VinFast Auto Ltd.
VinFast Auto Ltd. (VFS) Stock Competitors & Peer Comparison
See (VFS) competitors and their performances in Stock Market.
Peer Comparison Table: Auto - Manufacturers Industry
Detailed financial metrics including price, market cap, P/E ratio, and more.
| Symbol | Price | Change % | Market Cap | P/E Ratio | EPS | Dividend Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VFS | $3.55 | +0.42% | 8.3B | -2.71 | -$1.31 | N/A |
| TSLA | $316.06 | +3.52% | 1T | 188.13 | $1.68 | N/A |
| TM | $188.49 | -1.65% | 246B | 7.70 | $24.49 | +2.87% |
| RACE | $517.65 | +0.28% | 92.2B | 50.22 | $10.30 | +0.65% |
| GM | $53.40 | +2.03% | 50.8B | 8.15 | $6.55 | +0.96% |
| F-PD | $23.67 | +1.07% | 45.7B | N/A | N/A | +6.54% |
| F-PB | $22.19 | +0.59% | 45.6B | N/A | N/A | +6.54% |
| F-PC | $21.74 | +0.32% | 45.4B | N/A | N/A | +6.54% |
| F | $11.47 | +1.85% | 44.8B | 9.17 | $1.25 | +6.54% |
| LI | $29.58 | -0.03% | 30.7B | 27.64 | $1.07 | N/A |
Stock Comparison
VFS vs TSLA Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, TSLA has a market cap of 1T. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while TSLA trades at $316.06.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas TSLA's P/E ratio is 188.13. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to TSLA's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to TSLA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check TSLA's competition here
VFS vs TM Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, TM has a market cap of 246B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while TM trades at $188.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas TM's P/E ratio is 7.70. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to TM's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to TM. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check TM's competition here
VFS vs RACE Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, RACE has a market cap of 92.2B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while RACE trades at $517.65.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas RACE's P/E ratio is 50.22. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to RACE's ROE of +0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to RACE. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check RACE's competition here
VFS vs GM Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, GM has a market cap of 50.8B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while GM trades at $53.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas GM's P/E ratio is 8.15. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GM's ROE of +0.08%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GM's competition here
VFS vs F-PD Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, F-PD has a market cap of 45.7B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while F-PD trades at $23.67.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas F-PD's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F-PD's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to F-PD. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F-PD's competition here
VFS vs F-PB Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, F-PB has a market cap of 45.6B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while F-PB trades at $22.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas F-PB's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F-PB's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to F-PB. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F-PB's competition here
VFS vs F-PC Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, F-PC has a market cap of 45.4B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while F-PC trades at $21.74.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas F-PC's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F-PC's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to F-PC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F-PC's competition here
VFS vs F Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, F has a market cap of 44.8B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while F trades at $11.47.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas F's P/E ratio is 9.17. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to F's ROE of +0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to F. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check F's competition here
VFS vs LI Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, LI has a market cap of 30.7B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while LI trades at $29.58.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas LI's P/E ratio is 27.64. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LI's ROE of +0.12%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to LI. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LI's competition here
VFS vs STLA Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, STLA has a market cap of 29B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while STLA trades at $10.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas STLA's P/E ratio is -10.66. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to STLA's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to STLA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check STLA's competition here
VFS vs XPEV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, XPEV has a market cap of 18.2B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while XPEV trades at $18.97.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas XPEV's P/E ratio is -25.28. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to XPEV's ROE of -0.16%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to XPEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check XPEV's competition here
VFS vs HMC Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, HMC has a market cap of 16B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while HMC trades at $33.11.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas HMC's P/E ratio is 9.10. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to HMC's ROE of +0.07%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to HMC. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check HMC's competition here
VFS vs RIVN Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, RIVN has a market cap of 16B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while RIVN trades at $14.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas RIVN's P/E ratio is -3.80. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to RIVN's ROE of -0.60%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to RIVN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check RIVN's competition here
VFS vs NIO Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, NIO has a market cap of 10.3B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while NIO trades at $4.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas NIO's P/E ratio is -3.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to NIO's ROE of -2.94%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to NIO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check NIO's competition here
VFS vs LCID Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, LCID has a market cap of 8.9B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while LCID trades at $2.92.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas LCID's P/E ratio is -2.45. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LCID's ROE of -0.69%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LCID. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LCID's competition here
VFS vs ZK Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ZK has a market cap of 7.5B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ZK trades at $29.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ZK's P/E ratio is -10.47. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ZK's ROE of +0.37%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to ZK. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ZK's competition here
VFS vs PSNY Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, PSNY has a market cap of 2.3B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while PSNY trades at $1.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas PSNY's P/E ratio is -1.13. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PSNY's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PSNY. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PSNY's competition here
VFS vs LOT Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, LOT has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while LOT trades at $2.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas LOT's P/E ratio is -1.46. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LOT's ROE of +1.69%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LOT. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LOT's competition here
VFS vs BLBD Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, BLBD has a market cap of 1.5B. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while BLBD trades at $46.05.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas BLBD's P/E ratio is 14.30. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to BLBD's ROE of +0.65%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to BLBD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check BLBD's competition here
