VinFast Auto Ltd.
VinFast Auto Ltd. (VFS) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (VFS) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Manufacturers Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VFS | $3.25 | -0.26% | 7.6B | -2.14 | -$1.52 | N/A |
| TSLA | $398.18 | -3.29% | 1.5T | 246.60 | $1.67 | N/A |
| TM | $237.94 | -1.54% | 312.2B | 12.89 | $18.58 | +2.35% |
| F-PD | $22.70 | -0.31% | 89.1B | N/A | N/A | +4.30% |
| GM | $78.56 | -3.57% | 76B | 24.92 | $3.27 | +0.70% |
| RACE | $359.83 | -1.82% | 65.3B | 34.51 | $10.63 | +0.94% |
| F | $13.61 | -1.23% | 54.9B | -6.80 | -$2.06 | +4.30% |
| F-PC | $21.44 | -0.16% | 43B | N/A | N/A | +4.30% |
| F-PB | $21.70 | -0.23% | 42.9B | N/A | N/A | +4.30% |
| HMC | $30.11 | -0.76% | 39.3B | 12.36 | $2.45 | +4.17% |
Stock Comparison
VFS vs TSLA Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, TSLA has a market cap of 1.5T. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while TSLA trades at $398.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas TSLA's P/E ratio is 246.60. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to TSLA's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to TSLA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check TSLA's competition here
VFS vs TM Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, TM has a market cap of 312.2B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while TM trades at $237.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas TM's P/E ratio is 12.89. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to TM's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to TM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check TM's competition here
VFS vs F-PD Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, F-PD has a market cap of 89.1B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while F-PD trades at $22.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas F-PD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to F-PD's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to F-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F-PD's competition here
VFS vs GM Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, GM has a market cap of 76B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while GM trades at $78.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas GM's P/E ratio is 24.92. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to GM's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GM's competition here
VFS vs RACE Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, RACE has a market cap of 65.3B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while RACE trades at $359.83.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas RACE's P/E ratio is 34.51. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to RACE's ROE of +0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to RACE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check RACE's competition here
VFS vs F Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, F has a market cap of 54.9B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while F trades at $13.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas F's P/E ratio is -6.80. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to F's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to F. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F's competition here
VFS vs F-PC Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, F-PC has a market cap of 43B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while F-PC trades at $21.44.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas F-PC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to F-PC's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to F-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F-PC's competition here
VFS vs F-PB Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, F-PB has a market cap of 42.9B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while F-PB trades at $21.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas F-PB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to F-PB's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to F-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F-PB's competition here
VFS vs HMC Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, HMC has a market cap of 39.3B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while HMC trades at $30.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas HMC's P/E ratio is 12.36. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to HMC's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to HMC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check HMC's competition here
VFS vs STLA Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, STLA has a market cap of 22.3B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while STLA trades at $7.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas STLA's P/E ratio is -10.74. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to STLA's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to STLA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check STLA's competition here
VFS vs RIVN Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, RIVN has a market cap of 18.9B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while RIVN trades at $14.84.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas RIVN's P/E ratio is -4.97. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to RIVN's ROE of -0.67%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to RIVN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check RIVN's competition here
VFS vs LI Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, LI has a market cap of 18.5B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while LI trades at $18.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas LI's P/E ratio is 16.62. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to LI's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LI's competition here
VFS vs XPEV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, XPEV has a market cap of 16.7B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while XPEV trades at $17.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas XPEV's P/E ratio is -27.11. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to XPEV's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to XPEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check XPEV's competition here
VFS vs NIO Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, NIO has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while NIO trades at $5.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas NIO's P/E ratio is -3.04. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to NIO's ROE of -11.32%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to NIO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check NIO's competition here
VFS vs ZK Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ZK has a market cap of 6.8B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ZK trades at $26.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ZK's P/E ratio is -20.88. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ZK's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to ZK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ZK's competition here
VFS vs LCID Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, LCID has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while LCID trades at $9.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas LCID's P/E ratio is -0.91. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to LCID's ROE of -0.81%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LCID. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LCID's competition here
VFS vs BLBD Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, BLBD has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while BLBD trades at $59.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas BLBD's P/E ratio is 15.40. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to BLBD's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to BLBD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check BLBD's competition here
VFS vs PSNY Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, PSNY has a market cap of 1.2B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while PSNY trades at $17.55.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas PSNY's P/E ratio is -0.45. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to PSNY's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PSNY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PSNY's competition here
VFS vs LOT Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, LOT has a market cap of 751.3M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while LOT trades at $1.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas LOT's P/E ratio is -0.89. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to LOT's ROE of +0.77%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LOT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LOT's competition here
VFS vs NAKD Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, NAKD has a market cap of 682M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while NAKD trades at $2.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas NAKD's P/E ratio is -0.96. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to NAKD's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to NAKD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check NAKD's competition here
