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.
-3.64%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 7.19%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-4.17%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 5.48%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-13.26%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-12.91%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-20.48%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-19.48%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-19.74%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.21%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.19%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 0.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.21%
Dividend growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 0.17%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if management’s capital return strategy is more aggressive yet sustainable.
-52.12%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-57.63%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
72.62%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 156.64%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
16.03%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 150.37%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
10.46%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 34.11%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
89.65%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 63.84%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
1.26%
Below 50% of MCHP's 31.61%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
48.44%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 89.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
159.95%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 111.95%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
17.70%
Below 50% of MCHP's 200.08%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
170.91%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
41.87%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 65.31%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
24.85%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 36.00%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
2.50%
Below 50% of MCHP's 9.64%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1248.38%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 789.38%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
182.07%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 4.91%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
99.80%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.61%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
11.88%
AR growth well above MCHP's 18.27%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
3.36%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 0.68%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-2.12%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 10.67%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.01%
Under 50% of MCHP's 1.32%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.09%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 32.57%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
8.68%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 9.06%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
2.33%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MCHP's 5.99%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.