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.
-8.74%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-1.10%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
3.79%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
8.77%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-11.07%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-11.54%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-15.38%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.62%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MCHP's 1.40%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
1.04%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MCHP's 9.11%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.42%
Dividend growth under 50% of MCHP's 2166247.42%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
-53.76%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-57.70%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
183.96%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to MCHP's 179.55%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
23.39%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 60.69%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
66.90%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 40.34%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
152.15%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 437.25%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
2.25%
Positive OCF/share growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
99.54%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1259.23%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 372.81% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-35.21%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MCHP is 45.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
1638.85%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 30.76%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
55.33%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 100.43%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
23.79%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 18.42%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
34.09%
Below 50% of MCHP's 79.42%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
776.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 776.07% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
324.16%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 61.17%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
54.27%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 8.61%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-4.34%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 8.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
3.64%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MCHP's 11.98%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.38%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 2.06%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.47%
Under 50% of MCHP's 2.25%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-5.49%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
7.38%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 2.58%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.05%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 1.24%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.