VFS vs LVWR Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, LVWR has a market cap of 857M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while LVWR trades at $4.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas LVWR's P/E ratio is -9.79. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LVWR's ROE of -0.70%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LVWR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LVWR's competition here
VFS vs NAKD Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, NAKD has a market cap of 682M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while NAKD trades at $2.61.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas NAKD's P/E ratio is -0.96. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to NAKD's ROE of -0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to NAKD. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check NAKD's competition here
VFS vs VFSWW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, VFSWW has a market cap of 664.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while VFSWW trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas VFSWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VFSWW's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to VFSWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check VFSWW's competition here
VFS vs PSNYW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, PSNYW has a market cap of 348.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while PSNYW trades at $0.16.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas PSNYW's P/E ratio is -0.17. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PSNYW's ROE of +0.51%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PSNYW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PSNYW's competition here
VFS vs NIU Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, NIU has a market cap of 300.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while NIU trades at $3.85.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas NIU's P/E ratio is -12.42. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to NIU's ROE of -0.18%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to NIU. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check NIU's competition here
VFS vs FFAI Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, FFAI has a market cap of 284.1M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while FFAI trades at $2.91.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas FFAI's P/E ratio is 0.45. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFAI's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFAI. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFAI's competition here
VFS vs FFIEW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, FFIEW has a market cap of 105.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while FFIEW trades at $0.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas FFIEW's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFIEW's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFIEW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFIEW's competition here
VFS vs FFIE Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, FFIE has a market cap of 105.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while FFIE trades at $1.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas FFIE's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFIE's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFIE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFIE's competition here
VFS vs FLYE Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, FLYE has a market cap of 97.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while FLYE trades at $5.39.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas FLYE's P/E ratio is -4.90. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FLYE's ROE of -0.11%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FLYE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FLYE's competition here
VFS vs LOTWW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, LOTWW has a market cap of 88.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while LOTWW trades at $0.13.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas LOTWW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LOTWW's ROE of +1.69%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LOTWW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LOTWW's competition here
VFS vs CJET Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, CJET has a market cap of 80M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while CJET trades at $2.62.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas CJET's P/E ratio is -0.30. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to CJET's ROE of +0.13%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to CJET. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check CJET's competition here
VFS vs FSR Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, FSR has a market cap of 52.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while FSR trades at $0.09.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas FSR's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FSR's ROE of -2.72%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FSR. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FSR's competition here
VFS vs CENN Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, CENN has a market cap of 30.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while CENN trades at $0.63.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas CENN's P/E ratio is -0.63. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to CENN's ROE of -0.47%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to CENN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check CENN's competition here
VFS vs SOLO Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, SOLO has a market cap of 25.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while SOLO trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas SOLO's P/E ratio is -0.44. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SOLO's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SOLO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SOLO's competition here
VFS vs RIDE Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, RIDE has a market cap of 21.6M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while RIDE trades at $2.20.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas RIDE's P/E ratio is -0.11. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to RIDE's ROE of -0.62%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to RIDE. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check RIDE's competition here
VFS vs WKHS Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, WKHS has a market cap of 18.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while WKHS trades at $1.94.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas WKHS's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to WKHS's ROE of -2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to WKHS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check WKHS's competition here
VFS vs SVMH Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, SVMH has a market cap of 16.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while SVMH trades at $0.73.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas SVMH's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SVMH's ROE of +43.14%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SVMH. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SVMH's competition here
VFS vs ECDAW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ECDAW has a market cap of 11.9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ECDAW trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ECDAW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ECDAW's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to ECDAW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ECDAW's competition here
VFS vs GP Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, GP has a market cap of 11.3M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while GP trades at $0.38.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas GP's P/E ratio is -0.47. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GP's ROE of -3.24%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GP's competition here
VFS vs PEV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, PEV has a market cap of 10.6M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while PEV trades at $0.23.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas PEV's P/E ratio is -1.21. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PEV's ROE of -2.05%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PEV's competition here
VFS vs ECDA Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ECDA has a market cap of 9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ECDA trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ECDA's P/E ratio is -0.60. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ECDA's ROE of +0.48%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ECDA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ECDA's competition here
VFS vs ARVL Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ARVL has a market cap of 9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ARVL trades at $0.49.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ARVL's P/E ratio is -0.07. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ARVL's ROE of -1.77%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ARVL. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ARVL's competition here
