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.
0.23%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.51%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-13.11%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-10.06%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-10.57%
Negative net income growth while LSCC stands at 2.35%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-8.77%
Negative EPS growth while LSCC is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-8.93%
Negative diluted EPS growth while LSCC is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.04%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.95%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.30%
Dividend reduction while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
80.35%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 58.92%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
166.20%
FCF growth above 1.5x LSCC's 87.04%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
173.88%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 30.33%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
21.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 24.91%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
16.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 38.78%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
397.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 9464.29%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
257.54%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 67.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
23.30%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 413.98%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
850.50%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 111.80% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
12.70%
Below 50% of LSCC's 1342.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
21.68%
Below 50% of LSCC's 286.99%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
39.50%
Positive growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
20.69%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
24.51%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 28.43%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
484.42%
Dividend/share CAGR of 484.42% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
323.55%
Dividend/share CAGR of 323.55% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
28.78%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 28.78% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.70%
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.
11.52%
Inventory growth well above LSCC's 0.15%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
22.28%
Asset growth above 1.5x LSCC's 5.93%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
2.19%
50-75% of LSCC's 3.22%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
65.84%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-6.84%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-5.60%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.