PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
176.45 - 178.59
86.62 - 184.48
124.91M / 173.95M (Avg.)
50.81 | 3.50
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.
160.20%
Net income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 16.36%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
0.65%
Less D&A growth vs. MRVL's 2.10%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
150.85%
Some yoy growth while MRVL is negative at -245.16%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
2.22%
SBC growth while MRVL is negative at -3.74%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-68.65%
Negative yoy working capital usage while MRVL is 65.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-102.52%
AR is negative yoy while MRVL is 154.16%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
221.91%
Inventory growth well above MRVL's 137.90%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
154.11%
A yoy AP increase while MRVL is negative at -137.08%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-145.60%
Negative yoy usage while MRVL is 1184.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-112.97%
Negative yoy while MRVL is 38.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
517.80%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x MRVL's 15.24%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
42.03%
Some CapEx rise while MRVL is negative at -8.47%. 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.
17.21%
Less growth in investment purchases vs. MRVL's 40.17%, preserving near-term liquidity. David Dodd would confirm no strategic investment opportunities are lost.
-34.11%
We reduce yoy sales while MRVL is 66.91%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
91.41%
Growth of 91.41% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-37.68%
We reduce yoy invests while MRVL stands at 96.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-3.08%
Both yoy lines negative, with MRVL at -2.08%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
77.68%
We slightly raise equity while MRVL is negative at -45.91%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.