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.
-11.93%
Negative revenue growth while ACB.TO stands at 8.72%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-15.04%
Negative gross profit growth while ACB.TO is at 87.35%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-960.92%
Negative EBIT growth while ACB.TO is at 1141.73%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1383.16%
Negative operating income growth while ACB.TO is at 1640.80%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-825.75%
Negative net income growth while ACB.TO stands at 363.01%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-782.35%
Negative EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 363.64%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-500.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 363.64%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
5.01%
Share count expansion well above ACB.TO's 0.35%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
5.01%
Slight or no buyback while ACB.TO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
85.85%
OCF growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 215.86%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
50.46%
FCF growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 181.47%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
21610.35%
10Y CAGR of 21610.35% while ACB.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
-58.90%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-34.59%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
83.84%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ACB.TO's 117.69%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
96.51%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to ACB.TO's 103.57%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
93.36%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ACB.TO's 148.32%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-1432.24%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is at 104.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-4510.94%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is 100.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1077.29%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ACB.TO is 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1098.12%
Positive growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-52.70%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-68.46%
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.
-8.31%
Firm’s AR is declining while ACB.TO shows 23.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-0.98%
Inventory is declining while ACB.TO stands at 19.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-18.81%
Negative asset growth while ACB.TO invests at 7.14%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-25.50%
We have a declining book value while ACB.TO shows 4.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-7.99%
We’re deleveraging while ACB.TO stands at 0.01%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
41.67%
We increase R&D while ACB.TO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-14.49%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.