PLAG Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED) has a net margin of -70.61% compared to Planet Green Holdings's net margin of --. Planet Green Holdings's return on equity of -80.05% beat 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED)'s return on equity of --.

Planet Green Holdings has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED) has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Planet Green Holdings has higher upside potential than 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED), analysts believe Planet Green Holdings is more attractive than 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED).

Planet Green Holdings has a beta of 0.369, which suggesting that the stock is 63.065% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED) has a beta of 0.967, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 3.322%.

Planet Green Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED) offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Planet Green Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED) pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Green Holdings quarterly revenues are $1.5M, which are larger than 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED) quarterly revenues of --. Planet Green Holdings's net income of -$1.1M is higher than 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED)'s net income of --. Notably, Planet Green Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED)'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 Planet Green Holdings is 4.44x versus -- for 1847 Holdings LLC (DELISTED). Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Harte-Hanks has a net margin of -70.61% compared to Planet Green Holdings's net margin of -5.17%. Planet Green Holdings's return on equity of -80.05% beat Harte-Hanks's return on equity of -146.84%.

Planet Green Holdings has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Harte-Hanks has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 302.3%. Given that Harte-Hanks has higher upside potential than Planet Green Holdings, analysts believe Harte-Hanks is more attractive than Planet Green Holdings.

Planet Green Holdings has a beta of 0.369, which suggesting that the stock is 63.065% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Harte-Hanks has a beta of 0.098, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 90.167%.

Planet Green Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Harte-Hanks offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Planet Green Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Harte-Hanks pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Green Holdings quarterly revenues are $1.5M, which are smaller than Harte-Hanks quarterly revenues of $47.1M. Planet Green Holdings's net income of -$1.1M is higher than Harte-Hanks's net income of -$2.4M. Notably, Planet Green Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Harte-Hanks'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 Planet Green Holdings is 4.44x versus 0.17x for Harte-Hanks. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Matthews International has a net margin of -70.61% compared to Planet Green Holdings's net margin of -0.86%. Planet Green Holdings's return on equity of -80.05% beat Matthews International's return on equity of -12.82%.

Planet Green Holdings has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Matthews International has an analysts' consensus of $41.00 which suggests that it could grow by 114.44%. Given that Matthews International has higher upside potential than Planet Green Holdings, analysts believe Matthews International is more attractive than Planet Green Holdings.

Planet Green Holdings has a beta of 0.369, which suggesting that the stock is 63.065% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Matthews International has a beta of 1.067, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 6.735%.

Planet Green Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Matthews International offers a yield of 5.13% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share. Planet Green Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Matthews International pays out -52.65% of its earnings as a dividend.

Planet Green Holdings quarterly revenues are $1.5M, which are smaller than Matthews International quarterly revenues of $401.8M. Planet Green Holdings's net income of -$1.1M is higher than Matthews International's net income of -$3.5M. Notably, Planet Green Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Matthews International's PE ratio is 30.15x. 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 Planet Green Holdings is 4.44x versus 0.34x for Matthews International. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Seaboard has a net margin of -70.61% compared to Planet Green Holdings's net margin of 6.21%. Planet Green Holdings's return on equity of -80.05% beat Seaboard's return on equity of 1.89%.

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

Planet Green Holdings has a beta of 0.369, which suggesting that the stock is 63.065% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Seaboard has a beta of 0.154, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 84.593%.

Planet Green Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Seaboard offers a yield of 0.36% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $2.25 per share. Planet Green Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Seaboard pays out 10.23% of its earnings as a dividend. Seaboard's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Planet Green Holdings quarterly revenues are $1.5M, which are smaller than Seaboard quarterly revenues of $2.5B. Planet Green Holdings's net income of -$1.1M is lower than Seaboard's net income of $154M. Notably, Planet Green Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Seaboard's PE ratio is 27.83x. 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 Planet Green Holdings is 4.44x versus 0.27x for Seaboard. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.