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.
6.07%
Positive revenue growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
7.06%
Gross profit growth under 50% of LSCC's 16.15%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
12.90%
EBIT growth below 50% of LSCC's 195.54%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
13.14%
Operating income growth under 50% of LSCC's 195.54%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
11.74%
Net income growth under 50% of LSCC's 134.49%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.59%
EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 131.25%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
12.86%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of LSCC's 131.25%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.82%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 2.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.80%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 3.71%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.16%
Dividend growth of 0.16% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
15.33%
OCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 54.10%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
10.08%
FCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 151.66%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
69.30%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 59.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
48.57%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 5.73%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
30.76%
Positive 3Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
169.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 96.80%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
106.95%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
57.28%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 293.65%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
275.27%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 190.21%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
182.32%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
107.02%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of LSCC's 125.82%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
40.20%
Positive growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
7.63%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
10.99%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
518.41%
Dividend/share CAGR of 518.41% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
121.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 121.07% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
82.03%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 82.03% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.19%
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.
1.24%
Inventory growth well above LSCC's 1.21%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.25%
Asset growth well under 50% of LSCC's 1.46%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.29%
We have a declining book value while LSCC shows 10.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.02%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
1.56%
We increase R&D while LSCC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-10.20%
We cut SG&A while LSCC invests at 3.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.