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.
-19.42%
Negative revenue growth while MRVL stands at 8.46%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-49.76%
Negative gross profit growth while MRVL is at 3.71%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-230.13%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-230.13%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-185.65%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-184.62%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-184.62%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
1.23%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 18.10%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
1.23%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 6.20%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-1.21%
Dividend reduction while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
392.44%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
131.24%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-15.41%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-28.11%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-17.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
1951.34%
OCF/share CAGR of 1951.34% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
200.68%
OCF/share CAGR of 200.68% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
65.62%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 65.62% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
12.15%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 12.15% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
-319.46%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-430.85%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
352.70%
Equity/share CAGR of 352.70% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
150.63%
Equity/share CAGR of 150.63% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
85.64%
Equity/share CAGR of 85.64% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
-79.28%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-2.78%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-2.08%
Negative near-term dividend growth while MRVL invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-14.48%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 22.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-8.31%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.13%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 179.88%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.76%
We have a declining book value while MRVL shows 741.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-2.28%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-7.62%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 27.69%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
14.94%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 25.66%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.