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.
-16.40%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 7.64%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-29.55%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-62.46%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-62.46%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-63.67%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-65.79%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-64.86%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
2.06%
Share count expansion well above QCOM's 0.51%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-12.19%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-2.02%
Dividend reduction while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-81.83%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 7.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-145.60%
Negative FCF growth while QCOM is at 4.55%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
9.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 1219.58%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-19.03%
Negative 5Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 214.39%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
1.93%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
72.96%
OCF/share CAGR of 72.96% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
241.61%
Below 50% of QCOM's 751.13%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
333.18%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
403.33%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 403.33% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
20.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
1743.73%
Positive short-term CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
305.24%
Equity/share CAGR of 305.24% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
163.29%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 316.31%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
91.82%
Positive short-term equity growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
5.40%
Dividend/share CAGR of 5.40% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-0.94%
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.
-1.13%
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.
-11.62%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-4.30%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.70%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.20%
Positive BV/share change while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.60%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
1.13%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 0.24%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-13.22%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 19.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.