Westwater Resources, Inc.
Westwater Resources, Inc. (WWR) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (WWR) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Industrial Materials Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WWR | $0.90 | +0.00% | 74.7M | -3.34 | -$0.26 | N/A |
| BHP | $75.07 | +0.00% | 195.2B | 21.66 | $3.55 | +2.82% |
| RIO | $96.34 | +0.00% | 157.7B | 15.46 | $6.28 | +3.83% |
| VALE | $16.10 | +0.00% | 71.3B | 30.37 | $0.55 | +7.94% |
| TECK | $59.29 | +0.00% | 28.6B | 32.83 | $1.81 | +0.60% |
| MP | $58.56 | +0.00% | 9.8B | -79.09 | -$0.70 | N/A |
| EMAT | $11.90 | +0.00% | 8.8B | -549.00 | -$0.02 | N/A |
| SKE | $34.35 | +0.00% | 4.3B | -48.77 | -$0.72 | N/A |
| MTRN | $150.85 | +0.00% | 3.1B | 41.68 | $3.58 | +0.38% |
| TMC | $6.04 | +0.00% | 2.4B | -7.34 | -$0.80 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
WWR vs BHP Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, BHP has a market cap of 195.2B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while BHP trades at $75.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas BHP's P/E ratio is 21.66. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BHP's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to BHP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check BHP's competition here
WWR vs RIO Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, RIO has a market cap of 157.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while RIO trades at $96.34.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas RIO's P/E ratio is 15.46. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to RIO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to RIO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check RIO's competition here
WWR vs VALE Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, VALE has a market cap of 71.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while VALE trades at $16.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas VALE's P/E ratio is 30.37. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to VALE's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to VALE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check VALE's competition here
WWR vs TECK Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, TECK has a market cap of 28.6B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while TECK trades at $59.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas TECK's P/E ratio is 32.83. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TECK's ROE of +0.06%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to TECK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check TECK's competition here
WWR vs MP Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, MP has a market cap of 9.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while MP trades at $58.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas MP's P/E ratio is -79.09. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MP's ROE of -0.09%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to MP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check MP's competition here
WWR vs EMAT Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, EMAT has a market cap of 8.8B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while EMAT trades at $11.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas EMAT's P/E ratio is -549.00. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to EMAT's ROE of +0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to EMAT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check EMAT's competition here
WWR vs SKE Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, SKE has a market cap of 4.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while SKE trades at $34.35.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas SKE's P/E ratio is -48.77. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SKE's ROE of -1.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to SKE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check SKE's competition here
WWR vs MTRN Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, MTRN has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while MTRN trades at $150.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas MTRN's P/E ratio is 41.68. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to MTRN's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to MTRN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check MTRN's competition here
WWR vs TMC Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, TMC has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while TMC trades at $6.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas TMC's P/E ratio is -7.34. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TMC's ROE of -160.78%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to TMC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check TMC's competition here
WWR vs USAS Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, USAS has a market cap of 2.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while USAS trades at $7.75.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas USAS's P/E ratio is -27.96. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to USAS's ROE of -1.14%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to USAS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check USAS's competition here
WWR vs USAR Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, USAR has a market cap of 1.7B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while USAR trades at $18.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas USAR's P/E ratio is -7.73. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to USAR's ROE of -0.46%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to USAR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check USAR's competition here
WWR vs NEXA Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, NEXA has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while NEXA trades at $11.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas NEXA's P/E ratio is -87.46. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to NEXA's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to NEXA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check NEXA's competition here
WWR vs STR-WT Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, STR-WT has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while STR-WT trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas STR-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to STR-WT's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to STR-WT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check STR-WT's competition here
WWR vs IPX Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, IPX has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while IPX trades at $42.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas IPX's P/E ratio is -36.41. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to IPX's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to IPX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check IPX's competition here
WWR vs STR Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, STR has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while STR trades at $18.12.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas STR's P/E ratio is 41.18. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to STR's ROE of +0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to STR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check STR's competition here
WWR vs METCZ Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, METCZ has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while METCZ trades at $25.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas METCZ's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to METCZ's ROE of -0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to METCZ. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check METCZ's competition here
WWR vs SGML Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, SGML has a market cap of 1.4B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while SGML trades at $13.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas SGML's P/E ratio is -44.54. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SGML's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to SGML. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check SGML's competition here
WWR vs VZLA Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, VZLA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while VZLA trades at $3.93.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas VZLA's P/E ratio is -97.62. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to VZLA's ROE of -0.03%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to VZLA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check VZLA's competition here
WWR vs LAR Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, LAR has a market cap of 1.1B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while LAR trades at $7.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas LAR's P/E ratio is -14.01. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LAR's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to LAR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check LAR's competition here
