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.
-12.77%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-14.16%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-21.48%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-21.73%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-21.08%
Negative net income growth while QRVO stands at 62.21%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-19.88%
Negative EPS growth while QRVO is at 61.92%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-19.62%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QRVO is at 62.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.65%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.92%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
24.31%
Dividend growth of 24.31% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
1.85%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
4.95%
FCF growth above 1.5x QRVO's 0.96%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
100.57%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 24.29%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
39.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 24.29%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
23.68%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QRVO's 23.67%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
157.89%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 1197.10%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
103.87%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1197.10%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
59.17%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 120.59%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
1456.48%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 58.95% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
176.30%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 58.95%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
57.27%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
29.63%
Below 50% of QRVO's 291.70%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-5.16%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while QRVO is at 291.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-4.04%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
601.64%
Dividend/share CAGR of 601.64% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
157.27%
Dividend/share CAGR of 157.27% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
102.33%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while QRVO cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-23.85%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
4.77%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QRVO's 11.68%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-7.73%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-13.04%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
0.02%
We have some new debt while QRVO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.56%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QRVO's 4.12%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.55%
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.