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.
6.66%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
6.29%
Positive gross profit growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.23%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.57%
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.
0.46%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.72%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.11%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.73%
Dividend growth of 0.73% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-29.07%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-13.10%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
53.66%
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.
48.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
17.46%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
133.79%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 108.03%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
87.28%
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.
49.88%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
106.89%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
120.86%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
49.13%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
15.89%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
13.63%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
1.63%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
463.52%
Dividend/share CAGR of 463.52% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
378.03%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
200.44%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 200.44% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
19.50%
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.
6.16%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
2.07%
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.
1.59%
50-75% of QRVO's 3.14%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.52%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.16%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.