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.
6.07%
Revenue growth similar to MU's 6.07%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
7.06%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MU's 10.61%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
12.90%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 10.82%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
13.14%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 10.82%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
11.74%
Net income growth at 75-90% of MU's 15.53%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements to catch or surpass competitor performance.
12.59%
EPS growth at 75-90% of MU's 15.38%. Bill Ackman would push for improved profitability or share repurchases to catch up.
12.86%
Diluted EPS growth at 75-90% of MU's 16.10%. Bill Ackman would expect further improvements in net income or share count reduction.
-0.82%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.80%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.16%
Dividend growth of 0.16% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
15.33%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
10.08%
Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
69.30%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 247.06%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
48.57%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 197.19%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
30.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 87.35%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
169.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 1209.29%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
106.95%
Below 50% of MU's 503.31%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
57.28%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 195.49%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
275.27%
Below 50% of MU's 1180.13%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
182.32%
Below 50% of MU's 7755.11%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
107.02%
Below 50% of MU's 620.84%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
40.20%
Below 50% of MU's 193.53%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
7.63%
Below 50% of MU's 245.41%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
10.99%
Below 50% of MU's 112.90%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
518.41%
Dividend/share CAGR of 518.41% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
121.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 121.07% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
82.03%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 82.03% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.19%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 10.71%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
1.24%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MU's 5.81%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.25%
Asset growth well under 50% of MU's 1.41%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.29%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.02%
We have some new debt while MU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
1.56%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 15.30%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-10.20%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 7.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.