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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
10.12%
Revenue growth below 50% of MRVL's 26.60%. Michael Burry would check for competitive disadvantage risks.
8.79%
Cost growth less than half of MRVL's 28.17%. David Dodd would verify if cost advantage is structural.
12.17%
Gross profit growth below 50% of MRVL's 25.20%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
1.86%
Margin expansion while MRVL shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
20.07%
Similar R&D growth to MRVL's 24.90%. Walter Schloss would investigate industry innovation requirements.
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.
17.13%
Operating expenses growth less than half of MRVL's 59.24%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
10.92%
Total costs growth less than half of MRVL's 44.42%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.43%
D&A growth less than half of MRVL's 265.59%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency is sustainable.
7.41%
EBITDA growth below 50% of MRVL's 58.66%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-2.46%
EBITDA margin decline while MRVL shows 25.33% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
6.58%
Operating income growth while MRVL declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-3.22%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
42.92%
Other expenses growth while MRVL reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
10.65%
Pre-tax income growth while MRVL declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
0.48%
Pre-tax margin growth while MRVL declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
10.64%
Tax expense growth less than half of MRVL's 40.73%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
10.66%
Net income growth while MRVL declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
0.49%
Net margin growth while MRVL declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-11.11%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
6.67%
Diluted EPS growth while MRVL declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
22.61%
Share count increase while MRVL reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.
0.61%
Diluted share increase while MRVL reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.