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 / 6.59M (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.
2.06%
Revenue growth under 50% of MCHP's 18.14%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.38%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 7.37%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
10.11%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
9.21%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
7.23%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 169.75%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
6.98%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 180.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
7.94%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 171.43%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.21%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.31%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.06%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 0.21%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
62.24%
Similar OCF growth to MCHP's 61.21%. Walter Schloss would assume comparable operations or industry factors.
76.64%
FCF growth 75-90% of MCHP's 95.07%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
101.87%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 313.59%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
27.36%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 143.94%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
20.00%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 142.75%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
336.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 162.90%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
164.88%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MCHP's 163.99%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
79.90%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 198.39%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
578.69%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
118.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
70.62%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 36.13%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
24.55%
Below 50% of MCHP's 307.01%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.32%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 114.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-8.78%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 122.75%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
602.36%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 7.59%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
155.50%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.83%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
102.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 8.42%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-1.46%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-2.44%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-0.34%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.17%
We have a declining book value while MCHP shows 0.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.10%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.26%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MCHP's 29.09%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
1.45%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MCHP's 7.68%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.