PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (Avg.)
37.73 | 5.46
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
9.31%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MPWR's 4.24%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
11.33%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MPWR's 3.62%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
14.74%
Positive EBIT growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
18.05%
Positive operating income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
9.84%
Positive net income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.85%
Positive EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.16%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.22%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.44%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.02%
Dividend reduction while MPWR stands at 24.40%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
119.08%
OCF growth of 119.08% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
302.55%
FCF growth of 302.55% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
56.74%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 574.75%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
38.54%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 233.90%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-13.53%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MPWR stands at 40.56%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
158.33%
OCF/share CAGR of 158.33% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
9.09%
OCF/share CAGR of 9.09% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
6.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 6.59% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
111.90%
Below 50% of MPWR's 1299.44%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-5.33%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MPWR is 314.73%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-42.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MPWR is 13.70%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
83.06%
Below 50% of MPWR's 692.72%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
116.48%
Below 50% of MPWR's 274.92%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
17.94%
Below 50% of MPWR's 133.09%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
297.32%
Below 50% of MPWR's 673.26%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
51.38%
Below 50% of MPWR's 181.26%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
18.05%
Below 50% of MPWR's 99.66%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-36.69%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
2.67%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MPWR's 7.88%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
3.48%
Asset growth at 75-90% of MPWR's 4.37%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
0.20%
Under 50% of MPWR's 4.09%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
9.30%
We have some new debt while MPWR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
1.93%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MPWR's 4.38%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
2.75%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MPWR's 13.82%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.