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.
-0.42%
Negative revenue growth while LSCC stands at 59.13%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-0.96%
Negative gross profit growth while LSCC is at 48.37%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-0.65%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-2.38%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
21.82%
Net income growth under 50% of LSCC's 90.23%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
14.29%
EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 90.33%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
15.00%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 90.33%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
4.86%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 0.94%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
5.55%
Diluted share count expanding well above LSCC's 0.94%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-7.44%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
71.52%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
221.43%
FCF growth above 1.5x LSCC's 100.48%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
2.56%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 637.70%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-18.47%
Negative 5Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 113.74%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-10.52%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 82.36%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
17.47%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
212.82%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 17.69%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
309.18%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 309.18% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
90.17%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
346.95%
Positive short-term CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
112.72%
Equity/share CAGR of 112.72% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
143.50%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with LSCC's 158.67%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
73.87%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 34.15%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
74.53%
Dividend/share CAGR of 74.53% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
31.98%
Dividend/share CAGR of 31.98% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-9.70%
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.
16.07%
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.
9.29%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
19.47%
Positive asset growth while LSCC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
12.42%
BV/share growth above 1.5x LSCC's 0.23%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
16.35%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-4.11%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 80.81%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
10.71%
SG&A declining or stable vs. LSCC's 88.89%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.