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.
-2.31%
Negative revenue growth while LSCC stands at 4.06%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
2.08%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 3.85%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
24.74%
EBIT growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.74%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
24.74%
Operating income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.74%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
587.55%
Net income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.93%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
558.82%
EPS growth of 558.82% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
568.75%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 6.67%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.89%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 0.97%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.76%
Diluted share count expanding well above LSCC's 0.97%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-3.88%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-9.44%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-26.97%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
41.78%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 688.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
2.59%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 98.93%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-7.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 48.38%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
37.89%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
31.84%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
2355.49%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 2355.49% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
2232.04%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 171.81%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
780.74%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 86.46%. 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.
146.09%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 255.88%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
111.23%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 130.83%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
84.04%
Dividend/share CAGR of 84.04% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
8.03%
Dividend/share CAGR of 8.03% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
39.18%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 39.18% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-0.17%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
2.85%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
28.62%
Asset growth above 1.5x LSCC's 5.91%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
40.37%
BV/share growth above 1.5x LSCC's 5.14%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-5.41%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-1.79%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 2.56%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-11.65%
We cut SG&A while LSCC invests at 5.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.