PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
-12.77%
Negative revenue growth while AVGO stands at 7.53%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-14.16%
Negative gross profit growth while AVGO is at 12.07%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-21.48%
Negative EBIT growth while AVGO is at 23.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-21.73%
Negative operating income growth while AVGO is at 23.38%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-21.08%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-19.88%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-19.62%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.65%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.92%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
24.31%
Dividend growth above 1.5x AVGO's 0.08%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
1.85%
OCF growth under 50% of AVGO's 17.27%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
4.95%
FCF growth under 50% of AVGO's 18.90%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
100.57%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 532.60%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
39.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 344.03%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
23.68%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 98.20%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
157.89%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 1100.58%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
103.87%
Below 50% of AVGO's 648.17%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
59.17%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 203.30%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
1456.48%
Below 50% of AVGO's 3117.50%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
176.30%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AVGO's 290.21%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
57.27%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of AVGO's 74.11%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
29.63%
Below 50% of AVGO's 1675.14%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-5.16%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AVGO is at 455.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-4.04%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AVGO is at 278.82%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
601.64%
Dividend/share CAGR of 601.64% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
157.27%
Below 50% of AVGO's 663.52%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
102.33%
Below 50% of AVGO's 317.53%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-23.85%
Firm’s AR is declining while AVGO shows 10.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
4.77%
We show growth while AVGO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-7.73%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-13.04%
We have a declining book value while AVGO shows 1.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.02%
We have some new debt while AVGO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.56%
We increase R&D while AVGO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
4.55%
SG&A growth well above AVGO's 1.28%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.