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.
5.45%
Positive revenue growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
2.54%
Positive gross profit growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-215.47%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-15.44%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-117.73%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-120.58%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-123.71%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.20%
Share reduction while ACB.TO is at 5.72%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.20%
Reduced diluted shares while ACB.TO is at 8.89%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-15.34%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
3.14%
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.
-43.07%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-27.65%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-3018.29%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ACB.TO stands at 81.19%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
67.43%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ACB.TO's 97.33%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-26.57%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ACB.TO stands at 60.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-5286.33%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is at 89.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-248.74%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-882.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ACB.TO is 63.30%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
10337.78%
Positive growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-34.81%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-58.34%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
8.36%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ACB.TO's 31.09%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.65%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. ACB.TO's 5.07%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-1.65%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.34%
Positive BV/share change while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-3.77%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-42.86%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-7.77%
We cut SG&A while ACB.TO invests at 1.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.