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.
6.86%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 5.60%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
7.84%
Gross profit growth similar to QCOM's 7.96%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
55.61%
Positive EBIT growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
50.63%
Positive operating income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
68.30%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 59.17%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
65.22%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 57.83%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
72.73%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 58.02%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
-0.26%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.94%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 1.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.26%
Dividend growth under 50% of QCOM's 0.55%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
50.33%
OCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 6.13%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
52.89%
FCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 13.52%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
157.09%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 542.26%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
22.78%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 117.45%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
50.86%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 95.77%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
190.70%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 841.77%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-5.25%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is at 86.14%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
34.69%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 45.35%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
682.46%
Below 50% of QCOM's 4491.37%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-7.84%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is 200.11%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
90.65%
Below 50% of QCOM's 850.27%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
63.47%
Below 50% of QCOM's 452.41%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
22.37%
Below 50% of QCOM's 107.25%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
34.60%
Below 50% of QCOM's 81.15%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
643.71%
Dividend/share CAGR of 643.71% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
113.74%
Dividend/share CAGR of 113.74% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
55.92%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while QCOM cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
10.22%
AR growth well above QCOM's 14.88%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
1.73%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 9.38%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.44%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 10.44%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.05%
Under 50% of QCOM's 10.91%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-11.01%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 11.96%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-5.70%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 9.28%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.30%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 18.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.