PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN)
205.980.01 (0.00%)
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (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.
2.66%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 33.42%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
11.13%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QCOM's 57.05%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
26.01%
EBIT growth below 50% of QCOM's 2266.67%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
26.01%
Operating income growth under 50% of QCOM's 2266.67%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
30.36%
Net income growth under 50% of QCOM's 1425.00%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
25.00%
EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 1566.67%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
25.00%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 1566.67%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
8.46%
Slight or no buybacks while QCOM is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
8.46%
Slight or no buyback while QCOM is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-11.64%
Dividend reduction while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
10.43%
Positive OCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
36.00%
Positive FCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
54.72%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 351.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
23.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 351.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
19.32%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 351.48%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1572.62%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 1572.62% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
250.38%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 250.38% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
41.03%
Net income/share CAGR of 41.03% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
2034.79%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 2034.79% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger 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.
-12.72%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
45.00%
Dividend/share CAGR of 45.00% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-7.24%
Negative near-term dividend growth while QCOM invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
13.12%
AR growth well above QCOM's 7.84%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
13.04%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 44.32%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
5.91%
Similar asset growth to QCOM's 5.99%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
-1.03%
We have a declining book value while QCOM shows 24.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.44%
We have some new debt while QCOM reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.27%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QCOM's 11.29%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.