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.
12.91%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MRVL's 2.48%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
16.69%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
91.72%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
91.72%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
96.98%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
92.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 6.25%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
92.00%
Diluted EPS growth of 92.00% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.52%
Slight or no buybacks while MRVL is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.10%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2281.65%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
464.38%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
80.39%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 476.56%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-1.28%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 29.83%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
18.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 40.65%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
22097.04%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 7584.17%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-46.36%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is at 404.29%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
31.30%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 14.56%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1572.42%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 943.93% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-39.06%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 272.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
199.84%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 75.68%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
272.06%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 106.09%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
74.22%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 55.48%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
75.00%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 37.49%. 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.
8.31%
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.
12.98%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.22%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.34%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.64%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-2.85%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.95%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 3.21%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
12.44%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 1.49%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.