You do know that this is making an apples to oranges comparison?
The idiom comparing apples and oranges means that one is trying to draw similarities between two things that are not similar.
Aurora has over 1 billion shares outstanding (not sure of float, but probably at least a half billion). It also has an "Unlimited" and uncapped authorized shares. Canopy has 350 million shares outstanding.
So, pretty typical they are trading millions of shares.
Canb has 1.2 million shares as float. If you track stock performance, it's not common and very rare for a stock with 1.2 million shares to trade "millions" of shares. That is 1x, 2x or maybe 3x it's float in a single day.
Now, here are the apples to apples types of comparisons that Myself and others make:
1) We compare the performance of Canb versus the others, over a given time period. particularly, to refute claims that try and give the impression that Canb is doing much worse than the others.
To do so, you take the price difference on a stock between an end date (usually the current date) and an starting date. Then you divide the price on the starting date with the price difference. That gives you the percentage a stock price has gained or lost. Then you compare that against another stock using the same calculations.
I use those calculations to show that the other stocks have also fallen over 90%, just like Canb. Figures such as float, authorized shares, and shares traded on a particular day are not factors in this calculation. What matters is that a 90% loss for one stock is the same as a 90% loss on another stock.
2) We compare revenue growth, which is also apples to apples. Revenue growth is the percentage increase for a company that occurs over a time period. You take revenue for a more current time period, and subtract it from a previous time period. Then you divide that number by the revenue for that previous time period.
For example, Canb has $1.76 million in revenue for the first three quarters of 2019. For the first three quarters of 2018, they had revenue of $387k. Doing the calculations, that is revenue growth of over 350%. A company such as CVSI had revenue in 2018 of $48 million, and in 2019 of $54 million. Doing that calculation, CVSI has revenue growth of 17%.
Would you rather invest in a company with 17% revenue growth (CVSI), or the potential of a company with 350% revenue growth? Which will run further when several hundred percent revenue growth continues? Investors love revenue growth.
It's apples to apples. Investors care most about their investment growing, not how many shares a company trades on a given day.
3) Comparisons are made with the potential for FDA legal pure CBD (which is exclusively what Canb produces), or a company that mostly produces FDA gray area broad or full spectrum? However, Canopy did just start a line of Pure CBD products in the U.S. I wonder why a multi billion dollar company would do that if nobody wanted pure CBD?
Would you rather invest in a company that sold a legal product, versus one that is somewhat legal?
