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.
6.71%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.74%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-18.30%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-18.30%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
3.42%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.42%
Slight or no buybacks while QRVO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
3.42%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-3.31%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
92.86%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
237.50%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-16.43%
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.
-2.34%
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.
-18.48%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
23.60%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 108.03%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
10.68%
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.
-41.48%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-18.75%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QRVO is at 1921.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
110.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-90.75%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
285.08%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
66.14%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-14.43%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
15.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 15.94% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
1.45%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
7.83%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 7.83% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.49%
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.
13.38%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.66%
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.
-1.39%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-12.30%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
3.92%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
8.97%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.