VFS vs VLCN Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, VLCN has a market cap of 500.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while VLCN trades at $10.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas VLCN's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to VLCN's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to VLCN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check VLCN's competition here
VFS vs LVWR Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, LVWR has a market cap of 452.9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while LVWR trades at $1.81.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas LVWR's P/E ratio is -5.84. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to LVWR's ROE of -1.06%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LVWR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LVWR's competition here
VFS vs VFSWW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, VFSWW has a market cap of 374.1M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while VFSWW trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas VFSWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to VFSWW's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to VFSWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check VFSWW's competition here
VFS vs NIU Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, NIU has a market cap of 278.9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while NIU trades at $3.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas NIU's P/E ratio is -69.80. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to NIU's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to NIU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check NIU's competition here
VFS vs PSNYW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, PSNYW has a market cap of 193.7M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while PSNYW trades at $2.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas PSNYW's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to PSNYW's ROE of +0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PSNYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PSNYW's competition here
VFS vs FFIE Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, FFIE has a market cap of 105.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while FFIE trades at $1.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas FFIE's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to FFIE's ROE of -6.96%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFIE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFIE's competition here
VFS vs FFIEW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, FFIEW has a market cap of 105.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while FFIEW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas FFIEW's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to FFIEW's ROE of -8.08%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFIEW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFIEW's competition here
VFS vs FSR Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, FSR has a market cap of 52.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while FSR trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas FSR's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to FSR's ROE of -2.72%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FSR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FSR's competition here
VFS vs SEV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, SEV has a market cap of 48.7M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while SEV trades at $1.80.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas SEV's P/E ratio is -1.21. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to SEV's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SEV's competition here
VFS vs LOTWW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, LOTWW has a market cap of 42.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while LOTWW trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas LOTWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to LOTWW's ROE of +0.77%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to LOTWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LOTWW's competition here
VFS vs FFAI Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, FFAI has a market cap of 41M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while FFAI trades at $0.57.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas FFAI's P/E ratio is -0.03. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to FFAI's ROE of -8.08%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFAI's competition here
VFS vs SOLO Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, SOLO has a market cap of 25.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while SOLO trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas SOLO's P/E ratio is -0.44. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to SOLO's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SOLO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SOLO's competition here
VFS vs RIDE Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, RIDE has a market cap of 21.6M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while RIDE trades at $2.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas RIDE's P/E ratio is -0.11. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to RIDE's ROE of -0.89%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to RIDE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check RIDE's competition here
VFS vs PEV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, PEV has a market cap of 10.7M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while PEV trades at $0.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas PEV's P/E ratio is -1.21. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to PEV's ROE of -1.78%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to PEV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PEV's competition here
VFS vs SSM Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, SSM has a market cap of 10.3M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while SSM trades at $7.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas SSM's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to SSM's ROE of -1.25%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SSM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SSM's competition here
VFS vs ARVL Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ARVL has a market cap of 9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ARVL trades at $0.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ARVL's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ARVL's ROE of -1.77%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ARVL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ARVL's competition here
VFS vs SVMH Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, SVMH has a market cap of 8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while SVMH trades at $0.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas SVMH's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to SVMH's ROE of +43.14%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to SVMH. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SVMH's competition here
VFS vs LOBO Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, LOBO has a market cap of 6.3M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while LOBO trades at $0.51.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas LOBO's P/E ratio is -1.51. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to LOBO's ROE of -0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LOBO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LOBO's competition here
VFS vs CENN Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, CENN has a market cap of 6.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while CENN trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas CENN's P/E ratio is -0.13. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to CENN's ROE of -0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to CENN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check CENN's competition here
VFS vs EVTV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, EVTV has a market cap of 6.1M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while EVTV trades at $1.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas EVTV's P/E ratio is -0.19. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to EVTV's ROE of -2.94%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to EVTV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check EVTV's competition here
VFS vs AIEV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, AIEV has a market cap of 5.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while AIEV trades at $0.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas AIEV's P/E ratio is -3.83. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to AIEV's ROE of -0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to AIEV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check AIEV's competition here
VFS vs GOEV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, GOEV has a market cap of 5.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while GOEV trades at $0.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas GOEV's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to GOEV's ROE of -1.24%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GOEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GOEV's competition here
