Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $147.33B | $78.63B | $2.04T | $230.92B | $53.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.19B | $2.79B | $68.28B | $44.49B | $4.37B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2.67B | $616M | $24.97B | $9.92B | $-97M |
| Gross Margin | 51.0% | 55.2% | 67.1% | 54.8% | 55.4% |
| Operating Margin | 16.1% | 26.1% | 40.9% | 25.5% | 4.1% |
| Forward P/E | 44.3x | 67.2x | 38.0x | 20.4x | 63.2x |
| Total Debt | $4.47B | $24M | $65.14B | $16.37B | $5.67B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.64B | $1.10B | $16.18B | $7.84B | $772M |
MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marvell Technology,… (MRVL) | 100 | 521.6 | +421.6% |
| Monolithic Power Sy… (MPWR) | 100 | 763.2 | +663.2% |
| Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) | 100 | 1476.1 | +1376.1% |
| QUALCOMM Incorporat… (QCOM) | 100 | 270.9 | +170.9% |
| Microchip Technolog… (MCHP) | 100 | 206.4 | +106.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MRVL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 42.1%, EPS growth 401.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.4%
- 42.1% revenue growth vs MCHP's -42.3%
- +195.6% vs QCOM's +53.4%
Among these 5 stocks, MPWR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
AVGO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 30.2% 10Y total return vs MPWR's 25.3%
- PEG 0.76 vs QCOM's 9.80
- 36.6% margin vs MCHP's -2.2%
QCOM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.64, yield 1.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.64, Low D/E 77.2%, current ratio 2.82x
- Beta 1.64, yield 1.6%, current ratio 2.82x
- Lower P/E (20.4x vs 63.2x)
MCHP is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 1.8% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs QCOM's 1.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 42.1% revenue growth vs MCHP's -42.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.4x vs 63.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 36.6% margin vs MCHP's -2.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.64 vs MPWR's 2.27 | |
| Dividends | 1.8% yield, 5-year raise streak, vs QCOM's 1.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +195.6% vs QCOM's +53.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.4% ROA vs MCHP's -0.7%, ROIC 29.1% vs 1.8% |
MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AVGO leads in 2 of 6 categories
QCOM leads 2 • MRVL leads 0 • MPWR leads 0 • MCHP leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AVGO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AVGO is the larger business by revenue, generating $68.3B annually — 24.5x MPWR's $2.8B. AVGO is the more profitable business, keeping 36.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MCHP's -2.2%. On growth, AVGO holds the edge at +29.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.2B | $2.8B | $68.3B | $44.5B | $4.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.3B | $781M | $38.8B | $12.8B | $881M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.7B | $616M | $25.0B | $9.9B | -$97M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.4B | $664M | $28.9B | $12.5B | $820M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +51.0% | +55.2% | +67.1% | +54.8% | +55.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +16.1% | +26.1% | +40.9% | +25.5% | +4.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +32.6% | +22.1% | +36.6% | +22.3% | -2.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +17.0% | +23.8% | +42.3% | +28.1% | +18.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +22.1% | +20.8% | +29.5% | -3.5% | +15.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +100.0% | -88.4% | +31.6% | +173.0% | +164.2% |
Valuation Metrics
QCOM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 43.7x trailing earnings, QCOM trades at a 65% valuation discount to MPWR's 125.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), AVGO offers better value at 1.81x vs QCOM's 21.03x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $147.3B | $78.6B | $2.04T | $230.9B | $53.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $149.2B | $77.6B | $2.09T | $239.5B | $58.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 55.42x | 125.56x | 90.15x | 43.73x | -9999.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 44.32x | 67.24x | 37.99x | 20.37x | 63.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.26x | 1.81x | 21.03x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 112.76x | 99.47x | 60.94x | 17.16x | 55.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 17.98x | 28.18x | 31.91x | 5.21x | 12.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 10.34x | 21.90x | 25.67x | 11.42x | 7.52x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 105.51x | 118.03x | 75.75x | 18.01x | 69.45x |
Profitability & Efficiency
QCOM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QCOM delivers a 40.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $40 in annual profit, vs $-1 for MCHP. MPWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AVGO's 0.80x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AVGO scores 8/9 vs MCHP's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +19.4% | +17.9% | +32.9% | +40.2% | -1.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +12.6% | +15.2% | +14.9% | +18.4% | -0.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.0% | +22.2% | +14.9% | +29.1% | +1.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.1% | +20.4% | +16.9% | +28.9% | +2.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.31x | 0.01x | 0.80x | 0.77x | 0.80x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.8B | -$1.1B | $49.0B | $8.5B | $4.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.6B | $1.1B | $16.2B | $7.8B | $772M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4.5B | $24M | $65.1B | $16.4B | $5.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 15.17x | — | 9.24x | 17.60x | 0.78x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AVGO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AVGO five years ago would be worth $100,886 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,873 for MCHP. Over the past 12 months, MRVL leads with a +195.6% total return vs QCOM's +53.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AVGO at 90.8% vs MCHP's 12.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +90.5% | +71.2% | +23.9% | +27.2% | +53.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +195.6% | +151.2% | +108.2% | +53.4% | +105.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +316.6% | +286.3% | +594.1% | +111.7% | +40.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +286.6% | +404.2% | +908.9% | +82.3% | +48.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1686.0% | +2534.9% | +3019.8% | +382.4% | +363.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +60.9% | +56.9% | +90.8% | +28.4% | +12.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AVGO and QCOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
