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.
-3.64%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-4.17%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-13.26%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-12.91%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-20.48%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-19.48%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-19.74%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.21%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 0.77%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.19%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.68%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.21%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MPWR cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-52.12%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-57.63%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
72.62%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 253.79%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
16.03%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 32.56%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
10.46%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 27.04%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
89.65%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 762.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
1.26%
Below 50% of MPWR's 72.52%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
48.44%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 119.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
159.95%
Below 50% of MPWR's 395.30%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
17.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MPWR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
170.91%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 73.64%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
41.87%
Below 50% of MPWR's 280.77%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
24.85%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 36.71%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
2.50%
Below 50% of MPWR's 18.25%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1248.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1248.38% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
182.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 182.07% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
99.80%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 99.80% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
11.88%
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.
3.36%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MPWR's 30.50%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.12%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 2.57%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.01%
Positive BV/share change while MPWR is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.09%
We’re deleveraging while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
8.68%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MPWR's 7.34%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
2.33%
SG&A growth well above MPWR's 4.35%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.