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.
-0.35%
Negative revenue growth while AMD stands at 6.51%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
0.52%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AMD's 3336.36%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-16.03%
Negative EBIT growth while AMD is at 160.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-5.08%
Negative operating income growth while AMD is at 103.21%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.78%
Negative net income growth while AMD stands at 35.29%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-4.81%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.90%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.20%
Slight or no buybacks while AMD is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.10%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x AMD's 0.86%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.00%
Dividend reduction while AMD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-42.68%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-47.69%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
54.04%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
24.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
23.53%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
107.34%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
102.79%
Positive OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
86.39%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
179.18%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 96.41% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
330.89%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 95.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
121.75%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
36.24%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
10.06%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
8.51%
Positive short-term equity growth while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
1145.59%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1145.59% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
193.66%
Dividend/share CAGR of 193.66% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
66.64%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 66.64% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.52%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AMD's 58.84%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.96%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AMD's 11.72%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.76%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.38%
Under 50% of AMD's 7.90%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-6.95%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
7.58%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. AMD's 2.65%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
6.81%
SG&A growth well above AMD's 1.65%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.