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.
-7.18%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-3.63%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-11.36%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-11.36%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-10.69%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-9.76%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-10.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.18%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.22%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
1.20%
Dividend growth of 1.20% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-38.66%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-73.49%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
19.20%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 95.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
47.21%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
60.39%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
839.85%
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.
422.47%
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.
199.68%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
243.23%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
183.91%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
427.26%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
154.02%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-3.52%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
10.46%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
43.45%
Dividend/share CAGR of 43.45% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
44.81%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
36.80%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 36.80% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
9.10%
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.
-2.12%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-6.80%
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.
-4.73%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-51.89%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.60%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-0.94%
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.