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.
5.99%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
10.72%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.22%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.22%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
-28.46%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-4.55%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-33.13%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-34.35%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
53.69%
Dividend growth of 53.69% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-63.17%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-101.01%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
0.94%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 95.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
32.83%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
18.57%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-19.88%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO stands at 108.03%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
67.07%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 5.08%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
237.16%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
130.60%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
32.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
62.90%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
309.80%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
66.92%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-5.11%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
83.26%
Dividend/share CAGR of 83.26% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
3.43%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
2.09%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 2.09% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
15.64%
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.
16.67%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.77%
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.
52.33%
BV/share growth above 1.5x QRVO's 3.14%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.36%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
10.27%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
14.94%
SG&A growth well above QRVO's 19.11%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.