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.
-7.10%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 2.32%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-6.45%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 3.85%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
8.36%
EBIT growth 50-75% of QCOM's 13.32%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
-5.45%
Negative operating income growth while QCOM is at 13.32%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
8.16%
Net income growth at 75-90% of QCOM's 10.73%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements to catch or surpass competitor performance.
4.00%
EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 10.20%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
4.08%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 10.31%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.51%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.10%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 0.34%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
31.30%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-1.84%
Negative OCF growth while QCOM is at 13.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
0.24%
FCF growth under 50% of QCOM's 13.50%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
45.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 246.45%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
13.86%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 71.17%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
22.94%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 9.90%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
141.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with QCOM's 145.16%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
62.92%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 30.49%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
26.13%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
131.02%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 191.65%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
300.73%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 72.55%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
123.41%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 22.70%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
35.88%
Below 50% of QCOM's 165.47%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
9.07%
Below 50% of QCOM's 34.37%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
5.67%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 1.42%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
1168.08%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 342.31%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
194.90%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 146.85%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
66.90%
3Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 52.14%. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the company's short-term profits or payout policy justify these higher hikes.
-12.44%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 14.44%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-1.00%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 16.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
1.33%
Asset growth well under 50% of QCOM's 3.10%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.34%
50-75% of QCOM's 3.34%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-0.06%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-2.83%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-7.01%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.