PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (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.
2.81%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 93.40%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.64%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QCOM's 168.32%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
4.17%
EBIT growth below 50% of QCOM's 465.64%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
5.51%
Operating income growth under 50% of QCOM's 465.64%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
9.20%
Net income growth under 50% of QCOM's 224.13%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
10.14%
EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 221.82%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.56%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 218.18%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.21%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.31%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 1.15%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.08%
Similar dividend growth to QCOM's 0.07%. Walter Schloss might see parallel free cash flow or payout philosophies.
10.91%
OCF growth under 50% of QCOM's 518.26%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
21.89%
FCF growth under 50% of QCOM's 646.96%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
75.75%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 376.23%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
22.11%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 95.77%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
9.87%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 92.69%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
220.59%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 514.52%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
63.29%
Below 50% of QCOM's 153.97%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
50.95%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 222.48%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
255.52%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of QCOM's 296.77%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
95.58%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 32.79%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
57.62%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of QCOM's 79.88%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
27.78%
Positive growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-2.72%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-6.47%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
601.27%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 264.31%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
156.24%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 47.89%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
102.09%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 16.85%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-5.43%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.88%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 2.84%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.50%
Asset growth above 1.5x QCOM's 0.32%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
6.11%
Under 50% of QCOM's 40.84%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.19%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 0.14%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-2.82%
Our R&D shrinks while QCOM invests at 5.50%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-5.00%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.