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 / 6.54M (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.
0.33%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 57.33%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-1.92%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 40.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-542.50%
Negative EBIT growth while QCOM is at 32.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-231.58%
Negative operating income growth while QCOM is at 32.94%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-293.42%
Negative net income growth while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-274.42%
Negative EPS growth while QCOM is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-274.42%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QCOM is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.10%
Share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 14.85%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-2.51%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 14.85%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.32%
Dividend growth of 2.32% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-7.27%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 39.32%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-52.53%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
53.71%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 1035.82%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
11.08%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 482.98%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
3.47%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 151.58%. 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.
12095.78%
OCF/share CAGR of 12095.78% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
-44.04%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-937.41%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-1.99%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-193.53%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
50.55%
Equity/share CAGR of 50.55% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
66.64%
Below 50% of QCOM's 471.83%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
108.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 108.73% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-69.20%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
33.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 33.29% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
10.02%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. QCOM's 45.52%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-13.16%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 19.54%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.42%
Asset growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 6.21%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
-3.93%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
44.26%
Debt growth far above QCOM's 27.81%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
90.64%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 32.29%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-2.24%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 33.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.