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.
13.12%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MCHP's 2.85%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
16.17%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MCHP's 1.72%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
10.22%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
12.17%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
13.43%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
8.33%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
8.70%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
2.53%
Slight or no buybacks while MCHP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
1.38%
Slight or no buyback while MCHP is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.49%
Dividend growth of 0.49% while MCHP is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
83.58%
OCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 55.49%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
152.78%
FCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 46.55%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
12.26%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 155.70%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-16.56%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 155.70%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
101.94%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 45.41%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
153.21%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 262.91%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
94.23%
Below 50% of MCHP's 262.91%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
34.58%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 66.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
882.41%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
108.68%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
1537.14%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
188.07%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 315.38%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
162.02%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 315.38%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
99.34%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 66.26%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
10.49%
Dividend/share CAGR of 10.49% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
27.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 27.18% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-6.24%
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.
-5.96%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 11.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
18.73%
We show growth while MCHP is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
13.87%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
13.93%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 6.52%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.91%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-3.71%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
28.49%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 0.79%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.