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.
6.98%
Revenue growth above 1.5x LSCC's 0.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
7.66%
Positive gross profit growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
11.16%
Positive EBIT growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
10.84%
Positive operating income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
11.70%
Positive net income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
12.70%
Positive EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
14.52%
Positive diluted EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.99%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 1.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.05%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.65%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.75%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
134.52%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
230.47%
Positive FCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
72.02%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
42.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to LSCC's 39.90%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
22.19%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 29.82%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
292.55%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
19.41%
Below 50% of LSCC's 818.72%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
3.03%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 297.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
83.88%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 19.13% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
86.72%
Below 50% of LSCC's 310.04%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
32.48%
Below 50% of LSCC's 439.10%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
16.38%
Positive growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
15.09%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
7.05%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
493.84%
Dividend/share CAGR of 493.84% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
784467.57%
Dividend/share CAGR of 784467.57% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
50.12%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 50.12% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.27%
AR growth well above LSCC's 4.07%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
5.56%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. LSCC's 18.09%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
3.99%
Asset growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 5.96%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
4.19%
75-90% of LSCC's 5.47%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.38%
We increase R&D while LSCC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.44%
We expand SG&A while LSCC cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.