205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
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.
-5.74%
Negative revenue growth while AVGO stands at 0.59%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
0.15%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AVGO's 0.51%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-20.25%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
2.69%
Positive operating income growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-16.12%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-17.24%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-14.29%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.33%
Share reduction while AVGO is at 0.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.36%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.95%
Dividend reduction while AVGO stands at 0.14%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-59.92%
Negative OCF growth while AVGO is at 7.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-77.51%
Negative FCF growth while AVGO is at 6.62%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-9.32%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AVGO stands at 409.54%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
3.28%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 122.61%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
81.70%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 60.90%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
96.01%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 441.92%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
24.83%
Below 50% of AVGO's 73.80%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
97.36%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 34.25%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
56.05%
Below 50% of AVGO's 691.11%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-6.33%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AVGO is 651.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
1308.11%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 66.58%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
217.61%
Below 50% of AVGO's 839.21%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
1.99%
Below 50% of AVGO's 147.32%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
12.23%
Below 50% of AVGO's 188.08%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
63.26%
Below 50% of AVGO's 1441.93%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
17.88%
Below 50% of AVGO's 71.80%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
29.81%
3Y dividend/share CAGR at 75-90% of AVGO's 38.29%. Bill Ackman wants overhead or revenue enhancements to match competitor's dividend growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.88%
Inventory is declining while AVGO stands at 5.71%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-7.69%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-7.64%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-1.58%
We’re deleveraging while AVGO stands at 1.06%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
1.43%
R&D dropping or stable vs. AVGO's 19.53%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-4.97%
We cut SG&A while AVGO invests at 14.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.