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.
-0.25%
Negative revenue growth while WEED.TO stands at 23.51%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-11.81%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1070.05%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1070.05%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
433.16%
Net income growth above 1.5x WEED.TO's 218.31%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
306.74%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 225.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
306.74%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 225.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
17.10%
Share count expansion well above WEED.TO's 8.85%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
16.43%
Diluted share count expanding well above WEED.TO's 16.45%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
437.30%
Positive OCF growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-403.23%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
197.22%
OCF/share CAGR of 197.22% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
197.22%
Positive OCF/share growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
750.80%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
253.30%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 134.22% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
253.30%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 172.92%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
386.95%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 113.29%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
964.68%
Equity/share CAGR of 964.68% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
964.68%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with WEED.TO's 937.76%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
2364.73%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 893.06%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-7.82%
Firm’s AR is declining while WEED.TO shows 33.81%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-5.96%
Inventory is declining while WEED.TO stands at 26.40%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
48.98%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 37.12%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
28.76%
Similar to WEED.TO's 28.07%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
18.59%
We have some new debt while WEED.TO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
10.45%
We increase R&D while WEED.TO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
34.18%
SG&A growth well above WEED.TO's 66.13%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.