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.
2.14%
Revenue growth under 50% of MRVL's 19.30%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
12.09%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 16.86%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
128.36%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MRVL's 68.76%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
128.36%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 68.76%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
119.86%
Net income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 69.03%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
119.44%
EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 70.23%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
119.44%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 70.23%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
2.54%
Share count expansion well above MRVL's 3.27%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
2.54%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 3.27%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
0.23%
Dividend growth of 0.23% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-73.66%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-87.40%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1.63%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 31.13%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-6.45%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 31.13%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-22.48%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 31.13%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
64.62%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 11.66%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
506.54%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 11.66%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-52.39%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 11.66%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
26.17%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
892.78%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-72.86%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
363.72%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5610.66%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
67.55%
Below 50% of MRVL's 5610.66%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-6.45%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 5610.66%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
46.91%
Dividend/share CAGR of 46.91% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
4.65%
Dividend/share CAGR of 4.65% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
3.23%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 3.23% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.16%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 33.78%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
11.65%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-1.93%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 0.19%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.52%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-20.32%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 15.59%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.97%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 11.54%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
4.51%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 7.08%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.