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.
13.15%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MRVL's 4.32%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
14.95%
Positive gross profit growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
29.79%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
29.79%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
31.23%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
30.51%
Positive EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
31.03%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.32%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 2.95%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.16%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 0.79%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.32%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-9.34%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-11.66%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
463.61%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
275.12%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 12.92%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
72.26%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
942.36%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
424.44%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 98.35%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
26.56%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1254.35%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
743.56%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
49.99%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
421.55%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 179.18%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
286.90%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 165.88%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
137.40%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 148.63%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
38.08%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
6.16%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
24.50%
AR growth well above MRVL's 29.39%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
9.09%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 100.62%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
6.96%
Asset growth well under 50% of MRVL's 97.21%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
10.78%
Under 50% of MRVL's 71.06%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
1.86%
Debt shrinking faster vs. MRVL's 310.66%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
0.52%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MRVL's 9.88%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.38%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MRVL's 72.31%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.