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.
-5.68%
Negative revenue growth while QRVO stands at 6.10%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.25%
Negative gross profit growth while QRVO is at 47.98%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-16.28%
Negative EBIT growth while QRVO is at 103.09%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-15.24%
Negative operating income growth while QRVO is at 98.70%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-14.95%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-12.50%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-13.75%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.46%
Share reduction while QRVO is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.88%
Reduced diluted shares while QRVO is at 2.65%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.31%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-61.75%
Negative OCF growth while QRVO is at 2.10%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-66.59%
Negative FCF growth while QRVO is at 181.39%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
42.07%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 8.01%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
2.81%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 8.01%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
14.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 8.01%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
54.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 817.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
22.90%
Below 50% of QRVO's 817.31%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
67.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of QRVO's 817.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
91.38%
Positive 10Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
23.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
116.01%
Positive short-term CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
37.06%
Below 50% of QRVO's 347.53%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
7.25%
Below 50% of QRVO's 347.53%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-1.77%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while QRVO is at 347.53%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
1156.44%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1156.44% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
190.22%
Dividend/share CAGR of 190.22% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
81.56%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 81.56% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.93%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. QRVO's 22.39%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
6.74%
Inventory growth well above QRVO's 4.90%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-3.35%
Negative asset growth while QRVO invests at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.19%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.05%
We’re deleveraging while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.23%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. QRVO's 1.50%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
8.89%
SG&A growth well above QRVO's 0.48%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.