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.
17.04%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of MRVL's 19.30%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
11.76%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 16.86%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
13.92%
EBIT growth below 50% of MRVL's 68.76%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
13.92%
Operating income growth under 50% of MRVL's 68.76%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
14.32%
Net income growth under 50% of MRVL's 69.03%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
27.78%
EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 70.23%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
8.33%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 70.23%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-14.98%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 3.27%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
3.01%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 3.27%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.58%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
175.14%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
537.74%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 31.13%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
537.74%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 31.13%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
537.74%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 31.13%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
1014.35%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 11.66%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
1014.35%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 11.66%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
1014.35%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 11.66%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
926.41%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
926.41%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
926.41%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
779.74%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5610.66%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
779.74%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5610.66%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
779.74%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5610.66%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
2.77%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 33.78%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
18.73%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
6.42%
Asset growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.19%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
33.76%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.28%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 15.59%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
17.89%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 11.54%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
10.81%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 7.08%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.