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.
10.84%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ON's 3.57%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
16.44%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ON's 5.69%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
26.41%
EBIT growth above 1.5x ON's 16.25%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
13.75%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of ON's 16.25%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
0.48%
Net income growth under 50% of ON's 27.03%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
2.63%
EPS growth under 50% of ON's 40.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.55%
Share reduction while ON is at 0.31%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.36%
Reduced diluted shares while ON is at 1.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-99.94%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
83.07%
Positive OCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
86.67%
Positive FCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-2.77%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
20.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
68.07%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
175.37%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
228.76%
Positive OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
182.00%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 895.96%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
102.53%
Positive 10Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-1.52%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
253.22%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 178.69%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
186.13%
Positive growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
1.13%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
12.65%
Below 50% of ON's 35.39%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-99.93%
Cut dividends over 10 years while ON stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-99.92%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while ON stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-99.93%
Negative near-term dividend growth while ON invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
0.68%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ON's 16.15%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-3.66%
Inventory is declining while ON stands at 0.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.44%
Similar asset growth to ON's 3.39%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
4.15%
50-75% of ON's 5.75%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-0.83%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.90%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ON's 3.91%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
20.35%
SG&A growth well above ON's 3.85%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.