QuantumScape Corporation

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, APTV-PA has a market cap of 29.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while APTV-PA trades at $108.66.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas APTV-PA's P/E ratio is 92.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to APTV-PA's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to APTV-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check APTV-PA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, APTV has a market cap of 15.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while APTV trades at $70.46.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas APTV's P/E ratio is 11.51. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to APTV's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to APTV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check APTV's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MBLY has a market cap of 12.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MBLY trades at $15.42.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MBLY's P/E ratio is -4.19. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MBLY's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to MBLY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MBLY's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MGA has a market cap of 12B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MGA trades at $42.76.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MGA's P/E ratio is 10.67. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MGA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MGA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MGA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, ALV has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while ALV trades at $115.85.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas ALV's P/E ratio is 12.67. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to ALV's ROE of +0.30%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ALV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ALV's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, LKQ has a market cap of 8.2B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while LKQ trades at $31.73.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas LKQ's P/E ratio is 11.80. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to LKQ's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to LKQ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LKQ's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, BWA has a market cap of 7.9B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while BWA trades at $36.03.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas BWA's P/E ratio is 25.39. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to BWA's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BWA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BWA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, ALSN has a market cap of 7.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while ALSN trades at $87.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas ALSN's P/E ratio is 10.17. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to ALSN's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ALSN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ALSN's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, LEA has a market cap of 5.8B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while LEA trades at $108.14.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas LEA's P/E ratio is 12.61. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to LEA's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to LEA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LEA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, GNTX has a market cap of 5.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while GNTX trades at $23.60.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas GNTX's P/E ratio is 13.80. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to GNTX's ROE of +0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GNTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GNTX's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MOD has a market cap of 5.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MOD trades at $97.87.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MOD's P/E ratio is 28.61. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MOD's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MOD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MOD's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, BC-PA has a market cap of 4.2B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while BC-PA trades at $24.47.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas BC-PA's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to BC-PA's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BC-PA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BC-PA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, BC-PB has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while BC-PB trades at $24.99.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas BC-PB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to BC-PB's ROE of +0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to BC-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check BC-PB's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, DORM has a market cap of 3.7B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while DORM trades at $121.56.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas DORM's P/E ratio is 17.47. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to DORM's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to DORM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check DORM's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, GT has a market cap of 3.2B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while GT trades at $11.28.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas GT's P/E ratio is 13.43. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to GT's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GT's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, VC has a market cap of 3.1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while VC trades at $115.13.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas VC's P/E ratio is 10.78. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to VC's ROE of +0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to VC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check VC's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, HSAI has a market cap of 2.8B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while HSAI trades at $21.30.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas HSAI's P/E ratio is -2131.00. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to HSAI's ROE of -0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HSAI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HSAI's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, GTX has a market cap of 2.5B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while GTX trades at $12.19.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas GTX's P/E ratio is 9.52. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to GTX's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GTX. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GTX's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, DAN has a market cap of 2.4B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while DAN trades at $16.35.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas DAN's P/E ratio is -68.13. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to DAN's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to DAN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check DAN's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, PHIN has a market cap of 2B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while PHIN trades at $49.90.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas PHIN's P/E ratio is 28.23. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to PHIN's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to PHIN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check PHIN's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, ADNT has a market cap of 1.9B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while ADNT trades at $22.73.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas ADNT's P/E ratio is -7.03. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to ADNT's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ADNT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ADNT's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, AEVA has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while AEVA trades at $23.57.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas AEVA's P/E ratio is -8.36. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to AEVA's ROE of -1.33%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to AEVA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AEVA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, FOXF has a market cap of 1.3B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while FOXF trades at $30.41.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas FOXF's P/E ratio is -5.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to FOXF's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to FOXF. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check FOXF's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, THRM has a market cap of 1B. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while THRM trades at $32.87.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas THRM's P/E ratio is 20.67. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to THRM's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to THRM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check THRM's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, XPEL has a market cap of 986.3M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while XPEL trades at $35.65.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas XPEL's P/E ratio is 20.73. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to XPEL's ROE of +0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to XPEL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check XPEL's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, SMP has a market cap of 725.