GNLN
Greenlane Holdings, Inc.
Tobacco
Market Cap$320K
5Y Perf.-100.0%
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
CGC
Canopy Growth Corporation
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Market Cap$122M
5Y Perf.-99.3%
ACB
Aurora Cannabis Inc.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Market Cap$195M
5Y Perf.-97.6%
TLRY
Tilray Brands, Inc.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Market Cap$660M
5Y Perf.-42.5%
GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | GNLN | CGC | ACB | TLRY |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Tobacco | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic |
| Market Cap | $320K | $122M | $195M | $660M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4M | $294M | $361M | $1.17B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-86M | $-327M | $41M | $-2.95B |
| Gross Margin | -286.2% | 22.8% | 62.7% | 28.0% |
| Operating Margin | -12.5% | -24.1% | 13.3% | -266.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 164.2x | — |
| Total Debt | $166K | $348M | $104M | $451M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $33M | $114M | $184M | $304M |
GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
GNLN
CGC
ACB
TLRY
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Greenlane Holdings,… (GNLN) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Canopy Growth Corpo… (CGC) | 100 | 0.7 | -99.3% |
| Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB) | 100 | 2.4 | -97.6% |
| Tilray Brands, Inc. (TLRY) | 100 | 57.5 | -42.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: ACB leads in 4 of 6 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and profitability and margin quality. Tilray Brands, Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for recent price momentum and sentiment. This set spans 2 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
GNLN
Greenlane Holdings, Inc.
The Specific-Use Pick
GNLN plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
Best for: consumer defensive exposure
CGC
Canopy Growth Corporation
The Secondary Option
CGC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Best for: healthcare exposure
ACB
Aurora Cannabis Inc.
The Income Pick
ACB carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 1.81
- Rev growth 27.0%, EPS growth 102.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.81, Low D/E 17.2%, current ratio 4.31x
- Beta 1.81, current ratio 4.31x
Best for: income & stability and growth exposure
TLRY
Tilray Brands, Inc.
The Long-Run Compounder
TLRY is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- -74.7% 10Y total return vs ACB's -92.0%
- +12.1% vs GNLN's -88.1%
Best for: long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | ACB | 27.0% revenue growth vs GNLN's -67.2% |
| Quality / Margins | ACB | 11.2% margin vs GNLN's -19.7% |
| Stability / Safety | ACB | Beta 1.81 vs GNLN's 2.17 |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | TLRY | +12.1% vs GNLN's -88.1% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | ACB | 5.2% ROA vs GNLN's -210.7%, ROIC 0.7% vs -164.6% |
GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FY 2022
FY 2024
Segment breakdown not available.
FY 2025
GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLACBLAGGINGCGC
Who Leads Where
ACB leads in 3 of 6 categories
GNLN leads 1 • TLRY leads 1 • CGC leads 0
Explore the data ↓CGCCanopy Growth Corpora…
0leads
TLRYTilray Brands, Inc.
1leads
GNLNGreenlane Holdings, I…
1leads
ACBAurora Cannabis Inc.
3leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs GNLNvs TLRYMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
ACB3/6
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
GNLN2/3
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
ACB7/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
TLRY5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
ACB2/2
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
—
—
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACB leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TLRY is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.2B annually — 268.2x GNLN's $4M. ACB is the more profitable business, keeping 11.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GNLN's -19.7%. On growth, CGC holds the edge at +20.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | GNLNGreenlane Holding… | CGCCanopy Growth Cor… | ACBAurora Cannabis I… | TLRYTilray Brands, In… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4M | $294M | $361M | $1.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$54M | -$32M | $71M | -$3.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$86M | -$327M | $41M | -$2.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$16M | -$86M | -$31M | -$94M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -2.9% | +22.8% | +62.7% | +28.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -12.5% | -24.1% | +13.3% | -2.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -19.7% | -111.0% | +11.2% | -2.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.8% | -29.3% | -8.7% | -8.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -18.0% | +20.9% | +6.8% | +3.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +83.2% | +83.8% | -94.5% | +70.7% |
ACB leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
GNLN leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | GNLNGreenlane Holding… | CGCCanopy Growth Cor… | ACBAurora Cannabis I… | TLRYTilray Brands, In… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $320,058 | $122M | $195M | $660M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$32M | $293M | $136M | $806M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.06x | -0.28x | 164.21x | -0.17x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 6.73x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.07x | 0.62x | 0.77x | 0.59x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 0.34x | 0.43x | 0.25x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
