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 | ₹19.75 | +0.25% | 400.4M | 14.85 | ₹1.33 | N/A |
| TIMETECHNO.NS | ₹172.24 | -1.41% | 84.9B | 17.21 | ₹9.99 | +0.73% |
| TIMETECHNO.BO | ₹171.95 | -1.60% | 84.8B | 17.18 | ₹10.00 | +0.73% |
| BORORENEW.NS | ₹501.35 | -0.08% | 69B | 51.89 | ₹9.48 | N/A |
| BORORENEW.BO | ₹501.45 | +0.26% | 69B | 52.10 | ₹9.45 | N/A |
| EPL.BO | ₹210.45 | -1.73% | 68.6B | 17.68 | ₹12.12 | +2.34% |
| EPL.NS | ₹210.42 | -1.51% | 68.5B | 17.61 | ₹12.14 | +2.34% |
| AGI.BO | ₹610.60 | +3.59% | 38.8B | 11.03 | ₹54.35 | +1.17% |
| AGI.NS | ₹611.35 | +3.63% | 38.7B | 11.02 | ₹54.33 | +1.17% |
| UFLEX.NS | ₹446.10 | +5.22% | 31.8B | 10.99 | ₹40.11 | +0.68% |
Stock Comparison
UMA.NS vs TIMETECHNO.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TIMETECHNO.NS has a market cap of 84.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TIMETECHNO.NS trades at ₹172.24.
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 14.85, whereas TIMETECHNO.NS's P/E ratio is 17.21. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TIMETECHNO.NS's ROE of +0.14%. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TIMETECHNO.BO has a market cap of 84.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TIMETECHNO.BO trades at ₹171.95.
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 14.85, whereas TIMETECHNO.BO's P/E ratio is 17.18. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TIMETECHNO.BO's ROE of +0.14%. 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 BORORENEW.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BORORENEW.NS has a market cap of 69B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BORORENEW.NS trades at ₹501.35.
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 14.85, whereas BORORENEW.NS's P/E ratio is 51.89. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BORORENEW.NS's ROE of +0.12%. 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 BORORENEW.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BORORENEW.BO has a market cap of 69B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BORORENEW.BO trades at ₹501.45.
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 14.85, whereas BORORENEW.BO's P/E ratio is 52.10. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BORORENEW.BO's ROE of +0.12%. 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 EPL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, EPL.BO has a market cap of 68.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while EPL.BO trades at ₹210.45.
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 14.85, whereas EPL.BO's P/E ratio is 17.68. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EPL.BO's ROE of +0.15%. 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 EPL.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, EPL.NS has a market cap of 68.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while EPL.NS trades at ₹210.42.
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 14.85, whereas EPL.NS's P/E ratio is 17.61. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to EPL.NS's ROE of +0.15%. 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 AGI.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, AGI.BO has a market cap of 38.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while AGI.BO trades at ₹610.60.
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 14.85, whereas AGI.BO's P/E ratio is 11.03. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AGI.BO's ROE of +0.16%. 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 AGI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, AGI.NS has a market cap of 38.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while AGI.NS trades at ₹611.35.
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 14.85, whereas AGI.NS's P/E ratio is 11.02. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to AGI.NS's ROE of +0.16%. 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 UFLEX.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, UFLEX.NS has a market cap of 31.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while UFLEX.NS trades at ₹446.10.
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 14.85, whereas UFLEX.NS's P/E ratio is 10.99. 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 MAXVIL.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, MAXVIL.NS has a market cap of 31.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, 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 14.85, 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 less volatile compared to MAXVIL.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check MAXVIL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs UFLEX.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, UFLEX.BO has a market cap of 31.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while UFLEX.BO trades at ₹448.30.
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 14.85, whereas UFLEX.BO's P/E ratio is 8.13. 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.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TCPLPACK.BO has a market cap of 23.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TCPLPACK.BO trades at ₹2,572.25.
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 14.85, whereas TCPLPACK.BO's P/E ratio is 20.75. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TCPLPACK.BO's ROE of +0.15%. 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 TCPLPACK.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TCPLPACK.NS has a market cap of 23.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TCPLPACK.NS trades at ₹2,580.90.
