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.
-8.07%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-8.02%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-27.22%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-27.22%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-16.79%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-17.65%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-15.66%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.35%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.09%
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.
148.51%
OCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 49.80%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
194.77%
FCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 42.66%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
91.29%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 366.22%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-17.64%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 3.04%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
1.38%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 9.19%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
193.99%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 994.08%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
59.86%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 40.52%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
486.12%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
176.80%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 287.72%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
-39.42%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 4254.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
19.44%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
319.49%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 108.60%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
65.02%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 47.58%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
63.01%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 20.45%. 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.
2.09%
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.
-2.17%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
5.55%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.58%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.87%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-3.20%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
4.87%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 3.82%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.75%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MRVL's 19.05%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.