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.
17.79%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MRVL's 4.79%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
39.45%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 5.16%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
272.17%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3330.00%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
1429.41%
Net income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 2.04%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
2000.00%
EPS growth of 2000.00% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
1900.00%
Diluted EPS growth of 1900.00% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
-0.63%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.94%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.39%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 2.16%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.80%
Dividend reduction while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
121.91%
OCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 40.47%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
144.71%
FCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 66.17%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
29.78%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 847.79%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
5.55%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 256.13%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-18.54%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL stands at 99.78%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
128.04%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 2424.45%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
53.26%
Below 50% of MRVL's 292.06%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
6.84%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 51.00%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-0.33%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is at 4039.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-17.92%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 517.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-86.65%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
73.41%
Below 50% of MRVL's 894.41%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
3.13%
Below 50% of MRVL's 48.87%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-11.69%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 27.55%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
417.19%
Dividend/share CAGR of 417.19% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
423.04%
Dividend/share CAGR of 423.04% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
262.50%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 262.50% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
10.58%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 30.75%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-3.19%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-0.09%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 2.48%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.66%
Under 50% of MRVL's 3.80%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4.40%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 4.71%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.21%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MRVL's 23.35%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.