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 14.85, whereas TCPLPACK.NS's P/E ratio is 20.57. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TCPLPACK.NS's ROE of +0.15%. 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 MOLDTKPAC.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, MOLDTKPAC.BO has a market cap of 23B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while MOLDTKPAC.BO trades at ₹706.10.
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 14.85, whereas MOLDTKPAC.BO's P/E ratio is 31.62. 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 MOLDTKPAC.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, MOLDTKPAC.NS has a market cap of 22.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while MOLDTKPAC.NS trades at ₹707.05.
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 14.85, whereas MOLDTKPAC.NS's P/E ratio is 31.48. 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 COSMOFIRST.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, COSMOFIRST.NS has a market cap of 18.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while COSMOFIRST.NS trades at ₹734.35.
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 14.85, whereas COSMOFIRST.NS's P/E ratio is 12.01. 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 COSMOFIRST.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, COSMOFIRST.BO has a market cap of 18.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while COSMOFIRST.BO trades at ₹734.95.
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 14.85, whereas COSMOFIRST.BO's P/E ratio is 12.01. 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 BOROSCI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BOROSCI.NS has a market cap of 13.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BOROSCI.NS trades at ₹151.47.
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 14.85, whereas BOROSCI.NS's P/E ratio is 82.77. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BOROSCI.NS's ROE of +0.08%. 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 HUHTAMAKI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HUHTAMAKI.NS has a market cap of 12.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HUHTAMAKI.NS trades at ₹167.31.
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 14.85, whereas HUHTAMAKI.NS's P/E ratio is 10.28. 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 HUHTAMAKI.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HUHTAMAKI.BO has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HUHTAMAKI.BO trades at ₹167.55.
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 14.85, whereas HUHTAMAKI.BO's P/E ratio is 10.18. 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 ORICONENT.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ORICONENT.NS has a market cap of 9.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ORICONENT.NS trades at ₹61.60.
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 14.85, whereas ORICONENT.NS's P/E ratio is 30.81. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ORICONENT.BO has a market cap of 9.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ORICONENT.BO trades at ₹61.47.
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 14.85, whereas ORICONENT.BO's P/E ratio is 30.35. 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 ARROWGREEN.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ARROWGREEN.BO has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ARROWGREEN.BO trades at ₹563.80.
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 14.85, whereas ARROWGREEN.BO's P/E ratio is 17.40. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ARROWGREEN.BO's ROE of +0.23%. 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 ARROWGREEN.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ARROWGREEN.NS has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ARROWGREEN.NS trades at ₹564.60.
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 14.85, whereas ARROWGREEN.NS's P/E ratio is 17.40. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ARROWGREEN.NS's ROE of +0.23%. 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 NAHARPOLY.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, NAHARPOLY.NS has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while NAHARPOLY.NS trades at ₹256.80.
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 14.85, whereas NAHARPOLY.NS's P/E ratio is 8.67. 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 NAHARPOLY.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, NAHARPOLY.BO has a market cap of 6.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while NAHARPOLY.BO trades at ₹258.20.
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 14.85, whereas NAHARPOLY.BO's P/E ratio is 8.66. 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 SHREERAMA.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SHREERAMA.NS has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while SHREERAMA.NS trades at ₹46.22.
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 14.85, whereas SHREERAMA.NS's P/E ratio is 26.24. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHREERAMA.NS's ROE of +0.15%. 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 SHREERAMA.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SHREERAMA.BO has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while SHREERAMA.BO trades at ₹46.30.
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 14.85, whereas SHREERAMA.BO's P/E ratio is 26.17. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHREERAMA.BO's ROE of +0.15%. 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 COMSYN.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, COMSYN.NS has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while COMSYN.NS trades at ₹153.01.
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 14.85, whereas COMSYN.NS's P/E ratio is 22.54. 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 COMSYN.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, COMSYN.BO has a market cap of 6.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while COMSYN.BO trades at ₹153.75.
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 14.85, 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 PYRAMID.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PYRAMID.BO has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PYRAMID.BO trades at ₹164.30.
