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.
5.20%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 4.29%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
-6.44%
Negative gross profit growth while MRVL is at 3.82%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-6.41%
Negative EBIT growth while MRVL is at 8.09%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-6.41%
Negative operating income growth while MRVL is at 15.99%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
0.69%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
-5.26%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-5.26%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.57%
Slight or no buybacks while MRVL is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.27%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 1.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.54%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MRVL cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
4.31%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-94.07%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
137.93%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 56.20%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
76.91%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 109.65%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
71.38%
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.
-9.01%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is at 45.44%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
42.84%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 63.72%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
665.18%
Similar net income/share CAGR to MRVL's 653.69%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
548.82%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 220.76%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
257.19%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 202.86%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
128.96%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 54.87%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
49.99%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 19.67%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
98.79%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
4.56%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.04%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
23.92%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
29.96%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-5.71%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 11.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
6.77%
Inventory growth well above MRVL's 4.05%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.61%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.79%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.21%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 3.89%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 1.74%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
40.00%
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.