Loading data...
Loading data...
Analyzing the stock…
70
Gathering technical, fundamental, and market data — a few seconds
Information Technology · ·
$244.25
▲ $3.49 (+1.4%)
Market data updated: 09/19 02:32 PM
Fundamentals updated: 09/18/2026
News analyzed: 09/19/2026
Market Cap
$214.18B
Day Range
$235.96 - $244.44
52-Week Range
$70.69 - $329.88
Beta
—
Next Earnings
30.11.2026
Support
$162.90
Resistance
$254.60
MRVL is a stock from the Technology sector — Software, hardware, chip, and computing-services companies — revenue tied to the pace of innovation and upgrade cycles.
+221.9% (1Y)
Strengths: 20/33 factors positiveRisk: Medium
This score and all analysis on this page are for informational and educational purposes only and do not constitute investment advice. Read the full disclaimer
Weighted: Technical 25% · Fundamental 20% · Growth 15% · Valuation 15% · News 10% · Quality 10% · Risk 5%
Overall Score
🟡 Mixed
Technical Trend
🟢 Bullish
Insiders
🔴 Bearish
Computed directly from the same signals behind the score above — not AI-generated.
Biggest positive driver
Revenue growth (last year)
Revenue growth (last year): 42.1%
Growth
Biggest negative driver
DCF Fair Value
Estimated fair value: $30.05 vs. price $244.25 (-87.7%)
Fair Value
Signal tension
Growth scores strong (68/100), but fair-value analysis scores this stock as relatively expensive (33/100) — the growth story and the current price aren't fully aligned.
What to watch next
When today echoes the past.
76/100
Similarity
15
Historical Matches
88/100
Analog Quality
-6.0%
Median 40D Outcome
17/100
Pattern Consistency
🟢 Bullish
40%
+4.6% … +9.9%
🟡 Base
0%
— … —
🔴 Bearish
60%
-16.3% … -5.2%
Typical timeframe (based on real historical rates clearing a 60% bar): 5 trading days.
📌 Bottom line: Out of 15 similar historical cases for this stock, 40% (95% CI 20%–64%) saw the stock rise within 20 trading days, with a median gain of -3.8%.
Echo #1 — Trend Acceleration
1 occurrence(s) · 100% historical success
Historical outcome rate is not a probability — it's what happened in this specific historical sample, with a 95% confidence range.
| Horizon | Positive rate (95% CI) | Median | 25th–75th pct | Baseline median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5D | 27% (11%–52%) | -3.8% | -8.7% … +1.3% | +0.6% |
| 10D | 47% (25%–70%) | -2.7% | -12.0% … +6.7% | +0.7% |
| 20D | 40% (20%–64%) | -3.8% | -8.1% … +5.0% | +2.0% |
| 40D | 40% (20%–64%) | -6.0% | -14.1% … +12.7% | +4.3% |
| 60D | 47% (25%–70%) | +0.4% | -20.8% … +28.6% | +6.4% |
Sample size: 15 analogs, each at least 10 trading days apart (no double-counted overlapping events).
What happened after each historical match (20-day return)
| Date | Similarity | Regime | 20D outcome | 60D outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-03-16 | 76/100 | High Volatility | -8.1% | -23.0% |
| 2026-01-05 | 75/100 | Uptrend | -16.3% | +18.3% |
| 2026-02-20 | 74/100 | Consolidation | +10.6% | +112.5% |
| 2025-12-08 | 72/100 | High Volatility | -8.0% | -2.6% |
| 2025-11-05 | 71/100 | Uptrend | +5.7% | -18.7% |
| 2022-03-30 | 71/100 | High Volatility | -16.4% | -34.7% |
| 2022-02-15 | 71/100 | ✓ High Volatility | -7.1% | -29.4% |
| 2021-03-22 | 70/100 | High Volatility | -3.8% | +13.5% |
| 2019-02-04 | 70/100 | Consolidation | +8.0% | +32.9% |
| 2020-11-16 | 70/100 | High Volatility | +4.3% | +24.3% |
| 2024-04-08 | 70/100 | Uptrend | -2.9% | +0.4% |
| 2022-06-07 | 70/100 | High Volatility | -23.6% | -24.7% |
| 2024-05-07 | 70/100 | Consolidation | +1.6% | -13.7% |
| 2023-05-16 | 69/100 | Consolidation | +51.1% | +37.0% |
| 2026-01-28 | 67/100 | Consolidation | -5.2% | +96.5% |
Every accepted match is compared to today across 6 domains (price structure, momentum, technical, volatility, volume, relative strength) using z-scored feature distances — no single indicator dominates. Matches within 10 trading days of each other count as one event, not independent evidence. Outcome rates use a Wilson confidence interval (never a raw percentage alone), the mean return is winsorized against extreme outliers, and "Analog Quality" separately captures sample size, data completeness, and regime match — distinct from raw similarity. Relative strength is measured against SPY and against XLK (this stock's sector).
