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.
8.61%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 5.79%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
11.90%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 5.78%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
22.28%
EBIT growth 75-90% of MRVL's 28.88%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
24.52%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of MRVL's 28.88%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
20.85%
Net income growth comparable to MRVL's 20.82%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
20.33%
EPS growth similar to MRVL's 20.83%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
20.49%
Similar diluted EPS growth to MRVL's 20.83%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.11%
Share count expansion well above MRVL's 0.20%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.11%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 0.20%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
0.06%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MRVL cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
10.25%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 347.11%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-17.95%
Negative FCF growth while MRVL is at 37258.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
37.66%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
12.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 27.06%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-9.62%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 46.99%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
45.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 61.90%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
-10.96%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is at 28.06%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-27.88%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 51.81%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
91.44%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-2.12%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-29.28%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
91.46%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with MRVL's 94.66%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
96.82%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 53.28%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
43.67%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 41.14%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
332.01%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.09%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
68.60%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.19%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
27.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.09%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
8.83%
AR growth well above MRVL's 0.45%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
4.63%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.78%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
0.20%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
4.92%
Debt growth far above MRVL's 0.79%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-1.20%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 1.33%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.96%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 1.43%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.