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.
6.98%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
11.21%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
25.22%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
25.22%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
27.21%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
30.95%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
28.57%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.39%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.43%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.53%
Dividend growth of 0.53% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
70.49%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
90.47%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
59.81%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 95.48%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
96.53%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
37.60%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
205.28%
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.
226.83%
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.
98.43%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-50.56%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while QRVO is at 1921.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
397.85%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
68.28%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
92.20%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
21.10%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
5.44%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
288.56%
Dividend/share CAGR of 288.56% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
278.60%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
286.61%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 286.61% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.64%
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.
1.83%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-2.11%
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.
-1.74%
We have a declining book value while QRVO shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.63%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
1.18%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.