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.
6.26%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 5.12%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
5.32%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of MCHP's 6.02%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
5.90%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
6.24%
Operating income growth under 50% of MCHP's 12.88%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
4.09%
Positive net income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
4.20%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
3.81%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.33%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.69%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.43%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 0.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.04%
Dividend growth under 50% of MCHP's 6.42%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
-17.54%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-31.16%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
93.65%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 235.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
52.48%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to MCHP's 48.04%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
44.72%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
224.56%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 173.61%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
108.31%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MCHP's 115.32%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
0.26%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 7.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
536.51%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 111.28% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
134.40%
Below 50% of MCHP's 457.84%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
78.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of MCHP's 114.97%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
56.50%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 107.34%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
42.19%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 76.98%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
69.13%
Positive short-term equity growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
573.58%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 26.72%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
129.97%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 22.05%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
49.53%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 20.70%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
22.01%
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.
6.75%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 4.36%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-2.19%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.86%
Under 50% of MCHP's 2.60%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-6.43%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
5.88%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MCHP's 3.27%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.