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.
18.34%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
40.10%
Positive gross profit growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
452.27%
EBIT growth above 1.5x LSCC's 57.72%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
452.27%
Operating income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 57.72%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
350.00%
Net income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 68.20%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
350.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 67.70%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
350.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 67.70%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.11%
Dividend growth of 18.11% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
30.74%
OCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 612.97%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
19.32%
FCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 7738.10%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-23.21%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 70.72%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-31.88%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-23.85%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
92.96%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 331.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-48.34%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is at 18.09%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
5.65%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-12.50%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-69.24%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-75.71%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC is 86.22%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
285.89%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 528.91%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
105.52%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 77.23%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
42.79%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 50.78%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
15.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 15.92% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
6.77%
Dividend/share CAGR of 6.77% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
8.43%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 8.43% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
22.90%
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.
6.77%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-3.53%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-3.98%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.12%
We increase R&D while LSCC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
11.32%
SG&A growth well above LSCC's 3.05%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.