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.
8.98%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
13.85%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
55.96%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
34.61%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
52.80%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
58.33%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
58.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-4.00%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-3.80%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.68%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
58.13%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
131.71%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-8.26%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while QRVO stands at 95.48%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
19.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 27.97%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
74.31%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
93.48%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of QRVO's 108.03%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
35.53%
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.
148.63%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
107.17%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-49.18%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
669.14%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
195.47%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-5.11%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
17.24%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
63.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 63.48% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
26.48%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
9.16%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 9.16% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.15%
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.
-3.45%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.72%
Negative asset growth while QRVO invests at 1.09%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.31%
Under 50% of QRVO's 3.14%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-3.22%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-0.40%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-1.45%
We cut SG&A while QRVO invests at 19.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.