205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
7.27%
Positive revenue growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
7.27%
Positive gross profit growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-368.46%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-368.46%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
1.71%
Positive net income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.11%
Slight or no buybacks while QCOM is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
1.11%
Slight or no buyback while QCOM is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.19%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 161.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
31.19%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 118.62%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
31.19%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
317.31%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 231.57%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
317.31%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 225.62%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
317.31%
Positive short-term CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
13.09%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 20.67%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
13.09%
Below 50% of QCOM's 749.40%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
13.09%
Below 50% of QCOM's 74.21%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-46.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while QCOM stands at 88.30%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-46.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 36.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-46.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while QCOM invests at 18.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.