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.
-0.05%
Negative revenue growth while MRVL stands at 10.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
7.69%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 11.62%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
0.27%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
0.27%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-11.66%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-15.38%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-23.08%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
2.27%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 5.14%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
10.51%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 5.68%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6579.03%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
422.34%
FCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 179.36%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
371.01%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 219.51%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
371.01%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 219.51%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
64.33%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 257.11%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1181.54%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 184.31%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
1181.54%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 184.31%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
44.58%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 136.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
140.14%
Similar net income/share CAGR to MRVL's 146.47%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
140.14%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 146.47%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
-30.76%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL is 111.75%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
903.49%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5674.48%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
903.49%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5674.48%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
96.68%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.41%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 10.94%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.24%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 17.69%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
4.21%
Asset growth above 1.5x MRVL's 2.06%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
1.03%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-30.45%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 0.69%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
8.00%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 5.98%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
11.34%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 15.98%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.