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.
-0.35%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
0.52%
Positive gross profit growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-16.03%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-5.08%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-4.78%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-4.81%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.90%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.20%
Share count expansion well above QCOM's 0.14%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.10%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x QCOM's 0.27%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.00%
Dividend reduction while QCOM stands at 0.12%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-42.68%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-47.69%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
54.04%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QCOM's 232.31%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
24.84%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QCOM's 46.02%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
23.53%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 3.46%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
107.34%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 95.47%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
102.79%
Positive OCF/share growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
86.39%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
179.18%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x QCOM's 17.71% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
330.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
121.75%
Positive short-term CAGR while QCOM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
36.24%
Below 50% of QCOM's 146.29%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
10.06%
Below 50% of QCOM's 24.88%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
8.51%
Positive short-term equity growth while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
1145.59%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1145.59% while QCOM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
193.66%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 146.76%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
66.64%
3Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QCOM's 51.76%. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the company's short-term profits or payout policy justify these higher hikes.
5.52%
Our AR growth while QCOM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
2.96%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QCOM's 22.75%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.76%
Negative asset growth while QCOM invests at 0.01%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.38%
Positive BV/share change while QCOM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.95%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
7.58%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QCOM's 6.67%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
6.81%
SG&A growth well above QCOM's 4.05%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.