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.
8.61%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MU's 16.95%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
11.90%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 69.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
22.28%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 2193.94%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
24.52%
Operating income growth under 50% of MU's 2193.94%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
20.85%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
20.33%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
20.49%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.11%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 0.27%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.11%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 0.81%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.06%
Dividend growth under 50% of MU's 0.51%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
10.25%
OCF growth under 50% of MU's 103.61%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-17.95%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 340.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
37.66%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 64.86%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
12.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 41.99%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-9.62%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
45.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 64.42%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
-10.96%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-27.88%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
91.44%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-2.12%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-29.28%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
91.46%
Below 50% of MU's 328.84%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
96.82%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 24.98%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
43.67%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 5.98%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
332.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 332.01% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
68.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 68.60% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
27.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 27.39% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.83%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 19.44%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
4.63%
Inventory growth well above MU's 0.82%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.78%
Similar asset growth to MU's 0.82%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
0.20%
Under 50% of MU's 0.55%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.92%
We have some new debt while MU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-1.20%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 2.16%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-7.96%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 3.93%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.