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 / 6.59M (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.
-7.92%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 2.46%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-9.52%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 1.51%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-17.63%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-17.63%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-4.84%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2.13%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.52%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-2.41%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
29.35%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
101.67%
OCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 16.67%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
341.26%
FCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 29.81%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
204.26%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 380.35%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
111.21%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 185.37%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
120.70%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QCOM's 110.38%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
37.20%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 1650.96%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
18.07%
Below 50% of QCOM's 179.33%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
39.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 72.63%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
2571.27%
Below 50% of QCOM's 5189.11%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
727.64%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 389.78%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
129.87%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 101.53%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
187.22%
Below 50% of QCOM's 979.78%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
4.23%
Below 50% of QCOM's 151.46%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
69.04%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to QCOM's 68.75%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
87.75%
Dividend/share CAGR of 87.75% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
75.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 75.60% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
184.42%
3Y dividend/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 239.58%. Bill Ackman wants overhead or revenue enhancements to match competitor's dividend growth.
-15.08%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 0.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-3.62%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-5.78%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 3.36%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.10%
We have a declining book value while QCOM shows 4.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.46%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 4.30%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.39%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 9.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.