WWR vs LAC Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, LAC has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while LAC trades at $4.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas LAC's P/E ratio is -4.19. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LAC's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to LAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check LAC's competition here
WWR vs CMP Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, CMP has a market cap of 974.6M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while CMP trades at $22.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas CMP's P/E ratio is -25.58. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to CMP's ROE of -0.15%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to CMP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check CMP's competition here
WWR vs CRMLW Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, CRMLW has a market cap of 939.2M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while CRMLW trades at $4.36.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas CRMLW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to CRMLW's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to CRMLW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check CRMLW's competition here
WWR vs GSM Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, GSM has a market cap of 938.7M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while GSM trades at $5.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas GSM's P/E ratio is -7.98. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GSM's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to GSM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check GSM's competition here
WWR vs SLI Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, SLI has a market cap of 888.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while SLI trades at $4.27.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas SLI's P/E ratio is 7.13. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SLI's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to SLI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check SLI's competition here
WWR vs UAMY Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, UAMY has a market cap of 859.8M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while UAMY trades at $7.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas UAMY's P/E ratio is -184.87. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to UAMY's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to UAMY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check UAMY's competition here
WWR vs CRML Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, CRML has a market cap of 846.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while CRML trades at $9.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas CRML's P/E ratio is -16.18. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to CRML's ROE of -0.63%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to CRML. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check CRML's competition here
WWR vs NAK Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, NAK has a market cap of 721.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while NAK trades at $1.32.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas NAK's P/E ratio is -11.86. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to NAK's ROE of -1.25%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to NAK. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check NAK's competition here
WWR vs TMQ Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, TMQ has a market cap of 664.6M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while TMQ trades at $3.66.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas TMQ's P/E ratio is -64.75. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TMQ's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to TMQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check TMQ's competition here
WWR vs WRN Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, WRN has a market cap of 642.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while WRN trades at $3.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas WRN's P/E ratio is -318.00. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to WRN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to WRN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check WRN's competition here
WWR vs EMX Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, EMX has a market cap of 454M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while EMX trades at $4.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas EMX's P/E ratio is 83.20. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to EMX's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to EMX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check EMX's competition here
WWR vs LAAC Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, LAAC has a market cap of 443.7M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while LAAC trades at $2.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas LAAC's P/E ratio is -39.14. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LAAC's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to LAAC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check LAAC's competition here
WWR vs NB Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, NB has a market cap of 414.8M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while NB trades at $5.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas NB's P/E ratio is -7.22. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to NB's ROE of -0.45%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to NB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check NB's competition here
WWR vs PLM Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, PLM has a market cap of 408.4M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while PLM trades at $2.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas PLM's P/E ratio is -11.05. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PLM's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to PLM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check PLM's competition here
WWR vs GRFX Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, GRFX has a market cap of 401.7M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while GRFX trades at $0.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas GRFX's P/E ratio is -0.65. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GRFX's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to GRFX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check GRFX's competition here
WWR vs ABAT Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, ABAT has a market cap of 372.9M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while ABAT trades at $3.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas ABAT's P/E ratio is -9.10. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to ABAT's ROE of -0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to ABAT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check ABAT's competition here
WWR vs TMCWW Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, TMCWW has a market cap of 363.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while TMCWW trades at $0.96.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas TMCWW's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TMCWW's ROE of -160.78%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to TMCWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check TMCWW's competition here
WWR vs LZM Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, LZM has a market cap of 351.9M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while LZM trades at $4.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas LZM's P/E ratio is -8.08. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LZM's ROE of -0.36%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to LZM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check LZM's competition here
WWR vs NMG Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, NMG has a market cap of 329.9M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while NMG trades at $2.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas NMG's P/E ratio is -3.23. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to NMG's ROE of -1.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to NMG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check NMG's competition here
WWR vs TII Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, TII has a market cap of 317.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while TII trades at $3.54.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas TII's P/E ratio is 26.69. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to TII's ROE of +3.28%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to TII. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check TII's competition here
WWR vs IONR Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, IONR has a market cap of 262.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while IONR trades at $4.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas IONR's P/E ratio is -32.67. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to IONR's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to IONR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check IONR's competition here
