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.
-7.99%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 2.28%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-8.87%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 2.55%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-18.98%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-18.98%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-12.32%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-9.09%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-9.26%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-3.28%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-3.79%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 2.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.35%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 6.53%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-54.95%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 70.45%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-66.02%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 53.44%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
75.89%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 136.81%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
88.01%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 52.56%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
41.12%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 17.61%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
1774.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 99.50%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
311.93%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 58.81%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
57.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 11.23%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
6975.22%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 292.60% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
612.67%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 241.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
106.47%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 73.73%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
93.88%
Below 50% of MCHP's 432.77%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
15.72%
Below 50% of MCHP's 70.59%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
6.14%
Below 50% of MCHP's 44.13%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
373.82%
Dividend/share CAGR of 373.82% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
352.76%
Dividend/share CAGR of 352.76% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
296.48%
Below 50% of MCHP's 600.70%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-4.19%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 2.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
11.28%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 2.27%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-2.60%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 4.09%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
2.17%
75-90% of MCHP's 2.83%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.98%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MCHP's 4.20%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.08%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MCHP's 7.40%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.