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.
15.87%
Revenue growth under 50% of WEED.TO's 50.34%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
24.23%
Positive gross profit growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
40.42%
Positive EBIT growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
40.42%
Positive operating income growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
35321.48%
Positive net income growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
15900.00%
Positive EPS growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.67%
Share reduction more than 1.5x WEED.TO's 40.30%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-3.21%
Reduced diluted shares while WEED.TO is at 33.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
189.60%
Positive OCF growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
78.29%
Positive FCF growth while WEED.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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
425.89%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
425.89%
Positive OCF/share growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
189.34%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 93.03%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
406.73%
Positive 10Y CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
406.73%
Positive 5Y CAGR while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
1531.95%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 90.83%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
340.60%
Below 50% of WEED.TO's 1524.55%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
340.60%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of WEED.TO's 597.71%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
407.04%
Positive short-term equity growth while WEED.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.
-9.97%
Firm’s AR is declining while WEED.TO shows 136.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
18.67%
We show growth while WEED.TO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
28.78%
Asset growth well under 50% of WEED.TO's 141.43%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
10.83%
Under 50% of WEED.TO's 74.21%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-89.14%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
24.88%
SG&A declining or stable vs. WEED.TO's 65.61%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.