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.
-2.97%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-5.44%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-40.46%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-40.46%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-47.91%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-47.92%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-47.92%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.71%
Slight or no buybacks while AVGO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.84%
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.
-102.24%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-110.44%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
16.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 36.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-3.71%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AVGO stands at 36.16%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
22.63%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to AVGO's 21.18%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
-113.86%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AVGO stands at 4123.37%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-102.64%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AVGO is at 4123.37%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-105.71%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AVGO stands at 332.88%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-46.70%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AVGO is at 1712.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-59.84%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AVGO is 1712.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
126.44%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of AVGO's 215.58%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
262.34%
Equity/share CAGR of 262.34% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
79.80%
Equity/share CAGR of 79.80% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
62.83%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of AVGO's 122.23%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
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.
22.32%
Our AR growth while AVGO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
0.71%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AVGO's 7.22%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
2.80%
Asset growth above 1.5x AVGO's 1.05%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
2.69%
50-75% of AVGO's 4.09%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-2.84%
We’re deleveraging while AVGO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
6.39%
R&D dropping or stable vs. AVGO's 16.25%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
5.75%
SG&A growth well above AVGO's 8.16%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.