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 / 2.92M (Avg.)
-0.48 | -4.19
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.
18.13%
Positive revenue growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
126.49%
Gross profit growth similar to ACB.TO's 124.48%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
7.01%
EBIT growth below 50% of ACB.TO's 14.47%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
7.01%
Operating income growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 63.66%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-223.94%
Negative net income growth while ACB.TO stands at 20.23%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-151.50%
Negative EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 18.24%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-151.50%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 18.24%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.66%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ACB.TO's 2.94%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.66%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ACB.TO's 2.04%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1622.35%
Negative OCF growth while ACB.TO is at 133.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-40695.39%
Negative FCF growth while ACB.TO is at 111.73%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
591.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 153.13%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
590.91%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-9912.68%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ACB.TO stands at 479.37%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-1199.97%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ACB.TO is at 165.48%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-255.95%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ACB.TO stands at 110.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-2334.26%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-938.00%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is 3.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-207.50%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
9571.99%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 884.94%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
979.62%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of ACB.TO's 1832.94%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
63.77%
Positive short-term equity growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
10.86%
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.
-1.92%
Inventory is declining while ACB.TO stands at 12.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.65%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.43%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-6.92%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
119.27%
We increase R&D while ACB.TO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
34.23%
SG&A growth well above ACB.TO's 4.05%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.