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.
-0.35%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
0.52%
Positive gross profit growth while MPWR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-16.03%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-5.08%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-4.78%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-4.81%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.90%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.20%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MPWR's 0.76%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.10%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MPWR's 2.04%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.00%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-42.68%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-47.69%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
54.04%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 204.25%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
24.84%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 65.18%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
23.53%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MPWR's 56.61%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
107.34%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 186.22%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
102.79%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MPWR's 192.48%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
86.39%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MPWR's 71.19%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
179.18%
Below 50% of MPWR's 17239.99%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
330.89%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MPWR's 301.62%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
121.75%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MPWR's 50.46%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
36.24%
Below 50% of MPWR's 231.00%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
10.06%
Below 50% of MPWR's 47.12%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
8.51%
Below 50% of MPWR's 26.34%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1145.59%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1145.59% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
193.66%
Dividend/share CAGR of 193.66% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
66.64%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 66.64% while MPWR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.52%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MPWR's 11.29%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.96%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MPWR's 9.89%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.76%
Negative asset growth while MPWR invests at 5.02%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.38%
Under 50% of MPWR's 3.86%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-6.95%
We’re deleveraging while MPWR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
7.58%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MPWR's 5.12%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
6.81%
SG&A growth well above MPWR's 3.64%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.