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.
6.71%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.74%
Positive gross profit growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-18.30%
Negative EBIT growth while LSCC is at 10.88%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-18.30%
Negative operating income growth while LSCC is at 10.88%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
3.42%
Net income growth under 50% of LSCC's 10.14%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.42%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 0.11%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
3.42%
Diluted share count expanding well above LSCC's 0.11%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-3.31%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
92.86%
OCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 249.31%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
237.50%
FCF growth 50-75% of LSCC's 433.31%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
-16.43%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 13.49%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-2.34%
Negative 5Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 2.25%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-18.48%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
23.60%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 350.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
10.68%
Below 50% of LSCC's 114.83%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-41.48%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 179.95%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-18.75%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
110.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-90.75%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
285.08%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with LSCC's 289.37%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
66.14%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 19.10%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
-14.43%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while LSCC is at 76.10%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
15.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 15.94% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
1.45%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1.45% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
7.83%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 7.83% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.49%
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.
13.38%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.66%
Asset growth well under 50% of LSCC's 19.77%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-1.39%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-12.30%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 112.38%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
3.92%
We increase R&D while LSCC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
8.97%
SG&A growth well above LSCC's 1.05%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.