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 14.85, whereas PYRAMID.BO's P/E ratio is 20.41. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PYRAMID.BO's ROE of +0.11%. 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 HALDYNGL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HALDYNGL.BO has a market cap of 6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HALDYNGL.BO trades at ₹111.40.
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 14.85, whereas HALDYNGL.BO's P/E ratio is 24.17. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HALDYNGL.BO's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to HALDYNGL.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check HALDYNGL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs PYRAMID.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PYRAMID.NS has a market cap of 5.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PYRAMID.NS trades at ₹164.65.
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 14.85, whereas PYRAMID.NS's P/E ratio is 20.38. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PYRAMID.NS's ROE of +0.11%. 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 TPLPLASTEH.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TPLPLASTEH.NS has a market cap of 5.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TPLPLASTEH.NS trades at ₹71.21.
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 14.85, whereas TPLPLASTEH.NS's P/E ratio is 19.64. 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 less volatile compared to TPLPLASTEH.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TPLPLASTEH.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs TIRUPATI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TIRUPATI.NS has a market cap of 4.9B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TIRUPATI.NS trades at ₹485.00.
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 14.85, whereas TIRUPATI.NS's P/E ratio is 34.23. 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 KANPRPLA.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, KANPRPLA.BO has a market cap of 4.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while KANPRPLA.BO trades at ₹186.95.
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 14.85, whereas KANPRPLA.BO's P/E ratio is 11.25. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KANPRPLA.BO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to KANPRPLA.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KANPRPLA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BBTCL.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BBTCL.NS has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BBTCL.NS trades at ₹209.13.
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 14.85, whereas BBTCL.NS's P/E ratio is 22.27. 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 less volatile compared to BBTCL.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BBTCL.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs KANPRPLA.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, KANPRPLA.NS has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while KANPRPLA.NS trades at ₹186.78.
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 14.85, whereas KANPRPLA.NS's P/E ratio is 11.11. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KANPRPLA.NS's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to KANPRPLA.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check KANPRPLA.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs BBTCL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BBTCL.BO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BBTCL.BO trades at ₹209.45.
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 14.85, whereas BBTCL.BO's P/E ratio is 22.21. 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 less volatile compared to BBTCL.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BBTCL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs HITECHCORP.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HITECHCORP.BO has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HITECHCORP.BO trades at ₹280.45.
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 14.85, whereas HITECHCORP.BO's P/E ratio is 30.21. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HITECHCORP.BO's ROE of +0.06%. 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 HITECHCORP.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HITECHCORP.NS has a market cap of 4.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HITECHCORP.NS trades at ₹279.70.
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 14.85, whereas HITECHCORP.NS's P/E ratio is 30.13. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HITECHCORP.NS's ROE of +0.06%. 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 KALYANI.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, KALYANI.BO has a market cap of 4.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while KALYANI.BO trades at ₹584.75.
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 14.85, whereas KALYANI.BO's P/E ratio is 27.53. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KALYANI.BO's ROE of +0.22%. 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 SAH.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SAH.BO has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, 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 14.85, 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 +0.01%. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SAH.NS has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, 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 14.85, 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 HPBL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HPBL.BO has a market cap of 2.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HPBL.BO trades at ₹248.00.
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 14.85, whereas HPBL.BO's P/E ratio is 11.50. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HPBL.BO's ROE of +0.33%. 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 RDBRL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, RDBRL.BO has a market cap of 2.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while RDBRL.BO trades at ₹146.55.
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 14.85, whereas RDBRL.BO's P/E ratio is 7.33. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RDBRL.BO's ROE of +0.15%. 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 WORTH.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, WORTH.NS has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, 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 14.85, 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 BALAJEE.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BALAJEE.NS has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BALAJEE.NS trades at ₹29.05.
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 14.85, whereas BALAJEE.NS's P/E ratio is 19.00. 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 less volatile compared to BALAJEE.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BALAJEE.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs PGFOILQ.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PGFOILQ.BO has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PGFOILQ.BO trades at ₹204.75.
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 14.85, whereas PGFOILQ.BO's P/E ratio is -73.37. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PGFOILQ.BO's ROE of -0.02%. 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.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, AERONEU.NS has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while AERONEU.NS trades at ₹88.04.
