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 / 6.59M (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.
8.61%
Revenue growth above 1.5x LSCC's 2.43%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
11.90%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 16.15%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
22.28%
Positive EBIT growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
24.52%
Positive operating income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
20.85%
Positive net income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
20.33%
Positive EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
20.49%
Positive diluted EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.11%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 0.12%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.11%
Slight or no buyback while LSCC is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.06%
Dividend growth of 0.06% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
10.25%
OCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 100.69%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-17.95%
Negative FCF growth while LSCC is at 308.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
37.66%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 26.48%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
12.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 18.63%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-9.62%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
45.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 148.50%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-10.96%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC is at 132.01%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-27.88%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
91.44%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-2.12%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-29.28%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
91.46%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 39.52%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
96.82%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 119.43%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
43.67%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 77.67%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
332.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 332.01% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
68.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 68.60% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
27.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 27.39% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.83%
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.
4.63%
Inventory growth well above LSCC's 2.92%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.78%
Asset growth well under 50% of LSCC's 3.16%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.20%
Under 50% of LSCC's 0.55%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.92%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-1.20%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 7.57%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.96%
We cut SG&A while LSCC invests at 161.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.