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.
-5.68%
Negative revenue growth while LSCC stands at 4.37%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
9.32%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.43%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
43.39%
EBIT growth above 1.5x LSCC's 5.74%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
33.50%
Operating income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 5.74%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
15.24%
Net income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 6.06%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
20.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 9.09%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
20.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 9.09%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
45.37%
Slight or no buybacks while LSCC is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
42.90%
Slight or no buyback while LSCC is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-33.23%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-24.69%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-19.83%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-33.03%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 430.33%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-57.43%
Negative 5Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 37.08%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-63.08%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-37.86%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is at 322.30%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-46.80%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
12.76%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 12.76% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
-27.94%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while LSCC is 60.79%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-56.65%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
115.41%
Equity/share CAGR of 115.41% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
42.97%
Below 50% of LSCC's 206.17%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
6.40%
Below 50% of LSCC's 53.27%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
29.25%
Dividend/share CAGR of 29.25% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-1.57%
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.
-33.25%
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.
-2.35%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
8.42%
Inventory growth well above LSCC's 0.53%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.96%
Asset growth above 1.5x LSCC's 2.19%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-25.51%
We have a declining book value while LSCC shows 2.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-1.07%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-3.44%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 7.59%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
5.47%
SG&A growth well above LSCC's 3.33%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.