Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN)

Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.

Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.

Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.

Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.

Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.

Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.

Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.

Share reduction while MRVL is at 0.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.

Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 0.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.

Dividend growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.15%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.

Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.

Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.

10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MRVL's 34.39%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.

Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.

Positive 3Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.

Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.

Positive OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.

Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.

Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.

Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.

Dividend/share CAGR of 651.36% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.

Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.

Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.

Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 8.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.

Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.

Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.

Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.

Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.

We increase R&D while MRVL cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.

We expand SG&A while MRVL cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.