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.
6.79%
Revenue growth under 50% of QCOM's 70.57%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
7.87%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QCOM's 98.36%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
20.72%
EBIT growth below 50% of QCOM's 341.43%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
12.68%
Operating income growth under 50% of QCOM's 341.43%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
24.76%
Net income growth under 50% of QCOM's 250.30%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
24.49%
EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 249.33%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
24.14%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of QCOM's 248.65%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.22%
Share count expansion well above QCOM's 0.27%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.32%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 0.79%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
13.33%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
47.26%
Positive OCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
47.49%
Positive FCF growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
47.46%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 302.82%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
40.65%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 110.77%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
16.50%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 84.61%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
120.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with QCOM's 126.95%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
63.52%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 42.45%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
18.07%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
128.52%
Below 50% of QCOM's 387.55%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
122.19%
Below 50% of QCOM's 284.40%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
425.94%
Below 50% of QCOM's 2201.39%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
12.26%
Positive growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
1.64%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-4.74%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
681.02%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 242.88%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
167.12%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 37.04%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
64.37%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 14.00%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
1.58%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. QCOM's 116.73%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-5.65%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 10.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
6.28%
Asset growth at 50-75% of QCOM's 10.10%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
10.11%
Under 50% of QCOM's 83.33%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.74%
We have some new debt while QCOM reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.52%
R&D dropping or stable vs. QCOM's 4.14%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-2.21%
We cut SG&A while QCOM invests at 7.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.