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.
3.47%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 5.58%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
1.64%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MCHP's 6.72%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
3.82%
EBIT growth below 50% of MCHP's 7.98%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
1.96%
Operating income growth under 50% of MCHP's 7.67%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
0.82%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 7.69%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
0.53%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 7.61%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
1.08%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 8.89%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.11%
Slight or no buybacks while MCHP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.11%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 9.01%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
20.60%
Positive OCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-126.40%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
80.64%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 277.75%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
21.37%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 73.30%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
41.12%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 33.98%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
152.14%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 775.14%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-17.56%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP is at 91.67%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-17.95%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 73.17%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
216.94%
Below 50% of MCHP's 1900.71%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
31.88%
Below 50% of MCHP's 144.30%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
25.88%
Below 50% of MCHP's 333.63%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
74.95%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 117.01%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
61.29%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 45.61%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
110.37%
Positive short-term equity growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
342.27%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 70.23%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
99.75%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 66.31%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
37.90%
3Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 64.49%. Martin Whitman might see a weaker short-term approach to distributing cash.
4.21%
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.
13.41%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 13.00%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
5.88%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.46%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 2.52%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
10.79%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
4.84%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-2.74%
We cut SG&A while MCHP invests at 7.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.