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.
17.85%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 13.36%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
17.82%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MU's 30.11%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
23.29%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 101.82%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
31.03%
Operating income growth under 50% of MU's 101.82%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-1.96%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 98.27%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-2.65%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 94.59%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2.03%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 97.22%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.11%
Share change of 0.11% while MU is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.22%
Slight or no buyback while MU is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.13%
Dividend growth of 0.13% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-16.10%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 1.10%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-18.43%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 243.64%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
31.77%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 89.41%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
23.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 36.31%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-0.08%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
41.36%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 81.35%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
13.88%
Below 50% of MU's 46.35%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-9.71%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
103.37%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
88.52%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 57.95%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
13.44%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
7.90%
Below 50% of MU's 292.45%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.15%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MU is at 193.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-18.37%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MU is at 132.82%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
644.90%
Dividend/share CAGR of 644.90% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
163.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 163.60% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.57%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.57% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
18.37%
AR growth well above MU's 18.17%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-3.00%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 3.78%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.37%
Similar asset growth to MU's 4.75%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
8.79%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MU's 2.15%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.01%
Debt shrinking faster vs. MU's 20.98%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
1.85%
We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
1.50%
We expand SG&A while MU cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.