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.
-10.32%
Negative revenue growth while MRVL stands at 4.29%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-13.87%
Negative gross profit growth while MRVL is at 3.82%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-72.60%
Negative EBIT growth while MRVL is at 8.09%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-51.78%
Negative operating income growth while MRVL is at 15.99%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-53.37%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-49.18%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-49.18%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.03%
Slight or no buybacks while MRVL is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.23%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 1.17%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.66%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MRVL cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
329.17%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
25.90%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
53.79%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to MRVL's 56.20%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
17.67%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 109.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-2.29%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 25.49%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
582.23%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 45.44%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-38.49%
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.
392.80%
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.
140.03%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 220.76%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-41.82%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL is 202.86%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
80.63%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 19.67%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
71.68%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
104.00%
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.
-78.68%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
15.10%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-3.94%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 11.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
0.35%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 4.05%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.30%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.11%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
14.36%
Debt growth far above MRVL's 3.89%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-3.29%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 1.74%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.26%
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.