PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (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.
2.06%
Revenue growth under 50% of MPWR's 6.82%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.38%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MPWR's 6.69%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
10.11%
Positive EBIT growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
9.21%
Positive operating income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
7.23%
Positive net income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
6.98%
Positive EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
7.94%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.21%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.31%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.55%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.06%
Dividend reduction while MPWR stands at 40.06%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
62.24%
OCF growth above 1.5x MPWR's 13.44%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
76.64%
FCF growth under 50% of MPWR's 220.83%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
101.87%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 189.86%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
27.36%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 98.00%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
20.00%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 50.38%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
336.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 216.11%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
164.88%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 54.41%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
79.90%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 175.20%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
578.69%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MPWR's 413.31%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
118.39%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 190.28%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
70.62%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to MPWR's 73.12%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
24.55%
Below 50% of MPWR's 209.14%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.32%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MPWR is at 88.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-8.78%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MPWR is at 66.95%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
602.36%
Dividend/share CAGR of 602.36% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
155.50%
Dividend/share CAGR of 155.50% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
102.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR similar to MPWR's 98.51%. Walter Schloss finds parallel short-term dividend strategies for both companies.
-1.46%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-2.44%
Inventory is declining while MPWR stands at 0.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.34%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 2.35%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.17%
We have a declining book value while MPWR shows 2.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.10%
We have some new debt while MPWR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.26%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MPWR's 8.20%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
1.45%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MPWR's 14.74%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.