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.
-3.16%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-4.91%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
133.15%
EBIT growth below 50% of QRVO's 810.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
184.17%
Operating income growth above 1.5x QRVO's 6.61%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
37.12%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
39.13%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
39.13%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.54%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.09%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.74%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-66.82%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-72.09%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
98.72%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to QRVO's 95.48%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
5.70%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 27.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
0.26%
Positive 3Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
177.32%
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.
-32.68%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is at 5.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-43.52%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
367.16%
Below 50% of QRVO's 1921.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-34.45%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-38.72%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
54.13%
Positive growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
33.19%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
24.41%
Positive short-term equity growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
846.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 846.73% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
109.10%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while QRVO is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
73.43%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 73.43% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.37%
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.
-3.24%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.81%
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.
0.46%
Under 50% of QRVO's 3.14%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.05%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-1.41%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
6.74%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 19.11%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.