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.
-12.77%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-14.16%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-21.48%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-21.73%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-21.08%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-19.88%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-19.62%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.65%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.92%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 0.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
24.31%
Dividend growth of 24.31% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
1.85%
Positive OCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
4.95%
Positive FCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
100.57%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
39.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
23.68%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 16.93%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
157.89%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 116.96%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
103.87%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 152.50%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
59.17%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 4.26%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1456.48%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 101.62% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
176.30%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
57.27%
Below 50% of AMD's 129.41%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
29.63%
Below 50% of AMD's 1035.27%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-5.16%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AMD is at 76.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-4.04%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AMD is at 342.57%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
601.64%
Dividend/share CAGR of 601.64% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
157.27%
Dividend/share CAGR of 157.27% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
102.33%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 102.33% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-23.85%
Firm’s AR is declining while AMD shows 2.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
4.77%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AMD's 14.50%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-7.73%
Negative asset growth while AMD invests at 4.81%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-13.04%
We have a declining book value while AMD shows 27.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.02%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.56%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. AMD's 2.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.55%
We expand SG&A while AMD cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.