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.
11.15%
Positive revenue growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
8.67%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 16.22%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
-18.95%
Negative EBIT growth while QCOM is at 202.87%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-14.93%
Negative operating income growth while QCOM is at 202.87%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-47.61%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-48.68%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-47.22%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.47%
Share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 3.48%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-4.07%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.45%
Dividend growth of 2.45% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-23.75%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-222.99%
Negative FCF growth while QCOM is at 19.19%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
42.96%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 2597.81%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-19.24%
Negative 5Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 252.88%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
13.52%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
2418.16%
OCF/share CAGR of 2418.16% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-16.24%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is at 490.11%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-19.88%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
7472.52%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 7472.52% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
105.66%
Below 50% of QCOM's 942.83%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-64.38%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
287.85%
Equity/share CAGR of 287.85% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
182.94%
Below 50% of QCOM's 882.74%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
76.79%
Positive short-term equity growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
15.66%
Dividend/share CAGR of 15.66% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-4.26%
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.
-1.77%
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.
12.58%
AR growth well above QCOM's 6.43%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
10.11%
We show growth while QCOM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-6.23%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 3.71%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.27%
We have a declining book value while QCOM shows 2.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
4.89%
We have some new debt while QCOM reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
33.25%
We increase R&D while QCOM cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
13.25%
We expand SG&A while QCOM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.