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.
1.04%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 2.76%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
0.29%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QCOM's 4.70%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
0.32%
Positive EBIT growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-0.96%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
297.09%
Positive net income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
294.29%
Positive EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
297.06%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.20%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.20%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.20%
Dividend growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 0.29%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders.
-42.35%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-45.64%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
56.33%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 175.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
47.90%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 16.67%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
27.80%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
134.19%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 121.65%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
247.85%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 3.23%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
94.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
178.55%
Positive 10Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
324.95%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
121.24%
Positive short-term CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
45.75%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 69.66%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
9.43%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
9.04%
Positive short-term equity growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
520.16%
Dividend/share CAGR of 520.16% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
196.58%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 128.17%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
82.35%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 36.18%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
13.77%
Our AR growth while QCOM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
3.83%
We show growth while QCOM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.77%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
3.16%
Positive BV/share change while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.02%
Debt shrinking faster vs. QCOM's 4.35%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-0.26%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 1.65%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
5.87%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 4.18%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.