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 / 6.59M (Avg.)
37.73 | 5.46
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.
9.31%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of QRVO's 18.03%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
11.33%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QRVO's 34.01%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
14.74%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 53.30%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
18.05%
Operating income growth under 50% of QRVO's 110.05%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
9.84%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.85%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.16%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.22%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.44%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.02%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
119.08%
OCF growth above 1.5x QRVO's 57.67%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
302.55%
FCF growth above 1.5x QRVO's 121.30%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
56.74%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 351.51%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
38.54%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 59.00%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-13.53%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
158.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 240.79%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
9.09%
Positive OCF/share growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
6.59%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
111.90%
Positive 10Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-5.33%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-42.73%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
83.06%
Below 50% of QRVO's 565.40%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
116.48%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
17.94%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
297.32%
Dividend/share CAGR of 297.32% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
51.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 51.38% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
18.05%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 18.05% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-36.69%
Firm’s AR is declining while QRVO shows 34.96%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
2.67%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.48%
Asset growth above 1.5x QRVO's 0.87%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
0.20%
Positive BV/share change while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
9.30%
Debt growth far above QRVO's 0.02%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
1.93%
R&D dropping or stable vs. QRVO's 7.17%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
2.75%
We expand SG&A while QRVO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.