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.
2.14%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
12.09%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
128.36%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
128.36%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
119.86%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
119.44%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
119.44%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
2.54%
Slight or no buybacks while QRVO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
2.54%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.23%
Dividend growth of 0.23% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-73.66%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-87.40%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1.63%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 95.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-6.45%
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.
-22.48%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
64.62%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 108.03%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
506.54%
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.
-52.39%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
26.17%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
892.78%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-72.86%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
363.72%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
67.55%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-6.45%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
46.91%
Dividend/share CAGR of 46.91% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
4.65%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
3.23%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 3.23% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.16%
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.
11.65%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-1.93%
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.
-2.52%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-20.32%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-0.97%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
4.51%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.