHTAMAKI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs ORICONENT.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ORICONENT.NS has a market cap of 10B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ORICONENT.NS trades at ₹63.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ORICONENT.NS's P/E ratio is 31.84. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ORICONENT.NS's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ORICONENT.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ORICONENT.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs ORICONENT.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ORICONENT.BO has a market cap of 10B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ORICONENT.BO trades at ₹63.68.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ORICONENT.BO's P/E ratio is 31.68. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ORICONENT.BO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ORICONENT.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ORICONENT.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BOROSCI.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BOROSCI.NS has a market cap of 9.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BOROSCI.NS trades at ₹103.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BOROSCI.NS's P/E ratio is 57.30. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BOROSCI.NS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BOROSCI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BOROSCI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs ARROWGREEN.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ARROWGREEN.NS has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ARROWGREEN.NS trades at ₹459.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ARROWGREEN.NS's P/E ratio is 13.48. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ARROWGREEN.NS's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to ARROWGREEN.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ARROWGREEN.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs ARROWGREEN.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ARROWGREEN.BO has a market cap of 6.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ARROWGREEN.BO trades at ₹458.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ARROWGREEN.BO's P/E ratio is 13.48. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ARROWGREEN.BO's ROE of +0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to ARROWGREEN.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ARROWGREEN.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SHREERAMA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SHREERAMA.BO has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SHREERAMA.BO trades at ₹46.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SHREERAMA.BO's P/E ratio is 11.48. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHREERAMA.BO's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SHREERAMA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SHREERAMA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SHREERAMA.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SHREERAMA.NS has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SHREERAMA.NS trades at ₹46.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SHREERAMA.NS's P/E ratio is 11.31. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHREERAMA.NS's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SHREERAMA.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SHREERAMA.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs COMSYN.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, COMSYN.BO has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while COMSYN.BO trades at ₹153.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas COMSYN.BO's P/E ratio is 22.57. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to COMSYN.BO's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to COMSYN.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check COMSYN.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs COMSYN.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, COMSYN.NS has a market cap of 6.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while COMSYN.NS trades at ₹153.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas COMSYN.NS's P/E ratio is 22.60. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to COMSYN.NS's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to COMSYN.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check COMSYN.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs NAHARPOLY.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, NAHARPOLY.BO has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while NAHARPOLY.BO trades at ₹203.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas NAHARPOLY.BO's P/E ratio is 6.91. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to NAHARPOLY.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to NAHARPOLY.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check NAHARPOLY.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs NAHARPOLY.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, NAHARPOLY.NS has a market cap of 5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while NAHARPOLY.NS trades at ₹203.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas NAHARPOLY.NS's P/E ratio is 6.89. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to NAHARPOLY.NS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to NAHARPOLY.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check NAHARPOLY.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs PYRAMID.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, PYRAMID.NS has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while PYRAMID.NS trades at ₹134.46.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas PYRAMID.NS's P/E ratio is 19.46. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PYRAMID.NS's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PYRAMID.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PYRAMID.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs PYRAMID.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, PYRAMID.BO has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while PYRAMID.BO trades at ₹134.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas PYRAMID.BO's P/E ratio is 19.40. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PYRAMID.BO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PYRAMID.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PYRAMID.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs TIRUPATI.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TIRUPATI.NS has a market cap of 4.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TIRUPATI.NS trades at ₹428.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TIRUPATI.NS's P/E ratio is 30.25. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TIRUPATI.NS's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TIRUPATI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TIRUPATI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs TPLPLASTEH.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TPLPLASTEH.NS has a market cap of 4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TPLPLASTEH.NS trades at ₹51.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TPLPLASTEH.NS's P/E ratio is 14.47. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TPLPLASTEH.NS's ROE of +0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TPLPLASTEH.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TPLPLASTEH.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs HALDYNGL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HALDYNGL.BO has a market cap of 3.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HALDYNGL.BO trades at ₹71.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HALDYNGL.BO's P/E ratio is 17.72. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HALDYNGL.BO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HALDYNGL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HALDYNGL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs KANPRPLA.