CLF Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Century Aluminum has a net margin of -10.34% compared to Cleveland-Cliffs's net margin of 7.16%. Cleveland-Cliffs's return on equity of -10.21% beat Century Aluminum's return on equity of 60.03%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a consensus price target of $11.17, signalling upside risk potential of 62.78%. On the other hand Century Aluminum has an analysts' consensus of $25.33 which suggests that it could grow by 84.92%. Given that Century Aluminum has higher upside potential than Cleveland-Cliffs, analysts believe Century Aluminum is more attractive than Cleveland-Cliffs.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a beta of 1.930, which suggesting that the stock is 93.028% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Century Aluminum has a beta of 2.557, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 155.662%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Century Aluminum offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Cleveland-Cliffs pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Century Aluminum pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Cleveland-Cliffs quarterly revenues are $4.3B, which are larger than Century Aluminum quarterly revenues of $630.9M. Cleveland-Cliffs's net income of -$447M is lower than Century Aluminum's net income of $45.2M. Notably, Cleveland-Cliffs's price-to-earnings ratio is 175.97x while Century Aluminum's PE ratio is 4.38x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Cleveland-Cliffs is 0.17x versus 0.60x for Century Aluminum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Commercial Metals has a net margin of -10.34% compared to Cleveland-Cliffs's net margin of 1.45%. Cleveland-Cliffs's return on equity of -10.21% beat Commercial Metals's return on equity of 1.76%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a consensus price target of $11.17, signalling upside risk potential of 62.78%. On the other hand Commercial Metals has an analysts' consensus of $54.65 which suggests that it could grow by 39.42%. Given that Cleveland-Cliffs has higher upside potential than Commercial Metals, analysts believe Cleveland-Cliffs is more attractive than Commercial Metals.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a beta of 1.930, which suggesting that the stock is 93.028% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Commercial Metals has a beta of 1.164, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 16.354%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Commercial Metals offers a yield of 1.84% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.18 per share. Cleveland-Cliffs pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Commercial Metals pays out 16.25% of its earnings as a dividend. Commercial Metals's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Cleveland-Cliffs quarterly revenues are $4.3B, which are larger than Commercial Metals quarterly revenues of $1.8B. Cleveland-Cliffs's net income of -$447M is lower than Commercial Metals's net income of $25.5M. Notably, Cleveland-Cliffs's price-to-earnings ratio is 175.97x while Commercial Metals's PE ratio is 65.33x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Cleveland-Cliffs is 0.17x versus 0.58x for Commercial Metals. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Kaiser Aluminum has a net margin of -10.34% compared to Cleveland-Cliffs's net margin of 0.93%. Cleveland-Cliffs's return on equity of -10.21% beat Kaiser Aluminum's return on equity of 7.06%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a consensus price target of $11.17, signalling upside risk potential of 62.78%. On the other hand Kaiser Aluminum has an analysts' consensus of $79.67 which suggests that it could grow by 58.67%. Given that Cleveland-Cliffs has higher upside potential than Kaiser Aluminum, analysts believe Cleveland-Cliffs is more attractive than Kaiser Aluminum.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a beta of 1.930, which suggesting that the stock is 93.028% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Kaiser Aluminum has a beta of 1.319, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 31.862%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Kaiser Aluminum offers a yield of 6.13% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.77 per share. Cleveland-Cliffs pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Kaiser Aluminum pays out 108.33% of its earnings as a dividend.

Cleveland-Cliffs quarterly revenues are $4.3B, which are larger than Kaiser Aluminum quarterly revenues of $765.4M. Cleveland-Cliffs's net income of -$447M is lower than Kaiser Aluminum's net income of $7.1M. Notably, Cleveland-Cliffs's price-to-earnings ratio is 175.97x while Kaiser Aluminum's PE ratio is 17.49x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Cleveland-Cliffs is 0.17x versus 0.27x for Kaiser Aluminum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Steel Dynamics has a net margin of -10.34% compared to Cleveland-Cliffs's net margin of 5.35%. Cleveland-Cliffs's return on equity of -10.21% beat Steel Dynamics's return on equity of 17.07%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a consensus price target of $11.17, signalling upside risk potential of 62.78%. On the other hand Steel Dynamics has an analysts' consensus of $146.24 which suggests that it could grow by 32.67%. Given that Cleveland-Cliffs has higher upside potential than Steel Dynamics, analysts believe Cleveland-Cliffs is more attractive than Steel Dynamics.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a beta of 1.930, which suggesting that the stock is 93.028% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Steel Dynamics has a beta of 1.347, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 34.654%.

Cleveland-Cliffs has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Steel Dynamics offers a yield of 1.71% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share. Cleveland-Cliffs pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Steel Dynamics pays out 18.39% of its earnings as a dividend. Steel Dynamics's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Cleveland-Cliffs quarterly revenues are $4.3B, which are larger than Steel Dynamics quarterly revenues of $3.9B. Cleveland-Cliffs's net income of -$447M is lower than Steel Dynamics's net income of $207.3M. Notably, Cleveland-Cliffs's price-to-earnings ratio is 175.97x while Steel Dynamics's PE ratio is 11.25x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Cleveland-Cliffs is 0.17x versus 0.98x for Steel Dynamics. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.