WWR vs PLL Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, PLL has a market cap of 159.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while PLL trades at $7.25.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas PLL's P/E ratio is -2.84. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to PLL's ROE of -0.19%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to PLL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check PLL's competition here
WWR vs USGO Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, USGO has a market cap of 145.6M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while USGO trades at $10.90.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas USGO's P/E ratio is -20.70. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to USGO's ROE of -1.76%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to USGO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check USGO's competition here
WWR vs FURY Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, FURY has a market cap of 138.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while FURY trades at $0.70.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas FURY's P/E ratio is -1.35. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to FURY's ROE of -1.36%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to FURY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check FURY's competition here
WWR vs AEC Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, AEC has a market cap of 113M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while AEC trades at $7.22.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas AEC's P/E ratio is -10.79. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to AEC's ROE of -0.27%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to AEC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check AEC's competition here
WWR vs USARW Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, USARW has a market cap of 107.2M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while USARW trades at $1.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas USARW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to USARW's ROE of +4.08%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to USARW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check USARW's competition here
WWR vs GRO Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, GRO has a market cap of 104.2M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while GRO trades at $2.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas GRO's P/E ratio is -1.70. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GRO's ROE of -0.43%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to GRO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check GRO's competition here
WWR vs LGO Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, LGO has a market cap of 89.1M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while LGO trades at $1.41.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas LGO's P/E ratio is -1.40. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LGO's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to LGO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check LGO's competition here
WWR vs ELBM Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, ELBM has a market cap of 78.5M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while ELBM trades at $0.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas ELBM's P/E ratio is -0.64. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to ELBM's ROE of -0.49%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to ELBM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check ELBM's competition here
WWR vs LITM Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, LITM has a market cap of 70.3M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while LITM trades at $3.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas LITM's P/E ratio is -1.31. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to LITM's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to LITM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check LITM's competition here
WWR vs XPL Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, XPL has a market cap of 67.6M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while XPL trades at $0.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas XPL's P/E ratio is -12.40. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to XPL's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to XPL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check XPL's competition here
WWR vs AMLI Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, AMLI has a market cap of 64.3M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while AMLI trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas AMLI's P/E ratio is -2.80. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to AMLI's ROE of -0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to AMLI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check AMLI's competition here
WWR vs BYU Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, BYU has a market cap of 8.9M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while BYU trades at $0.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas BYU's P/E ratio is 0.17. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BYU's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to BYU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check BYU's competition here
WWR vs GTI Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, GTI has a market cap of 7.4M. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while GTI trades at $2.29.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas GTI's P/E ratio is -0.24. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GTI's ROE of +0.99%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to GTI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check GTI's competition here
WWR vs GLG Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, GLG has a market cap of 221.1K. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while GLG trades at $0.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas GLG's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to GLG's ROE of +0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to GLG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check GLG's competition here
WWR vs KMCM Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, KMCM has a market cap of 238. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while KMCM trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas KMCM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to KMCM's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, Volatility data is not available for a full comparison. WWR has daily volatility of 3.39 and KMCM has daily volatility of N/A.Check KMCM's competition here
WWR vs EXN Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, EXN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while EXN trades at $0.30.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas EXN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to EXN's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to EXN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check EXN's competition here
WWR vs SMTS Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, SMTS has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while SMTS trades at $0.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas SMTS's P/E ratio is -1.06. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to SMTS's ROE of -0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to SMTS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check SMTS's competition here
WWR vs IFFT Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, IFFT has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while IFFT trades at $47.56.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas IFFT's P/E ratio is 34.00. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to IFFT's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to IFFT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check IFFT's competition here
WWR vs VEDL Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, VEDL has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while VEDL trades at $16.50.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas VEDL's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to VEDL's ROE of +0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is less volatile compared to VEDL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check VEDL's competition here
WWR vs BBL Comparison February 2026
WWR plays a significant role within the Basic Materials sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, WWR stands at 74.7M. In comparison, BBL has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, WWR is priced at $0.90, while BBL trades at $64.18.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
WWR currently has a P/E ratio of -3.34, whereas BBL's P/E ratio is 14.39. In terms of profitability, WWR's ROE is -0.14%, compared to BBL's ROE of +0.20%. Regarding short-term risk, WWR is more volatile compared to BBL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for WWR.Check BBL's competition here