205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
2.95%
Some net income increase while MRVL is negative at -633.64%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
0.47%
Less D&A growth vs. MRVL's 14.46%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
75.00%
Well above MRVL's 43.41% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
48.00%
SBC growth well above MRVL's 55.90%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-572.34%
Both reduce yoy usage, with MRVL at -301.23%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-95.83%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with MRVL at -25.01%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-219.15%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with MRVL at -13901.04%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
120.37%
A yoy AP increase while MRVL is negative at -1154.32%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-181.37%
Both reduce yoy usage, with MRVL at -616.95%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-500.00%
Negative yoy while MRVL is 129.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-9.04%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with MRVL at -108.67%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
65.44%
Some CapEx rise while MRVL is negative at -9.21%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-97.06%
Negative yoy acquisition while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-7.87%
Negative yoy purchasing while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
2.44%
Liquidation growth of 2.44% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
50.00%
Less 'other investing' outflow yoy vs. MRVL's 223.82%. David Dodd would see a stronger short-term cash position unless competitor invests more wisely.
25.17%
We have mild expansions while MRVL is negative at -15557.72%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
100.00%
We repay more while MRVL is negative at -80.72%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
9.62%
Issuance growth of 9.62% while MRVL is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
-314.79%
Both yoy lines negative, with MRVL at -187.42%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.