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.
-1.49%
Negative revenue growth while QRVO stands at 4.42%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.01%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1.42%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
0.44%
Positive operating income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-4.70%
Negative net income growth while QRVO stands at 109.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-4.35%
Negative EPS growth while QRVO is at 109.25%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-4.35%
Negative diluted EPS growth while QRVO is at 109.43%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.46%
Share reduction while QRVO is at 6.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.54%
Reduced diluted shares while QRVO is at 2.68%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.15%
Dividend growth of 0.15% while QRVO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-61.47%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-64.74%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
62.88%
10Y CAGR of 62.88% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
68.66%
5Y CAGR of 68.66% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
-5.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
88.46%
OCF/share CAGR of 88.46% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
117.10%
OCF/share CAGR of 117.10% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
-3.34%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
112.73%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 112.73% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
3278.82%
Net income/share CAGR of 3278.82% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
-21.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while QRVO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
40.88%
Equity/share CAGR of 40.88% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
36.00%
Equity/share CAGR of 36.00% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
8.43%
Equity/share CAGR of 8.43% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
1308.17%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1308.17% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
171.86%
Dividend/share CAGR of 171.86% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
129.32%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 129.32% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.64%
AR growth well above QRVO's 5.48%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-0.98%
Inventory is declining while QRVO stands at 3.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.02%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-1.28%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
9.58%
Debt growth far above QRVO's 1.54%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
5.78%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.90%
SG&A declining or stable vs. QRVO's 14.77%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.