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.
13.08%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MCHP's 7.21%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
21.62%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MCHP's 8.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
67.84%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MCHP's 8.36%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
67.84%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 94.00%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
93.02%
Net income growth comparable to MCHP's 96.32%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
88.89%
EPS growth similar to MCHP's 86.29%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
77.78%
Similar diluted EPS growth to MCHP's 86.29%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.42%
Slight or no buybacks while MCHP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.65%
Slight or no buyback while MCHP is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
2.70%
Dividend growth of 2.70% while MCHP is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
107.56%
OCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 35.23%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
304.55%
FCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 102.99%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
50.60%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 84.24%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
12.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 84.24%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-2.10%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 84.24%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
273.52%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 61.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
99.32%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 61.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
308.53%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 171.28% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
184.44%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MCHP's 171.28%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
29.95%
Below 50% of MCHP's 171.28%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
87.76%
Below 50% of MCHP's 239.01%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
60.15%
Below 50% of MCHP's 239.01%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
91.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 91.48% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
8.57%
Dividend/share CAGR of 8.57% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
86.41%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 86.41% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
4.12%
AR growth well above MCHP's 6.95%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
11.16%
We show growth while MCHP is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.34%
Asset growth well under 50% of MCHP's 2.70%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
4.97%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 2.20%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-14.52%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 15.94%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
17.15%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 10.56%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.67%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MCHP's 7.86%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.