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.
-6.63%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 2.28%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-7.29%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 2.78%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-5.86%
Negative EBIT growth while MCHP is at 4.04%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-6.38%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 7.80%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-0.12%
Negative net income growth while MCHP stands at 5.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.26%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.44%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.02%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 1.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
13.02%
Dividend growth above 1.5x MCHP's 0.03%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
-8.03%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 37.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-10.39%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 36.97%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
70.78%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 166.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
29.09%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 160.18%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
3.75%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 21.95%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
60.55%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 121.35%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
50.79%
Below 50% of MCHP's 321.40%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
42.19%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 25.20%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
177.33%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 146.43%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
49.47%
Below 50% of MCHP's 346.21%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
200.49%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
31.01%
Below 50% of MCHP's 67.44%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
26.82%
Below 50% of MCHP's 96.92%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
2.97%
Below 50% of MCHP's 10.66%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1232.73%
10Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 907.28%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if a higher payout growth rate remains sustainable long term.
183.53%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 4.75%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
100.21%
Below 50% of MCHP's 2218925.93%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-15.64%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 8.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
1.88%
We show growth while MCHP is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.99%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 1.61%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.49%
Under 50% of MCHP's 2.46%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.06%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 0.13%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-6.33%
Our R&D shrinks while MCHP invests at 1.34%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.34%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.