Cross-stock analogs — real other companies, not this stock's own history.
TIME ECHO identifies historical situations that resemble the current market state. Historical outcomes are not guarantees of future performance. Similarity does not imply causation, and results may change as new data becomes available.
🗓️ What Changed This Week
🌱 Building History
We don't have a real data point from a week ago for this stock yet. The weekly comparison will appear once enough history has accumulated.
📊 Score History
67
Today
—
30D
—
90D
—
1Y
🕰️ Signal Timeline
What StockIQ actually saw for this stock, and what happened after each signal — real data, not a forecast.
1d ago · $241.01
Evidence: FOMO score jumped from 0 to 42 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
2d ago · $229.71
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from -6 to 22 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
2d ago · $229.71
Evidence: Euphoria score crossed 55 (now 60)
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
4d ago · $218.82
Evidence: Narrative Gap moved from 18 to -9 day-over-day
What happened after
Still awaiting outcome
🐂🐻 Investment Thesis
🐂 Bull Case
🐻 Bear Case
🔍 What Could Prove This Wrong
This isn't a price-direction forecast — just a synthesis of real, already-computed data, and future conditions that could change the picture.
🧬 STOCK DNA
This stock's profile across 8 real dimensions — a research tool, not a recommendation
Growth
68
Quality
63
Value
33
Momentum
67
Risk
54
Sentiment
100
Fundamental
80
Institutional
0
Stocks with a similar DNA right now
SCANNING MRVL...
Recent coverage of Marvell Technology centers on its growing role in AI‑chip markets. Multiple analysts (Piper Sandler, Rothschild & Co Redburn, GuruFocus) raised price targets and highlighted the firm as a potential “major AI chip winner,” calling it the “Switzerland of AI” for its broad customer base. Commentary compares Marvell’s AI business to peers such as Astera Labs, Qualcomm and NVIDIA, noting strong data‑center revenue and bullish investor sentiment despite a neutral rating from Redburn.
AI summary based on English-language news sources only — not investment advice.
Everyone's writing about Marvell Technology. News trend score: 100. Reason: 18 of the last 20 articles are positive, versus 2 negative.
News trend analysis is based on article sentiment only, and is not investment advice or financial counsel. Read the full disclaimer
🌡️ Emotional Temperature
59
🎯 Conviction (vs. Emotion)
44
Psychology
72
Fundamentals
80
Technical
67
Valuation
33
A significant decline over time, but on unusually low trading volume — holders unwilling to accept the loss.
Extreme momentum, price far above its moving average, and a large premium over fair value.
The price rise has far outpaced the actual improvement in fundamental data.
Price, volume, and sentiment accelerating together — a sign investors are chasing the price, not just following it.
A sharp drop, unusual volume, and negative news sentiment all at once — selling pressure that looks emotional.
Price (3M)
-23%
Market Narrative
93
Fundamental Reality
44
Narrative Gap
+49
🔀 Psychology Acceleration
News attention/sentiment is running well ahead of the price move itself.
