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.
-9.93%
Negative revenue growth while LSCC stands at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-29.32%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
89.00%
EBIT growth above 1.5x LSCC's 2.23%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
89.00%
Operating income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 2.23%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
103.86%
Net income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 1.46%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
105.56%
EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 273.33%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
105.56%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 273.33%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.07%
Share reduction more than 1.5x LSCC's 0.24%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.33%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x LSCC's 1.94%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-3.01%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-109.49%
Negative OCF growth while LSCC is at 3.45%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-487.33%
Negative FCF growth while LSCC is at 185.71%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
20.18%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 545.91%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
8.64%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 39.72%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-27.24%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 20.44%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-140.49%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is at 40.60%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-118.39%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 116.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-89.63%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while LSCC is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-87.29%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while LSCC is 90.52%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-95.45%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC is 45.55%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
176.77%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 220.59%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
73.88%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 122.12%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
88.03%
Dividend/share CAGR of 88.03% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
40.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 40.38% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
36.61%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 36.61% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-2.29%
Firm’s AR is declining while LSCC shows 2.55%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
4.58%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-4.42%
Negative asset growth while LSCC invests at 5.18%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.99%
Under 50% of LSCC's 3.52%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-3.24%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-55.74%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 2.50%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-10.57%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.