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.
-51.02%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-46.54%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-9.60%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-55.20%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
80.95%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
81.13%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
81.13%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.19%
Slight or no buybacks while MU is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.19%
Slight or no buyback while MU is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-3.21%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
316.99%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
184.15%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 40.23%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-28.67%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MU stands at 1482.31%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-39.49%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MU stands at 410.84%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-62.42%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU stands at 98.81%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
64.38%
Below 50% of MU's 149.82%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
39.55%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-185.06%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MU is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
70.38%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MU's 74.92%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
-115.93%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
91.70%
Below 50% of MU's 1328.98%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
88.43%
Below 50% of MU's 356.51%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
33.93%
Below 50% of MU's 239.78%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1.01% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
19.89%
Dividend/share CAGR of 19.89% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
42.45%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 42.45% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-17.25%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 16.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-29.91%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.06%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.62%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 4.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
6.74%
Debt growth far above MU's 2.26%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-55.80%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-10.69%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 12.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.