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.
11.79%
Positive revenue growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-46.43%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-309.91%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-309.91%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-2284.85%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2260.25%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-2260.25%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.61%
Share reduction more than 1.5x WEED.TO's 2.40%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.61%
Slight or no buyback while WEED.TO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
104.19%
OCF growth above 1.5x WEED.TO's 48.15%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
80.26%
FCF growth above 1.5x WEED.TO's 44.76%. 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.
946.12%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 327.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
538.59%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 217.52%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-84.89%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
65.84%
Positive OCF/share growth while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
261.74%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 62.86%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-5501.82%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-4443.43%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-289.78%
Negative 3Y CAGR while WEED.TO is 98.15%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
3122.11%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WEED.TO's 1845.59%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
403.50%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of WEED.TO's 584.01%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
-8.22%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while WEED.TO is at 46.50%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-4.56%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
2.73%
We show growth while WEED.TO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
13.71%
Positive asset growth while WEED.TO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.38%
Positive BV/share change while WEED.TO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
29.90%
We have some new debt while WEED.TO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
88.66%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. WEED.TO's 5.06%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
18.88%
SG&A declining or stable vs. WEED.TO's 45.59%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.