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.
1.95%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.45%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-0.33%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-0.33%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
0.90%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
1.79%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
1.82%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.94%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.17%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-1.03%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
22.29%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
10.25%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
163.00%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 95.48%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
25.66%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QRVO's 27.97%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
17.83%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
66.82%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 108.03%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
32.66%
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.
38.83%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
628.47%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-62.18%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
30.50%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
33.35%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
14.54%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
24.70%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
528.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 528.07% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
328.75%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
29.76%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 29.76% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.63%
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.
5.01%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
28.46%
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.
4.09%
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.
0.47%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.79%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.