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.
6.10%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
6.17%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
15.50%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
15.25%
Positive operating income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
14.66%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
16.67%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
16.92%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.40%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.52%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.30%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
71.83%
OCF growth above 1.5x MU's 6.71%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
82.73%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 51.01%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
52.13%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 120.79%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
6.46%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 38.96%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
12.10%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 63.23%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
48.23%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 141.75%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
24.14%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MU's 23.91%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
29.91%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 79.06%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
101.43%
Below 50% of MU's 331.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
7.87%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
12.80%
Below 50% of MU's 241.18%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
33.75%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 29.94%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
16.21%
Below 50% of MU's 33.85%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-3.10%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MU is at 46.75%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
2216987.49%
Dividend/share CAGR of 2216987.49% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
182.59%
Dividend/share CAGR of 182.59% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
98.80%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 98.80% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
3.28%
Our AR growth while MU is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-6.05%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 0.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-5.66%
Negative asset growth while MU invests at 5.53%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.92%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-15.40%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 12.26%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-1.25%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 7.12%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.66%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.