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.
6.66%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MRVL's 1.67%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
6.29%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 1.41%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
8.23%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
8.57%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
0.46%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.72%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 1.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.11%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.73%
Dividend growth of 0.73% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-29.07%
Negative OCF growth while MRVL is at 32.42%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-13.10%
Negative FCF growth while MRVL is at 42.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
53.66%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 428.39%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
48.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 65.38%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
17.46%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
133.79%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 1154.54%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
87.28%
Below 50% of MRVL's 341.26%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
49.88%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 192.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
106.89%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
120.86%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
49.13%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
15.89%
Below 50% of MRVL's 8192.09%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
13.63%
Below 50% of MRVL's 43.60%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
1.63%
Below 50% of MRVL's 11.22%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
463.52%
Dividend/share CAGR of 463.52% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
378.03%
Dividend/share CAGR of 378.03% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
200.44%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 200.44% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
19.50%
AR growth well above MRVL's 28.49%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
6.16%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
2.07%
Asset growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.61%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
1.59%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.52%
We increase R&D while MRVL cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.16%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MRVL's 110.02%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.