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.
5.53%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-4.88%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-115.79%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-115.79%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-163.64%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-220.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-220.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.25%
Slight or no buybacks while QRVO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.25%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-4.40%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-112.40%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-101.65%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
29.67%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 95.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
29.67%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to QRVO's 27.97%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
12.58%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
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.
92.23%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
92.23%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-111.86%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
56.31%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 56.31% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
19.82%
Our AR growth while QRVO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
0.34%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
2.77%
Asset growth above 1.5x QRVO's 1.09%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-1.22%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
16.84%
We have some new debt while QRVO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.94%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.