🧠 StockIQ Psychologist
MRVL’s psychology is dominated by **Loss Aversion**, as recent underperformance (-10.7% in 3 months) and subdued volume (0.69x avg) suggest traders hesitate to exit despite valuation extremes (+650% vs. DCF). The **narrative-reality gap (18 points)** hints at overoptimistic expectations, while **Overconfidence (45)** reflects persistent disconnect between price and fundamentals. Key tension: euphoric valuation clashes with weak momentum, raising whether traders cling to gains or exit. The open question: Will traders prioritize locking in losses or double down on overvalued expectations?
Updated: 09/09/2026, 06:49 AM
What could change this?
👥 What the crowd believes
"Marvell's AI Business Is Booming"
"Broadcom vs. Marvell: Which Custom AI Chip Stock Is the Better Buy?"
"Advanced Micro Devices and Marvell Technology Keep Growing Their Revenue"
"After an 18% summer selloff in chip stocks, Citi asks what comes next"
🧠 Market Brain events driving this
📈 12D Investor Psychology
Signal classification confidence: High (confidence in the behavioral read, not a price prediction). Describes observable market behavior, not what any individual investor thinks, and is not a buy/sell signal.
🏛️ Investor DNA — Historical Investors
A Historical Strategy Simulation: assuming each investor follows their documented principles, how would they rate this stock today? This is not a prediction of what they would actually do.
🟢 Best match
Peter Lynch — 96/100
🔴 Weakest match
Jack Schwager — 17/100
🗣️ Why do they disagree?
This stock sparks a sharp divide between methodologies, with some legendary investors seeing it as a high-potential growth play while others flag it as risky or overvalued. Peter Lynch and Edgar Lawrence Smith both rate it near the top (96 and 93, respectively), praising its growth potential and long-term hold viability—reflecting their focus on early-stage companies with untapped upside. Even Thorstein Veblen, who prioritizes real value creation, gives it a solid 70, suggesting alignment between its growth and fundamentals. However, the more conservative and cyclical frameworks—like Benjamin Graham’s (25) and Howard Marks’ (38)—warn of valuation risks, defensive weaknesses, or late-cycle red flags, questioning whether the stock’s premium justifies its exposure. Meanwhile, market efficiency skeptics like Livermore (36) and Schwager (25) dismiss it outright, seeing it as either trending downward or lacking a disciplined entry setup. The contrast underscores a tension between growth-at-all-costs philosophies and those prioritizing safety, liquidity, or structural risks.
Peter Lynch
One Up on Wall Street (1989)
🟢 96
Growth candidate — the price hasn't caught up to the growth
Key question
Is the growth worth the price?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Edgar Lawrence Smith
Common Stocks as Long-Term Investments (1924)
🟢 93
Looks like a real 'buy and hold for a decade' candidate
Key question
Is this a stock I'd be happy to hold and forget about for a decade?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Thorstein Veblen
The Theory of Business Enterprise (1904)
🟢 70
Growth appears aligned with real value creation
Key question
Is management building real value, or just building itself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Walter Bagehot
Lombard Street (1873)
🟢 69
Adequate but not exceptional liquidity
Key question
Does this company have enough liquidity to survive real stress?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Philip Fisher
Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (1958)
🟢 68
Solid, but not the exceptional quality Fisher looked for
Key question
How exceptional is this business, really?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jesse Livermore
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (1923) / How to Trade in Stocks (1940)
🟡 59
No clear trend — Livermore preferred to stay out of this
Key question
What is the price telling me right now?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Gerald M. Loeb
The Battle for Investment Survival (1935)
🟡 52
Moderate risk to capital
Key question
How much capital could I lose here if I'm wrong?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Burton Malkiel & John Bogle
A Random Walk Down Wall Street (1973) / The Little Book of Common Sense Investing (2007)
🟡 39
Mixed case — the evidence for picking this stock over an index is not strong
Key question
Do I actually have an edge here, or do I just think I do?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Morgan Housel
The Psychology of Money (2020)
🟡 36
The kind of volatility that tends to shake patient holders out
Key question
Could I live with this volatility long enough for compounding to actually work?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks (Market Cycle)
Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 34
Looks late-cycle — the position Marks would treat with extra caution
Key question
Where are we in the cycle right now — near a hot extreme, or a cold one?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham (Enterprising Investor)
The Intelligent Investor (1949) — the Enterprising Investor chapters
🔴 31
Not statistically cheap enough for the Enterprising Investor's looser safety bar
Key question
Is the stock statistically cheap enough to justify the extra risk?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Howard Marks
The Most Important Thing (2011) / Mastering the Market Cycle (2018)
🔴 26
Risk/valuation combination Marks would flag as a caution sign
Key question
What is the market probably misunderstanding about the risk here?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Benjamin Graham
Security Analysis (1934) / The Intelligent Investor (1949)
🔴 25
Fails most of Graham's defensive criteria
Key question
Where is my margin of safety?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Charles Mackay
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
🔴 21
Pattern consistent with a crowd delusion Mackay would flag
Key question
Am I being swept along with the crowd, or thinking for myself?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Samuel Armstrong Nelson
The ABC of Stock Speculation (1903)
🔴 20
Cycle looks stretched toward overbought
Key question
Is the price overextended, or is there still room to move?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Jack Schwager
Market Wizards (1989)
🔴 17
No real setup here — the discipline Schwager's wizards shared would say stay out
Key question
What's the risk/reward here, and where is my exit point?
