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.
6.35%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of ON's 10.02%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
8.67%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ON's 4.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
19.59%
Positive EBIT growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
19.65%
Positive operating income growth while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
20.94%
Positive net income growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
22.22%
Positive EPS growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
22.58%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.03%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.10%
Reduced diluted shares while ON is at 0.09%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.21%
Dividend reduction while ON stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
78.45%
Positive OCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
84.17%
Positive FCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
75.81%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 50.82%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
43.93%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 69.29%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
9.01%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
139.61%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 74.35%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
96.33%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 1.21%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
31.16%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
139.45%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 69.08% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
81.78%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 30.10%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
48.33%
Below 50% of ON's 183.49%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
32.52%
Below 50% of ON's 309.28%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
31.35%
Below 50% of ON's 74.47%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
2.49%
Below 50% of ON's 11.39%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1346.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1346.20% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
173.68%
Dividend/share CAGR of 173.68% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
132.62%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 132.62% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.27%
Firm’s AR is declining while ON shows 11.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
0.40%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. ON's 14.50%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.51%
Asset growth well under 50% of ON's 13.57%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.09%
Under 50% of ON's 2.22%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.06%
We’re deleveraging while ON stands at 30.80%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-4.87%
Our R&D shrinks while ON invests at 10.93%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.91%
We cut SG&A while ON invests at 7.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.