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.
-7.92%
Negative revenue growth while MU stands at 4.62%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-9.52%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-17.63%
Negative EBIT growth while MU is at 11.81%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-17.63%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 11.81%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.84%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2.13%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.52%
Share reduction while MU is at 1.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.41%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
29.35%
Dividend growth of 29.35% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
101.67%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
341.26%
Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
204.26%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 15.56%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
111.21%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 137.18%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
120.70%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 30.74%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
37.20%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 78.19%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
18.07%
Below 50% of MU's 588.53%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
39.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 149.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
2571.27%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 101.94% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
727.64%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 109.18%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
129.87%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to MU's 143.75%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
187.22%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 91.22%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
4.23%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
69.04%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 38.11%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
87.75%
Stable or rising dividend while MU is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
75.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 75.60% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
184.42%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 184.42% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-15.08%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 18.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-3.62%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 20.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-5.78%
Negative asset growth while MU invests at 18.64%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.10%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 16.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.46%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-1.39%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 26.94%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.