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.
-4.54%
Negative revenue growth while LSCC stands at 2.92%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-7.90%
Negative gross profit growth while LSCC is at 3.12%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-38.53%
Negative EBIT growth while LSCC is at 21.91%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-38.53%
Negative operating income growth while LSCC is at 21.91%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-413.30%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-427.27%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-427.27%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-4.63%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-4.63%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
3.93%
Dividend growth of 3.93% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
31.68%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
71.62%
Positive FCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-5.13%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 30.55%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-15.47%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-15.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
85.67%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
50.12%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-19.16%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-771.93%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-97.66%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-236.55%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
384.28%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 348.68%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
73.59%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 33.85%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
22.61%
Equity/share CAGR of 22.61% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
31.76%
Dividend/share CAGR of 31.76% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
1.27%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1.27% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
11.94%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 11.94% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-19.03%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-4.01%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.48%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.47%
Positive BV/share change while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.72%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-6.80%
We cut SG&A while LSCC invests at 5.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.