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while SMP trades at $32.97.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas SMP's P/E ratio is 12.79. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to SMP's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SMP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SMP's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, PLOW has a market cap of 683.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while PLOW trades at $29.42.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas PLOW's P/E ratio is 10.78. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to PLOW's ROE of +0.25%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to PLOW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check PLOW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, AXL has a market cap of 574.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while AXL trades at $4.85.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas AXL's P/E ratio is 26.92. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to AXL's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to AXL. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AXL's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, GTXAP has a market cap of 557.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while GTXAP trades at $8.60.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas GTXAP's P/E ratio is 4.44. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to GTXAP's ROE of -0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GTXAP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GTXAP's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, ECX has a market cap of 509.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while ECX trades at $1.57.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas ECX's P/E ratio is -4.49. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to ECX's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to ECX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ECX's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MLR has a market cap of 505.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MLR trades at $44.09.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MLR's P/E ratio is 9.41. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MLR's ROE of +0.14%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MLR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MLR's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, ALLG has a market cap of 496.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while ALLG trades at $1.82.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas ALLG's P/E ratio is -3.96. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to ALLG's ROE of +4.17%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to ALLG. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ALLG's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MNRO has a market cap of 474.7M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MNRO trades at $15.84.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MNRO's P/E ratio is -72.00. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MNRO's ROE of -0.01%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MNRO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MNRO's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, SES has a market cap of 445.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while SES trades at $1.21.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas SES's P/E ratio is -4.06. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to SES's ROE of -0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to SES. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SES's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, CPS has a market cap of 414.7M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while CPS trades at $23.56.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas CPS's P/E ratio is -9.16. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to CPS's ROE of +0.33%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CPS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CPS's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, INVZ has a market cap of 388M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while INVZ trades at $1.95.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas INVZ's P/E ratio is -4.24. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to INVZ's ROE of -0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to INVZ. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check INVZ's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, INVZW has a market cap of 364.5M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while INVZW trades at $0.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas INVZW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to INVZW's ROE of -0.79%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to INVZW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check INVZW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, HYLN has a market cap of 307.5M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while HYLN trades at $1.75.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas HYLN's P/E ratio is -5.66. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to HYLN's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HYLN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HYLN's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, HLLY-WT has a market cap of 300.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while HLLY-WT trades at $0.04.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas HLLY-WT's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to HLLY-WT's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to HLLY-WT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HLLY-WT's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, HLLY has a market cap of 273.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while HLLY trades at $2.32.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas HLLY's P/E ratio is -10.95. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to HLLY's ROE of -0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HLLY. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HLLY's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, STRT has a market cap of 271.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while STRT trades at $65.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas STRT's P/E ratio is 13.14. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to STRT's ROE of +0.10%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to STRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check STRT's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MPAA has a market cap of 235.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MPAA trades at $12.12.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MPAA's P/E ratio is -12.24. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MPAA's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MPAA. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MPAA's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, SRI has a market cap of 219.3M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while SRI trades at $7.89.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas SRI's P/E ratio is -12.30. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to SRI's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SRI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SRI's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, LAZR has a market cap of 168M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while LAZR trades at $3.39.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas LAZR's P/E ratio is -0.55. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to LAZR's ROE of +0.84%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to LAZR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LAZR's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, XL has a market cap of 164.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while XL trades at $1.14.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas XL's P/E ratio is -3.21. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to XL's ROE of N/A. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to XL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check XL's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, CAAS has a market cap of 125.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while CAAS trades at $4.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas CAAS's P/E ratio is 4.34. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to CAAS's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CAAS. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CAAS's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, GGR has a market cap of 112.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while GGR trades at $0.38.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas GGR's P/E ratio is -0.83. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to GGR's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to GGR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GGR's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, KNDI has a market cap of 109.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while KNDI trades at $1.27.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas KNDI's P/E ratio is -2.15. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to KNDI's ROE of -0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to KNDI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check KNDI's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, LIDRW has a market cap of 73M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while LIDRW trades at $0.26.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas LIDRW's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to LIDRW's ROE of -1.96%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to LIDRW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LIDRW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, WPRT has a market cap of 69.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while WPRT trades at $3.97.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas WPRT's P/E ratio is -6.44. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to WPRT's ROE of -0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to WPRT. