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.
9.08%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
12.14%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
15.73%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
16.53%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
16.87%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
18.87%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
19.23%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-2.03%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-2.01%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.70%
Dividend growth of 0.70% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-20.85%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-43.18%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
74.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of QRVO's 95.48%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
45.91%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
21.46%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
24.50%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 108.03%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-8.14%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is at 5.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-25.55%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-15.87%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QRVO is at 1921.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
65.53%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
49.96%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
9.16%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
15.04%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
0.96%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
513.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 513.01% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
384.68%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
52.06%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 52.06% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.39%
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.
5.72%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-1.67%
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.
1.55%
Under 50% of QRVO's 3.14%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.95%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.29%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.