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.
-2.12%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
21.56%
Positive gross profit growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
123.81%
Positive EBIT growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
123.81%
Positive operating income growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
645.04%
Positive net income growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
22200.00%
Positive EPS growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
22200.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
5.52%
Slight or no buybacks while WEED.TO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
6.15%
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.
-170.95%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-106.82%
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.
656.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of WEED.TO's 1646.55%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
17.13%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of WEED.TO's 486.34%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-267.86%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-478.36%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-28.16%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
440.92%
Positive 10Y CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
122.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
122.65%
Positive short-term CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
6526.78%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 5602.30%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
522.42%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 449.48%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
56.04%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of WEED.TO's 94.45%. 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.
5.73%
Our AR growth while WEED.TO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
17.28%
Inventory growth well above WEED.TO's 1.29%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.97%
Positive asset growth while WEED.TO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-1.25%
We have a declining book value while WEED.TO shows 739.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-8.37%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-68.16%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
19.59%
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.