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.
3.12%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
223.36%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
31.15%
EBIT growth similar to MU's 30.47%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
31.15%
Operating income growth similar to MU's 30.47%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
24.78%
Net income growth at 50-75% of MU's 37.14%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
37.80%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
37.80%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
14.90%
Share change of 14.90% while MU is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
14.90%
Diluted share change of 14.90% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-75.13%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
35000.00%
OCF growth above 1.5x MU's 99.49%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
321.90%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 183.84%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
28.18%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 898.04%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
17.88%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 209.75%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-2.29%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-82.91%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MU is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-387.17%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-184.17%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
21.11%
Below 50% of MU's 168.53%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
1.73%
Below 50% of MU's 213.02%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
7.09%
Below 50% of MU's 33.60%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-15.75%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-15.75%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
56.02%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 56.02% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-12.39%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-5.12%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 3.81%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.55%
Negative asset growth while MU invests at 1.61%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-20.60%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 2.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-4.73%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.90%
We expand SG&A while MU cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.