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.
0.56%
Positive revenue growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.22%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-0.70%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.65%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
0.17%
Positive net income growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
1.21%
Positive EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
0.82%
Positive diluted EPS growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.76%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.75%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.09%
Dividend reduction while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
56.45%
Positive OCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
68.74%
Positive FCF growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
91.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 35.09%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
37.79%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of QRVO's 55.88%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
42.33%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of QRVO's 51.68%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
184.81%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
73.82%
Positive OCF/share growth while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
42.20%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while QRVO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
262.30%
Below 50% of QRVO's 5029.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
93.27%
Below 50% of QRVO's 418.01%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
64.93%
Below 50% of QRVO's 252.56%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
57.46%
Below 50% of QRVO's 137.25%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
42.87%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 10.98%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
65.35%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x QRVO's 15.56%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
570.52%
Dividend/share CAGR of 570.52% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
129.76%
Dividend/share CAGR of 129.76% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
49.28%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 49.28% while QRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-6.85%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.32%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QRVO's 18.85%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
5.40%
Asset growth above 1.5x QRVO's 0.66%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
3.73%
Positive BV/share change while QRVO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
9.57%
Debt growth far above QRVO's 17.60%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
4.11%
We increase R&D while QRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.13%
We expand SG&A while QRVO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.