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.
-7.10%
Negative revenue growth while MU stands at 11.01%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-6.45%
Negative gross profit growth while MU is at 16.27%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
8.36%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-5.45%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
8.16%
Net income growth under 50% of MU's 20.93%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
4.00%
EPS growth under 50% of MU's 19.05%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
4.08%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MU's 23.81%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.51%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
0.10%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.10%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
31.30%
Dividend growth of 31.30% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-1.84%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 130.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
0.24%
FCF growth under 50% of MU's 17.21%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
45.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 68.67%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
13.86%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 49.09%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
22.94%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 16.87%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
141.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 95.26%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
62.92%
Below 50% of MU's 151.03%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
26.13%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 29.06%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
131.02%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
300.73%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
123.41%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
35.88%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 7.16%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
9.07%
Below 50% of MU's 41.45%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
5.67%
Below 50% of MU's 36.47%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1168.08%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1168.08% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
194.90%
Dividend/share CAGR of 194.90% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
66.90%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 66.90% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-12.44%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
1.33%
Asset growth at 50-75% of MU's 2.00%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
2.34%
BV/share growth of 2.34% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-0.06%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 2.90%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-2.83%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 7.59%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.01%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 6.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.