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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1819.75%
Negative EBIT growth while WEED.TO is at 42.93%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1819.75%
Negative operating income growth while WEED.TO is at 42.93%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-1808.27%
Negative net income growth while WEED.TO stands at 42.93%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-283.82%
Negative EPS growth while WEED.TO is at 43.06%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-283.82%
Negative diluted EPS growth while WEED.TO is at 43.06%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
398.17%
Share change of 398.17% while WEED.TO is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
398.17%
Diluted share change of 398.17% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-314.14%
Negative OCF growth while WEED.TO is at 65.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-314.14%
Negative FCF growth while WEED.TO is at 65.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
57.56%
AR growth of 57.56% while WEED.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
158.96%
Positive asset growth while WEED.TO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-22.61%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment 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.