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.
-3.16%
Negative revenue growth while MPWR stands at 6.75%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-4.91%
Negative gross profit growth while MPWR is at 7.17%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
133.15%
EBIT growth similar to MPWR's 135.20%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
184.17%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x MPWR's 135.20%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
37.12%
Net income growth under 50% of MPWR's 907.66%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
39.13%
EPS growth under 50% of MPWR's 600.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
39.13%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MPWR's 600.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.54%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 1.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.09%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 2.57%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.74%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-66.82%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-72.09%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
98.72%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 162.37%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
5.70%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 33.66%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
0.26%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 0.06%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
177.32%
OCF/share CAGR of 177.32% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-32.68%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MPWR is at 4.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-43.52%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
367.16%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 122.12% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-34.45%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-38.72%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
54.13%
Equity/share CAGR of 54.13% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
33.19%
Below 50% of MPWR's 82.45%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
24.41%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MPWR's 17.93%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
846.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 846.73% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
109.10%
Dividend/share CAGR of 109.10% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
73.43%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 73.43% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.37%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MPWR's 16.95%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-3.24%
Inventory is declining while MPWR stands at 8.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.81%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 8.23%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.46%
Under 50% of MPWR's 4.90%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.05%
We’re deleveraging while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-1.41%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
6.74%
We expand SG&A while MPWR cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.