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.
13.14%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 11.66%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
13.66%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 11.55%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
17.15%
EBIT growth similar to LSCC's 18.10%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
17.15%
Operating income growth similar to LSCC's 18.10%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
20.87%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 14.29%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
20.00%
Positive EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
20.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.82%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 1.58%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
1.33%
Slight or no buyback while LSCC is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-0.82%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
68.24%
OCF growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 126.64%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
830.00%
FCF growth above 1.5x LSCC's 113.46%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
110.16%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 572.01%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
77.19%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 134.62%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
45.91%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 94.42%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
164.73%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 44.88%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
147.97%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 52.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1724.99%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 1724.99% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
2101.73%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 162.63%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
224.85%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 130.35%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
25.90%
Below 50% of LSCC's 352.22%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
53.12%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 92.92%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
47.43%
Dividend/share CAGR of 47.43% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-16.51%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-22.60%
Negative near-term dividend growth while LSCC invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
16.65%
Our AR growth while LSCC is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
7.20%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. LSCC's 17.73%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
7.28%
Asset growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.15%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
7.82%
Similar to LSCC's 7.24%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
0.24%
Debt growth of 0.24% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
0.94%
R&D dropping or stable vs. LSCC's 3.23%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
17.41%
SG&A growth well above LSCC's 7.25%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.