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.
6.86%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
7.84%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
55.61%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
50.63%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
68.30%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
65.22%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
72.73%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.26%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.94%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.26%
Dividend growth of 0.26% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
50.33%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
52.89%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
157.09%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 95.48%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
22.78%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of QRVO's 27.97%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
50.86%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
190.70%
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.
-5.25%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is at 5.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
34.69%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
682.46%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-7.84%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
90.65%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
63.47%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
22.37%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
34.60%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
643.71%
Dividend/share CAGR of 643.71% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
113.74%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
55.92%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 55.92% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
10.22%
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.
1.73%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-2.44%
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.
1.05%
Under 50% of QRVO's 3.14%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-11.01%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-5.70%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-1.30%
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.