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.
16.78%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of MRVL's 19.11%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
15.87%
Positive gross profit growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
17.31%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
17.31%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
16.33%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
16.18%
EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 313.64%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
16.42%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 313.64%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.18%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.30%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.22%
Dividend reduction while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
21.67%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 75.03%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
24.45%
FCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 82.13%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
2457.03%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
1057.66%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 76.64%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
403.10%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 19.80%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
7201.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 63.55%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
968.99%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 531.93%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
1082.05%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 93.95%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
9870.55%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
2036.19%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
698.24%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1299.84%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 57.69%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
484.46%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 44.04%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
182.07%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
374.95%
Stable or rising dividend while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
151.21%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
149.56%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
25.20%
Our AR growth while MRVL is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
14.67%
Inventory growth well above MRVL's 5.09%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
12.66%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
13.52%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
2.10%
We have some new debt while MRVL reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
9.71%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 0.39%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
6.53%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 4.05%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.