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.
-6.66%
Negative revenue growth while ON stands at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-7.81%
Negative gross profit growth while ON is at 1.48%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-18.38%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-18.60%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-18.76%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-17.86%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-17.86%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.91%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.81%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
6.82%
Dividend growth of 6.82% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
4.17%
OCF growth under 50% of ON's 112.02%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
6.33%
FCF growth under 50% of ON's 1040.43%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
160.86%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 4.54%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
43.38%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 34.40%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
-7.30%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ON stands at 21.58%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
168.15%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 85.31%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
26.50%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 43.08%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
5.20%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
137.70%
Similar net income/share CAGR to ON's 140.09%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
463.32%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 107.56%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-41.46%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
117.37%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 192.33%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
36.69%
Below 50% of ON's 97.76%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
11.74%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 5.35%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
2060.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 2060.94% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
172.72%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while ON is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
129.94%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 129.94% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-21.06%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
0.29%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. ON's 4.53%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-1.59%
Negative asset growth while ON invests at 0.26%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.31%
We have a declining book value while ON shows 1.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.06%
We’re deleveraging while ON stands at 3.72%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-5.98%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-0.86%
We cut SG&A while ON invests at 3.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.