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.
11.15%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 28.49%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
8.67%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 36.76%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-18.95%
Negative EBIT growth while MU is at 60.81%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-14.93%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 60.81%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-47.61%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 70.43%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-48.68%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 66.67%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-47.22%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 65.52%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.47%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 1.89%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-4.07%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 7.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.45%
Dividend growth of 2.45% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-23.75%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 198.48%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-222.99%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 271.12%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
42.96%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 881.67%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-19.24%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MU stands at 80.68%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
13.52%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 124.02%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
2418.16%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 1554.93%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-16.24%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is at 42.30%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-19.88%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU stands at 27767.50%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
7472.52%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 2632.13% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
105.66%
Below 50% of MU's 267.75%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-64.38%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU is 297.86%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
287.85%
Below 50% of MU's 705.12%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
182.94%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 76.23%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
76.79%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 54.30%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
15.66%
Dividend/share CAGR of 15.66% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-4.26%
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.
-1.77%
Negative near-term dividend growth while MU invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
12.58%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 30.61%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
10.11%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-6.23%
Negative asset growth while MU invests at 6.15%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.27%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 15.61%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
4.89%
We have some new debt while MU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
33.25%
We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
13.25%
SG&A growth well above MU's 22.56%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.