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.
2.34%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 4.29%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
1.44%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MRVL's 3.82%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
10.06%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 8.09%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
9.27%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 15.99%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
-7.68%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-3.85%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-5.29%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-4.04%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 1.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
8.69%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MRVL cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-58.68%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-152.53%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
43.68%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 56.20%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
-12.20%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 109.65%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
14.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 25.49%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
322.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 237.57%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
57.02%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 45.44%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
29.13%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 63.72%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
2488.56%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 653.69% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
66.59%
Below 50% of MRVL's 220.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
205.05%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 202.86%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
261.53%
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.
211.41%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 19.67%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
147.24%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
16.57%
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.
38.50%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
2.24%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
0.10%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 11.24%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
4.81%
Inventory growth well above MRVL's 4.05%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
16.45%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
27.76%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.41%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 3.89%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
18.99%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 1.74%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-18.83%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.