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.
242.97%
Revenue growth above 1.5x WEED.TO's 61.54%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
191.95%
Gross profit growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 1609.59%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-318.21%
Negative EBIT growth while WEED.TO is at 35.48%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-318.21%
Negative operating income growth while WEED.TO is at 35.48%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-299.52%
Negative net income growth while WEED.TO stands at 67.67%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-295.00%
Negative EPS growth while WEED.TO is at 67.59%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-295.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while WEED.TO is at 64.29%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
2.15%
Share count expansion well above WEED.TO's 0.38%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.34%
Slight or no buyback while WEED.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.
-1249.62%
Negative OCF growth while WEED.TO is at 6.03%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-27.33%
Negative FCF growth while WEED.TO is at 15.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
28238.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 2132.48%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
545.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 325.36%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-187.04%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while WEED.TO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-89.89%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-395.23%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-1405.06%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-592.17%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-1081.80%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
4146.76%
Equity/share CAGR of 4146.76% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
2334.22%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of WEED.TO's 2706.29%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
298.88%
Below 50% of WEED.TO's 600.42%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
37.94%
AR growth well above WEED.TO's 1.24%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
115.87%
Inventory growth well above WEED.TO's 34.83%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-1.21%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-5.72%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
41.69%
We have some new debt while WEED.TO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-63.20%
Our R&D shrinks while WEED.TO invests at 74.43%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
90.27%
We expand SG&A while WEED.TO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.