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.
4.07%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 6.36%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
6.28%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 10.52%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
8.28%
EBIT growth below 50% of MRVL's 81.51%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.59%
Operating income growth under 50% of MRVL's 81.51%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
9.81%
Net income growth under 50% of MRVL's 172.18%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
9.48%
EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 158.48%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.66%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MRVL's 158.48%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.11%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 0.45%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
12.62%
Dividend growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.13%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
-2.92%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-44.64%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
73.70%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
52.56%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
34.08%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
198.43%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
83.17%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 123.25%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
13.33%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
782.06%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
120.11%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 195.99%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
77.97%
Positive short-term CAGR while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
49.67%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with MRVL's 47.06%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
37.23%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 53.18%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
52.90%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 49.30%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
576.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 576.51% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
129.41%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MRVL is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
48.82%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
2.90%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MRVL's 9.46%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.52%
We show growth while MRVL is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
6.03%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
9.61%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MRVL's 0.10%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
6.03%
We have some new debt while MRVL reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.26%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MRVL's 1.86%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-1.94%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 1.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.