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.
8.55%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 15.82%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
10.73%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 20.31%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
18.30%
EBIT growth below 50% of MRVL's 235.66%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
18.21%
Operating income growth under 50% of MRVL's 235.66%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
5.92%
Net income growth under 50% of MRVL's 326.22%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
6.06%
EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 324.22%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
6.19%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 324.22%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.40%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.39%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 1.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.00%
Dividend growth under 50% of MRVL's 0.22%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
15.35%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 109.72%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
14.67%
FCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 106.90%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
55.93%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 25.12%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
27.00%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
20.87%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
47.63%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
55.81%
Positive OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
27.49%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
150.27%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 31.06% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
171.55%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
66.59%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
34.68%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 46.25%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
10.06%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
10.24%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
526.04%
Dividend/share CAGR of 526.04% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
192.90%
Dividend/share CAGR of 192.90% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
66.12%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
9.87%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 24.24%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
5.64%
Inventory growth well above MRVL's 3.04%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
2.88%
Asset growth above 1.5x MRVL's 1.28%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
1.05%
Similar to MRVL's 0.96%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
6.70%
Debt growth of 6.70% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
2.44%
We increase R&D while MRVL cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-1.14%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 1.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.