Canopy Growth vs IM Cannabis
CGC and IMCC side by side, both in drugs. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CGC and IMCC compare
Canopy Growth grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.7% versus 1.3% for IM Cannabis).
IM Cannabis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −20.7% compared with −87.0% at Canopy Growth.
IM Cannabis scores higher on the StockData Score (4 against 3 for Canopy Growth), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CGC | IMCC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Share price | $0.605 | $0.575 |
| Change, 1 year | −52.4% | −98.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −99.5% | −100.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.91 | 1.36 |
| Employees | 1,128 | 95 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.7% (better) | 1.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −12.2% | 28.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 24.4% (better) | 17.7% |
| Operating margin | −54.2% | −21.2% (better) |
| Net margin | −87.0% | −20.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | −25.8% | 8.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | – | −82.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | −3.7× | −3.3× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.82 (better) | 0.56 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 6.9% | – |
| Held by insiders | 1.0% | 0.00% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$393K | – |
Go deeper
- CGC stock overview
- CGC income statement
- CGC valuation and score
- IMCC stock overview
- IMCC income statement
- IMCC valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.