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.
9.36%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 21.26%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
15.92%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 138.73%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
75.90%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MU's 42.51%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
75.90%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MU's 42.51%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
14.77%
Net income growth under 50% of MU's 42.67%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
-15.38%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 42.86%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-16.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 42.86%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
50.74%
Share count expansion well above MU's 0.16%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
51.98%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.20%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-35.45%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
109.22%
OCF growth at 75-90% of MU's 138.09%. Bill Ackman would demand better working capital management or cost discipline.
186.64%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 56.21%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-48.19%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MU stands at 75.73%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
21.71%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-38.73%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
36.94%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
120.38%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 20.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
8.97%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
71.28%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
137.70%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 4.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-45.79%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
127.57%
Below 50% of MU's 370.44%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
59.18%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 27.99%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
-36.96%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-5.96%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-4.47%
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.
-34.92%
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.
-4.66%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 29.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-1.11%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
2.81%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 0.22%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-31.13%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.48%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-4.27%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 2.72%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.60%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 42.43%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.