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.
-3.47%
Negative revenue growth while MU stands at 13.79%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-6.47%
Negative gross profit growth while MU is at 49.40%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-11.63%
Negative EBIT growth while MU is at 120.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-11.39%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 120.26%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-11.53%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 167.17%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-10.81%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 166.67%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-11.56%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 163.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.11%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.09%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.11%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
4.58%
Dividend growth above 1.5x MU's 0.69%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
15.36%
OCF growth under 50% of MU's 37.19%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
93.75%
Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
40.67%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 76.73%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
22.37%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 58.56%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-15.98%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
80.26%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 143.66%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
16.53%
Below 50% of MU's 51.93%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-14.12%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
67.62%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
15.21%
Below 50% of MU's 57.54%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-42.90%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
86.70%
Below 50% of MU's 303.88%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
94.14%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 25.33%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
28.44%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 4.12%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
299.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 299.73% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
50.84%
Dividend/share CAGR of 50.84% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
18.30%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 18.30% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-7.68%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 28.92%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
5.38%
Inventory growth well above MU's 4.26%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.53%
Asset growth well under 50% of MU's 4.77%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-2.01%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 0.43%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-6.71%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 0.52%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.20%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 6.24%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
4.21%
SG&A growth well above MU's 1.37%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.