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 / 6.59M (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.
2.81%
Revenue growth under 50% of MRVL's 27.92%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.64%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 1.72%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
4.17%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
5.51%
Positive operating income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
9.20%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.14%
Positive EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
9.56%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.21%
Share reduction while MRVL is at 19.06%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.31%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 16.97%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.08%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MRVL cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
10.91%
OCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 383.40%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
21.89%
FCF growth under 50% of MRVL's 588.10%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
75.75%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 0.13%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
22.11%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
9.87%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
220.59%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 7.81%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
63.29%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 26.42%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
50.95%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 245.18%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
255.52%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
95.58%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
57.62%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 33.13%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
27.78%
Below 50% of MRVL's 84.03%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-2.72%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 27.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-6.47%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 41.46%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
601.27%
Dividend/share CAGR of 601.27% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
156.24%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
102.09%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-5.43%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 2.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-1.88%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.50%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
6.11%
Positive BV/share change while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.19%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-2.82%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 22.47%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-5.00%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.