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.
-2.80%
Negative revenue growth while WEED.TO stands at 18.69%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-41.28%
Negative gross profit growth while WEED.TO is at 10.35%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
20.03%
EBIT growth above 1.5x WEED.TO's 4.69%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
20.03%
Operating income growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 48.15%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-89.15%
Negative net income growth while WEED.TO stands at 4.99%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-78.84%
Negative EPS growth while WEED.TO is at 25.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-78.84%
Negative diluted EPS growth while WEED.TO is at 25.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
3.24%
Share reduction more than 1.5x WEED.TO's 27.04%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
3.24%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x WEED.TO's 27.04%. 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.
47.13%
Similar OCF growth to WEED.TO's 49.93%. Walter Schloss would assume comparable operations or industry factors.
28.93%
FCF growth 50-75% of WEED.TO's 49.37%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-6.49%
Negative 5Y CAGR while WEED.TO stands at 90.86%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-45.05%
Negative 3Y CAGR while WEED.TO stands at 87.03%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-449.35%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
71.41%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x WEED.TO's 54.90%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
-9039.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while WEED.TO stands at 43.18%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-781.73%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
68.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
88.49%
Positive short-term CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
7068.67%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 897.75%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
-27.08%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-0.15%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
-1.16%
Firm’s AR is declining while WEED.TO shows 17.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-3.39%
Inventory is declining while WEED.TO stands at 0.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-2.72%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-4.57%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-9.02%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
89.29%
R&D growth of 89.29% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
1.66%
SG&A growth well above WEED.TO's 1.58%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.