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.
-1.33%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 3.31%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-11.24%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 4.25%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-53.58%
Negative EBIT growth while MCHP is at 4.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-55.16%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 5.88%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-50.42%
Negative net income growth while MCHP stands at 24.56%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-50.00%
Negative EPS growth while MCHP is at 22.22%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-49.02%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MCHP is at 26.92%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.70%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.35%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
31.32%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MCHP cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-14.67%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 9.99%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-13.44%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 22.68%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
169.55%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 94.62%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
27.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 73.63%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
54.82%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 48.68%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
75.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 982.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
48.49%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MCHP's 50.77%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
-2.06%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 78.31%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
461.83%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 532.32%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
-42.35%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MCHP is 87.61%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
214.05%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 66.87%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
29.85%
Below 50% of MCHP's 102.09%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
24.58%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 18.58%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
32.42%
Below 50% of MCHP's 78.23%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
655.09%
Dividend/share CAGR of 655.09% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
330.01%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MCHP is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
54.35%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MCHP cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-13.40%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-9.01%
Inventory is declining while MCHP stands at 1.74%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.96%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 4.93%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.03%
Under 50% of MCHP's 9.85%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-3.60%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
20.00%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 4.65%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
14.43%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 1.40%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.