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.
26.51%
Positive revenue growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
674.09%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ACB.TO's 100.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
92.54%
Positive EBIT growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
92.54%
Operating income growth similar to ACB.TO's 100.00%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
89.98%
Net income growth at 75-90% of ACB.TO's 100.00%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements to catch or surpass competitor performance.
90.72%
EPS growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 784.92%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
90.72%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 784.92%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
6.68%
Share count expansion well above ACB.TO's 1.26%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
6.68%
Diluted share count expanding well above ACB.TO's 1.26%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
334.00%
OCF growth above 1.5x ACB.TO's 60.37%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
260.05%
FCF growth above 1.5x ACB.TO's 56.64%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
480.08%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-38.62%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
1711.87%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 28.13%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
360.13%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 89.68%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
543.04%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 87.64%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-16516.68%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-737.15%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ACB.TO is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
38.51%
Below 50% of ACB.TO's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
5797.52%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 135.33%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
5.79%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-7.21%
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.
10.06%
Our AR growth while ACB.TO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-1.11%
Inventory is declining while ACB.TO stands at 5.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.57%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-8.38%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-2.25%
We’re deleveraging while ACB.TO stands at 0.64%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.26%
We increase R&D while ACB.TO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
22.38%
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.