Fact → Principle → Simulation
Based on the last 300 trading days, calculated from real price data. Click an indicator for details and a chart.
🟢 Most indicators support an uptrend (7 bullish · 4 bearish · 1 neutral)
A market-structure read based purely on real price and volume data — not full classic Wyckoff schematic identification (Phase A-E), but a quantitative analysis of what can reliably be computed: trading ranges, "effort vs. result", volume within the range, and Spring/Upthrust detection.
The stock is in a clear uptrend with no defined trading range in the period examined.
Low confidence
The Wyckoff Method, developed by Richard Wyckoff in the early 20th century, reads the balance of supply and demand through price and volume, based on the premise that large investors ("smart money") quietly accumulate shares before rallies and quietly distribute them before declines. The read here is based solely on real price and volume data — full, precise identification of classic Wyckoff patterns (such as Phases A-E) requires human chart-reading experience and judgment, so this is an approximate algorithmic read, not a substitute for professional analysis. This should not be considered investment advice.
Gross Margin
51.0%
Operating Margin
16.1%
Net Margin
32.6%
EBITDA Margin
16.1%
ROE
18.7%
ROA
12.0%
ROIC
—
EPS
$3.10
Cash
$2.64B
Total Debt
$4.47B
Current Ratio
2.01
Debt/Equity
0.31
Total dividend per share paid each year, over the last 5 years.
| Ex-Dividend Date | Amount per Share |
|---|---|
| 10.7.2026 | $0.060 |
| 9.7.2026 | $0.060 |
| 10.4.2026 | $0.060 |
| 9.4.2026 | $0.060 |
| 9.1.2026 | $0.060 |
| 8.1.2026 | $0.060 |
| 10.10.2025 | $0.060 |
| 9.10.2025 | $0.060 |
| 11.7.2025 | $0.060 |
| 10.7.2025 | $0.060 |
| 11.4.2025 | $0.060 |
| 10.4.2025 | $0.060 |
How is Fair Value calculated? →
Current Price
$244.25
Estimated Fair Value (DCF)
$30.05
Model estimate — not a price target. Highly sensitive to growth/discount-rate assumptions.
Gap
-87.7%
🔴 Appears expensive relative to estimated value
Year 1 Growth Rate
13.3%
Discount Rate (WACC)
9.0%
Terminal Growth Rate
2.5%
Projection Years
5
| Year | Growth Rate | Projected FCF | Present Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 13.3% | $1.58B | $1.45B |
| 2 | 10.6% | $1.75B | $1.47B |
| 3 | 7.9% | $1.89B | $1.46B |
| 4 | 5.2% | $1.99B | $1.41B |
| 5 | 2.5% | $2.04B | $1.32B |
Base FCF (last actual year)
$1.40B
Terminal Value
$32.09B
Present Value of Terminal Value
$20.86B
Enterprise Value
$27.97B
Net Debt
$1.83B
Equity Value
$26.13B
*The DCF model is an estimate based on assumptions — not a guaranteed forecast. You can change the assumptions to examine different scenarios.
