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.
2.60%
Revenue growth under 50% of QRVO's 14.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.58%
Gross profit growth under 50% of QRVO's 17.70%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
5.30%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 62.09%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
5.43%
Operating income growth under 50% of QRVO's 51.46%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
6.10%
Net income growth under 50% of QRVO's 63.82%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
6.45%
EPS growth under 50% of QRVO's 65.38%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
6.56%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of QRVO's 65.38%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.99%
Share reduction while QRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.94%
Reduced diluted shares while QRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.43%
Dividend growth of 0.43% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
34.65%
OCF growth at 50-75% of QRVO's 61.88%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
43.00%
FCF growth 75-90% of QRVO's 48.73%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
57.57%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
7.99%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
6.84%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
56.58%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 1316.36%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
70.44%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1316.36%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
33.92%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 1316.36%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
75.01%
Below 50% of QRVO's 277.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
5.73%
Below 50% of QRVO's 277.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
72.03%
Below 50% of QRVO's 277.68%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
40.58%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 14.16%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
22.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 14.16%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
0.82%
Below 50% of QRVO's 14.16%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1263.46%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1263.46% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
181.31%
Dividend/share CAGR of 181.31% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
100.13%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 100.13% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.87%
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.
2.22%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QRVO's 11.37%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.07%
Asset growth well under 50% of QRVO's 13.18%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.60%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 12.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
5.30%
Debt growth of 5.30% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-5.33%
Our R&D shrinks while QRVO invests at 8.93%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.06%
We expand SG&A while QRVO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.