Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN)

Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.

Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.

Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.

Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.

Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.

Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.

Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.

Share reduction while MU is at 0.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.

Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.23%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.

Dividend growth of 1.64% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.

Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.

Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.

Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.

Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.

Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.

Positive OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.

Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.

Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.

Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.

Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.

5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 102.65%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.

3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 87.33%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.

Dividend/share CAGR of 28.19% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.

Stable or rising mid-term dividends while MU is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.

3Y dividend/share CAGR of 54.74% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.

Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 16.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.

Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.

Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.

Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.

Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.

We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.

We cut SG&A while MU invests at 95.97%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.