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.
-3.77%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-7.59%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-25.49%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 810.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-26.18%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 6.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-29.30%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-29.11%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-28.57%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.43%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
0.42%
Slight or no buyback while QRVO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.43%
Dividend growth of 0.43% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-58.05%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-65.34%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
103.42%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to QRVO's 95.48%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
38.18%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x QRVO's 27.97%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
17.88%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
557.38%
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.
25.82%
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.
-8.46%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
339.00%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
54.62%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
14.40%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
23.29%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
27.79%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
21.98%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
526.91%
Dividend/share CAGR of 526.91% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
332.92%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
30.81%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 30.81% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
3.29%
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.
10.39%
We show growth while QRVO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.68%
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.
1.75%
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.
7.65%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
1.54%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.