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.
-2.88%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 15.60%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-3.46%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 9.95%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-155.87%
Negative EBIT growth while QCOM is at 8.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-155.87%
Negative operating income growth while QCOM is at 8.38%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-116.65%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-116.07%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-116.82%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.87%
Share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 715.75%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.32%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 715.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
5.33%
Dividend growth of 5.33% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-13.35%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 191.39%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-23.08%
Negative FCF growth while QCOM is at 138.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
27.65%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 2719.99%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
12.23%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 910.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-17.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 312.38%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
23.67%
Below 50% of QCOM's 474.07%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
4.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 364.54%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-398.64%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-439.94%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is 2554.81%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-244.17%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM is 1056.03%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
176.53%
Below 50% of QCOM's 6074.33%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
178.97%
Below 50% of QCOM's 628.00%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
85.07%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 110.78%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
93.86%
Dividend/share CAGR of 93.86% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
30.11%
Dividend/share CAGR of 30.11% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
40.58%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 40.58% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.45%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 27.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-2.11%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-10.15%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 10.94%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-7.23%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-16.54%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 46.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
169.45%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 10.72%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
16.62%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 9.98%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.