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.
-2.70%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-0.29%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
4.57%
Positive EBIT growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-1.29%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
17.55%
Positive net income growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
19.84%
Positive EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
19.35%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.61%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.70%
Reduced diluted shares while MRVL is at 0.70%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.54%
Dividend reduction while MRVL stands at 4.55%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
102.12%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
130.43%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
22.18%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
13.14%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-4.83%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
303.61%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
136.80%
Positive OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
103.54%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
136.66%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
123.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
41.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
3.34%
Below 50% of MRVL's 82.04%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-15.44%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 16.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.54%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MRVL is at 39.01%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
638.34%
Dividend/share CAGR of 638.34% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
162.46%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 3.99%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
79.33%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 4.36%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-10.64%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
6.64%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.94%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
0.45%
Under 50% of MRVL's 3.07%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
3.76%
Debt growth far above MRVL's 0.06%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
0.53%
We increase R&D while MRVL cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-3.84%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 3.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.