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
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-1.96%
Negative net income growth while LSCC stands at 18.61%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
0.40%
Less D&A growth vs. LSCC's 2.54%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-70.00%
Negative yoy deferred tax while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-27.54%
Both cut yoy SBC, with LSCC at -4.76%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-630.56%
Negative yoy working capital usage while LSCC is 112.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-254.29%
AR is negative yoy while LSCC is 176.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
148.12%
Some inventory rise while LSCC is negative at -5.81%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-117.81%
Both negative yoy AP, with LSCC at -165.91%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
40.91%
Some yoy usage while LSCC is negative at -170.56%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
100.00%
Some yoy increase while LSCC is negative at -4.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-16.10%
Negative yoy CFO while LSCC is 103.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-12.31%
Negative yoy CapEx while LSCC is 0.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
12.31%
Acquisition growth of 12.31% while LSCC is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-920.08%
Negative yoy purchasing while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-71.82%
We reduce yoy sales while LSCC is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-28.23%
Both yoy lines negative, with LSCC at -20.15%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
-252.33%
Both yoy lines negative, with LSCC at -7.54%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
100.00%
Debt repayment similar to LSCC's 100.00%. Walter Schloss sees parallel liability management or similar free cash flow availability.
41.38%
Stock issuance far above LSCC's 20.35%. Michael Burry flags a significant dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach unless ROI is very high.
98.30%
Buyback growth of 98.30% while LSCC is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.