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.
-1.33%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-11.24%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-53.58%
Negative EBIT growth while ON is at 555.22%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-55.16%
Negative operating income growth while ON is at 555.22%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-50.42%
Negative net income growth while ON stands at 13.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-50.00%
Negative EPS growth while ON is at 14.18%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-49.02%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ON is at 16.09%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.70%
Share reduction while ON is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.35%
Reduced diluted shares while ON is at 2.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
31.32%
Dividend growth of 31.32% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-14.67%
Negative OCF growth while ON is at 38.17%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-13.44%
Negative FCF growth while ON is at 211.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
169.55%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 9.33%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
27.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 35.80%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
54.82%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 41.25%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
75.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 653.26%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
48.49%
Positive OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-2.06%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON stands at 82.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
461.83%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 96.43% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-42.35%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
214.05%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 92.46%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
29.85%
Below 50% of ON's 234.03%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
24.58%
Below 50% of ON's 562.60%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
32.42%
Below 50% of ON's 94.47%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
655.09%
Dividend/share CAGR of 655.09% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
330.01%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while ON is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
54.35%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while ON cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-13.40%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-9.01%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.96%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.03%
Positive BV/share change while ON is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-3.60%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
20.00%
We increase R&D while ON cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
14.43%
We expand SG&A while ON cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.