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.
-13.75%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-11.45%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-54.91%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-54.91%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-55.23%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-52.86%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-52.86%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.53%
Share reduction while AVGO is at 0.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.44%
Reduced diluted shares while AVGO is at 0.79%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.75%
Dividend reduction while AVGO stands at 8.34%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-61.05%
Negative OCF growth while AVGO is at 8.02%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-72.73%
Negative FCF growth while AVGO is at 14.19%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
81.86%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 65.58%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
-25.44%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AVGO stands at 65.58%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-12.38%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO stands at 25.29%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
235.16%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 5020.28%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
8.94%
Below 50% of AVGO's 5020.28%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
3092.43%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 232.18%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
204.28%
Below 50% of AVGO's 1819.41%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-60.32%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AVGO is 1819.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-47.95%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO is 9.44%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
287.32%
Equity/share CAGR of 287.32% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
58.76%
Equity/share CAGR of 58.76% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
55.06%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of AVGO's 76.88%. 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.
-23.61%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-10.03%
Inventory is declining while AVGO stands at 0.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-2.07%
Negative asset growth while AVGO invests at 1.67%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.46%
Under 50% of AVGO's 3.26%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-3.50%
We’re deleveraging while AVGO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
9.78%
We increase R&D while AVGO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
4.43%
SG&A declining or stable vs. AVGO's 23.33%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.