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check WPRT's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, CVGI has a market cap of 65.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while CVGI trades at $1.88.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas CVGI's P/E ratio is -1.55. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to CVGI's ROE of -0.23%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to CVGI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CVGI's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, LIDR has a market cap of 56.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while LIDR trades at $2.92.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas LIDR's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to LIDR's ROE of -1.96%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to LIDR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check LIDR's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, SYPR has a market cap of 47.3M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while SYPR trades at $2.06.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas SYPR's P/E ratio is -103.00. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to SYPR's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SYPR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SYPR's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MKDW has a market cap of 33.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MKDW trades at $0.24.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MKDW's P/E ratio is -1.57. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MKDW's ROE of +1.39%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to MKDW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MKDW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MKDWW has a market cap of 31.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MKDWW trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MKDWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MKDWW's ROE of +1.39%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to MKDWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MKDWW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, ECXWW has a market cap of 23.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while ECXWW trades at $0.07.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas ECXWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to ECXWW's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to ECXWW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check ECXWW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, NCNCW has a market cap of 20.2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while NCNCW trades at $0.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas NCNCW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to NCNCW's ROE of +3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to NCNCW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check NCNCW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, WKSP has a market cap of 19.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while WKSP trades at $3.68.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas WKSP's P/E ratio is -0.72. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to WKSP's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to WKSP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check WKSP's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, AMV has a market cap of 17.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while AMV trades at $0.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas AMV's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to AMV's ROE of +0.04%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to AMV. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check AMV's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, INEO has a market cap of 11.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while INEO trades at $1.15.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas INEO's P/E ratio is 7.67. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to INEO's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to INEO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check INEO's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, SAG has a market cap of 10.4M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while SAG trades at $1.01.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas SAG's P/E ratio is 6.73. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to SAG's ROE of +0.35%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SAG. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SAG's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, SUP has a market cap of 9.6M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while SUP trades at $0.32.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas SUP's P/E ratio is -0.09. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to SUP's ROE of +0.56%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to SUP. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check SUP's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, FRSX has a market cap of 9.1M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while FRSX trades at $0.47.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas FRSX's P/E ratio is -0.78. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to FRSX's ROE of -1.15%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to FRSX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check FRSX's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, CREV has a market cap of 6.8M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while CREV trades at $3.45.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas CREV's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to CREV's ROE of +2.58%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to CREV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CREV's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, GGROW has a market cap of 5.9M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while GGROW trades at $0.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas GGROW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to GGROW's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to GGROW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check GGROW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, UFAB has a market cap of 2M. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while UFAB trades at $0.17.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas UFAB's P/E ratio is -0.08. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to UFAB's ROE of -0.21%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to UFAB. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check UFAB's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, WKSPW has a market cap of 575.3K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while WKSPW trades at $0.03.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas WKSPW's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to WKSPW's ROE of -0.93%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to WKSPW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check WKSPW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, CREVW has a market cap of 145.8K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while CREVW trades at $0.02.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas CREVW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to CREVW's ROE of -1.47%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to CREVW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check CREVW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, HYZNW has a market cap of 15.5K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while HYZNW trades at $0.00.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas HYZNW's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to HYZNW's ROE of -2.38%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to HYZNW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HYZNW's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, NCNC has a market cap of 13.5K. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while NCNC trades at $0.10.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas NCNC's P/E ratio is -0.70. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to NCNC's ROE of +3.11%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is less volatile compared to NCNC. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check NCNC's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, MTOR has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while MTOR trades at $36.50.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas MTOR's P/E ratio is 11.97. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to MTOR's ROE of +0.38%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to MTOR. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check MTOR's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, HZN has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while HZN trades at $1.76.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas HZN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to HZN's ROE of +1.26%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to HZN. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check HZN's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, RMO has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while RMO trades at $0.35.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas RMO's P/E ratio is -0.29. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to RMO's ROE of +0.05%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to RMO. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check RMO's competition here

QS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.

Comparing market capitalization, QS stands at 7.1B. In comparison, VNE has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, QS is priced at $12.63, while VNE trades at $36.95.

To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.

QS currently has a P/E ratio of -13.87, whereas VNE's P/E ratio is -10.74. In terms of profitability, QS's ROE is -0.42%, compared to VNE's ROE of -0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, QS is more volatile compared to VNE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for QS.Check VNE's competition here