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.
-7.10%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-6.45%
Negative gross profit growth while QRVO is at 10.05%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
8.36%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 187.89%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
-5.45%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 164.16%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
8.16%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
4.00%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
4.08%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.51%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
0.10%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
31.30%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QRVO cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-1.84%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
0.24%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
45.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 12.63%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
13.86%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QRVO's 12.63%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
22.94%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 12.63%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
141.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 693.22%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
62.92%
Below 50% of QRVO's 693.22%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
26.13%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 693.22%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
131.02%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 21.19% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
300.73%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 21.19%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
123.41%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 21.19%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
35.88%
Below 50% of QRVO's 306.66%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
9.07%
Below 50% of QRVO's 306.66%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
5.67%
Below 50% of QRVO's 306.66%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1168.08%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1168.08% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
194.90%
Dividend/share CAGR of 194.90% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
66.90%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 66.90% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-12.44%
Firm’s AR is declining while QRVO shows 11.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-1.00%
Inventory is declining while QRVO stands at 5.13%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
1.33%
Positive asset growth while QRVO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.34%
Positive BV/share change while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.06%
We’re deleveraging while QRVO stands at 0.02%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-2.83%
Our R&D shrinks while QRVO invests at 1.20%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.01%
We cut SG&A while QRVO invests at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.