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.
8.98%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of MRVL's 10.23%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
13.85%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 10.24%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
55.96%
EBIT growth 50-75% of MRVL's 83.95%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
34.61%
Operating income growth under 50% of MRVL's 83.95%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
52.80%
Net income growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 97.45%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
58.33%
EPS growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
58.33%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 100.00%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
-4.00%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 1.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-3.80%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 1.31%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.68%
Dividend reduction while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
58.13%
OCF growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 89.79%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
131.71%
FCF growth similar to MRVL's 122.76%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
-8.26%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 278.95%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
19.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 278.95%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
74.31%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 267.81%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
93.48%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 731.73%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
35.53%
Below 50% of MRVL's 731.73%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
148.63%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 453.94%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
107.17%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1782.20%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-49.18%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 1782.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
669.14%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 123.12%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
195.47%
Below 50% of MRVL's 599.45%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-5.11%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 599.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
17.24%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
63.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 63.48% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
26.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 26.48% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
9.16%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 9.16% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.15%
AR growth well above MRVL's 6.37%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-3.45%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.72%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 2.41%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.31%
Under 50% of MRVL's 1.90%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-3.22%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 281.29%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.40%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 1.21%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.45%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 7.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.