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.
1.73%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.31%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-2.41%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-2.41%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-70.59%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-69.48%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-69.33%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-3.03%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-3.09%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.93%
Dividend growth of 0.93% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-34.43%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-46.04%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
57.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 95.48%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
125.75%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
69.50%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
176.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 108.03%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
39.23%
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.
-6.21%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
581.29%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
765.91%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
79.28%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
194.56%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
15.59%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
20.14%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
40.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 40.48% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
37.98%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
41.93%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 41.93% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.29%
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.
11.69%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-7.18%
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.
-3.02%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.34%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.35%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.