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.
9.08%
Positive revenue growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
12.14%
Gross profit growth of 12.14% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
15.73%
Positive EBIT growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
16.53%
Positive operating income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
16.87%
Positive net income growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
18.87%
Positive EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
19.23%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-2.03%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-2.01%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.70%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while QCOM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-20.85%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-43.18%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
74.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 215.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
45.91%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 93.21%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
21.46%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QCOM's 19.68%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
24.50%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 169.04%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-8.14%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-25.55%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-15.87%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QCOM is at 234.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
65.53%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 44.09%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
49.96%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 6.42%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
9.16%
Below 50% of QCOM's 227.39%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
15.04%
Below 50% of QCOM's 94.95%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
0.96%
Below 50% of QCOM's 37.61%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
513.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 513.01% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
384.68%
Dividend/share CAGR of 384.68% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
52.06%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 52.06% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.39%
AR growth well above QCOM's 10.39%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
5.72%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 14.86%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-1.67%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.55%
Positive BV/share change while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.95%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 8.72%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
5.29%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QCOM's 13.46%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.