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.
-8.89%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 9.94%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-8.13%
Negative gross profit growth while QCOM is at 12.80%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-13.11%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-12.58%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-73.23%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-72.87%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-73.02%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.30%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.10%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
23.81%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
12.02%
OCF growth under 50% of QCOM's 2847.56%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
10.55%
FCF growth under 50% of QCOM's 2368.42%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
46.89%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 187.47%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
42.24%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QCOM's 39.95%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
21.89%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 0.08%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
88.82%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 160.15%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
100.89%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to QCOM's 98.04%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
61.14%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 69.32%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
-36.54%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
47.24%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-55.69%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
44.34%
Below 50% of QCOM's 117.98%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
6.56%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 5.88%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
5.71%
Positive short-term equity growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
516.71%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 310.49%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
193.79%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 127.91%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
82.37%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 35.87%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-18.91%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 2.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
2.57%
Inventory growth well above QCOM's 1.65%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
4.21%
Asset growth above 1.5x QCOM's 1.72%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-5.64%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
13.79%
We have some new debt while QCOM reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.93%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 0.43%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-0.73%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 4.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.