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.
2.31%
Revenue growth under 50% of MCHP's 6.89%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.64%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 7.04%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
12.92%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
10.33%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
34.92%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
33.33%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
33.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-29.56%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-27.87%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 4.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
41.96%
Dividend growth of 41.96% while MCHP is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-48.82%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 114.53%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-112.03%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 213.90%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
3.06%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 194.37%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-24.01%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 194.37%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-27.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 68.14%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-52.04%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP is at 265.20%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
385.77%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 33.57%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
143.28%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 253.19%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
73.69%
Below 50% of MCHP's 253.19%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
48.33%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 21.08%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
145.52%
Below 50% of MCHP's 460.92%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
49.68%
Below 50% of MCHP's 103.06%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
83.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 83.48% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
77.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 77.18% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-2.22%
Negative near-term dividend growth while MCHP invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
7.14%
AR growth well above MCHP's 3.01%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
3.72%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 4.55%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-1.20%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
45.27%
Positive BV/share change while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-3.48%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 115.31%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.68%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 4.64%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-1.52%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.