COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
AVGO vs MRVL
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AVGO scored 72.2, MRVL scored 58.6 — AVGO leads.
Compare another set
AVGO
Broadcom Inc.
72.2
$368.45 · $1.8T
fundamentals as of
Score gap
13.6
AVGO leads
MRVL
Marvell Technology, Inc.
58.6
$237.04 · $212.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestAVGO61.3x
- Fastest growthMRVL+34.1%
- Strongest balance sheetMRVL0.29
- Highest qualityAVGO80 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
AVGO
stronger →← stronger
MRVL
80
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
55
93
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
92
51
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
40
AVGO is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AVGO
MRVL
$32.8bA
FCF
$1.7bC+
+32.3%A
Rev
+34.1%A
0.74C+
D/E
0.29B
61.3xC
P/E
81.2xC
0.41A
PEG
1.34B
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
AVGO
MRVL
215% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
849% above
~47%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
>60%/yr
-76%
1-yr DCF upside
-92%
-68%
5-yr DCF upside
-89%
-54%
10-yr DCF upside
-85%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AVGO
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
MRVL
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
AVGOBroadcom Inc.
Why now
Semiconductors · market cap $1.8T. Down 26% from 52-week high of $495.00 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +32% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.41 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 45 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $527.88 (implying +43% upside).
Moat
Net margin 39% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 33% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 112% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 61.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Beta 1.47 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. P/S 23.2x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
MRVLMarvell Technology, Inc.
Why now
Semiconductors · market cap $212.8b. Down 28% from 52-week high of $329.88 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +34% — in hypergrowth territory. 40 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $259.91 (implying +10% upside).
Moat
Net margin 29% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. $212.8b market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Trailing P/E 81.2x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Beta 2.25 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. P/S 24.4x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where AVGO and MRVL diverge
On the headline score the gap is 13.6 points in favor of AVGO. The widest single difference is Quality, where AVGO leads by 24.2 points.
- QualityAVGO 79.7 · MRVL 55.5AVGO +24.2
- ValueAVGO 50.7 · MRVL 39.5AVGO +11.2
- GrowthAVGO 93.1 · MRVL 91.7level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.