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.
-5.92%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-17.46%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-31.73%
Negative EBIT growth while ACB.TO is at 91.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-31.73%
Negative operating income growth while ACB.TO is at 15.77%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
6.32%
Net income growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 91.66%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
16.67%
EPS growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 93.92%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.09%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 93.92%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
8.22%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ACB.TO's 37.64%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
6.33%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ACB.TO's 20.58%. 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.
163.13%
Positive OCF growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
150.08%
Positive FCF growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
314.91%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-45.00%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
8257.32%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
66.67%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 43.88%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
133.03%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ACB.TO's 94.67%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
-1627.18%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-333.74%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-256.42%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
7683.64%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 129.70%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
181.95%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
18.65%
Positive short-term equity growth while ACB.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.
-8.79%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.52%
Inventory is declining while ACB.TO stands at 4.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-2.11%
Negative asset growth while ACB.TO invests at 7.89%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-9.22%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-7.43%
We’re deleveraging while ACB.TO stands at 20.81%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.60%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
4.40%
We expand SG&A while ACB.TO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.