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.
0.23%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.51%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-13.11%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-10.06%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-10.57%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-8.77%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-8.93%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.04%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.95%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.30%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
80.35%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
166.20%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
173.88%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 95.48%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
21.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of QRVO's 27.97%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
16.64%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
397.80%
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.
257.54%
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.
23.30%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
850.50%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
12.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
21.68%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
39.50%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
20.69%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
24.51%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
484.42%
Dividend/share CAGR of 484.42% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
323.55%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
28.78%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 28.78% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.70%
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.
11.52%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
22.28%
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.
2.19%
50-75% of QRVO's 3.14%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
65.84%
We have some new debt while QRVO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-6.84%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-5.60%
We cut SG&A while QRVO invests at 19.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.