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.
5.99%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 36.67%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
10.72%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QCOM's 44.82%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.22%
EBIT growth below 50% of QCOM's 72.25%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.22%
Operating income growth under 50% of QCOM's 72.25%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-28.46%
Negative net income growth while QCOM stands at 20.90%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-4.55%
Negative EPS growth while QCOM is at 22.22%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-33.13%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 1.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-34.35%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 4.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
53.69%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-63.17%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-101.01%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
0.94%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 1344.74%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
32.83%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
18.57%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 70.01%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-19.88%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 20462.06%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
67.07%
Below 50% of QCOM's 324.34%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
237.16%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 69.78%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
130.60%
Below 50% of QCOM's 4300.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
32.77%
Below 50% of QCOM's 388.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
62.90%
Below 50% of QCOM's 244.20%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
309.80%
Below 50% of QCOM's 1938.11%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
66.92%
Below 50% of QCOM's 426.06%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-5.11%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while QCOM is at 48.17%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
83.26%
Dividend/share CAGR of 83.26% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
3.43%
Dividend/share CAGR of 3.43% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
2.09%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 2.09% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
15.64%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. QCOM's 35.42%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
16.67%
We show growth while QCOM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.77%
Asset growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 2.39%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
52.33%
BV/share growth above 1.5x QCOM's 3.05%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.36%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
10.27%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 4.63%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
14.94%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QCOM's 381.60%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.