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
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.
0.56%
Revenue growth under 50% of AVGO's 11.69%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
145.36%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x AVGO's 43.88%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
136.55%
EBIT growth below 50% of AVGO's 318.18%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
136.55%
Operating income growth under 50% of AVGO's 318.18%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
151.06%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 106.45%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
151.85%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 106.90%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
151.85%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 106.90%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
-2.09%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
1.64%
Diluted share count expanding well above AVGO's 1.87%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-46.88%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-340.52%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
500.98%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
64.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
44.33%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
165.97%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
544.73%
Positive OCF/share growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-52.03%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
278.30%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
765.55%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-11.23%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
1541.41%
Equity/share CAGR of 1541.41% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
119.46%
Equity/share CAGR of 119.46% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
72.89%
Equity/share CAGR of 72.89% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.54%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
21.22%
Inventory growth well above AVGO's 1.32%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-7.86%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-4.61%
We have a declining book value while AVGO shows 0.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.26%
Our R&D shrinks while AVGO invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-2.22%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.