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.
7.30%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 10.13%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
8.98%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 5.13%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
18.97%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
18.97%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
18.22%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
16.67%
Positive EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
20.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.35%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.07%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
98.97%
Dividend growth of 98.97% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
62.09%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 260.57%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
93.07%
FCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 572.13%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
42.64%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 568.49%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
109.40%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 548.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
29.69%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 151.18%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
58.50%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 2305.66%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
206.80%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1502.18%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
117.86%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 273.61%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
161.17%
Below 50% of MRVL's 2595.21%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
748.99%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 133.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
69.80%
Below 50% of MRVL's 302.01%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
174.56%
Below 50% of MRVL's 805.60%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
33.59%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 16.84%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
13.44%
Below 50% of MRVL's 35.58%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
271.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 271.51% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
247.95%
Dividend/share CAGR of 247.95% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
281.54%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 281.54% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.03%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 16.78%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
1.06%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 12.82%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.96%
Asset growth well under 50% of MRVL's 5.92%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.22%
Similar to MRVL's 2.19%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
-100.00%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 5.58%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.18%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 22.28%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
4.69%
SG&A growth well above MRVL's 7.21%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.