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.
-7.00%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-6.56%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-0.77%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.89%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
4.76%
Positive net income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
3.90%
Positive EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
5.26%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.82%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.77%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
11.84%
Dividend growth above 1.5x QCOM's 0.68%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
1.49%
Positive OCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-0.31%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
40.82%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 266.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
4.85%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 91.12%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
17.82%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 22.58%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
149.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 86.78%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
34.74%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 59.32%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
45.06%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 30.80%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
102.44%
Similar net income/share CAGR to QCOM's 106.71%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
2.85%
Below 50% of QCOM's 26.83%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
248.52%
Positive short-term CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
32.16%
Below 50% of QCOM's 196.20%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
10.44%
Below 50% of QCOM's 55.77%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-0.13%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while QCOM is at 2.58%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
1175.51%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 426.22%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
192.39%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 150.20%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
80.78%
3Y dividend/share CAGR similar to QCOM's 89.60%. Walter Schloss finds parallel short-term dividend strategies for both companies.
-21.34%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 0.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-4.52%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.87%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.58%
Positive BV/share change while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.29%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-3.16%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-6.68%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 3.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.