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.
7.30%
Revenue growth above 1.5x LSCC's 1.96%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
8.98%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x LSCC's 2.39%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
18.97%
EBIT growth 75-90% of LSCC's 22.75%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
18.97%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of LSCC's 22.75%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
18.22%
Net income growth under 50% of LSCC's 66.67%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
16.67%
EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 66.75%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
20.00%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 66.75%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.35%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.12%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.07%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.12%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
98.97%
Dividend growth of 98.97% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
62.09%
OCF growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 108.96%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
93.07%
FCF growth similar to LSCC's 101.73%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
42.64%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
109.40%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 0.22%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
29.69%
Positive 3Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
58.50%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
206.80%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
117.86%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
161.17%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
748.99%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 82.87%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
69.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of LSCC's 91.02%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
174.56%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 9.52%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
33.59%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
13.44%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
271.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 271.51% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
247.95%
Dividend/share CAGR of 247.95% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
281.54%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 281.54% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.03%
AR growth well above LSCC's 3.50%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
1.06%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.96%
Positive asset growth while LSCC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.22%
BV/share growth above 1.5x LSCC's 0.10%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-100.00%
We’re deleveraging while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.18%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
4.69%
SG&A growth well above LSCC's 1.50%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.