VFS vs HYZN Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, HYZN has a market cap of 5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while HYZN trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas HYZN's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to HYZN's ROE of -0.84%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to HYZN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check HYZN's competition here
VFS vs AIIOW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, AIIOW has a market cap of 4.7M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while AIIOW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas AIIOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to AIIOW's ROE of -160.20%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to AIIOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check AIIOW's competition here
VFS vs AYRO Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, AYRO has a market cap of 4.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while AYRO trades at $7.08.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas AYRO's P/E ratio is -0.12. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to AYRO's ROE of -6.49%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to AYRO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check AYRO's competition here
VFS vs DMN Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, DMN has a market cap of 4.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while DMN trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas DMN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to DMN's ROE of +0.64%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to DMN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check DMN's competition here
VFS vs GP Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, GP has a market cap of 3.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while GP trades at $1.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas GP's P/E ratio is -0.45. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to GP's ROE of +1.61%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GP's competition here
VFS vs EGOX Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, EGOX has a market cap of 2.9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while EGOX trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas EGOX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to EGOX's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to EGOX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check EGOX's competition here
VFS vs VEV Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, VEV has a market cap of 2.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while VEV trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas VEV's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to VEV's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to VEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check VEV's competition here
VFS vs WKHS Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, WKHS has a market cap of 2.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while WKHS trades at $3.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas WKHS's P/E ratio is 0.05. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to WKHS's ROE of -1.98%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to WKHS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check WKHS's competition here
VFS vs FLYE Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, FLYE has a market cap of 2.1M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while FLYE trades at $2.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas FLYE's P/E ratio is -0.10. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to FLYE's ROE of -0.52%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FLYE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FLYE's competition here
VFS vs FFAIW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, FFAIW has a market cap of 1.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while FFAIW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas FFAIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to FFAIW's ROE of -8.08%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFAIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFAIW's competition here
VFS vs ZAPP Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ZAPP has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ZAPP trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ZAPP's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ZAPP's ROE of +0.44%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ZAPP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ZAPP's competition here
VFS vs CJET Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, CJET has a market cap of 721.2K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while CJET trades at $2.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas CJET's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to CJET's ROE of +0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to CJET. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check CJET's competition here
VFS vs GOEVW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, GOEVW has a market cap of 365.7K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while GOEVW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas GOEVW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to GOEVW's ROE of -1.24%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GOEVW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GOEVW's competition here
VFS vs ECDAW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ECDAW has a market cap of 23.5K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ECDAW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ECDAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ECDAW's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to ECDAW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ECDAW's competition here
VFS vs DCX Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, DCX has a market cap of 4.9K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while DCX trades at $2.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas DCX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to DCX's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to DCX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check DCX's competition here
VFS vs ECDA Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ECDA has a market cap of 4.4K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ECDA trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ECDA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ECDA's ROE of +0.42%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ECDA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ECDA's competition here
VFS vs MULN Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, MULN has a market cap of 539. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while MULN trades at $0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas MULN's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to MULN's ROE of +5.98%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to MULN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check MULN's competition here
VFS vs SOLOW Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, SOLOW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while SOLOW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas SOLOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to SOLOW's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SOLOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SOLOW's competition here
VFS vs ADOM Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ADOM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ADOM trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ADOM's P/E ratio is -35.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ADOM's ROE of -1.69%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ADOM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ADOM's competition here
VFS vs PTRA Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, PTRA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while PTRA trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas PTRA's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to PTRA's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PTRA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PTRA's competition here
VFS vs ELMS Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, ELMS has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while ELMS trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas ELMS's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to ELMS's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ELMS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ELMS's competition here
VFS vs TTM Comparison February 2026
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 7.6B. In comparison, TTM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.25, while TTM trades at $25.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.14, whereas TTM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.55%, compared to TTM's ROE of +0.58%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to TTM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check TTM's competition here