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.
3.12%
Revenue growth of 3.12% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a small edge can widen further.
223.36%
Gross profit growth of 223.36% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
31.15%
Positive EBIT growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
31.15%
Positive operating income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
24.78%
Net income growth of 24.78% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate into a larger gap.
37.80%
EPS growth of 37.80% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
37.80%
Diluted EPS growth of 37.80% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
14.90%
Share change of 14.90% while QCOM is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
14.90%
Diluted share change of 14.90% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-75.13%
Dividend reduction while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
35000.00%
OCF growth of 35000.00% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
321.90%
FCF growth of 321.90% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
28.18%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 93.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
17.88%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 93.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-2.29%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM stands at 93.16%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-82.91%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-387.17%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-184.17%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QCOM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
21.11%
Positive growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
1.73%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
7.09%
Positive short-term equity growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-15.75%
Cut dividends over 10 years while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-15.75%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
56.02%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 56.02% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-12.39%
Firm’s AR is declining while QCOM shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-5.12%
Inventory is declining while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.55%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-20.60%
We have a declining book value while QCOM shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-4.73%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.90%
SG&A growth of 0.90% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.