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.
0.28%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
0.54%
Positive gross profit growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
10.98%
EBIT growth below 50% of LSCC's 46.38%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
10.98%
Operating income growth under 50% of LSCC's 46.38%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
27.66%
Net income growth under 50% of LSCC's 60.42%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
32.00%
EPS growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 60.07%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
28.00%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 60.07%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.93%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.28%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.79%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
86.17%
OCF growth above 1.5x LSCC's 24.01%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
308.00%
FCF growth 50-75% of LSCC's 501.88%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
7.93%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 9.14%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
32.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
69.82%
Positive 3Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
102.84%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
72.68%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
172.49%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 2602.28%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
158.75%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
36.06%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
564.91%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 94.17%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
285.05%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 160.07%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
58.13%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 0.54%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
7.89%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
39.88%
Dividend/share CAGR of 39.88% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
5.99%
Dividend/share CAGR of 5.99% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-6.00%
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.
1.81%
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.
5.53%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.54%
Asset growth well under 50% of LSCC's 1.50%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
5.72%
Positive BV/share change while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-51.52%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-6.03%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 2.72%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-6.93%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.