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.
-2.49%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 15.11%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
13.22%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 10.87%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
597.37%
EBIT growth above 1.5x QCOM's 4.00%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
634.21%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QCOM's 4.00%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
215.38%
Positive net income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
233.33%
Positive EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
233.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.18%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.46%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 1.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
3.22%
Dividend growth of 3.22% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
82.20%
OCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 6.07%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
146.94%
FCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 0.71%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
9.50%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 35336.90%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-11.69%
Negative 5Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 7749.13%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-40.47%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 4535.24%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.19%
Positive OCF/share growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
6.52%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
43.07%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 43.07% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
1.45%
Below 50% of QCOM's 321.65%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-45.24%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM is 321.65%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
137.33%
Below 50% of QCOM's 6445.93%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
51.12%
Below 50% of QCOM's 1967.48%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
93.58%
Dividend/share CAGR of 93.58% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
33.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 33.51% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
2.52%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 2.52% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-11.07%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 28.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-19.26%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 9.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.61%
Asset growth well under 50% of QCOM's 7.31%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.34%
Similar to QCOM's 1.35%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
-0.15%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 126.07%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-4.90%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 20.62%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-31.95%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 6.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.