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.
-1.33%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 13.64%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-11.24%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 11.73%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-53.58%
Negative EBIT growth while QCOM is at 11.14%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-55.16%
Negative operating income growth while QCOM is at 11.14%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-50.42%
Negative net income growth while QCOM stands at 2.03%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-50.00%
Negative EPS growth while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-49.02%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QCOM is at 1.64%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.70%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.54%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.35%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 0.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
31.32%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-14.67%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 43.99%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-13.44%
Negative FCF growth while QCOM is at 55.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
169.55%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 477.59%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
27.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 102.40%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
54.82%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 21.14%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
75.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 424.81%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
48.49%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 87.88%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-2.06%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 80.16%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
461.83%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 589.79%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
-42.35%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is 69.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
214.05%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 17.99%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
29.85%
Below 50% of QCOM's 396.80%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
24.58%
Below 50% of QCOM's 97.57%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
32.42%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 47.34%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
655.09%
Dividend/share CAGR of 655.09% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
330.01%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 79.18%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
54.35%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 33.13%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-13.40%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 19.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-9.01%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 1.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.96%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 3.77%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.03%
Under 50% of QCOM's 2.00%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-3.60%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
20.00%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 12.42%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
14.43%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 12.00%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.