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.
2.31%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 1.65%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
3.64%
Positive gross profit growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
12.92%
Positive EBIT growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
10.33%
Positive operating income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
34.92%
Net income growth above 1.5x QCOM's 21.58%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
33.33%
EPS growth similar to QCOM's 33.93%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
33.33%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x QCOM's 19.05%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-29.56%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-27.87%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 2.11%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
41.96%
Dividend growth of 41.96% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-48.82%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-112.03%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
3.06%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 4798.31%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-24.01%
Negative 5Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 1526.26%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-27.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 501.66%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-52.04%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
385.77%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
143.28%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 143.28% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
73.69%
Below 50% of QCOM's 800.56%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
48.33%
Below 50% of QCOM's 350.28%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
145.52%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 287.43%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
49.68%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 17.26%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
83.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 83.48% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
77.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 77.18% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-2.22%
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.
7.14%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. QCOM's 37.48%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
3.72%
We show growth while QCOM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-1.20%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 7.64%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
45.27%
BV/share growth above 1.5x QCOM's 8.63%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-3.48%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 86.28%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.68%
We increase R&D while QCOM cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-1.52%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 4.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.