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.
6.98%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 10.34%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
7.66%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MCHP's 18.37%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
11.16%
EBIT growth below 50% of MCHP's 30.90%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
10.84%
Operating income growth under 50% of MCHP's 37.63%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
11.70%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 56.01%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.70%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 58.33%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
14.52%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 58.33%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.99%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.05%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 0.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.75%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 0.34%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
134.52%
Positive OCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
230.47%
Positive FCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
72.02%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 81.06%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
42.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 36.91%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
22.19%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 16.90%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
292.55%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 53.06%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
19.41%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.70%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
3.03%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 10.57%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
83.88%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 145.53%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
86.72%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 46.84%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
32.48%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 11.78%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
16.38%
Below 50% of MCHP's 202.92%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
15.09%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with MCHP's 15.90%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
7.05%
Positive short-term equity growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
493.84%
Dividend/share CAGR of 493.84% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
784467.57%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 553.74%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
50.12%
3Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 35.96%. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the company's short-term profits or payout policy justify these higher hikes.
2.27%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MCHP's 6.67%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
5.56%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 4.00%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
3.99%
Asset growth above 1.5x MCHP's 1.05%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
4.19%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 1.38%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.38%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 2.58%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.44%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 4.99%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.