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.
38.05%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AVGO's 6.54%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
33.90%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x AVGO's 8.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-31.92%
Negative EBIT growth while AVGO is at 1460.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-31.92%
Negative operating income growth while AVGO is at 1460.00%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-36.35%
Negative net income growth while AVGO stands at 280.95%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-34.78%
Negative EPS growth while AVGO is at 279.78%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-36.76%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AVGO is at 286.05%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.87%
Slight or no buybacks while AVGO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.28%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
816.19%
Positive OCF growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
293.17%
FCF growth above 1.5x AVGO's 28.00%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
505.77%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 12.36%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
28.61%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 12.36%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
-6.24%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO stands at 12.36%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
2606.74%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 1029.45%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
111.21%
Below 50% of AVGO's 1029.45%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
171.41%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 1029.45%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-2169.33%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AVGO is at 474.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-961.70%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AVGO is 474.29%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-313.69%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO is 474.29%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1857.62%
Equity/share CAGR of 1857.62% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
95.08%
Equity/share CAGR of 95.08% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
38.73%
Equity/share CAGR of 38.73% 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.
-4.41%
Firm’s AR is declining while AVGO shows 9.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-39.15%
Inventory is declining while AVGO stands at 2.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-5.13%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-4.00%
We have a declining book value while AVGO shows 4.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-1.10%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
42.51%
We increase R&D while AVGO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
37.51%
We expand SG&A while AVGO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.