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.
7.30%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 10.00%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
8.98%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 14.58%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
18.97%
EBIT growth 50-75% of QCOM's 29.86%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
18.97%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 29.86%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
18.22%
Net income growth above 1.5x QCOM's 12.04%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
16.67%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 12.82%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
20.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x QCOM's 13.16%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.35%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.07%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 0.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
98.97%
Dividend growth of 98.97% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
62.09%
OCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 25.60%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
93.07%
FCF growth similar to QCOM's 92.51%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
42.64%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
109.40%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 195.36%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
29.69%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 77.64%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
58.50%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 322.71%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
206.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 405.95%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
117.86%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 22.23%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
161.17%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 280.62%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
748.99%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 1429.91%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
69.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 44.52%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
174.56%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 48.51%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
33.59%
Below 50% of QCOM's 166.54%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
13.44%
Below 50% of QCOM's 70.79%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
271.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 271.51% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
247.95%
Dividend/share CAGR of 247.95% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
281.54%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while QCOM cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
8.03%
AR growth well above QCOM's 3.03%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
1.06%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 5.15%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.96%
Asset growth well under 50% of QCOM's 5.61%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.22%
Under 50% of QCOM's 5.65%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-100.00%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.18%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 3.18%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
4.69%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 4.34%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.