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.
4.34%
Positive revenue growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
7.29%
Positive gross profit growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
14.75%
EBIT growth below 50% of MCHP's 71.72%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
14.68%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
21.75%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
23.26%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
23.81%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.04%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.23%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.63%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
9.10%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MCHP cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
20.02%
OCF growth under 50% of MCHP's 1610.31%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-7.07%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 225.49%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
54.53%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to MCHP's 57.58%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
32.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.51%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
2.56%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
42.74%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 27.29%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
6.47%
Positive OCF/share growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
40.02%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
99.29%
Below 50% of MCHP's 1027.63%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
85.55%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
15.90%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
45.75%
Below 50% of MCHP's 158.74%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
3.31%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
1.15%
Positive short-term equity growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
508.03%
Dividend/share CAGR of 508.03% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
370.06%
Below 50% of MCHP's 861.59%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
203.64%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 77.23%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-11.01%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 12.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
7.71%
We show growth while MCHP is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.81%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.09%
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.
-3.80%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
2.35%
We expand SG&A while MCHP cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.