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.
9.16%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AVGO's 4.46%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
9.87%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x AVGO's 4.45%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
9.29%
EBIT growth similar to AVGO's 10.11%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
9.29%
Operating income growth similar to AVGO's 10.11%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
3.79%
Net income growth under 50% of AVGO's 18.69%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
4.21%
EPS growth under 50% of AVGO's 15.87%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
3.19%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of AVGO's 16.39%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.24%
Share reduction more than 1.5x AVGO's 2.56%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.24%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x AVGO's 1.42%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.24%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-43.36%
Negative OCF growth while AVGO is at 4.27%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-48.06%
Negative FCF growth while AVGO is at 3.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
547.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of AVGO's 715.70%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
205.23%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 83.99%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
117.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 45.60%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
503.88%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 1918.51%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
185.61%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 159.18%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
204.05%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 73.51%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1243.02%
Similar net income/share CAGR to AVGO's 1138.11%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
291.49%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AVGO's 520.03%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
95.27%
Below 50% of AVGO's 307.89%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
481.97%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 433.32%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
284.93%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 2.41%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
144.83%
Positive short-term equity growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
41.17%
Below 50% of AVGO's 356.43%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
7.12%
Below 50% of AVGO's 55.82%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
10.26%
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.
5.63%
Inventory growth well above AVGO's 10.19%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
5.13%
Positive asset growth while AVGO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
12.27%
Positive BV/share change while AVGO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-7.68%
We’re deleveraging while AVGO stands at 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
12.69%
We increase R&D while AVGO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.89%
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.