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.
8.54%
Positive revenue growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
13.64%
Positive gross profit growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-13.86%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-13.86%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-21.22%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-18.31%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-22.54%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
1.95%
Slight or no buybacks while MRVL is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
1.97%
Slight or no buyback while MRVL is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-60.38%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-65.89%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
179.08%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 779.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
23.81%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 40.64%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-22.08%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
237.34%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 1137.67%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
199.82%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 246.66%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
10.76%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 28.03%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
265.36%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 198.55%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
30.85%
Below 50% of MRVL's 78.18%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-28.55%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL is 97.59%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
420.13%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 53.05%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
88.06%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 40.98%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
17.68%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 30.42%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
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.
-1.60%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
10.26%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 21.86%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
5.37%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
6.30%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.85%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
7.40%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 4.62%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-32.34%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.