QCOM is the less volatile stock with a 1.64 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MPWR's 2.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AVGO currently trades 98.2% from its 52-week high vs MCHP's 93.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.27x | 2.27x | 1.96x | 1.64x | 1.69x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $175.79 | $1662.00 | $437.68 | $228.04 | $105.91 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $56.69 | $630.00 | $203.69 | $121.99 | $48.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.8% | +96.3% | +98.2% | +96.1% | +93.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.7 | 61.6 | 60.0 | 82.6 | 78.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 24.9M | 578K | 23.1M | 15.6M | 9.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — QCOM and MCHP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MRVL as "Buy", MPWR as "Buy", AVGO as "Buy", QCOM as "Hold", MCHP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 7.3% upside for MCHP (target: $106) vs -21.8% for MRVL (target: $133). For income investors, MCHP offers the higher dividend yield at 1.83% vs MRVL's 0.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $133.10 | $1615.00 | $443.72 | $185.56 | $106.35 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 72 | 25 | 58 | 69 | 46 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.1% | +0.4% | +0.5% | +1.6% | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 8 | 16 | 23 | 5 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.24 | $5.90 | $2.30 | $3.44 | $1.82 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | +0.0% | +0.3% | +3.8% | +0.2% |
AVGO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). QCOM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
MRVL vs MPWR vs AVGO vs QCOM vs MCHP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Marvell Technology, Inc.
(MRVL) is the stronger pick with 42. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -42. 3% for Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP). QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) offers the better valuation at 43. 7x trailing P/E (20. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Marvell Technology, Inc. (MRVL) a "Buy" — based on 72 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP?
On trailing P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the cheapest at 43.
7x versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. at 125. 6x. On forward P/E, QUALCOMM Incorporated is actually cheaper at 20. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Broadcom Inc. wins at 0. 76x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP?
Over the past 5 years, Broadcom Inc.
(AVGO) delivered a total return of +908. 9%, compared to +48. 7% for Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AVGO returned +30. 2% versus MCHP's +363. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
64β versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 's 2. 27β — meaning MPWR is approximately 39% more volatile than QCOM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (MPWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 80% for Broadcom Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Marvell Technology, Inc.
(MRVL) is pulling ahead at 42. 1% versus -42. 3% for Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Marvell Technology, Inc. grew EPS 401. 0% year-over-year, compared to -100. 1% for Microchip Technology Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, AVGO leads at 24. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP?
Broadcom Inc.
(AVGO) is the more profitable company, earning 36. 2% net margin versus -0. 0% for Microchip Technology Incorporated — meaning it keeps 36. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AVGO leads at 39. 9% versus 6. 7% for MCHP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AVGO leads at 67. 8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 76x versus QUALCOMM Incorporated's 9. 80x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) trades at 20. 4x forward P/E versus 67. 2x for Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. — 46. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MCHP: 7. 3% to $106. 35.
08Which pays a better dividend — MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Microchip Technology Incorporated (MCHP) offers the highest yield at 1. 8%, versus 0. 1% for Marvell Technology, Inc. (MRVL).
09Is MRVL or MPWR or AVGO or QCOM or MCHP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, QUALCOMM Incorporated (QCOM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (1.
6% yield, +382. 4% 10Y return). Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (MPWR) carries a higher beta of 2. 27 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (QCOM: +382. 4%, MPWR: +25. 3%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between MRVL and MPWR and AVGO and QCOM and MCHP?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: MRVL is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MPWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; AVGO is a mega-cap high-growth stock; QCOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MCHP is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. AVGO, QCOM, MCHP pay a dividend while MRVL, MPWR do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.