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.
0.23%
Revenue growth under 50% of MRVL's 7.01%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-0.51%
Negative gross profit growth while MRVL is at 7.31%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-13.11%
Negative EBIT growth while MRVL is at 18.77%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-10.06%
Negative operating income growth while MRVL is at 18.77%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-10.57%
Negative net income growth while MRVL stands at 16.36%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-8.77%
Negative EPS growth while MRVL is at 14.71%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-8.93%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MRVL is at 15.15%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.04%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.27%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.95%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.30%
Dividend reduction while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
80.35%
OCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 15.24%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
166.20%
FCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 15.88%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
173.88%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 1198.54%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
21.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 96.60%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
16.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 15.03%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
397.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 4583.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
257.54%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 287.41%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
23.30%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 1255.33%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
850.50%
Below 50% of MRVL's 6871.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
12.70%
Below 50% of MRVL's 139.96%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
21.68%
Below 50% of MRVL's 3712.53%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
39.50%
Below 50% of MRVL's 1747.03%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
20.69%
Below 50% of MRVL's 63.10%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
24.51%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 43.75%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
484.42%
Dividend/share CAGR of 484.42% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
323.55%
Dividend/share CAGR of 323.55% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
28.78%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 28.78% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.70%
Our AR growth while MRVL is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
11.52%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
22.28%
Asset growth above 1.5x MRVL's 4.34%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
2.19%
Under 50% of MRVL's 4.64%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
65.84%
Debt growth of 65.84% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-6.84%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-5.60%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 11.27%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.