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.
2.41%
Positive revenue growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.40%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
3.22%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.22%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-11.18%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-10.20%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.53%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.52%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.23%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 5.27%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-19.03%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-41.00%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
83.22%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 122.16%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
87.61%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 42.00%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
27.99%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 11.46%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
99.01%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 146.60%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
79.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 71.57%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
-22.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 24.55%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
1239.80%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 179.96% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
536.36%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 451.01%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
15.83%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
98.52%
Below 50% of MCHP's 376.38%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
19.49%
Below 50% of MCHP's 60.09%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
7.75%
Below 50% of MCHP's 33.85%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
373.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 373.94% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
367.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 367.18% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
298.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 542.10%. Martin Whitman might see a weaker short-term approach to distributing cash.
8.51%
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.
4.63%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 0.66%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.36%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.83%
Positive BV/share change while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.06%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-1.61%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.