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.
-7.00%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 2.74%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-6.56%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 3.87%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-0.77%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.89%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 12.59%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
4.76%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 15.51%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
3.90%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 13.64%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
5.26%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 15.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.82%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.77%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
11.84%
Dividend growth above 1.5x MCHP's 0.10%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
1.49%
Positive OCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-0.31%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 0.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
40.82%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 168.35%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
4.85%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 78.86%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
17.82%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 53.00%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
149.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 220.46%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
34.74%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 51.27%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
45.06%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 66.31%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
102.44%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 81.16%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
2.85%
Below 50% of MCHP's 20.12%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
248.52%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 17.68%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
32.16%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 41.47%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
10.44%
Below 50% of MCHP's 22.06%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-0.13%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
1175.51%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 410.56%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
192.39%
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.
80.78%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.25%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-21.34%
Firm’s AR is declining while MCHP shows 12.92%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-4.52%
Inventory is declining while MCHP stands at 1.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.87%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 3.28%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.58%
Positive BV/share change while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.29%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 34.37%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-3.16%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-6.68%
We cut SG&A while MCHP invests at 1.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.