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.
6.47%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MU's 11.55%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
13.31%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 51.91%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
37.52%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 747.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
-6.84%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 747.83%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.70%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 115.03%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.08%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 114.29%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.45%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 114.29%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.63%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.79%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.54%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 3.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.31%
Dividend growth of 0.31% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
70.77%
OCF growth under 50% of MU's 166.67%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
77.99%
FCF growth under 50% of MU's 552.69%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
100.90%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 87.93%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
13.95%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 16.78%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
-6.30%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
254.02%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 688.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
30.17%
Below 50% of MU's 117.02%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-5.66%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
120.73%
Similar net income/share CAGR to MU's 111.89%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
32.93%
Below 50% of MU's 113.75%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-20.90%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
51.69%
Positive growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
30.26%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
19.84%
Positive short-term equity growth while MU is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
1205.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1205.79% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
179.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 179.73% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
132.68%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 132.68% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.21%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 22.59%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.35%
Inventory growth well above MU's 0.64%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-0.79%
Negative asset growth while MU invests at 1.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.48%
BV/share growth of 0.48% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-0.08%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-5.40%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 5.61%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.27%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 3.25%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.