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.
6.47%
Revenue growth under 50% of AMD's 25.84%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
13.31%
Gross profit growth similar to AMD's 13.51%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
37.52%
EBIT growth below 50% of AMD's 437.93%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
-6.84%
Negative operating income growth while AMD is at 404.17%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.70%
Negative net income growth while AMD stands at 164.86%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.08%
Negative EPS growth while AMD is at 160.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.45%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AMD is at 160.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.63%
Share reduction while AMD is at 8.11%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.54%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 1.60%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.31%
Dividend growth of 0.31% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
70.77%
OCF growth under 50% of AMD's 160.00%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
77.99%
FCF growth 50-75% of AMD's 109.52%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
100.90%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
13.95%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-6.30%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
254.02%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 911651.75%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
30.17%
Below 50% of AMD's 107.39%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-5.66%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD stands at 115.09%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
120.73%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 166.73%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
32.93%
Below 50% of AMD's 127.22%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-20.90%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AMD is 136.25%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
51.69%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
30.26%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
19.84%
Positive short-term equity growth while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
1205.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1205.79% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
179.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 179.73% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
132.68%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 132.68% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.21%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AMD's 30.30%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.35%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AMD's 29.68%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-0.79%
Negative asset growth while AMD invests at 10.78%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.48%
Under 50% of AMD's 11.82%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.08%
We’re deleveraging while AMD stands at 0.10%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-5.40%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-1.27%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.