Competitive Comparison

Broadcom vs. Marvell vs. Qualcomm

Three custom/specialty silicon names serving hyperscalers and mobile — one held, one watched, one not owned — compared on growth-adjusted valuation.

Metric	Broadcom (AVGO)	Marvell (MRVL)	Qualcomm (QCOM)
PEG ratio	2.37	2.63	1.22
5yr EBITDA growth	19.3%	29.6%	9.2%
Capex (TTM)	$860.00M	$391.00M	n/a

PEG ratio, compared

AVGO

2.37

MRVL

2.63

QCOM

1.22

Same PEG ratio figures as the table above, plotted for a direct read. Bold = held in this book.

Market cap, P/E, PEG, EV/EBITDA, and capex sourced via public filings and financial-data aggregators (GuruFocus, StockAnalysis, company earnings releases), as of July 2026. PEG ratio sourced primarily from GuruFocus where available; different providers use different growth-rate assumptions, so figures elsewhere for the same stock can vary by several multiples. Gold-highlighted column(s) indicate the name(s) actually held in this book.

Why Broadcom over Marvell and Qualcomm

Marvell actually has the fastest 5-year EBITDA growth of the three (29.6%) and a lower PEG than Broadcom, which makes it a genuinely reasonable name to watch rather than a clear loser in this comparison. I hold Broadcom specifically because its custom-silicon business pairs with a large, sticky infrastructure-software franchise built through acquisitions — a more diversified earnings base than a pure custom-chip designer, which matters given how lumpy hyperscaler custom-silicon orders can be. Qualcomm, cheapest of the three on PEG at 1.22, is fundamentally a different bet on mobile and connectivity chips rather than AI-accelerator custom silicon, which is why it isn't part of this comparison's core thesis despite the attractive multiple.