Microchip Technology vs Marvell Technology
MCHP and MRVL side by side, both in electronic components and accessories. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MCHP and MRVL compare
Marvell Technology is the larger company, worth 4.1 times as much as Microchip Technology ($172B against $42.0B).
On earnings, Marvell Technology is cheaper: it trades at 64.8× trailing earnings, against 115× for Microchip Technology.
Marvell Technology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (30.6% versus 20.9% for Microchip Technology).
Marvell Technology keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 27.9% compared with 9.3% at Microchip Technology.
Both pay dividends: Microchip Technology yields 2.4% and Marvell Technology 0.12%.
Marvell Technology scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 12 for Microchip Technology), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | MCHP | MRVL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $42.0B | $172B |
| Share price | $77.34 | $196.40 |
| Change, 1 year | 23.7% | 118% |
| Change, 5 years | −9.8% | 173% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.67 | 1.99 |
| Employees | 18K | 7,480 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 115× | 64.8× (better) |
| P/S | 8.2× (better) | 18.2× |
| P/B | 6.5× (better) | 9.3× |
| EV/EBITDA | 32.0× (better) | 111× |
| P/FCF | 37.8× (better) | 99.5× |
| FCF yield | 2.6% (better) | 1.0% |
| Fair value | $33.00 | $75.71 |
| Margin of safety | −134% (better) | −159% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 20.9% | 30.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −2.8% | 22.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −19.5% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 60.2% (better) | 52.2% |
| Operating margin | 15.5% | 16.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 9.3% | 27.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | 21.7% (better) | 18.3% |
| Return on equity | 7.2% | 16.5% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 5.6% | 6.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.83 | 0.27 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.46 | 0.66 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 3.7× | 7.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.92 | 3.17 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.28 | 12.30 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.4% (better) | 0.12% |
| Payout ratio | 206% | 7.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 17 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 19.5% (better) | 0.00% |
| Buyback yield | −0.15% | 1.1% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% (better) | 1.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 79.7% |
| Held by insiders | 2.0% | 0.37% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$71.1M | −$49.6M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.8% |
Go deeper
- MCHP stock overview
- MCHP income statement
- MCHP valuation and score
- MRVL stock overview
- MRVL income statement
- MRVL valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.