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.
10.36%
Positive revenue growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
17.05%
Positive gross profit growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
41.52%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 33.29%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
42.32%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 33.29%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
40.25%
Net income growth above 1.5x QCOM's 4.48%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
43.18%
EPS growth above 1.5x QCOM's 4.50%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
40.91%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x QCOM's 4.59%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.93%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.91%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.31%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
67.75%
Positive OCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
80.52%
Positive FCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
67.30%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 400.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
58.50%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 153.66%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
2.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 61.00%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
152.27%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 119.89%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
64.60%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 40.48%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
32.57%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 0.54%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
155.09%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 283.25%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
210.77%
Below 50% of QCOM's 763.00%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
9.70%
Below 50% of QCOM's 92.15%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
38.59%
Below 50% of QCOM's 327.22%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
34.39%
Below 50% of QCOM's 118.64%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
3.61%
Below 50% of QCOM's 50.13%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1337.84%
10Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 895.82%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if a higher payout growth rate remains sustainable long term.
174.90%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 9.11%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
132.42%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 82.64%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
12.69%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. QCOM's 67.07%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
1.75%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 7.80%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-5.94%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 3.44%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.53%
We have a declining book value while QCOM shows 3.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-17.76%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-4.64%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 2.11%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.46%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.