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.
1.07%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-6.06%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-10.44%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-10.44%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-4.25%
Negative net income growth while LSCC stands at 48.58%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-4.44%
Negative EPS growth while LSCC is at 49.58%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2.27%
Negative diluted EPS growth while LSCC is at 49.58%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.21%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.72%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.46%
Dividend growth of 0.46% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
102.70%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
243.37%
Positive FCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
91.91%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
76.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 9.42%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
17.50%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 6.20%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
123.71%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
171.96%
Below 50% of LSCC's 1489.88%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-13.46%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 206.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
311.00%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
66.06%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to LSCC's 69.09%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
11.12%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 3.07%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
100.48%
Positive growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
16.45%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
5.88%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
361.29%
Dividend/share CAGR of 361.29% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
366.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 366.79% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
652488.96%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 652488.96% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-2.04%
Firm’s AR is declining while LSCC shows 1.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-4.60%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.68%
Positive asset growth while LSCC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.34%
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.
3.89%
We increase R&D while LSCC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-8.88%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.