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.
-3.62%
Negative revenue growth while MRVL stands at 2.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.43%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-7.22%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-7.22%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-7.08%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-7.69%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.76%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.65%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 1.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.20%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 2.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-1.68%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-62.31%
Negative OCF growth while MRVL is at 133.99%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-63.52%
Negative FCF growth while MRVL is at 152.49%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
107.11%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 272.09%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
61.04%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 124.99%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
21.95%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 51.00%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
117.69%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 779.30%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
3.07%
Below 50% of MRVL's 99.27%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-6.70%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 67.91%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
466.73%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 618.61%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
165.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 209.32%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
7.41%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
240.03%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 123.97%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
74.30%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 55.97%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
28.58%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 23.04%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
-7.02%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 14.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
1.42%
Inventory growth well above MRVL's 0.80%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-5.33%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 4.26%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.92%
We have a declining book value while MRVL shows 0.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.44%
Debt growth of 0.44% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-0.71%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 2.24%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
2.51%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MRVL's 9.36%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.