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.
9.36%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
15.92%
Positive gross profit growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
75.90%
Positive EBIT growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
75.90%
Positive operating income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
14.77%
Positive net income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
-15.38%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-16.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
50.74%
Share change of 50.74% while LSCC is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
51.98%
Diluted share change of 51.98% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-35.45%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
109.22%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
186.64%
Positive FCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-48.19%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
21.71%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-38.73%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
36.94%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
120.38%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
8.97%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
71.28%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
137.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-45.79%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
127.57%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 234.92%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
59.18%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 9.39%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
-36.96%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-5.96%
Cut dividends over 10 years while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-4.47%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-34.92%
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.
-4.66%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.11%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
2.81%
Positive asset growth while LSCC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-31.13%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.48%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-4.27%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 5.72%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.60%
We cut SG&A while LSCC invests at 11.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.