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.
10.36%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MPWR's 13.94%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
17.05%
Gross profit growth similar to MPWR's 15.58%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
41.52%
Positive EBIT growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
42.32%
Positive operating income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
40.25%
Positive net income growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
43.18%
Positive EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
40.91%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.93%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.91%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.23%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.31%
Dividend growth of 0.31% while MPWR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
67.75%
OCF growth at 50-75% of MPWR's 113.63%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
80.52%
FCF growth under 50% of MPWR's 223.48%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
67.30%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 5.32%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
58.50%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MPWR's 46.39%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
2.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 15.98%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
152.27%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 43.17%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
64.60%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 104.71%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
32.57%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 68.63%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
155.09%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 252.96%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
210.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 76.84%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
9.70%
Below 50% of MPWR's 60.74%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
38.59%
Equity/share CAGR of 38.59% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
34.39%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 63.72%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
3.61%
Below 50% of MPWR's 28.90%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1337.84%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1337.84% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
174.90%
Dividend/share CAGR of 174.90% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
132.42%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 132.42% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.69%
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.
1.75%
Inventory growth well above MPWR's 3.44%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-5.94%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 3.21%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.53%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-17.76%
We’re deleveraging while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-4.64%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-1.46%
We cut SG&A while MPWR invests at 4.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.