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.
-0.91%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 5.97%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
6.12%
Gross profit growth similar to MCHP's 5.56%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
-72.73%
Negative EBIT growth while MCHP is at 6.71%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-72.73%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 6.71%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
372.73%
Net income growth above 1.5x MCHP's 7.57%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
200.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x MCHP's 7.07%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
200.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MCHP's 7.07%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.25%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MCHP's 0.89%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.48%
Diluted share count expanding well above MCHP's 0.89%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-0.25%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
786.67%
Positive OCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
125.30%
Positive FCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
11.86%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 125.68%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-14.43%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 125.68%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-35.92%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 95.14%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
11.67%
Below 50% of MCHP's 187.82%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-24.52%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 469.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-54.44%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MCHP is at 274.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-61.41%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MCHP is 274.72%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-82.09%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP is 114.13%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
131.78%
Below 50% of MCHP's 412.31%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
60.37%
Below 50% of MCHP's 225.71%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
87.55%
Dividend/share CAGR of 87.55% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
14.29%
Dividend/share CAGR of 14.29% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
37.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 37.39% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-5.10%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 4.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-9.02%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.16%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 7.04%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.55%
We have a declining book value while MCHP shows 6.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.23%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-6.71%
Our R&D shrinks while MCHP invests at 1.85%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
25.55%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 5.98%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.