PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
18.13%
Positive revenue growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
126.49%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 99.13%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
7.01%
EBIT growth below 50% of WEED.TO's 405.44%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
7.01%
Operating income growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 405.44%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-223.94%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-151.50%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-151.50%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.66%
Share count expansion well above WEED.TO's 1.05%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.66%
Diluted share count expanding well above WEED.TO's 1.07%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1622.35%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-40695.39%
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.
591.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 185.53%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
590.91%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 5.99%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-9912.68%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-1199.97%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-255.95%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while WEED.TO stands at 22.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-2334.26%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-938.00%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-207.50%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
9571.99%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 668.72%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
979.62%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 4.33%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
63.77%
Positive short-term equity growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
10.86%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. WEED.TO's 41.69%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-1.92%
Inventory is declining while WEED.TO stands at 0.55%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.65%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.43%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-6.92%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
119.27%
We increase R&D while WEED.TO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
34.23%
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.