BLNK Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Forrester Research has a net margin of -244.28% compared to Blink Charging's net margin of -97.1%. Blink Charging's return on equity of -56.43% beat Forrester Research's return on equity of -40%.

Blink Charging has a consensus price target of $2.42, signalling upside risk potential of 225.87%. On the other hand Forrester Research has an analysts' consensus of $14.00 which suggests that it could grow by 40%. Given that Blink Charging has higher upside potential than Forrester Research, analysts believe Blink Charging is more attractive than Forrester Research.

Blink Charging has a beta of 3.338, which suggesting that the stock is 233.819% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Forrester Research has a beta of 0.943, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 5.722%.

Blink Charging has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Forrester Research offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Blink Charging pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Forrester Research pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Blink Charging quarterly revenues are $30.1M, which are smaller than Forrester Research quarterly revenues of $89.9M. Blink Charging's net income of -$73.5M is higher than Forrester Research's net income of -$87.3M. Notably, Blink Charging's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Forrester Research's PE ratio is 239.75x. 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 Blink Charging is 0.60x versus 0.45x for Forrester Research. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Gold Rock Holdings has a net margin of -244.28% compared to Blink Charging's net margin of -117.27%. Blink Charging's return on equity of -56.43% beat Gold Rock Holdings's return on equity of -98.68%.

Blink Charging has a consensus price target of $2.42, signalling upside risk potential of 225.87%. On the other hand Gold Rock Holdings has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Blink Charging has higher upside potential than Gold Rock Holdings, analysts believe Blink Charging is more attractive than Gold Rock Holdings.

Blink Charging has a beta of 3.338, which suggesting that the stock is 233.819% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Gold Rock Holdings has a beta of 7,170.702, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 716970.209%.

Blink Charging has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Gold Rock Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Blink Charging pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Gold Rock Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Blink Charging quarterly revenues are $30.1M, which are larger than Gold Rock Holdings quarterly revenues of $67.5K. Blink Charging's net income of -$73.5M is lower than Gold Rock Holdings's net income of -$79.2K. Notably, Blink Charging's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Gold Rock Holdings's PE ratio is 37.14x. 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 Blink Charging is 0.60x versus 30.05x for Gold Rock Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

One World Universe has a net margin of -244.28% compared to Blink Charging's net margin of --. Blink Charging's return on equity of -56.43% beat One World Universe's return on equity of --.

Blink Charging has a consensus price target of $2.42, signalling upside risk potential of 225.87%. On the other hand One World Universe has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could fall by --. Given that Blink Charging has higher upside potential than One World Universe, analysts believe Blink Charging is more attractive than One World Universe.

Blink Charging has a beta of 3.338, which suggesting that the stock is 233.819% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison One World Universe has a beta of 4.143, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 314.334%.

Blink Charging has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. One World Universe offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Blink Charging pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. One World Universe pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Blink Charging quarterly revenues are $30.1M, which are larger than One World Universe quarterly revenues of --. Blink Charging's net income of -$73.5M is higher than One World Universe's net income of --. Notably, Blink Charging's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while One World Universe'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 Blink Charging is 0.60x versus -- for One World Universe. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

SBC Medical Group Holdings has a net margin of -244.28% compared to Blink Charging's net margin of 5.34%. Blink Charging's return on equity of -56.43% beat SBC Medical Group Holdings's return on equity of 25.89%.

Blink Charging has a consensus price target of $2.42, signalling upside risk potential of 225.87%. On the other hand SBC Medical Group Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $6.00 which suggests that it could grow by 78.57%. Given that Blink Charging has higher upside potential than SBC Medical Group Holdings, analysts believe Blink Charging is more attractive than SBC Medical Group Holdings.

Blink Charging has a beta of 3.338, which suggesting that the stock is 233.819% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison SBC Medical Group Holdings has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Blink Charging has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. SBC Medical Group Holdings offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Blink Charging pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. SBC Medical Group Holdings pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Blink Charging quarterly revenues are $30.1M, which are smaller than SBC Medical Group Holdings quarterly revenues of $53.1M. Blink Charging's net income of -$73.5M is lower than SBC Medical Group Holdings's net income of $2.8M. Notably, Blink Charging's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while SBC Medical Group Holdings's PE ratio is 8.08x. 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 Blink Charging is 0.60x versus 1.58x for SBC Medical Group Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.