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.
10.84%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
16.44%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
26.41%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
13.75%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
0.48%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.63%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.55%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.36%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-99.94%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
83.07%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
86.67%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-2.77%
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.
20.39%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 27.97%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
68.07%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
175.37%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 108.03%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
228.76%
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.
182.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
102.53%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-1.52%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
253.22%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
186.13%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
1.13%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
12.65%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-99.93%
Cut dividends over 10 years while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-99.92%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
-99.93%
Negative near-term dividend growth while QRVO invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
0.68%
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.
-3.66%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.44%
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.
4.15%
1.25-1.5x QRVO's 3.14%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
-0.83%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.90%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
20.35%
SG&A growth well above QRVO's 19.11%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.