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.
2.41%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 6.80%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-0.40%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 7.79%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
3.22%
EBIT growth below 50% of QCOM's 7.40%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
3.22%
Operating income growth under 50% of QCOM's 7.40%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-11.18%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.00%
Negative EPS growth while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-10.20%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QCOM is at 2.17%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.53%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.52%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.23%
Dividend reduction while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-19.03%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 7.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-41.00%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
83.22%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
87.61%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 143.83%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
27.99%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 94.34%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
99.01%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 162.57%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
79.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 59.66%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
-22.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 17.42%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
1239.80%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 151.09% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
536.36%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 625.66%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
15.83%
Below 50% of QCOM's 46.57%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
98.52%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 17.83%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
19.49%
Below 50% of QCOM's 115.14%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
7.75%
Below 50% of QCOM's 49.67%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
373.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 373.94% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
367.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 367.18% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
298.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 298.29% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.51%
AR growth well above QCOM's 3.56%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
4.63%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 17.24%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.36%
Positive asset growth while QCOM is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.83%
BV/share growth above 1.5x QCOM's 0.25%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.06%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 8.22%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.61%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 7.97%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.