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.
5.78%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.19%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.44%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.44%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
3.96%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
5.56%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
5.56%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.59%
Slight or no buybacks while QRVO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.84%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
38.32%
Dividend growth of 38.32% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
30.10%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
26.88%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
129.53%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 95.48%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
77.01%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
44.21%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2867.62%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 5.08%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
31.90%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
378.63%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
3684.73%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
303.89%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
37.08%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
53.77%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.80%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
10.83%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 10.83% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
13.60%
Our AR growth while QRVO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
5.04%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
8.58%
Asset growth above 1.5x QRVO's 1.09%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
7.55%
BV/share growth above 1.5x QRVO's 3.14%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
4.60%
We have some new debt while QRVO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.79%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-5.72%
We cut SG&A while QRVO invests at 19.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.