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.
2.34%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 46.60%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
1.44%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 271.85%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
10.06%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 6848.10%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
9.27%
Operating income growth under 50% of MU's 6848.10%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-7.68%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 2050.29%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-3.85%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 2051.22%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-4.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 1929.27%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-5.29%
Share reduction while MU is at 1.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-4.04%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 11.59%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
8.69%
Dividend growth of 8.69% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-58.68%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 93.27%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-152.53%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 5404.84%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
43.68%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 1527.86%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-12.20%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MU stands at 131.90%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
14.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 66.52%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
322.80%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 1417.79%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
57.02%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 82.06%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
29.13%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 183.90%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
2488.56%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 2488.56% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
66.59%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MU's 67.77%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
205.05%
Below 50% of MU's 1167.83%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
261.53%
Below 50% of MU's 527.33%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
211.41%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 184.16%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
147.24%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 32.76%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
16.57%
Dividend/share CAGR of 16.57% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
38.50%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MU is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
2.24%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 2.24% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
0.10%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 32.31%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
4.81%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MU's 37.85%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
16.45%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 8.85%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
27.76%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MU's 9.47%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-2.41%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
18.99%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 4.92%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-18.83%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 25.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.