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, KANPRPLA.NS has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while KANPRPLA.NS trades at ₹157.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas KANPRPLA.NS's P/E ratio is 12.66. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KANPRPLA.NS's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to KANPRPLA.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KANPRPLA.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs KANPRPLA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, KANPRPLA.BO has a market cap of 3.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while KANPRPLA.BO trades at ₹157.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas KANPRPLA.BO's P/E ratio is 12.59. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KANPRPLA.BO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to KANPRPLA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KANPRPLA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs KALYANI.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, KALYANI.BO has a market cap of 3.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while KALYANI.BO trades at ₹506.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas KALYANI.BO's P/E ratio is 23.08. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KALYANI.BO's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to KALYANI.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KALYANI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BBTCL.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BBTCL.NS has a market cap of 3.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BBTCL.NS trades at ₹159.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BBTCL.NS's P/E ratio is 15.75. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BBTCL.NS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BBTCL.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BBTCL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs BBTCL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BBTCL.BO has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BBTCL.BO trades at ₹154.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BBTCL.BO's P/E ratio is 15.27. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BBTCL.BO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BBTCL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BBTCL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs RDBRL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, RDBRL.BO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while RDBRL.BO trades at ₹159.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas RDBRL.BO's P/E ratio is 8.02. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RDBRL.BO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to RDBRL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RDBRL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SAH.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SAH.BO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SAH.BO trades at ₹106.95.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SAH.BO's P/E ratio is 368.79. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SAH.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SAH.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SAH.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SAH.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SAH.NS has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SAH.NS trades at ₹104.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SAH.NS's P/E ratio is 361.21. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SAH.NS's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SAH.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SAH.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs WORTH.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, WORTH.NS has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while WORTH.NS trades at ₹159.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas WORTH.NS's P/E ratio is 16.24. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to WORTH.NS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to WORTH.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check WORTH.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs PGFOILQ.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, PGFOILQ.BO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while PGFOILQ.BO trades at ₹200.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas PGFOILQ.BO's P/E ratio is -70.88. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PGFOILQ.BO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PGFOILQ.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PGFOILQ.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs AERONEU.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, AERONEU.BO has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while AERONEU.BO trades at ₹79.79.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas AERONEU.BO's P/E ratio is 104.99. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AERONEU.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to AERONEU.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AERONEU.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs HITECHCORP.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HITECHCORP.BO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HITECHCORP.BO trades at ₹115.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HITECHCORP.BO's P/E ratio is 27.07. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HITECHCORP.BO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HITECHCORP.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HITECHCORP.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs AERONEU.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, AERONEU.NS has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while AERONEU.NS trades at ₹76.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas AERONEU.NS's P/E ratio is 101.00. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AERONEU.NS's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to AERONEU.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AERONEU.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs HITECHCORP.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HITECHCORP.NS has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HITECHCORP.NS trades at ₹114.31.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HITECHCORP.NS's P/E ratio is 26.90. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HITECHCORP.NS's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HITECHCORP.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HITECHCORP.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs WORTHPERI.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, WORTHPERI.NS has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while WORTHPERI.NS trades at ₹116.52.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas WORTHPERI.NS's P/E ratio is 11.35. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to WORTHPERI.NS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to WORTHPERI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check WORTHPERI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs MEGAFLEX.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, MEGAFLEX.NS has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while MEGAFLEX.NS trades at ₹151.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas MEGAFLEX.NS's P/E ratio is 35.50. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to MEGAFLEX.NS's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to MEGAFLEX.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check MEGAFLEX.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs WORTHPERI.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, WORTHPERI.BO has a market cap of 1.