GLGI Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Friedman Industries has a net margin of 6.75% compared to Greystone Logistics's net margin of -1.23%. Greystone Logistics's return on equity of 13.42% beat Friedman Industries's return on equity of 4.48%.

Greystone Logistics has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Friedman Industries has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Greystone Logistics has higher upside potential than Friedman Industries, analysts believe Greystone Logistics is more attractive than Friedman Industries.

Greystone Logistics has a beta of 0.389, which suggesting that the stock is 61.107% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Friedman Industries has a beta of 1.509, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 50.9%.

Greystone Logistics has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Friedman Industries offers a yield of 0.94% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.04 per share. Greystone Logistics pays 14.35% of its earnings as a dividend. Friedman Industries pays out 3.35% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Greystone Logistics quarterly revenues are $14.3M, which are smaller than Friedman Industries quarterly revenues of $94.1M. Greystone Logistics's net income of $965.7K is higher than Friedman Industries's net income of -$1.2M. Notably, Greystone Logistics's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.56x while Friedman Industries's PE ratio is 20.99x. 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 Greystone Logistics is 0.69x versus 0.26x for Friedman Industries. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Kaiser Aluminum has a net margin of 6.75% compared to Greystone Logistics's net margin of 2.78%. Greystone Logistics's return on equity of 13.42% beat Kaiser Aluminum's return on equity of 6.41%.

Greystone Logistics has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Kaiser Aluminum has an analysts' consensus of $69.00 which suggests that it could fall by -11.36%. Given that Kaiser Aluminum has higher upside potential than Greystone Logistics, analysts believe Kaiser Aluminum is more attractive than Greystone Logistics.

Greystone Logistics has a beta of 0.389, which suggesting that the stock is 61.107% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Kaiser Aluminum has a beta of 1.433, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 43.302%.

Greystone Logistics has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Kaiser Aluminum offers a yield of 3.96% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.77 per share. Greystone Logistics pays 14.35% of its earnings as a dividend. Kaiser Aluminum pays out 108.33% of its earnings as a dividend. Greystone Logistics's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but Kaiser Aluminum's is not.

Greystone Logistics quarterly revenues are $14.3M, which are smaller than Kaiser Aluminum quarterly revenues of $777.4M. Greystone Logistics's net income of $965.7K is lower than Kaiser Aluminum's net income of $21.6M. Notably, Greystone Logistics's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.56x while Kaiser Aluminum's PE ratio is 29.15x. 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 Greystone Logistics is 0.69x versus 0.42x for Kaiser Aluminum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Paramount Gold Nevada has a net margin of 6.75% compared to Greystone Logistics's net margin of --. Greystone Logistics's return on equity of 13.42% beat Paramount Gold Nevada's return on equity of --.

Greystone Logistics has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Paramount Gold Nevada has an analysts' consensus of $1.40 which suggests that it could grow by 137.29%. Given that Paramount Gold Nevada has higher upside potential than Greystone Logistics, analysts believe Paramount Gold Nevada is more attractive than Greystone Logistics.

Greystone Logistics has a beta of 0.389, which suggesting that the stock is 61.107% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Paramount Gold Nevada has a beta of 1.120, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.978%.

Greystone Logistics has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Paramount Gold Nevada offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Greystone Logistics pays 14.35% of its earnings as a dividend. Paramount Gold Nevada pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Greystone Logistics's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Greystone Logistics quarterly revenues are $14.3M, which are larger than Paramount Gold Nevada quarterly revenues of --. Greystone Logistics's net income of $965.7K is higher than Paramount Gold Nevada's net income of -$2.6M. Notably, Greystone Logistics's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.56x while Paramount Gold Nevada's PE ratio is --. 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 Greystone Logistics is 0.69x versus -- for Paramount Gold Nevada. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Solitario Resources has a net margin of 6.75% compared to Greystone Logistics's net margin of --. Greystone Logistics's return on equity of 13.42% beat Solitario Resources's return on equity of --.

Greystone Logistics has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Solitario Resources has an analysts' consensus of $1.50 which suggests that it could grow by 119.94%. Given that Solitario Resources has higher upside potential than Greystone Logistics, analysts believe Solitario Resources is more attractive than Greystone Logistics.

Greystone Logistics has a beta of 0.389, which suggesting that the stock is 61.107% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Solitario Resources has a beta of 0.470, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 52.985%.

Greystone Logistics has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Solitario Resources offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Greystone Logistics pays 14.35% of its earnings as a dividend. Solitario Resources pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Greystone Logistics's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Greystone Logistics quarterly revenues are $14.3M, which are larger than Solitario Resources quarterly revenues of --. Greystone Logistics's net income of $965.7K is higher than Solitario Resources's net income of -$511K. Notably, Greystone Logistics's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.56x while Solitario Resources's PE ratio is --. 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 Greystone Logistics is 0.69x versus -- for Solitario Resources. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.