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.
5.99%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 24.61%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
10.72%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 68.73%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.22%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 120.55%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.22%
Operating income growth under 50% of MU's 120.55%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-28.46%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 100.89%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-4.55%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 100.85%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-33.13%
Share reduction while MU is at 4.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-34.35%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 4.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
53.69%
Dividend growth of 53.69% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-63.17%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 128.06%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-101.01%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 84.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
0.94%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 117.01%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
32.83%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 8.17%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
18.57%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-19.88%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MU stands at 16.96%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
67.07%
Positive OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
237.16%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
130.60%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
32.77%
Below 50% of MU's 101.85%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
62.90%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
309.80%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 380.09%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
66.92%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 9.73%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
-5.11%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
83.26%
Dividend/share CAGR of 83.26% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
3.43%
Dividend/share CAGR of 3.43% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
2.09%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 2.09% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
15.64%
AR growth well above MU's 12.64%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
16.67%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.77%
Asset growth well under 50% of MU's 5.50%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
52.33%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MU's 4.99%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.36%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
10.27%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 12.22%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
14.94%
We expand SG&A while MU cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.