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.
-16.26%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-26.53%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
22.34%
Positive EBIT growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-80.00%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-84.11%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-88.89%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-88.89%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.47%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.62%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.47%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-77.55%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 253.28%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-80.02%
Negative FCF growth while QCOM is at 466.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
28.28%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 74.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-3.43%
Negative 5Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 96.27%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-22.22%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 43.87%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
45.03%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 1750.59%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-13.19%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is at 635.74%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-43.98%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 484.57%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-91.64%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is at 358.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-93.70%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-96.39%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
72.90%
Below 50% of QCOM's 1001.18%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
3.59%
Below 50% of QCOM's 109.33%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
1.88%
Below 50% of QCOM's 42.45%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
435.74%
Dividend/share CAGR of 435.74% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
417.97%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QCOM is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
265.17%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 265.17% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
23.22%
Our AR growth while QCOM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-20.15%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.38%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.78%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.44%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-15.75%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.