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.
-8.74%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-1.10%
Negative gross profit growth while ON is at 2.51%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
3.79%
EBIT growth below 50% of ON's 42.95%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.77%
Operating income growth under 50% of ON's 42.95%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-11.07%
Negative net income growth while ON stands at 166.35%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-11.54%
Negative EPS growth while ON is at 163.56%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-15.38%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ON is at 165.01%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.62%
Share count expansion well above ON's 0.49%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
1.04%
Diluted share change of 1.04% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
0.42%
Dividend growth of 0.42% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-53.76%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-57.70%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
183.96%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 6.86%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
23.39%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 27.27%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
66.90%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 79.48%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
152.15%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 208.29%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
2.25%
Positive OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
99.54%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 117.84%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
1259.23%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 121.79% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-35.21%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
1638.85%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 176.03%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
55.33%
Below 50% of ON's 226.15%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
23.79%
Below 50% of ON's 713.89%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
34.09%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 65.89%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
776.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 776.07% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
324.16%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while ON is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
54.27%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 54.27% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-4.34%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
3.64%
We show growth while ON is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-2.38%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.47%
Under 50% of ON's 2.25%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-5.49%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
7.38%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ON's 0.77%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.05%
SG&A growth well above ON's 0.46%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.