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 / 6.59M (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.
2.97%
Revenue growth under 50% of LSCC's 10.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.03%
Gross profit growth under 50% of LSCC's 12.78%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
16.31%
EBIT growth below 50% of LSCC's 42.72%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
12.45%
Operating income growth under 50% of LSCC's 42.72%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
207.84%
Positive net income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
204.00%
Positive EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
200.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
4.94%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 1.12%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
5.32%
Diluted share count expanding well above LSCC's 0.58%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-7.43%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
59.20%
OCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 238.31%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
136.40%
FCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 378.44%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
36.04%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 183.96%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-23.23%
Negative 5Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 21.03%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-0.63%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 6.29%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
277.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 28.41%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
42.76%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-5.23%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
8874.99%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 94.55% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
307.63%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
365.54%
Positive short-term CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
292.02%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 549.65%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
211.37%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 43.66%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
153.92%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
7.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 7.92% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
29.26%
Dividend/share CAGR of 29.26% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-7.85%
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.
9.79%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. LSCC's 46.80%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
8.75%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. LSCC's 19.53%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
11.76%
Asset growth above 1.5x LSCC's 1.65%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
7.81%
BV/share growth above 1.5x LSCC's 1.27%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-1.82%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.25%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 6.38%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
3.09%
SG&A growth well above LSCC's 2.17%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.