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 14.85, whereas AERONEU.NS's P/E ratio is 155.07. 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 AERONEU.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, AERONEU.BO has a market cap of 2.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while AERONEU.BO trades at ₹87.08.
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 14.85, whereas AERONEU.BO's P/E ratio is 151.93. 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 more volatile compared to AERONEU.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AERONEU.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs WORTHPERI.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, WORTHPERI.BO has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while WORTHPERI.BO trades at ₹132.05.
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 14.85, whereas WORTHPERI.BO's P/E ratio is 13.89. 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 less volatile compared to WORTHPERI.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check WORTHPERI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs WORTHPERI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, WORTHPERI.NS has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while WORTHPERI.NS trades at ₹128.91.
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 14.85, whereas WORTHPERI.NS's P/E ratio is 13.79. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to WORTHPERI.NS's ROE of +0.08%. 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 ECOPLAST.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ECOPLAST.BO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ECOPLAST.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 14.85, whereas ECOPLAST.BO's P/E ratio is 21.82. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ECOPLAST.BO's ROE of +0.12%. 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 EASTINDIA.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, EASTINDIA.BO has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while EASTINDIA.BO trades at ₹108.70.
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 14.85, whereas EASTINDIA.BO's P/E ratio is 34.36. 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 EMMBI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, EMMBI.NS has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while EMMBI.NS trades at ₹84.71.
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 14.85, whereas EMMBI.NS's P/E ratio is 22.23. 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 WORTH.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, WORTH.BO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while WORTH.BO trades at ₹4.29.
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 14.85, whereas WORTH.BO's P/E ratio is 72.83. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to WORTH.BO's ROE of +0.08%. 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 EMMBI.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, EMMBI.BO has a market cap of 1.6B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while EMMBI.BO trades at ₹85.60.
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 14.85, whereas EMMBI.BO's P/E ratio is 22.17. 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 MEGAFLEX.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, MEGAFLEX.NS has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while MEGAFLEX.NS trades at ₹126.95.
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 14.85, whereas MEGAFLEX.NS's P/E ratio is 29.80. 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 BI.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BI.BO has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BI.BO trades at ₹66.02.
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 14.85, whereas BI.BO's P/E ratio is -6.98. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BI.BO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to BI.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BI.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs RPPL.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, RPPL.NS has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while RPPL.NS trades at ₹18.93.
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 14.85, whereas RPPL.NS's P/E ratio is 9.57. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RPPL.NS's ROE of +0.10%. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, KAIRA.BO has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while KAIRA.BO trades at ₹1,397.70.
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 14.85, whereas KAIRA.BO's P/E ratio is 69.89. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KAIRA.BO's ROE of +0.02%. 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 BISIL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BISIL.BO has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, 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 14.85, 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 CAPRIHANS.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, CAPRIHANS.BO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while CAPRIHANS.BO trades at ₹78.82.
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 14.85, whereas CAPRIHANS.BO's P/E ratio is -2.39. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to CAPRIHANS.BO's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to CAPRIHANS.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check CAPRIHANS.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs HINDTIN.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HINDTIN.BO has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while HINDTIN.BO trades at ₹105.95.
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 14.85, whereas HINDTIN.BO's P/E ratio is 10.73. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to HINDTIN.BO's ROE of +0.04%. 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 PURVFLEXI.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PURVFLEXI.NS has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PURVFLEXI.NS trades at ₹52.00.
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 14.85, whereas PURVFLEXI.NS's P/E ratio is 10.48. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PURVFLEXI.NS's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to PURVFLEXI.NS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PURVFLEXI.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs CLARA.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, CLARA.BO has a market cap of 962.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while CLARA.BO trades at ₹37.50.
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 14.85, whereas CLARA.BO's P/E ratio is 44.64. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to CLARA.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to CLARA.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check CLARA.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs GUJCONT.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, GUJCONT.BO has a market cap of 943.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while GUJCONT.BO trades at ₹167.00.
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 14.85, whereas GUJCONT.BO's P/E ratio is 14.10. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to GUJCONT.BO's ROE of +0.14%. 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 AMDIND.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, AMDIND.BO has a market cap of 910.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while AMDIND.BO trades at ₹49.00.
