PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
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.
6.07%
Revenue growth under 50% of MPWR's 14.46%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
7.06%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MPWR's 14.77%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
12.90%
EBIT growth below 50% of MPWR's 34.61%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
13.14%
Operating income growth under 50% of MPWR's 34.61%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
11.74%
Net income growth under 50% of MPWR's 30.41%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.59%
EPS growth under 50% of MPWR's 31.58%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
12.86%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MPWR's 29.09%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.82%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.80%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.61%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.16%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MPWR cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
15.33%
OCF growth under 50% of MPWR's 105.17%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
10.08%
FCF growth under 50% of MPWR's 137.60%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
69.30%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 161.61%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
48.57%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 119.08%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
30.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 63.95%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
169.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 1100.56%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
106.95%
Below 50% of MPWR's 481.85%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
57.28%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 121.05%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
275.27%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 141.36% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
182.32%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 281.25%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
107.02%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of MPWR's 163.40%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
40.20%
Below 50% of MPWR's 201.53%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
7.63%
Below 50% of MPWR's 72.07%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
10.99%
Below 50% of MPWR's 61.04%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
518.41%
Dividend/share CAGR of 518.41% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
121.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 121.07% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
82.03%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 50.66%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
2.19%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MPWR's 12.02%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
1.24%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MPWR's 6.11%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.25%
Asset growth well under 50% of MPWR's 6.00%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.29%
We have a declining book value while MPWR shows 5.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.02%
Debt growth of 0.02% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
1.56%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MPWR's 9.15%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-10.20%
We cut SG&A while MPWR invests at 3.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.