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.
10.84%
Positive revenue growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
16.44%
Positive gross profit growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
26.41%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
13.75%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
0.48%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.63%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.55%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.36%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 0.15%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-99.94%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 13.22%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
83.07%
OCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 37.26%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
86.67%
FCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 48.75%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-2.77%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 222.94%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
20.39%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 32.26%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
68.07%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 40.28%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
175.37%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 711.70%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
228.76%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 49.03%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
182.00%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 86.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
102.53%
Below 50% of MCHP's 381.78%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-1.52%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MCHP is 67.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
253.22%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 118.37%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
186.13%
Below 50% of MCHP's 754.87%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
1.13%
Below 50% of MCHP's 161.37%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
12.65%
Below 50% of MCHP's 31.09%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-99.93%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-99.92%
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.
-99.93%
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.
0.68%
Our AR growth while MCHP is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-3.66%
Inventory is declining while MCHP stands at 8.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.44%
Asset growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 5.12%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
4.15%
Similar to MCHP's 4.05%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
-0.83%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 4.68%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
6.90%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
20.35%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 0.17%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.