Short answer:
The press release you provided about The Cannabist Company’s Q2 2025 results does not contain any information on the company’s current debt balances, leverage ratios, or the specific terms of its financing arrangements. Because those data are absent, we cannot directly compare The Cannabist Company’s debt profile to that of its peers in the U.S. cannabis industry from this release alone.
Why the comparison isn’t possible from the supplied news
| What the press release includes | What is needed for a debt‑and‑financing comparison |
|---|---|
| Revenue, gross profit, net loss, adjusted EBITDA, and operational highlights (cultivation, retail, etc.) | Total debt (short‑term & long‑term), debt‑to‑equity, interest coverage, covenant details, recent financing rounds, maturity schedule, and any convertible instruments |
| No balance‑sheet or cash‑flow details | Comparable metrics for competitors (e.g., Curaleaf, Trulieve, Green Thumb, Cresco Labs, etc.) |
| No mention of new credit facilities, bond issuances, or equity raises | Disclosure of financing terms (interest rates, covenants, use‑of‑proceeds) to see whether The Cannabist Company is more or less leveraged than the sector average |
Because none of the above debt‑related figures appear in the article, any attempt to rank or benchmark The Cannabist Company’s leverage against its rivals would be speculative.
What you would normally look at to answer this question
If you obtain the missing data (e.g., from the company’s Form 10‑Q, investor presentation, or a more detailed earnings release), you could assess the debt situation in several concrete ways:
| Metric | How to interpret | Typical competitor range (2024‑2025 cannabis sector) |
|---|---|---|
| Total Debt (USD mm) | Absolute size of borrowings. Larger absolute debt may reflect aggressive expansion or higher leverage. | Mid‑size operators often carry $200‑$500 mm of debt; smaller cultivators < $100 mm. |
| Debt‑to‑Equity (D/E) | Leverage ratio. A D/E > 1.0 suggests more debt than equity; < 0.5 indicates a relatively conservative capital structure. | Many publicly‑traded cannabis firms sit 0.3‑0.8; a few highly‑leveraged players exceed 1.2. |
| Interest Coverage (EBITDA/Interest) | Ability to meet interest obligations. Values > 2.0 are generally comfortable. | Sector averages hover around 1.5‑2.5, reflecting cash‑flow volatility. |
| Debt Maturity Profile | Timing of principal repayments. A concentrated “wall” of maturities can pose refinancing risk. | Companies often stagger maturities over 3‑7 years; a “single‑year wall” would be a red flag. |
| Financing Sources | Bank loans, private credit facilities, convertible notes, equity raises, or venture‑capital preferred stock. | Most large operators rely on senior secured loans from specialty cannabis lenders, supplemented by convertible senior notes and occasional equity placements. |
| Covenant Structure | Financial covenants (e.g., leverage caps, cash‑flow tests). Tight covenants can limit operational flexibility. | Covenants have become stricter post‑2022, with many lenders imposing leverage‑to‑EBITDA caps of 3‑4x. |
A comparative table could then be built, e.g.:
| Company | Total Debt (USD mm) | D/E | EBITDA/Interest | Primary Lender(s) | Recent Financing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Cannabist Company | (value from 10‑Q) | (calc) | (calc) | (bank/credit fund) | (e.g., $150 mm senior secured term loan, 2024) |
| Curaleaf | 300 | 0.65 | 1.9 | JPMorgan, Citi | $500 mm senior note, 2024 |
| Trulieve | 215 | 0.48 | 2.3 | Bank of America | $350 mm revolving credit, 2023 |
| Green Thumb | 180 | 0.55 | 1.7 | Specialty cannabis lender | $200 mm term loan, 2025 |
Numbers above are illustrative only; you would replace them with the actual figures from each company’s latest filings.
How to obtain the missing information
SEC Filings – Look up The Cannabist Company’s latest Form 10‑Q (quarterly report) or Form 8‑K (current report) for the balance sheet and notes to the financial statements. Those sections disclose:
- Total debt and its breakdown (short‑term vs. long‑term).
- Debt covenants and any default events.
- Details of recent financing transactions (e.g., credit facilities, convertible notes).
Investor Relations Materials – The company’s earnings deck or “Management Discussion & Analysis” (MD&A) often includes a “Liquidity & Capital Resources” slide that summarizes debt, cash, and financing plans.
Industry Research Reports – Firms such as New Frontier Data, BDS Analytics, or Canaccord Genuity regularly publish comparative leverage tables for the cannabis sector.
Competitor Filings – Pull the same data points from the 10‑Q/10‑K filings of major peers (Curaleaf, Trulieve, Green Thumb, etc.) to build a side‑by‑side comparison.
Bottom line
- From the provided news release alone, there is no data on The Cannabist Company’s debt level or financing arrangements.
- Consequently, a direct comparison to competitors cannot be performed without supplemental information from SEC filings, investor presentations, or third‑party research.
- If you can access those additional sources, you can evaluate total debt, leverage ratios, interest coverage, maturity schedules, and financing terms, then benchmark The Cannabist Company against the typical ranges observed in the U.S. cannabis industry.