PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Tilray Brands, Inc. (TLRY.TO)
2.000.05 (2.56%)
1.90 - 2.15
0.48 - 2.54
9.88M / 3.06M (Avg.)
-0.59 | -3.40
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
-4.18%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-13.34%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-340.87%
Negative EBIT growth while ACB.TO is at 134.02%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-340.87%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-148.50%
Negative net income growth while ACB.TO stands at 5189.64%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-145.28%
Negative EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 400.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-145.28%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 400.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.27%
Slight or no buybacks while ACB.TO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.36%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-32.18%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
3.33%
Positive FCF growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1118.33%
5Y CAGR of 1118.33% while ACB.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
654.32%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ACB.TO's 560.19%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
-339.33%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-2397.94%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-604.60%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-315.13%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is at 1282.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-278.03%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is 182.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-165.58%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ACB.TO is 148.13%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
3215.35%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of ACB.TO's 5917.18%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
2681.11%
Below 50% of ACB.TO's 5833.53%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
137.62%
Below 50% of ACB.TO's 2889.27%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.81%
Our AR growth while ACB.TO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
35.48%
Inventory growth well above ACB.TO's 22.37%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
2.87%
Asset growth above 1.5x ACB.TO's 1.89%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
0.31%
Under 50% of ACB.TO's 64.88%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
7.25%
Debt shrinking faster vs. ACB.TO's 23.40%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
10.80%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ACB.TO's 0.38%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
20.12%
We expand SG&A while ACB.TO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.