AVGO vs MRVL
Broadcom and Marvell Technology compared on price, size, range and sentiment. They sit in different parts of the AI supply chain, which is the first thing worth understanding about the comparison.
Prices as of 2026-08-06 13:23 UTC. Updates live in your browser.
Broadcom (AVGO)
Builds custom AI accelerators for hyperscalers alongside a large networking silicon franchise, plus infrastructure software from its VMware acquisition.
- Custom accelerator design wins
- Ethernet switching share against InfiniBand
- Software segment margins
Marvell Technology (MRVL)
Supplies optical interconnect silicon and co-designs custom accelerators, sitting at the point where datacentre networking meets bespoke compute.
- Custom silicon programme milestones
- 800G and 1.6T optical transitions
- Loss or retention of key accelerator sockets
How to read this comparison
Neither column is a verdict. Market cap tells you size, not value. The sentiment score describes how a stock is currently behaving relative to its own history and its peer group — a high score often reflects a large recent move rather than an opportunity. Because these sit in different segments, their drivers differ, and comparing them directly is less meaningful than comparing each against its own peers.
Common questions
Is AVGO or MRVL the bigger company?
Broadcom is larger, at $1.99T against $184.8B. Market caps update through the session.
What is the difference between AVGO and MRVL?
They sit in different parts of the AI supply chain. Broadcom is grouped under ai chips — Builds custom AI accelerators for hyperscalers alongside a large networking silicon franchise, plus infrastructure software from its VMware acquisition. Marvell Technology is grouped under optical & networking — Supplies optical interconnect silicon and co-designs custom accelerators, sitting at the point where datacentre networking meets bespoke compute.
Which has stronger sentiment, AVGO or MRVL?
MRVL currently scores higher, 73 against 72. The score combines momentum, five-day trend, position in the 52-week range, participation, strength versus the group and coverage intensity. It describes behaviour, not value.