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.
-11.16%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-14.27%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-19.78%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-21.40%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-24.91%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-25.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-24.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.21%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.21%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
16.89%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-11.95%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-13.67%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
48.40%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 148.93%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
14.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 0.60%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
4.75%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
133.26%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 29.20%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
54.69%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 5.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
35.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
117.46%
Positive 10Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
45.49%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
9.10%
Positive short-term CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
21.96%
Positive growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-3.83%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-9.21%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
651.36%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 249.46%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
165.01%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 41.64%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
79.91%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 12.11%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-19.97%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 3.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-1.91%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.14%
Positive asset growth while QCOM is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-0.66%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.20%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
1.85%
R&D dropping or stable vs. QCOM's 4.42%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.26%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 0.18%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.