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 14.85, whereas AMDIND.BO's P/E ratio is -16.38. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, AMDIND.NS has a market cap of 905.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while AMDIND.NS trades at ₹48.94.
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 14.85, whereas AMDIND.NS's P/E ratio is -16.29. 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 less volatile compared to AMDIND.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check AMDIND.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs SHETR.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SHETR.BO has a market cap of 858M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while SHETR.BO trades at ₹92.25.
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 14.85, whereas SHETR.BO's P/E ratio is 21.46. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHETR.BO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to SHETR.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SHETR.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs BAPACK.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BAPACK.BO has a market cap of 850.2M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BAPACK.BO trades at ₹177.40.
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 14.85, whereas BAPACK.BO's P/E ratio is 11.59. 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 more volatile compared to BAPACK.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BAPACK.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs TOKYOPLAST.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TOKYOPLAST.BO has a market cap of 833.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TOKYOPLAST.BO trades at ₹83.86.
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 14.85, whereas TOKYOPLAST.BO's P/E ratio is 79.05. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TOKYOPLAST.BO's ROE of +0.01%. 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 TOKYOPLAST.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TOKYOPLAST.NS has a market cap of 817.1M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TOKYOPLAST.NS trades at ₹86.14.
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 14.85, whereas TOKYOPLAST.NS's P/E ratio is 130.30. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to TOKYOPLAST.NS's ROE of +0.01%. 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 HINDNATGLS.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, HINDNATGLS.NS has a market cap of 791.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, 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 14.85, 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 +0.04%. 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 SHALIWIR.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SHALIWIR.BO has a market cap of 765.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while SHALIWIR.BO trades at ₹17.73.
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 14.85, whereas SHALIWIR.BO's P/E ratio is 17.39. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SHALIWIR.BO's ROE of +0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to SHALIWIR.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SHALIWIR.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs ORIENTLTD.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ORIENTLTD.BO has a market cap of 639M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ORIENTLTD.BO trades at ₹62.13.
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 14.85, whereas ORIENTLTD.BO's P/E ratio is -32.11. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ORIENTLTD.BO's ROE of -0.02%. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ORIENTLTD.NS has a market cap of 620.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ORIENTLTD.NS trades at ₹61.48.
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 14.85, whereas ORIENTLTD.NS's P/E ratio is -31.20. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ORIENTLTD.NS's ROE of -0.02%. 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 BALKRISHNA.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BALKRISHNA.BO has a market cap of 603.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BALKRISHNA.BO trades at ₹18.42.
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 14.85, whereas BALKRISHNA.BO's P/E ratio is -9.92. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BALKRISHNA.BO's ROE of +0.04%. 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 BALKRISHNA.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, BALKRISHNA.NS has a market cap of 587.4M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while BALKRISHNA.NS trades at ₹18.21.
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 14.85, whereas BALKRISHNA.NS's P/E ratio is -9.65. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to BALKRISHNA.NS's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to BALKRISHNA.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check BALKRISHNA.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs DKEGL.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, DKEGL.NS has a market cap of 511.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while DKEGL.NS trades at ₹69.70.
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 14.85, whereas DKEGL.NS's P/E ratio is 9.69. 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 PERFEPA.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PERFEPA.BO has a market cap of 496.8M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PERFEPA.BO trades at ₹75.90.
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 14.85, whereas PERFEPA.BO's P/E ratio is 15.77. 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 JUMBO.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, JUMBO.BO has a market cap of 493.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while JUMBO.BO trades at ₹57.59.
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 14.85, whereas JUMBO.BO's P/E ratio is 6.02. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to JUMBO.BO's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to JUMBO.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check JUMBO.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs GUJCRAFT.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, GUJCRAFT.BO has a market cap of 487.1M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while GUJCRAFT.BO trades at ₹99.66.
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 14.85, whereas GUJCRAFT.BO's P/E ratio is 50.33. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to GUJCRAFT.BO's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to GUJCRAFT.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check GUJCRAFT.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs SIEL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SIEL.BO has a market cap of 444.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while SIEL.BO trades at ₹30.55.
