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.
1.73%
Revenue growth under 50% of MRVL's 9.11%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
1.31%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MRVL's 10.71%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-2.41%
Negative EBIT growth while MRVL is at 19.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-2.41%
Negative operating income growth while MRVL is at 19.85%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-70.59%
Negative net income growth while MRVL stands at 20.37%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-69.48%
Negative EPS growth while MRVL is at 21.43%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-69.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MRVL is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-3.03%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-3.09%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 0.99%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.93%
Dividend growth of 0.93% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-34.43%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-46.04%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
57.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 560.50%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
125.75%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 560.50%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
69.50%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 164.22%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
176.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 1109.00%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
39.23%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1109.00%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-6.21%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL stands at 484.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
581.29%
Below 50% of MRVL's 2805.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
765.91%
Below 50% of MRVL's 2805.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
79.28%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1121.47%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
194.56%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1032.42%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
15.59%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1032.42%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
20.14%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 19.99%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
40.48%
Dividend/share CAGR of 40.48% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
37.98%
Dividend/share CAGR of 37.98% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
41.93%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 41.93% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.29%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 20.52%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
11.69%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 31.30%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-7.18%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 5.82%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.02%
We have a declining book value while MRVL shows 3.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.34%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MRVL's 6.18%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.35%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 3.54%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.