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.
17.85%
Revenue growth above 1.5x QRVO's 7.73%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
17.82%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 13.76%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
23.29%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 74.36%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
31.03%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of QRVO's 35.74%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
-1.96%
Negative net income growth while QRVO stands at 94.32%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-2.65%
Negative EPS growth while QRVO is at 95.77%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2.03%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QRVO is at 94.29%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.11%
Slight or no buybacks while QRVO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.22%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.13%
Dividend growth of 0.13% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-16.10%
Negative OCF growth while QRVO is at 73.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-18.43%
Negative FCF growth while QRVO is at 92.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
31.77%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
23.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 180.76%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-0.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QRVO stands at 15.25%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
41.36%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 116.60%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
13.88%
Below 50% of QRVO's 130.86%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-9.71%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO stands at 49.55%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
103.37%
Below 50% of QRVO's 3585.37%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
88.52%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 135.58%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
13.44%
Below 50% of QRVO's 324.86%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
7.90%
Below 50% of QRVO's 109.06%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.15%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while QRVO is at 521.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-18.37%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
644.90%
Dividend/share CAGR of 644.90% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
163.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 163.60% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.57%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.57% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
18.37%
AR growth well above QRVO's 1.72%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-3.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
4.37%
Asset growth well under 50% of QRVO's 11.47%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
8.79%
BV/share growth above 1.5x QRVO's 2.22%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.01%
Debt shrinking faster vs. QRVO's 54.38%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
1.85%
R&D dropping or stable vs. QRVO's 6.26%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
1.50%
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.