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.
17.85%
Positive revenue growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
17.82%
Positive gross profit growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
23.29%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
31.03%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-1.96%
Negative net income growth while MCHP stands at 185.67%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-2.65%
Negative EPS growth while MCHP is at 182.61%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2.03%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MCHP is at 172.73%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.11%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MCHP's 0.34%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.22%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MCHP's 1.18%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.13%
Similar dividend growth to MCHP's 0.12%. Walter Schloss might see parallel free cash flow or payout philosophies.
-16.10%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-18.43%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 0.82%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
31.77%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 295.66%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
23.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 104.82%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-0.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 39.47%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
41.36%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 201.20%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
13.88%
Below 50% of MCHP's 79.98%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-9.71%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 22.93%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
103.37%
Below 50% of MCHP's 244.54%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
88.52%
Below 50% of MCHP's 204.08%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
13.44%
Below 50% of MCHP's 162.37%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
7.90%
Below 50% of MCHP's 190.93%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.15%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 109.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-18.37%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 97.78%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
644.90%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 7.82%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
163.60%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.76%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
79.57%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 1.67%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
18.37%
Our AR growth while MCHP is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-3.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
4.37%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
8.79%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 4.41%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.01%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
1.85%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
1.50%
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.