205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
27.21%
Some net income increase while MRVL is negative at -87.18%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
0.68%
Less D&A growth vs. MRVL's 6.81%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
1300.00%
Deferred tax of 1300.00% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
579.12%
Well above MRVL's 11.15% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-126.67%
Negative yoy inventory while MRVL is 295.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
718.42%
Some yoy usage while MRVL is negative at -7.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-114.77%
Both negative yoy, with MRVL at -3.09%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
70.49%
Some CFO growth while MRVL is negative at -21.91%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
12.64%
Some CapEx rise while MRVL is negative at -4.57%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-30.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with MRVL at -49.41%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-10.17%
We reduce yoy sales while MRVL is 1896.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
3150.00%
Growth of 3150.00% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-410.24%
We reduce yoy invests while MRVL stands at 198.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-55.61%
Both yoy lines negative, with MRVL at -90.53%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment or preference for internal financing over new equity in the niche.
-89.89%
We cut yoy buybacks while MRVL is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.