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.
8.44%
Positive revenue growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
8.64%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x AVGO's 1.32%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-37.10%
Negative EBIT growth while AVGO is at 2.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-37.10%
Negative operating income growth while AVGO is at 2.94%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-46.12%
Negative net income growth while AVGO stands at 12.35%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-45.83%
Negative EPS growth while AVGO is at 11.11%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-46.67%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AVGO is at 14.29%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.08%
Share reduction more than 1.5x AVGO's 1.70%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.31%
Reduced diluted shares while AVGO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.08%
Dividend reduction while AVGO stands at 6.27%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-42.93%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-50.36%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
780.79%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to AVGO's 810.87%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
304.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 64.15%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
261.71%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 44.90%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
18577.20%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 1183.92%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
480.03%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 134.94%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
132.93%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 65.50%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
2531.36%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 1676.85% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
201.56%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
297.88%
Below 50% of AVGO's 833.36%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
503.38%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 444.81%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
305.59%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AVGO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
162.79%
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.
15.24%
Below 50% of AVGO's 150.22%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
-0.12%
Negative near-term dividend growth while AVGO invests at 33.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
16.95%
AR growth well above AVGO's 9.33%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
21.42%
We show growth while AVGO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
2.32%
Positive asset growth while AVGO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-1.18%
We have a declining book value while AVGO shows 0.93%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.10%
We have some new debt while AVGO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
10.37%
We increase R&D while AVGO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.15%
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.