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.
1.07%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 10.23%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-6.06%
Negative gross profit growth while MU is at 211.63%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-10.44%
Negative EBIT growth while MU is at 70.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-10.44%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 70.85%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.25%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 69.63%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-4.44%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 69.31%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2.27%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 69.31%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.21%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.72%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.46%
Dividend growth of 0.46% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
102.70%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
243.37%
Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
91.91%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 33.73%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
76.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 60.93%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
17.50%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to MU's 19.19%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
123.71%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 9188.52%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
171.96%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 263.42%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-13.46%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
311.00%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
66.06%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 13.56%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
11.12%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
100.48%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 27.74%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
16.45%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 0.70%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
5.88%
Positive short-term equity growth while MU is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
361.29%
Dividend/share CAGR of 361.29% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
366.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 366.79% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
652488.96%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 652488.96% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-2.04%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 11.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-4.60%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 0.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.68%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.34%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.89%
We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-8.88%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.