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.
9.06%
Net income growth under 50% of MRVL's 172.18%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-4.01%
Negative yoy D&A while MRVL is 0.26%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-209.43%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
8.88%
SBC growth while MRVL is negative at -0.52%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
112.65%
Slight usage while MRVL is negative at -213.03%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
125.27%
AR growth while MRVL is negative at -589.51%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-259.14%
Negative yoy inventory while MRVL is 101.60%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-66.67%
Both negative yoy AP, with MRVL at -4.41%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
164.15%
Some yoy usage while MRVL is negative at -124.33%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-950.00%
Negative yoy while MRVL is 127.86%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
61.61%
Some CFO growth while MRVL is negative at -38.53%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
40.17%
CapEx growth well above MRVL's 38.53%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
102.51%
Acquisition growth of 102.51% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-42.78%
Negative yoy purchasing while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-16.54%
We reduce yoy sales while MRVL is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
80.57%
Growth well above MRVL's 24.16%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-56.37%
We reduce yoy invests while MRVL stands at 38.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
24.16%
Repurchase growth above 1.5x MRVL's 1.71%. David Dodd would see a strong per-share advantage if the share price is reasonably valued.