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.
8.98%
Revenue growth under 50% of MPWR's 52.06%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
13.85%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MPWR's 54.94%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
55.96%
Positive EBIT growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
34.61%
Positive operating income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
52.80%
Positive net income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
58.33%
Positive EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
58.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-4.00%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.67%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-3.80%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.67%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.68%
Dividend reduction while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
58.13%
OCF growth at 50-75% of MPWR's 94.64%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
131.71%
FCF growth 50-75% of MPWR's 238.09%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
-8.26%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MPWR stands at 73.45%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
19.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 73.45%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
74.31%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to MPWR's 73.45%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
93.48%
OCF/share CAGR of 93.48% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
35.53%
OCF/share CAGR of 35.53% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
148.63%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 148.63% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
107.17%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-49.18%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
669.14%
Positive short-term CAGR while MPWR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
195.47%
Equity/share CAGR of 195.47% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-5.11%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MPWR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
17.24%
Equity/share CAGR of 17.24% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
63.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 63.48% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
26.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 26.48% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
9.16%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 9.16% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.15%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MPWR's 62.07%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-3.45%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.72%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 12.81%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.31%
Positive BV/share change while MPWR is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-3.22%
We’re deleveraging while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.40%
Our R&D shrinks while MPWR invests at 63.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.45%
We cut SG&A while MPWR invests at 13.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.