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.
0.23%
Revenue growth under 50% of AVGO's 7.68%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-0.51%
Negative gross profit growth while AVGO is at 8.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-13.11%
Negative EBIT growth while AVGO is at 5.07%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-10.06%
Negative operating income growth while AVGO is at 5.07%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-10.57%
Negative net income growth while AVGO stands at 6.67%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-8.77%
Negative EPS growth while AVGO is at 7.27%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-8.93%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AVGO is at 5.56%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.04%
Share reduction while AVGO is at 0.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.95%
Reduced diluted shares while AVGO is at 0.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.30%
Dividend reduction while AVGO stands at 9.55%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
80.35%
Positive OCF growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
166.20%
Positive FCF growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
173.88%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 19.49%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
21.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to AVGO's 19.49%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
16.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of AVGO's 19.49%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
397.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 208.82%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
257.54%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 208.82%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
23.30%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AVGO's 208.82%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
850.50%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 184.70% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
12.70%
Below 50% of AVGO's 184.70%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
21.68%
Below 50% of AVGO's 184.70%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
39.50%
Equity/share CAGR of 39.50% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
20.69%
Equity/share CAGR of 20.69% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
24.51%
Equity/share CAGR of 24.51% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
484.42%
Dividend/share CAGR of 484.42% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
323.55%
Dividend/share CAGR of 323.55% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
28.78%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 28.78% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.70%
Our AR growth while AVGO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
11.52%
Inventory growth well above AVGO's 3.09%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
22.28%
Asset growth above 1.5x AVGO's 4.41%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
2.19%
50-75% of AVGO's 3.99%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
65.84%
Debt growth of 65.84% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-6.84%
Our R&D shrinks while AVGO invests at 11.84%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-5.60%
We cut SG&A while AVGO invests at 9.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.