Book Value per Share
$16.45
Tangible Book Value per Share (Tangible NAV)
$1.71
Sentiment based on basic keywords (not AI) — 18 positive, 0 neutral, 2 negative out of the last 20 articles.
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 19.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 19.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
SeekingAlpha · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Benzinga · 18.9.2026
ChartMill · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 18.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Yahoo · 17.9.2026
Marvell Technology (MRVL) currently has a StockIQ AI score of 67/100, rated "Moderate". The score is a weighted average across up to 7 categories (technical, fundamental, growth, fair value, news, quality, risk), based on real data only.
MRVL currently scores 67/100 (Moderate) across the categories we measure. StockIQ doesn't give buy/sell recommendations — use this as one data point in your own research, not as investment advice.
Per StockIQ's DCF model, MRVL's estimated fair value is $30.05, which is 87.7% below the current price of $244.25. This is one valuation model among several signals in the fair-value category, not a price target.
MRVL's technical score is 67/100, which currently reads as bullish — based on real price/volume signals (moving averages, RSI, MACD, and more), not a prediction of what happens next.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Revenue growth (last year): 42.1%; Earnings per share (EPS) growth: 401.0%; Net income growth: 401.7%.
Based on the real signals StockIQ computed: Estimated fair value: $30.05 vs. price $244.25 (-87.7%); ATR: 6.0% of price; Free cash flow growth: -0.0%.
Yes — MRVL has a real recorded dividend payment history on StockIQ. See the Dividends section on this page for the actual per-share amounts and dates.
Real transactions by officers and insiders, as reported to the SEC on Form 4 — 0 purchases and 7 sales out of the last 25 filings.
| Name | Transaction Type | Date | Shares | Change | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Koopmans Chris | Open Market Sale | 1.9.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $203.27 |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Open Market Sale | 17.8.2026 | 7,500 | -7,500 | $236.08 |
| Scarpulla Justin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 3,166 | -3,166 | — |
| Scarpulla Justin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.8.2026 | 1,570 | -1,570 | $222.02 |
| Scarpulla Justin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.8.2026 | 3,166 | +3,166 | — |
| Koopmans Chris | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 10,000 | -10,000 | $180.50 |
| Koopmans Chris | Open Market Sale | 3.8.2026 | 227,941 | -10,000 | $180.50 |
| Bharathi Sandeep | Open Market Sale | 16.7.2026 | 9,013 | -9,013 | $199.24 |
| Bharathi Sandeep | Open Market Sale | 16.7.2026 | 57,139 | -9,013 | $199.24 |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 6,119 | -6,119 | — |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 6,969 | -6,969 | — |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 8,409 | -8,409 | — |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 6,119 | +6,119 | — |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 3,222 | -3,222 | $206.26 |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 4,428 | -4,428 | $206.26 |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 8,409 | +8,409 | — |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 3,670 | -3,670 | $206.26 |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Open Market Sale | 15.7.2026 | 7,500 | -7,500 | $209.52 |
| MURPHY MATTHEW J | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 6,969 | +6,969 | — |
| Scarpulla Justin | Tax Withholding in Shares | 15.7.2026 | 253 | -253 | $206.26 |
| Scarpulla Justin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 510 | -510 | — |
| Koopmans Chris | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 11,256 | -11,256 | — |
| Scarpulla Justin | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 510 | +510 | — |
| Koopmans Chris | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 3,399 | -3,399 | — |
| Koopmans Chris | Exercise of Derivative Securities | 15.7.2026 | 4,077 | -4,077 | — |
Official FINRA data — the number of shares open in short positions, plus daily short-sale activity.
38,175,634 shares short as of 2026-08-31 · vs. 35,826,090 on 2026-07-31
Official biweekly report (FINRA Rule 4560) — no real higher-frequency data exists for this metric.
43.7% of trading volume this week was short selling, vs. 46.1% the prior week
Based on daily short-sale volume (Reg SHO) — a different metric from the open short interest above: this is daily trading volume, not an open position, so it updates weekly rather than biweekly.
Full breakdown of every data type and its source: Data Sources · Methodology