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.
6.98%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
7.66%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
11.16%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
10.84%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
11.70%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
12.70%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
14.52%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.99%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-2.05%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.75%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
134.52%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
230.47%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
72.02%
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.
42.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
22.19%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
292.55%
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.
19.41%
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.
3.03%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
83.88%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
86.72%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
32.48%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
16.38%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
15.09%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
7.05%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
493.84%
Dividend/share CAGR of 493.84% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
784467.57%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
50.12%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 50.12% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.27%
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.
5.56%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.99%
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.
4.19%
1.25-1.5x QRVO's 3.14%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.38%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.44%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.