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.
3.98%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-2.45%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-29.68%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-29.68%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
97.89%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
120.00%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
120.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-10.05%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-10.05%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-7.61%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
45.99%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
40.95%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-16.58%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QRVO stands at 95.48%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-18.69%
Negative 5Y CAGR while QRVO stands at 27.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-7.31%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
28.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 108.03%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-6.59%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is at 5.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
4.84%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
131.58%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-90.07%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-54.01%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
290.57%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
58.71%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
37.68%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
10.87%
Dividend/share CAGR of 10.87% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
2.63%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
8.23%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 8.23% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-2.08%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
0.37%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.60%
Negative asset growth while QRVO invests at 1.09%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
8.39%
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.
0.24%
We have some new debt while QRVO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.72%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
4.75%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.