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while WORTHPERI.BO trades at ₹114.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas WORTHPERI.BO's P/E ratio is 11.14. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to WORTHPERI.BO's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to WORTHPERI.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check WORTHPERI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BALAJEE.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BALAJEE.NS has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BALAJEE.NS trades at ₹21.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BALAJEE.NS's P/E ratio is 13.47. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BALAJEE.NS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BALAJEE.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BALAJEE.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs HPBL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HPBL.BO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HPBL.BO trades at ₹158.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HPBL.BO's P/E ratio is 7.27. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HPBL.BO's ROE of +0.31%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HPBL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HPBL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs EASTINDIA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, EASTINDIA.BO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while EASTINDIA.BO trades at ₹99.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas EASTINDIA.BO's P/E ratio is 30.37. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EASTINDIA.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to EASTINDIA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check EASTINDIA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs ECOPLAST.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ECOPLAST.BO has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ECOPLAST.BO trades at ₹400.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ECOPLAST.BO's P/E ratio is 18.03. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ECOPLAST.BO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ECOPLAST.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ECOPLAST.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BI.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BI.BO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BI.BO trades at ₹52.76.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BI.BO's P/E ratio is -5.83. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BI.BO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BI.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs EMMBI.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, EMMBI.NS has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while EMMBI.NS trades at ₹60.59.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas EMMBI.NS's P/E ratio is 15.99. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EMMBI.NS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to EMMBI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check EMMBI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs EMMBI.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, EMMBI.BO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while EMMBI.BO trades at ₹60.33.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas EMMBI.BO's P/E ratio is 15.92. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EMMBI.BO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to EMMBI.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check EMMBI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BISIL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BISIL.BO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BISIL.BO trades at ₹2.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BISIL.BO's P/E ratio is 5.92. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BISIL.BO's ROE of +1.19%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BISIL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BISIL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs RPPL.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, RPPL.NS has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while RPPL.NS trades at ₹15.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas RPPL.NS's P/E ratio is 7.99. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RPPL.NS's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to RPPL.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RPPL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs KAIRA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, KAIRA.BO has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while KAIRA.BO trades at ₹1,123.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas KAIRA.BO's P/E ratio is 32.57. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KAIRA.BO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to KAIRA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KAIRA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs HINDTIN.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HINDTIN.BO has a market cap of 917.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HINDTIN.BO trades at ₹88.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HINDTIN.BO's P/E ratio is 8.89. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HINDTIN.BO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HINDTIN.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HINDTIN.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs GUJCONT.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, GUJCONT.BO has a market cap of 850M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while GUJCONT.BO trades at ₹150.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas GUJCONT.BO's P/E ratio is 12.71. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to GUJCONT.BO's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to GUJCONT.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check GUJCONT.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs WORTH.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, WORTH.BO has a market cap of 845.2M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while WORTH.BO trades at ₹2.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas WORTH.BO's P/E ratio is 38.00. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to WORTH.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to WORTH.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check WORTH.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BAPACK.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BAPACK.BO has a market cap of 829.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BAPACK.BO trades at ₹167.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BAPACK.BO's P/E ratio is 11.30. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BAPACK.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to BAPACK.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BAPACK.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SHETR.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SHETR.BO has a market cap of 824.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SHETR.BO trades at ₹91.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SHETR.BO's P/E ratio is 25.03. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHETR.BO's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SHETR.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SHETR.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs HINDNATGLS.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, HINDNATGLS.NS has a market cap of 791.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while HINDNATGLS.NS trades at ₹8.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas HINDNATGLS.NS's P/E ratio is -4.31. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HINDNATGLS.NS's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to HINDNATGLS.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HINDNATGLS.