Agricultural Farm Products
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
VFF vs ACB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
VFF vs ACB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Agricultural Farm Products | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic |
| Market Cap | $319M | $195M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $216M | $361M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $32M | $41M |
| Gross Margin | 40.6% | 62.7% |
| Operating Margin | 12.7% | 13.3% |
| Forward P/E | 15.3x | 164.2x |
| Total Debt | $39M | $104M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $81M | $184M |
VFF vs ACB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Village Farms Inter… (VFF) | 100 | 50.7 | -49.3% |
| Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB) | 100 | 2.4 | -97.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VFF vs ACB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
VFF carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.69
- 144.8% 10Y total return vs ACB's -92.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.69, Low D/E 12.5%, current ratio 2.64x
ACB is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 27.0%, EPS growth 102.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.8%
- 27.0% revenue growth vs VFF's -35.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 27.0% revenue growth vs VFF's -35.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.3x vs 164.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.0% margin vs ACB's 11.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.69 vs ACB's 1.81, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +323.6% vs ACB's -25.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.0% ROA vs ACB's 5.2%, ROIC 7.4% vs 0.7% |
VFF vs ACB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
VFF vs ACB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — VFF and ACB each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACB is the larger business by revenue, generating $361M annually — 1.7x VFF's $216M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 15.0% (VFF) to 11.2% (ACB). On growth, ACB holds the edge at +6.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $216M | $361M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $44M | $71M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $32M | $41M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$12M | -$31M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.6% | +62.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.7% | +13.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.0% | +11.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.5% | -8.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -85.2% | +6.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +125.3% | -94.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — VFF and ACB each lead in 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 10.2x trailing earnings, VFF trades at a 94% valuation discount to ACB's 164.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, VFF's 6.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ACB's 6.7x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $319M | $195M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $277M | $136M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.22x | 164.21x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.28x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.40x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.31x | 6.73x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.48x | 0.77x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.07x | 0.43x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 10.14x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
VFF leads this category, winning 7 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
VFF delivers a 11.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $11 in annual profit, vs $7 for ACB. VFF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ACB's 0.17x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.1% | +7.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.0% | +5.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.4% | +0.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.9% | +0.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.12x | 0.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$42M | -$80M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $81M | $184M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $39M | $104M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 10.13x | 6.27x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
VFF leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in VFF five years ago would be worth $2,484 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $385 for ACB. Over the past 12 months, VFF leads with a +323.6% total return vs ACB's -25.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VFF at 55.4% vs ACB's -19.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -25.2% | -21.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +323.6% | -25.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +275.5% | -47.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.2% | -96.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +144.8% | -92.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +55.4% | -19.2% |
Risk & Volatility
VFF leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VFF is the less volatile stock with a 1.69 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ACB's 1.81 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. VFF currently trades 55.3% from its 52-week high vs ACB's 51.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.69x | 1.81x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.99 | $6.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.64 | $3.07 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +55.3% | +51.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.4 | 52.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 979K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates VFF as "Buy" and ACB as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 122.8% upside for VFF (target: $6) vs 72.6% for ACB (target: $6).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.15 | $5.92 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 14 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | 0.0% |
VFF leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Profitability & Efficiency and Total Returns. 2 categories are tied.
VFF vs ACB: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VFF or ACB 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 -35. 8% for Village Farms International, Inc. (VFF). Village Farms International, Inc. (VFF) offers the better valuation at 10. 2x trailing P/E (15. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Village Farms International, Inc. (VFF) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 has the better valuation — VFF or ACB?
On trailing P/E, Village Farms International, Inc.
(VFF) is the cheapest at 10. 2x versus Aurora Cannabis Inc. at 164. 2x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — VFF or ACB?
Over the past 5 years, Village Farms International, Inc.
(VFF) delivered a total return of -75. 2%, compared to -96. 1% for Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: VFF returned +144. 8% versus ACB's -92. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — VFF or ACB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Village Farms International, Inc.
(VFF) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 69β versus Aurora Cannabis Inc. 's 1. 81β — meaning ACB is approximately 7% more volatile than VFF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Village Farms International, Inc. (VFF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 12% versus 17% for Aurora Cannabis Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VFF or ACB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Aurora Cannabis Inc.
(ACB) is pulling ahead at 27. 0% versus -35. 8% for Village Farms International, Inc. (VFF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Village Farms International, Inc. grew EPS 184. 4% year-over-year, compared to 102. 2% for Aurora Cannabis 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.
06Which has better profit margins — VFF or ACB?
Village Farms International, Inc.
(VFF) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 0% net margin versus 0. 5% for Aurora Cannabis Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: VFF leads at 12. 7% versus 1. 4% for ACB. 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.
07Is VFF or ACB more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for VFF: 122.
8% to $6. 15.
08Which pays a better dividend — VFF or ACB?
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.
09Is VFF or ACB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Village Farms International, Inc.
(VFF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+144. 8% 10Y return). Aurora Cannabis Inc. (ACB) carries a higher beta of 1. 81 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (VFF: +144. 8%, ACB: -92. 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.
10What are the main differences between VFF and ACB?
These companies operate in different sectors (VFF (Consumer Defensive) and ACB (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: VFF is a small-cap deep-value stock; ACB is a small-cap high-growth 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.