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.
18.78%
Positive revenue growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
49.59%
Positive gross profit growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
190.40%
Positive EBIT growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
190.40%
Positive operating income growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
171.27%
Positive net income growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
162.90%
Positive EPS growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
162.90%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
2.26%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ACB.TO's 64.33%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
2.43%
Diluted share count expanding well above ACB.TO's 4.71%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.58%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-32.85%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1211.10%
5Y CAGR of 1211.10% while ACB.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
736.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 241.45%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-600.11%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-3629.51%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-19942.46%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
175.53%
Positive 10Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
37300.27%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-73.74%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
4319.20%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 2812.12%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
1522.06%
Below 50% of ACB.TO's 3882.62%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
48.90%
Below 50% of ACB.TO's 1135.54%. 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.
0.05%
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.
47.19%
Inventory growth well above ACB.TO's 24.03%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
3.70%
Positive asset growth while ACB.TO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.02%
Positive BV/share change while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-4.80%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
4.80%
R&D dropping or stable vs. ACB.TO's 12.02%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
0.20%
SG&A declining or stable vs. ACB.TO's 10.35%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.