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs CLARA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, CLARA.BO has a market cap of 788.4M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while CLARA.BO trades at ₹30.71.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas CLARA.BO's P/E ratio is 36.56. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to CLARA.BO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to CLARA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check CLARA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs CAPRIHANS.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, CAPRIHANS.BO has a market cap of 782.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while CAPRIHANS.BO trades at ₹53.53.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas CAPRIHANS.BO's P/E ratio is -1.57. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to CAPRIHANS.BO's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to CAPRIHANS.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check CAPRIHANS.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SHALIWIR.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SHALIWIR.BO has a market cap of 708.9M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SHALIWIR.BO trades at ₹16.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SHALIWIR.BO's P/E ratio is 16.10. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHALIWIR.BO's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SHALIWIR.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SHALIWIR.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs AMDIND.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, AMDIND.BO has a market cap of 675.2M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while AMDIND.BO trades at ₹35.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas AMDIND.BO's P/E ratio is -12.15. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AMDIND.BO's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to AMDIND.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AMDIND.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs AMDIND.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, AMDIND.NS has a market cap of 668M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while AMDIND.NS trades at ₹34.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas AMDIND.NS's P/E ratio is -12.02. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AMDIND.NS's ROE of -0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to AMDIND.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AMDIND.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs ORIENTLTD.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ORIENTLTD.BO has a market cap of 589.9M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ORIENTLTD.BO trades at ₹58.99.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ORIENTLTD.BO's P/E ratio is -29.64. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ORIENTLTD.BO's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ORIENTLTD.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ORIENTLTD.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs ORIENTLTD.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ORIENTLTD.NS has a market cap of 580.9M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ORIENTLTD.NS trades at ₹58.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ORIENTLTD.NS's P/E ratio is -29.19. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ORIENTLTD.NS's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ORIENTLTD.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ORIENTLTD.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs TOKYOPLAST.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TOKYOPLAST.NS has a market cap of 556.4M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TOKYOPLAST.NS trades at ₹58.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TOKYOPLAST.NS's P/E ratio is 52.76. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TOKYOPLAST.NS's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TOKYOPLAST.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TOKYOPLAST.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs TOKYOPLAST.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TOKYOPLAST.BO has a market cap of 545.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TOKYOPLAST.BO trades at ₹57.43.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TOKYOPLAST.BO's P/E ratio is 51.74. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TOKYOPLAST.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TOKYOPLAST.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TOKYOPLAST.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs PERFEPA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, PERFEPA.BO has a market cap of 519.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while PERFEPA.BO trades at ₹78.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas PERFEPA.BO's P/E ratio is 17.00. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PERFEPA.BO's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PERFEPA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PERFEPA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs DKEGL.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, DKEGL.NS has a market cap of 473M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while DKEGL.NS trades at ₹63.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas DKEGL.NS's P/E ratio is 8.96. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to DKEGL.NS's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to DKEGL.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check DKEGL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs GUJCRAFT.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, GUJCRAFT.BO has a market cap of 454.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while GUJCRAFT.BO trades at ₹93.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas GUJCRAFT.BO's P/E ratio is 24.87. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to GUJCRAFT.BO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to GUJCRAFT.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check GUJCRAFT.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SIEL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SIEL.BO has a market cap of 436.3M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SIEL.BO trades at ₹31.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SIEL.BO's P/E ratio is 6.20. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SIEL.BO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to SIEL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SIEL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BALKRISHNA.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BALKRISHNA.NS has a market cap of 435M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BALKRISHNA.NS trades at ₹13.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BALKRISHNA.NS's P/E ratio is -7.14. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BALKRISHNA.NS's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BALKRISHNA.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BALKRISHNA.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs BALKRISHNA.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, BALKRISHNA.BO has a market cap of 429.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while BALKRISHNA.BO trades at ₹13.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas BALKRISHNA.BO's P/E ratio is -7.06. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BALKRISHNA.BO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to BALKRISHNA.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BALKRISHNA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs JUMBO.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, JUMBO.BO has a market cap of 424.5M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while JUMBO.BO trades at ₹50.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas JUMBO.BO's P/E ratio is 5.18. