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.
-3.94%
Negative revenue growth while MRVL stands at 2.10%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-1.44%
Negative gross profit growth while MRVL is at 3.53%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
1.97%
EBIT growth below 50% of MRVL's 72.21%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
1.97%
Operating income growth under 50% of MRVL's 72.21%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-19.11%
Negative net income growth while MRVL stands at 62.42%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-11.76%
Negative EPS growth while MRVL is at 62.54%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-19.12%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MRVL is at 62.54%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-5.34%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.22%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.03%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 0.22%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
33.03%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 692.07%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
73.79%
FCF growth 50-75% of MRVL's 104.66%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
671.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 577.75%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
20.97%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 416.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
63.79%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 112.12%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
5748.32%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 395.26%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
424.82%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 343.56%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
356.35%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 74.20%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1262.01%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
32.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
467.16%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1672.84%
Below 50% of MRVL's 7410.91%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
101.52%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 31.52%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
76.67%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 30.07%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-9.09%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-6.22%
Inventory is declining while MRVL stands at 8.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.70%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
10.33%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.44%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 4.80%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-5.12%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.