GNLN leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ACB leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ACB delivers a 7.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $7 in annual profit, vs $-3 for GNLN. GNLN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CGC's 0.72x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ACB scores 7/9 vs GNLN's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | GNLNGreenlane Holding… | CGCCanopy Growth Cor… | ACBAurora Cannabis I… | TLRYTilray Brands, In… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.8% | -43.1% | +7.2% | -136.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.1% | -29.5% | +5.2% | -100.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -164.6% | -10.2% | +0.7% | -66.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -146.4% | -12.4% | +0.7% | -78.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.72x | 0.17x | 0.22x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$32M | $235M | -$80M | $147M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $33M | $114M | $184M | $304M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $166,000 | $348M | $104M | $451M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -216.19x | -7.79x | 6.27x | -89.43x |
ACB leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TLRY leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TLRY five years ago would be worth $3,498 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for GNLN. Over the past 12 months, TLRY leads with a +1209.3% total return vs GNLN's -88.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TLRY at 26.7% vs GNLN's -97.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | GNLNGreenlane Holding… | CGCCanopy Growth Cor… | ACBAurora Cannabis I… | TLRYTilray Brands, In… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -57.8% | -5.0% | -21.0% | -41.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -88.1% | -12.4% | -25.3% | +1209.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -91.4% | -47.2% | +103.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -99.6% | -96.1% | -65.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -94.3% | -92.0% | -74.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -97.0% | -55.9% | -19.2% | +26.7% |
TLRY leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ACB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ACB is the less volatile stock with a 1.81 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GNLN's 2.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ACB currently trades 51.4% from its 52-week high vs GNLN's 5.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | GNLNGreenlane Holding… | CGCCanopy Growth Cor… | ACBAurora Cannabis I… | TLRYTilray Brands, In… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.17x | 1.90x | 1.81x | 2.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $101.40 | $2.38 | $6.67 | $15.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.57 | $0.84 | $3.07 | $0.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +5.3% | +47.5% | +51.4% | +36.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.7 | 52.9 | 52.2 | 37.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 197K | 10.4M | 979K | 4.7M |
ACB leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CGC as "Hold", ACB as "Hold", TLRY as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 1180.5% upside for CGC (target: $14) vs 72.6% for ACB (target: $6).
| Metric | GNLNGreenlane Holding… | CGCCanopy Growth Cor… | ACBAurora Cannabis I… | TLRYTilray Brands, In… |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $14.47 | $5.92 | $10.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 26 | 14 | 20 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Key Takeaway
ACB leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GNLN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
Best OverallAurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB)Leads 3 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
GNLN vs CGC vs ACB vs TLRY: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Aurora Cannabis Inc.
(ACB) is the stronger pick with 27. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -67. 2% for Greenlane Holdings, Inc. (GNLN). Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB) offers the better valuation at 164. 2x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Canopy Growth Corporation (CGC) a "Hold" — based on 26 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which is the better long-term investment — GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY?
Over the past 5 years, Tilray Brands, Inc.
(TLRY) delivered a total return of -65. 0%, compared to -100. 0% for Greenlane Holdings, Inc. (GNLN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TLRY returned -74. 7% versus GNLN's -100. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Aurora Cannabis Inc.
(ACB) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 81β versus Greenlane Holdings, Inc. 's 2. 17β — meaning GNLN is approximately 20% more volatile than ACB relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Greenlane Holdings, Inc. (GNLN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 72% for Canopy Growth Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Aurora Cannabis Inc.
(ACB) is pulling ahead at 27. 0% versus -67. 2% for Greenlane Holdings, Inc. (GNLN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Aurora Cannabis Inc. grew EPS 102. 2% year-over-year, compared to -651. 7% for Tilray Brands, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ACB leads at 15. 8% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
05Which has better profit margins — GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY?
Aurora Cannabis Inc.
(ACB) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 5% net margin versus -1965. 1% for Greenlane Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACB leads at 1. 4% versus -1245. 6% for GNLN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ACB leads at 54. 6%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Which pays a better dividend — GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
07Is GNLN or CGC or ACB or TLRY better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Aurora Cannabis Inc.
(ACB) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. Greenlane Holdings, Inc. (GNLN) carries a higher beta of 2. 17 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACB: -92. 0%, GNLN: -100. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
08What are the main differences between GNLN and CGC and ACB and TLRY?
These companies operate in different sectors (GNLN (Consumer Defensive) and CGC (Healthcare) and ACB (Healthcare) and TLRY (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: GNLN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CGC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACB is a small-cap high-growth stock; TLRY is a small-cap quality compounder stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
Revenue Growth>
%
(GNLN: -18.0% · CGC: 20.9%)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.