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.
-3.77%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-7.59%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-25.49%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-26.18%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-29.30%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-29.11%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-28.57%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.43%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.42%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MPWR's 3.09%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.43%
Dividend growth of 0.43% while MPWR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-58.05%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-65.34%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
103.42%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 285.76%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
38.18%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MPWR's 47.74%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
17.88%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to MPWR's 19.55%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
557.38%
OCF/share CAGR of 557.38% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
25.82%
Below 50% of MPWR's 165.75%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-8.46%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MPWR stands at 32.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
339.00%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 132.55% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
54.62%
Below 50% of MPWR's 481.73%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
14.40%
Positive short-term CAGR while MPWR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
23.29%
Equity/share CAGR of 23.29% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
27.79%
Below 50% of MPWR's 144.21%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
21.98%
Below 50% of MPWR's 66.28%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
526.91%
Dividend/share CAGR of 526.91% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
332.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 332.92% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
30.81%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 30.81% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
3.29%
Our AR growth while MPWR is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
10.39%
We show growth while MPWR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.68%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.75%
Positive BV/share change while MPWR is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.65%
We increase R&D while MPWR cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
1.54%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MPWR's 8.18%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.