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.
6.10%
Positive revenue growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
6.17%
Positive gross profit growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
15.50%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
15.25%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
14.66%
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.
16.92%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.40%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.52%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.30%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
71.83%
OCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 24.01%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
82.73%
FCF growth above 1.5x MRVL's 23.63%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
52.13%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 209.00%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
6.46%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 40.56%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
12.10%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 14.37%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
48.23%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 183.07%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
24.14%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 16.06%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
29.91%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
101.43%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 179.04%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
7.87%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
12.80%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
33.75%
Below 50% of MRVL's 122.04%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
16.21%
Below 50% of MRVL's 48.77%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-3.10%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 16.74%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
2216987.49%
Dividend/share CAGR of 2216987.49% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
182.59%
Dividend/share CAGR of 182.59% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
98.80%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 98.80% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
3.28%
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.
-6.05%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-5.66%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.92%
We have a declining book value while MRVL shows 1.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-15.40%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-1.25%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-7.66%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 3.98%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.