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.
9.86%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MRVL's 4.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
0.99%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MRVL's 3.82%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
3232.57%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MRVL's 8.09%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
3232.57%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 15.99%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
-8.90%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2.50%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-10.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-18.38%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
16.37%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 1.17%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-9.44%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
36.22%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
88.24%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
106.37%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 56.20%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
57.31%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 109.65%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
53.45%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 25.49%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-22.10%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 63.72%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
440.05%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 653.69%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
56.48%
Below 50% of MRVL's 220.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
370.04%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 202.86%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
70.39%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 54.87%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
50.67%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 19.67%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
11.63%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-29.09%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MRVL stands at 0.04%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
31.31%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
-15.96%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
3.13%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 11.24%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-7.95%
Inventory is declining while MRVL stands at 4.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.04%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
23.65%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.95%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 3.89%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.65%
We expand SG&A while MRVL cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.