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.
2.41%
Revenue growth under 50% of MPWR's 17.21%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-0.40%
Negative gross profit growth while MPWR is at 16.82%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
3.22%
Positive EBIT growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.22%
Positive operating income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-11.18%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-10.20%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.53%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.52%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.95%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.23%
Dividend reduction while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-19.03%
Negative OCF growth while MPWR is at 60.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-41.00%
Negative FCF growth while MPWR is at 63.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
83.22%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 169.82%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
87.61%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MPWR's 61.66%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
27.99%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 55.56%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
99.01%
OCF/share CAGR of 99.01% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
79.80%
OCF/share CAGR of 79.80% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
-22.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MPWR stands at 217.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
1239.80%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 211.60% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
536.36%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 149.77%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
15.83%
Below 50% of MPWR's 157.17%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
98.52%
Equity/share CAGR of 98.52% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
19.49%
Equity/share CAGR of 19.49% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
7.75%
Below 50% of MPWR's 111.80%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
373.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 373.94% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
367.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 367.18% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
298.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 298.29% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.51%
AR growth well above MPWR's 15.19%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
4.63%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MPWR's 47.16%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.36%
Asset growth well under 50% of MPWR's 12.15%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.83%
Under 50% of MPWR's 8.50%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.06%
Our R&D shrinks while MPWR invests at 13.60%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.61%
We cut SG&A while MPWR invests at 2.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.