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.
-5.68%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-2.25%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-16.28%
Negative EBIT growth while MCHP is at 74.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-15.24%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 9.94%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-14.95%
Negative net income growth while MCHP stands at 31.45%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-12.50%
Negative EPS growth while MCHP is at 32.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-13.75%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MCHP is at 30.43%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.46%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.88%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.31%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 0.14%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-61.75%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 1.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-66.59%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
42.07%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 151.79%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
2.81%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 52.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
14.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 45.05%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
54.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 99.01%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
22.90%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MCHP's 24.92%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
67.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 34.64%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
91.38%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 120.65%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
23.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 33.85%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
116.01%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 58.80%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
37.06%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with MCHP's 39.24%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
7.25%
Below 50% of MCHP's 22.85%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-1.77%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
1156.44%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 276.54%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
190.22%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 4.58%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
81.56%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.13%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
8.93%
AR growth well above MCHP's 1.13%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
6.74%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 8.67%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-3.35%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 1.60%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.19%
We have a declining book value while MCHP shows 1.58%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.05%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 1.74%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.23%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
8.89%
We expand SG&A while MCHP cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.