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.
1.38%
Revenue growth under 50% of MCHP's 3.25%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
2.44%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 4.69%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
1.49%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
4.16%
Operating income growth under 50% of MCHP's 8.58%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
0.83%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
0.96%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
0.98%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.11%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 2.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.47%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 11.83%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
11.93%
FCF growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 8.63%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capex decisions or cost controls create a cash flow advantage.
66.03%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 161.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
37.03%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 93.13%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
14.40%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 20.87%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
164.44%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with MCHP's 161.62%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
86.38%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MCHP's 86.90%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
21.04%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 24.12%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
301.53%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
118.16%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
30.19%
Below 50% of MCHP's 112.81%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
36.59%
Below 50% of MCHP's 128.52%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
28.13%
Below 50% of MCHP's 92.27%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
21.31%
Below 50% of MCHP's 47.81%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
688.88%
Stable or rising dividend while MCHP is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
167.47%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 1.61%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
64.28%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 0.38%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
3.90%
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.
0.38%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 0.71%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
12.96%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
8.95%
Positive BV/share change while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
23.80%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.77%
Our R&D shrinks while MCHP invests at 5.16%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-3.06%
We cut SG&A while MCHP invests at 6.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.