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 / 6.59M (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.
2.06%
Revenue growth under 50% of AMD's 20.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.38%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AMD's 19.19%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
10.11%
EBIT growth below 50% of AMD's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
9.21%
Operating income growth under 50% of AMD's 55.26%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
7.23%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 118.75%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
6.98%
EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 200.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
7.94%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 200.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.21%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.31%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 1.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.06%
Dividend reduction while AMD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
62.24%
OCF growth at 50-75% of AMD's 114.08%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
76.64%
FCF growth 75-90% of AMD's 89.82%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
101.87%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
27.36%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
20.00%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 10.21%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
336.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 111.91%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
164.88%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to AMD's 166.12%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
79.90%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 126.09%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
578.69%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 106.45% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
118.39%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 160.00%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
70.62%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
24.55%
Below 50% of AMD's 333.73%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.32%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AMD is at 134.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-8.78%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AMD is at 440.29%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
602.36%
Dividend/share CAGR of 602.36% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
155.50%
Dividend/share CAGR of 155.50% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
102.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 102.39% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-1.46%
Firm’s AR is declining while AMD shows 7.41%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-2.44%
Inventory is declining while AMD stands at 6.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.34%
Negative asset growth while AMD invests at 3.47%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.17%
We have a declining book value while AMD shows 45.81%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.10%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.26%
R&D growth of 0.26% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
1.45%
SG&A declining or stable vs. AMD's 11.18%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.