IM Cannabis vs Ispire Technology
IMCC and ISPR side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How IMCC and ISPR compare
IM Cannabis grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (1.3% versus −21.3% for Ispire Technology).
IM Cannabis keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −20.7% compared with −39.0% at Ispire Technology.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | IMCC | ISPR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $103M |
| Share price | $0.575 | $1.78 |
| Change, 1 year | −98.7% | 11.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −100.0% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.36 | 1.13 |
| Employees | 95 | 88 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | – | 1.1× |
| FCF yield | – | −1.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.3% (better) | −21.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 28.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 17.7% (better) | 12.5% |
| Operating margin | −21.2% (better) | −38.7% |
| Net margin | −20.7% (better) | −39.0% |
| FCF margin | 8.6% (better) | −1.4% |
| Return on invested capital | −82.3% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | −3.3× (better) | −111.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.56 | 1.01 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | – | −2.10 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Shareholder yield | – | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | – | 7.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.00% | 3.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | $930 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 0.96% |
Go deeper
- IMCC stock overview
- IMCC income statement
- IMCC valuation and score
- ISPR stock overview
- ISPR income statement
- ISPR valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.