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.
0.06%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-2.03%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
6.44%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
6.44%
Operating income growth similar to QRVO's 6.61%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
3.80%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
5.13%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
5.26%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.23%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.50%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
194294.01%
Dividend growth of 194294.01% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-40.03%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-47.18%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-5.84%
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.
28.37%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QRVO's 27.97%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
70.09%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
61.20%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 108.03%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
49.82%
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.
24.02%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
112.59%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
11.83%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
213.01%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
175.31%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
2.48%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
13.01%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
37.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 37.38% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
40.20%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
35.49%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 35.49% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-13.94%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.93%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.53%
Asset growth well under 50% of QRVO's 1.09%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.79%
50-75% of QRVO's 3.14%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
84.64%
We have some new debt while QRVO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-5.12%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
4.17%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.