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.
2.60%
Revenue growth under 50% of LSCC's 20.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.58%
Gross profit growth under 50% of LSCC's 21.52%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
5.30%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 3.85%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
5.43%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 3.85%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
6.10%
Net income growth under 50% of LSCC's 33.32%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
6.45%
EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 34.78%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
6.56%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 34.78%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.99%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.03%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.94%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.03%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.43%
Dividend growth of 0.43% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
34.65%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
43.00%
Positive FCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
57.57%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 97.21%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
7.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 37.10%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
6.84%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 51.63%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
56.58%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
70.44%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
33.92%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
75.01%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
5.73%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
72.03%
Positive short-term CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
40.58%
Positive growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
22.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 24.94%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
0.82%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
1263.46%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1263.46% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
181.31%
Dividend/share CAGR of 181.31% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
100.13%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 100.13% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.87%
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.
2.22%
Inventory growth well above LSCC's 0.30%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.07%
Positive asset growth while LSCC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-0.60%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
5.30%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-5.33%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 43.09%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.06%
SG&A declining or stable vs. LSCC's 33.67%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.