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.
18.86%
Positive revenue growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
21.26%
Positive gross profit growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
70.38%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
70.38%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
44.48%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
45.61%
Positive EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
43.86%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.24%
Share count expansion well above MRVL's 0.30%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.52%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 0.30%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
0.78%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MRVL cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
29.44%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
53.05%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
652.53%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 5.50%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
120.08%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 26.90%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
132.18%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 47.58%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
1555.59%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 45.68%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
97.70%
Positive OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
218.43%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
2520.23%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
61.17%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
121.53%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
407.76%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 108.67%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
211.82%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 109.88%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
86.13%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 40.59%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
113.76%
Stable or rising dividend while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
6.77%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.14%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
0.45%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.12%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
6.61%
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.
-10.62%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
7.96%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
10.68%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.90%
Debt shrinking faster vs. MRVL's 4.02%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-3.94%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 8.49%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.28%
We expand SG&A while MRVL cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.