VFS vs VLCN Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, VLCN has a market cap of 7.3M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while VLCN trades at $13.40.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas VLCN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VLCN's ROE of -2.95%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to VLCN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check VLCN's competition here
VFS vs MULN Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, MULN has a market cap of 5.8M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while MULN trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas MULN's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to MULN's ROE of +10.03%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to MULN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check MULN's competition here
VFS vs AIEV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, AIEV has a market cap of 5.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while AIEV trades at $0.10.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas AIEV's P/E ratio is -1.35. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to AIEV's ROE of -0.22%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to AIEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check AIEV's competition here
VFS vs GOEV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, GOEV has a market cap of 5.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while GOEV trades at $0.37.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas GOEV's P/E ratio is -0.01. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GOEV's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to GOEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GOEV's competition here
VFS vs LOBO Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, LOBO has a market cap of 5.3M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while LOBO trades at $0.45.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas LOBO's P/E ratio is -4.08. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to LOBO's ROE of -0.02%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to LOBO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check LOBO's competition here
VFS vs HYZN Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, HYZN has a market cap of 5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while HYZN trades at $0.64.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas HYZN's P/E ratio is -0.02. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to HYZN's ROE of -2.38%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to HYZN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check HYZN's competition here
VFS vs EVTV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, EVTV has a market cap of 4.9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while EVTV trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas EVTV's P/E ratio is -0.21. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to EVTV's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to EVTV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check EVTV's competition here
VFS vs FFAIW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, FFAIW has a market cap of 4.4M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while FFAIW trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas FFAIW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to FFAIW's ROE of -2.27%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to FFAIW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check FFAIW's competition here
VFS vs DMN Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, DMN has a market cap of 4.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while DMN trades at $0.00.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas DMN's P/E ratio is 0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to DMN's ROE of +0.55%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to DMN. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check DMN's competition here
VFS vs AYRO Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, AYRO has a market cap of 3.9M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while AYRO trades at $7.04.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas AYRO's P/E ratio is -0.58. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to AYRO's ROE of +0.17%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to AYRO. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check AYRO's competition here
VFS vs VEV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, VEV has a market cap of 2.5M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while VEV trades at $0.02.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas VEV's P/E ratio is -0.05. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to VEV's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to VEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check VEV's competition here
VFS vs ZAPP Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ZAPP has a market cap of 1.2M. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ZAPP trades at $0.15.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ZAPP's P/E ratio is -0.06. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ZAPP's ROE of +0.00%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ZAPP. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ZAPP's competition here
VFS vs GOEVW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, GOEVW has a market cap of 365.7K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while GOEVW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas GOEVW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to GOEVW's ROE of -0.66%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is more volatile compared to GOEVW. This indicates potentially higher risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check GOEVW's competition here
VFS vs EGOX Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, EGOX has a market cap of 341.5K. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while EGOX trades at $0.03.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas EGOX's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to EGOX's ROE of -0.40%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to EGOX. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check EGOX's competition here
VFS vs ADOM Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ADOM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ADOM trades at $0.28.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ADOM's P/E ratio is -35.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ADOM's ROE of -1.09%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ADOM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ADOM's competition here
VFS vs ELMS Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, ELMS has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while ELMS trades at $0.19.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas ELMS's P/E ratio is -0.00. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to ELMS's ROE of -0.71%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to ELMS. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check ELMS's competition here
VFS vs SEV Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, SEV has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while SEV trades at $0.21.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas SEV's P/E ratio is -0.14. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SEV's ROE of -5.71%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SEV. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SEV's competition here
VFS vs TTM Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, TTM has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while TTM trades at $25.14.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas TTM's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to TTM's ROE of +0.39%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to TTM. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check TTM's competition here
VFS vs SOLOW Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, SOLOW has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while SOLOW trades at $0.01.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas SOLOW's P/E ratio is N/A. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to SOLOW's ROE of -0.57%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to SOLOW. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check SOLOW's competition here
VFS vs PTRA Comparison July 2025
VFS plays a significant role within the Consumer Cyclical sector. Its performance reflects broader market trends and attracts considerable investor interest.
Comparing market capitalization, VFS stands at 8.3B. In comparison, PTRA has a market cap of 0. Regarding current trading prices, VFS is priced at $3.55, while PTRA trades at $0.07.
To assess relative profitability and valuation, we examine the Return on Equity (ROE) and Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratios.
VFS currently has a P/E ratio of -2.71, whereas PTRA's P/E ratio is -0.04. In terms of profitability, VFS's ROE is +0.48%, compared to PTRA's ROE of -0.41%. Regarding short-term risk, VFS is less volatile compared to PTRA. This indicates potentially lower risk in terms of short-term price fluctuations for VFS.Check PTRA's competition here