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.
-2.70%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-0.29%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
4.57%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-1.29%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
17.55%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
19.84%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
19.35%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.61%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.70%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.35%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.54%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
102.12%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
130.43%
Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
22.18%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 86.62%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
13.14%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 11.31%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
-4.83%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU stands at 2.09%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
303.61%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 89.88%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
136.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 54.63%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
103.54%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 40.88%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
136.66%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
123.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
41.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
3.34%
Below 50% of MU's 404.20%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-15.44%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MU is at 188.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.54%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MU is at 156.34%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
638.34%
Dividend/share CAGR of 638.34% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
162.46%
Dividend/share CAGR of 162.46% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.33%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.33% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-10.64%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
6.64%
Inventory growth well above MU's 5.36%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.94%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
0.45%
Under 50% of MU's 1.07%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
3.76%
We have some new debt while MU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.53%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 6.41%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-3.84%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 5.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.