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 14.85, whereas SIEL.BO's P/E ratio is 6.32. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to SIEL.BO's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to SIEL.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SIEL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs KSHITIJPOL.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, KSHITIJPOL.NS has a market cap of 441.4M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while KSHITIJPOL.NS trades at ₹5.19.
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 14.85, whereas KSHITIJPOL.NS's P/E ratio is 19.84. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to KSHITIJPOL.NS's ROE of +0.08%. 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 SPL.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, SPL.BO has a market cap of 436.1M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while SPL.BO trades at ₹22.40.
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 14.85, whereas SPL.BO's P/E ratio is 5.80. 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 more volatile compared to SPL.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check SPL.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs PEARLPOLY.NS Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PEARLPOLY.NS has a market cap of 326.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PEARLPOLY.NS trades at ₹18.59.
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 14.85, whereas PEARLPOLY.NS's P/E ratio is -6.38. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PEARLPOLY.NS's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to PEARLPOLY.NS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check PEARLPOLY.NS's competition here
UMA.NS vs PEARLPOLY.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, PEARLPOLY.BO has a market cap of 319.9M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while PEARLPOLY.BO trades at ₹19.00.
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 14.85, whereas PEARLPOLY.BO's P/E ratio is -6.25. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to PEARLPOLY.BO's ROE of -0.15%. 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 INNOVTEC.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, INNOVTEC.BO has a market cap of 312.5M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while INNOVTEC.BO trades at ₹13.75.
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 14.85, whereas INNOVTEC.BO's P/E ratio is -15.99. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, POLYSPIN.BO has a market cap of 295M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while POLYSPIN.BO trades at ₹30.06.
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 14.85, whereas POLYSPIN.BO's P/E ratio is 5.02. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to POLYSPIN.BO's ROE of +0.08%. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, RISHITECH.BO has a market cap of 291.9M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while RISHITECH.BO trades at ₹38.69.
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 14.85, whereas RISHITECH.BO's P/E ratio is 9.42. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RISHITECH.BO's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is less volatile compared to RISHITECH.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RISHITECH.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs RCAN.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, RCAN.BO has a market cap of 188.6M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while RCAN.BO trades at ₹18.47.
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 14.85, whereas RCAN.BO's P/E ratio is 8.69. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TRANSFRE.BO has a market cap of 162M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TRANSFRE.BO trades at ₹22.20.
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 14.85, whereas TRANSFRE.BO's P/E ratio is 9.80. 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 ANUROOP.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ANUROOP.BO has a market cap of 159.7M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ANUROOP.BO trades at ₹14.78.
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 14.85, whereas ANUROOP.BO's P/E ratio is 3.09. 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 less volatile compared to ANUROOP.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check ANUROOP.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs TIRTPLS.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, TIRTPLS.BO has a market cap of 158.1M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while TIRTPLS.BO trades at ₹34.54.
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 14.85, whereas TIRTPLS.BO's P/E ratio is 68.33. 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 less volatile compared to TIRTPLS.BO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check TIRTPLS.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs ARROWHEAD.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, ARROWHEAD.BO has a market cap of 140.3M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while ARROWHEAD.BO trades at ₹75.00.
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 14.85, whereas ARROWHEAD.BO's P/E ratio is -34.56. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to ARROWHEAD.BO's ROE of +0.03%. 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 June 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 400.4M. In comparison, RAJPACK.BO has a market cap of 139.4M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while RAJPACK.BO trades at ₹30.40.
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 14.85, whereas RAJPACK.BO's P/E ratio is -1525.00. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to RAJPACK.BO's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, UMA.NS is more volatile compared to RAJPACK.BO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for UMA.NS.Check RAJPACK.BO's competition here
UMA.NS vs GKP.BO Comparison June 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 400.4M. In comparison, GKP.BO has a market cap of 137.1M. Regarding current trading prices, UMA.NS is priced at ₹19.75, while GKP.BO trades at ₹6.28.
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 14.85, whereas GKP.BO's P/E ratio is 18.88. In terms of profitability, UMA.NS's ROE is N/A, compared to GKP.BO's ROE of +0.02%. 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