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.
10.39%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MCHP's 4.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
12.03%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MCHP's 64.25%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
24.89%
EBIT growth below 50% of MCHP's 352.76%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
24.89%
Operating income growth under 50% of MCHP's 352.76%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
20.16%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 168.03%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
19.05%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 157.14%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
19.05%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 183.33%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
1.79%
Share count expansion well above MCHP's 0.58%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-1.12%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 1.15%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-1.76%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
28.75%
OCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 14.00%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
1975.00%
FCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 15.60%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
7.68%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 245.24%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
22.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 35.95%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
61.53%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
45.01%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 450.17%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
48.79%
Below 50% of MCHP's 157.12%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-12.33%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
99.88%
Below 50% of MCHP's 559.82%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
21.43%
Below 50% of MCHP's 72.14%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
327.27%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
287.62%
Below 50% of MCHP's 1560.91%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
68.15%
Below 50% of MCHP's 201.89%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-0.31%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 57.75%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
81.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 81.51% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-1.12%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
1.53%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 1.53% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
15.02%
AR growth well above MCHP's 2.97%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
11.93%
We show growth while MCHP is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.68%
Asset growth well under 50% of MCHP's 4.18%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.11%
Under 50% of MCHP's 4.07%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-4.70%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
4.05%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.93%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 1.52%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.