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.
-5.68%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-2.25%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-16.28%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-15.24%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-14.95%
Negative net income growth while MPWR stands at 4.61%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-12.50%
Negative EPS growth while MPWR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-13.75%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MPWR is at 4.17%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.46%
Share reduction while MPWR is at 1.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.88%
Reduced diluted shares while MPWR is at 0.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.31%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-61.75%
Negative OCF growth while MPWR is at 18.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-66.59%
Negative FCF growth while MPWR is at 40.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
42.07%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 145.69%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
2.81%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 66.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
14.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 48.74%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
54.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 715.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
22.90%
Below 50% of MPWR's 206.94%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
67.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 290.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
91.38%
Below 50% of MPWR's 1965.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
23.77%
Below 50% of MPWR's 388.80%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
116.01%
Below 50% of MPWR's 283.32%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
37.06%
Below 50% of MPWR's 235.56%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
7.25%
Below 50% of MPWR's 37.40%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-1.77%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MPWR is at 25.23%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
1156.44%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1156.44% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
190.22%
Dividend/share CAGR of 190.22% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
81.56%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 81.56% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.93%
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.
6.74%
We show growth while MPWR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-3.35%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 3.67%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.19%
We have a declining book value while MPWR shows 2.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.05%
We’re deleveraging while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.23%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MPWR's 3.51%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
8.89%
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.