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.
-3.35%
Negative revenue growth while MRVL stands at 26.60%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.35%
Negative gross profit growth while MRVL is at 25.20%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-9.39%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-9.39%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
0.85%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
-3.57%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-3.57%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-4.27%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-4.27%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
1.64%
Dividend growth of 1.64% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
133.53%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
2372.73%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-12.84%
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.
44.05%
5Y CAGR of 44.05% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
27.18%
3Y CAGR of 27.18% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
90.99%
OCF/share CAGR of 90.99% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
16.19%
OCF/share CAGR of 16.19% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
160.94%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 160.94% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-16.62%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-293.74%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-187.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
419.26%
Equity/share CAGR of 419.26% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
175.56%
Equity/share CAGR of 175.56% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
158.15%
Equity/share CAGR of 158.15% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
28.19%
Dividend/share CAGR of 28.19% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
6.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 6.92% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
54.74%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 54.74% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-17.32%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 62.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-16.56%
Inventory is declining while MRVL stands at 217.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.51%
Asset growth well under 50% of MRVL's 1332.99%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
7.46%
Under 50% of MRVL's 1941.26%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-1.19%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.70%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MRVL's 24.90%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-3.53%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 16.53%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.