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to JUMBO.BO's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to JUMBO.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check JUMBO.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SPL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, SPL.BO has a market cap of 367.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while SPL.BO trades at ₹18.89.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas SPL.BO's P/E ratio is 4.89. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SPL.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to SPL.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SPL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs INNOVTEC.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, INNOVTEC.BO has a market cap of 297.4M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while INNOVTEC.BO trades at ₹13.24.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas INNOVTEC.BO's P/E ratio is -15.22. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to INNOVTEC.BO's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to INNOVTEC.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check INNOVTEC.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs POLYSPIN.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, POLYSPIN.BO has a market cap of 256M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while POLYSPIN.BO trades at ₹25.60.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas POLYSPIN.BO's P/E ratio is 4.35. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to POLYSPIN.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to POLYSPIN.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check POLYSPIN.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs RISHITECH.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, RISHITECH.BO has a market cap of 238M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while RISHITECH.BO trades at ₹32.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas RISHITECH.BO's P/E ratio is 7.68. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RISHITECH.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to RISHITECH.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RISHITECH.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs PEARLPOLY.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, PEARLPOLY.NS has a market cap of 219M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while PEARLPOLY.NS trades at ₹13.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas PEARLPOLY.NS's P/E ratio is -4.28. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PEARLPOLY.NS's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PEARLPOLY.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PEARLPOLY.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs PEARLPOLY.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, PEARLPOLY.BO has a market cap of 215M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while PEARLPOLY.BO trades at ₹12.77.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas PEARLPOLY.BO's P/E ratio is -4.20. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PEARLPOLY.BO's ROE of -0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PEARLPOLY.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PEARLPOLY.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs KSHITIJPOL.NS Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, KSHITIJPOL.NS has a market cap of 197.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while KSHITIJPOL.NS trades at ₹2.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas KSHITIJPOL.NS's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KSHITIJPOL.NS's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to KSHITIJPOL.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KSHITIJPOL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs RCAN.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, RCAN.BO has a market cap of 179.9M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while RCAN.BO trades at ₹17.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas RCAN.BO's P/E ratio is 8.29. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RCAN.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to RCAN.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RCAN.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs TRANSFRE.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TRANSFRE.BO has a market cap of 163M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TRANSFRE.BO trades at ₹22.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TRANSFRE.BO's P/E ratio is 9.86. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TRANSFRE.BO's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TRANSFRE.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TRANSFRE.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs ARROWHEAD.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ARROWHEAD.BO has a market cap of 131M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ARROWHEAD.BO trades at ₹70.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ARROWHEAD.BO's P/E ratio is -32.26. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ARROWHEAD.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ARROWHEAD.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ARROWHEAD.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs RAJPACK.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, RAJPACK.BO has a market cap of 124.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while RAJPACK.BO trades at ₹27.26.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas RAJPACK.BO's P/E ratio is -1363.00. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RAJPACK.BO's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to RAJPACK.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RAJPACK.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs JAUSPOL.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, JAUSPOL.BO has a market cap of 120.2M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while JAUSPOL.BO trades at ₹25.98.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas JAUSPOL.BO's P/E ratio is -31.30. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to JAUSPOL.BO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to JAUSPOL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check JAUSPOL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs TIRTPLS.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, TIRTPLS.BO has a market cap of 111.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while TIRTPLS.BO trades at ₹25.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas TIRTPLS.BO's P/E ratio is 48.29. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TIRTPLS.BO's ROE of +0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to TIRTPLS.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TIRTPLS.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs GKP.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, GKP.BO has a market cap of 111.1M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while GKP.BO trades at ₹5.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas GKP.BO's P/E ratio is 15.30. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to GKP.BO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to GKP.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check GKP.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs ANUROOP.BO Comparison April 2026
UMA.NS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, UMA.NS stands at 313.2M. In comparison, ANUROOP.BO has a market cap of 106.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹15.45, while ANUROOP.BO trades at ₹9.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
UMA.NS currently has a P/E ratio of 11.62, whereas ANUROOP.BO's P/E ratio is 2.06. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ANUROOP.BO's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to ANUROOP.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ANUROOP.BO's competition here