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.
8.29%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 13.58%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
17.45%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 14.70%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
99.20%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MRVL's 25.23%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
99.20%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 25.23%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
269.42%
Net income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 17.65%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
271.43%
EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 17.86%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
257.14%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 17.86%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.54%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
3.44%
Diluted share count expanding well above MRVL's 0.58%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
0.54%
Dividend growth of 0.54% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
34.92%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 474.06%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
28.24%
FCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 251.32%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-3.87%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 149.98%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
8.86%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 149.98%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-19.76%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 149.98%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
64.67%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 106.72%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
-17.74%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is at 106.72%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
4.61%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 106.72%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
151.10%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
147.51%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-34.10%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
308.57%
Below 50% of MRVL's 843.73%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
72.15%
Below 50% of MRVL's 843.73%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-8.05%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 843.73%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
31.93%
Dividend/share CAGR of 31.93% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-1.18%
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.
5.82%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 5.82% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.69%
AR growth well above MRVL's 2.75%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-0.50%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.09%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.01%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-4.68%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 196.68%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.38%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 15.53%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-4.57%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 0.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.