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.
-2.70%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 1.15%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-0.29%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 1.51%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
4.57%
EBIT growth similar to MCHP's 4.18%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
-1.29%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 6.99%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
17.55%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 114.79%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
19.84%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 109.09%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
19.35%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 120.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.61%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.70%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 0.55%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.54%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
102.12%
OCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 4.05%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
130.43%
FCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 6.06%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
22.18%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 353.53%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
13.14%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 106.11%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-4.83%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 38.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
303.61%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 137.68%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
136.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 73.53%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
103.54%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 61.17%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
136.66%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 88.11% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
123.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
41.81%
Below 50% of MCHP's 190.25%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
3.34%
Below 50% of MCHP's 182.50%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-15.44%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 104.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.54%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 92.37%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
638.34%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 8.05%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
162.46%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.84%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
79.33%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 1.65%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-10.64%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
6.64%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 0.15%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.94%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
0.45%
Under 50% of MCHP's 1.13%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
3.76%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.53%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 0.32%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-3.84%
We cut SG&A while MCHP invests at 2.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.