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.
-3.35%
Negative revenue growth while QCOM stands at 0.38%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.35%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-9.39%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-9.39%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
0.85%
Net income growth under 50% of QCOM's 29.26%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
-3.57%
Negative EPS growth while QCOM is at 27.78%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.57%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QCOM is at 27.78%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-4.27%
Share reduction while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-4.27%
Reduced diluted shares while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
1.64%
Dividend growth of 1.64% while QCOM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
133.53%
OCF growth under 50% of QCOM's 5617.71%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
2372.73%
FCF growth above 1.5x QCOM's 325.15%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-12.84%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QCOM stands at 1120.02%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
44.05%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 68.33%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
27.18%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
90.99%
OCF/share CAGR of 90.99% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
16.19%
Below 50% of QCOM's 526.84%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
160.94%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 47.97%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-16.62%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-293.74%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-187.06%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
419.26%
Below 50% of QCOM's 80610.86%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
175.56%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 329.41%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
158.15%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 280.41%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
28.19%
Dividend/share CAGR of 28.19% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
6.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 6.92% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
54.74%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 54.74% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-17.32%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-16.56%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.51%
Positive asset growth while QCOM is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
7.46%
Positive BV/share change while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.19%
We’re deleveraging while QCOM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
6.70%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 7.03%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-3.53%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.