MPWR vs MRVL Stock Comparison
MPWR currently leads MRVL in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 42 vs 38. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while MRVL has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between MPWR and MRVL?
MPWR leads the current stock comparison as Monolithic Power Systems, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. vs Marvell Technology, Inc.
MPWR leads
MPWR leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 8 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support MPWR, and its lead is narrowing.
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
Marvell Technology, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MPWR over MRVL, 42 versus 38 as of Oct 21, 2026. MPWR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while MRVL holds the stronger momentum profile. MPWR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MPWR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. MPWR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. and Marvell Technology, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare MPWR and MRVL against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Risk Resilience49 vs 36MPWR +13
- Quality77 vs 65MPWR +12
- Momentum17 vs 22MRVL +5
- Value25 vs 25Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor MPWR. MPWR’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; MRVL keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
MPWR's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MPWR and MRVL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MPWR (Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
MRVL (Marvell Technology, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 54.9% against 45.8%.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
MPWRMPWR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MPWRMPWR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
MRVLMRVL on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
MPWRMPWR on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
MPWRMPWR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | MPWR | MRVL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +44.7% | +15.8% | MPWR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.9% | +114.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 29 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | MPWR | MRVL |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 25.55% | 0.00% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.000 | $0.240 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $6.240 | $0.240 |
| Years increased | 5 | 1 |
| No cut in window | Yes | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | #3 | not ranked |
MPWR grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 25.55% a year against MRVL's 0.00%. MPWR never reduced its regular dividend in the window; MRVL did in 1 year.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MPWR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MPWR | 42 vs 38 |
| Fundamentals | MPWR | revenue growth 21.9% vs 13.3%; EPS growth 32.7% vs 7.7%; TTM ROE 21.8% vs 16.2%; gross margin 55.2% vs 51.4%; operating margin 28.7% vs 16.7% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 25 vs 25 |
| Technicals | MRVL | Price vs 50-day -1.4% vs 1.1%; vs 200-day -4.5% vs 35.5% |
| Risk Resilience | MPWR | Risk Resilience 49 vs 36 |
| Analyst expectations | MPWR | Target upside 44.7% vs 15.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MPWR and MRVL and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on MPWR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20MPWR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MPWR +4
- 42 vs 38
- 7 sessions ago
- MRVL +1
- 41 vs 42
- 30 sessions ago
- MPWR +8
- 61 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- MPWR +6
- 59 vs 53
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when MPWR moved ahead of MRVL.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
Only MPWR
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.40%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only MRVL
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (36.46%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
MRVL is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.77%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.81%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1MRVL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 13 points behind, the largest single contributor to MPWR's edge.
- 2MRVL's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3MPWR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate MPWR's advantage entirely.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
MPWR leads on balance| Metric | MPWR | MRVL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 21.9% | 13.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 32.7% | 7.7% |
| Gross margin | 55.2% | 51.4% |
| Operating margin | 28.7% | 16.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 21.8% | 16.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0.29 |
Performance
MRVL leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | MPWR | MRVL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.4% | -10.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.6% | -8.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -10.7% | 13.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.2% | 58.9% |
| Year to date | 37.8% | 182.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.2% | 172.5% |
Technicals
MRVL has the stronger structure| Metric | MPWR | MRVL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.1 | 38.5 |
| ADX (14) | 21.6 | 19.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.4% | 1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.5% | 35.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 45.8% | 54.9% |
Risk
MPWR is the more resilient| Metric | MPWR | MRVL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.51 | 3.15 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.6 | 1.6 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.93 | 2.76 |
| Max drawdown | -32.4% | -48.4% |
| Current drawdown | -26.1% | -24% |
| Annualized volatility | 54.1% | 79.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.3% | -7.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MPWR or MRVL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MPWR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 42 against MRVL's 38. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. MRVL is not without a case — it holds the better momentum profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is MPWR or MRVL the better buy right now?
MPWR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MPWR over MRVL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MPWR leads Risk Resilience by 13 points; MPWR leads Quality by 12 points; MRVL leads Momentum by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MPWR or MRVL?
Analyst price targets imply +44.7% upside for MPWR and +15.8% for MRVL, so the Street currently favors MPWR. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, MPWR or MRVL?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, MPWR or MRVL?
MPWR on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, MPWR or MRVL?
MRVL on the Momentum factor, by 5 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, MPWR or MRVL?
MPWR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MPWR on Risk Resilience, by 13 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is MPWR more profitable than MRVL?
MPWR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 55.2% vs 51.4%; operating margin 28.7% vs 16.7%; ttm roe 21.8% vs 16.2%.
Is MPWR's lead over MRVL getting stronger or weaker?
MPWR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-19, when MPWR moved ahead of MRVL.
What would change the MPWR vs MRVL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MRVL closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 13 points behind, the largest single contributor to MPWR's edge; MRVL's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; MPWR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate MPWR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about MPWR and MRVL?
MPWR: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. MRVL: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on MPWR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MRVL it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MPWR and MRVL with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.