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.
111.14%
Revenue growth above 1.5x WEED.TO's 21.68%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
91.08%
Gross profit growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 359.42%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
10.33%
Positive EBIT growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
10.33%
Positive operating income growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
10.46%
Net income growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 237.50%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
10.98%
EPS growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 231.23%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
10.98%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 231.23%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.98%
Share reduction while WEED.TO is at 5.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.00%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x WEED.TO's 8.29%. 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.
48.20%
Positive OCF growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
11.57%
Positive FCF growth while WEED.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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-109.58%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while WEED.TO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-109.58%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-888.70%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-9.81%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while WEED.TO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-9.81%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while WEED.TO is 2171.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-28.19%
Negative 3Y CAGR while WEED.TO is 786.13%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
19.21%
Equity/share CAGR of 19.21% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
19.21%
Below 50% of WEED.TO's 184.44%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
135.88%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of WEED.TO's 221.87%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
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.
24.20%
AR growth well above WEED.TO's 34.89%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-2.65%
Inventory is declining while WEED.TO stands at 13.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.88%
Negative asset growth while WEED.TO invests at 28.88%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.13%
We have a declining book value while WEED.TO shows 23.44%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-37.31%
Our R&D shrinks while WEED.TO invests at 24.81%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
53.56%
SG&A growth well above WEED.TO's 30.06%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.