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.
1.97%
Positive revenue growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
4.02%
Positive gross profit growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
9.76%
Positive EBIT growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
9.76%
Positive operating income growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
4.97%
Positive net income growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
5.26%
Positive EPS growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
1.75%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
1.63%
Slight or no buybacks while AVGO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
2.89%
Slight or no buyback while AVGO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-107.79%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-148.16%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
352.22%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 32.16%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
53.06%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 32.16%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
13.23%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 32.16%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-134.04%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AVGO stands at 1581.20%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-105.37%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AVGO is at 1581.20%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-101.68%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AVGO stands at 1581.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
404.31%
Below 50% of AVGO's 1653.86%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
90.46%
Below 50% of AVGO's 1653.86%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-0.72%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO is 1653.86%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1080.32%
Equity/share CAGR of 1080.32% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
107.36%
Equity/share CAGR of 107.36% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
30.25%
Equity/share CAGR of 30.25% 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.
41.26%
AR growth well above AVGO's 2.11%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
17.38%
Inventory growth well above AVGO's 7.41%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.05%
Positive asset growth while AVGO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.61%
50-75% of AVGO's 9.24%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-1.44%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
0.86%
We increase R&D while AVGO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.05%
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.