Jim Cramer points to NVIDIA CEO’s bullish comments as he cites Marvell upside

Jim Cramer on CNBC’s Mad Money singled out Marvell Technology as a stock he says could have “a lot more upside,” tying the argument to bullish comments by NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang about Marvell’s trajectory. Cramer’s point, as reported in a market roundup, was not a forecast about any specific merger or contract. Instead, he framed Marvell’s potential as a bet on whether Huang’s public endorsement plays out in the market’s view of what Marvell can become over time.

In the segment, Cramer pointed to Huang’s prediction that Marvell could be the “next trillion-dollar company.” Cramer then said that if Huang is right, there is “a lot more upside,” arguing that investors may be underestimating how far Marvell’s portfolio and customer traction could go. Cramer also characterized Marvell as still relatively smaller by market value terms, saying Marvell is a “$260 billion company.”

The comments came as Cramer discussed how investors might position around what he described as an upcoming “wave of takeovers,” a theme he has highlighted in other episodes. In this specific reference, however, Marvell was presented less as a pure takeover target and more as a high-visibility semiconductor name tied to AI-related demand for data-center infrastructure, particularly networking and storage connectivity that underpins training and inference workloads.

Cramer also addressed investor concerns that Marvell may have lost meaningful business. He cited prior remarks from Marvell CEO Matt Murphy, referring to a December appearance when the stock was around $88. According to the report, Murphy told Cramer that he had reported no loss of business, and Cramer urged viewers to weigh those statements against what he characterized as “noise” or competing claims.

Marvell develops semiconductor solutions used in data infrastructure, including system-on-a-chip designs and processors, along with networking and storage products, according to the research text describing what Cramer covered. For investors, the relevance of that product set is that AI systems depend on fast interconnects and reliable data movement between accelerators and servers, where specialized chips can influence performance and platform upgrades over multiple hardware cycles.

Cramer’s broader “takeovers” framing also matters for how markets interpret multiple areas of corporate activity at once. He has argued in past segments that dealmaking can expand across sectors, potentially pulling attention toward technology and infrastructure names that sit at the intersection of demand growth and strategic consolidation. Even so, in the Marvell reference, the reported material did not specify any direct deal or offer, and there was no disclosed timetable or named counterpart tied to Cramer’s comments.

A key limitation is that the materials available here are based on how the segment was summarized rather than a full transcript or an official Marvell filing. The report does not provide additional specifics on what exact NVIDIA materials Huang referenced beyond the characterization that Huang endorsed Marvell and predicted it could reach trillion-dollar scale. It also does not clarify whether Cramer’s “takeovers” discussion related directly to Marvell’s valuation, business lines, or ownership structure, or whether it was a general market theme during the episode.

Investors watching Marvell after comments like these typically look for follow-through indicates such as management commentary on customer adoption, order visibility, and any evidence that its AI-related product roadmap is broadening within data-center deployments. For NVIDIA, the watch item is whether public statements around partners continue to translate into measurable commercial momentum. For the market more broadly, the watch is whether the rumored pickup in merger activity, if it materializes, lifts interest in companies positioned at the core of AI infrastructure buildouts. In this episode’s case, the immediate new information is the renewed spotlight, not a disclosed corporate action.