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.
6.71%
Revenue growth similar to MCHP's 6.26%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
1.74%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MCHP's 9.07%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-18.30%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-18.30%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
3.42%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.42%
Share count expansion well above MCHP's 0.38%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
3.42%
Slight or no buyback while MCHP is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-3.31%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
92.86%
Positive OCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
237.50%
Positive FCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-16.43%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 253.06%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-2.34%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 56.45%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-18.48%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 23.27%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
23.60%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 313.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
10.68%
Below 50% of MCHP's 43.73%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-41.48%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-18.75%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MCHP is at 90.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
110.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-90.75%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
285.08%
Below 50% of MCHP's 1424.50%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
66.14%
Below 50% of MCHP's 197.57%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-14.43%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 132.22%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
15.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 15.94% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
1.45%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1.45% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
7.83%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 7.83% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.49%
AR growth well above MCHP's 7.42%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
13.38%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 3.83%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.66%
Asset growth above 1.5x MCHP's 0.84%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-1.39%
We have a declining book value while MCHP shows 1.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-12.30%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
3.92%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 3.60%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
8.97%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 5.41%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.