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.
2.60%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ON's 1.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
3.58%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ON's 1.33%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
5.30%
Positive EBIT growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
5.43%
Positive operating income growth while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
6.10%
Positive net income growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
6.45%
Positive EPS growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
6.56%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.99%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.94%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.43%
Dividend growth of 0.43% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
34.65%
OCF growth above 1.5x ON's 21.68%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
43.00%
FCF growth similar to ON's 39.57%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
57.57%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 73.90%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
7.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 52.15%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
6.84%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 25.86%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
56.58%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
70.44%
Positive OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
33.92%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 83.03%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
75.01%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 63.89%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
5.73%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
72.03%
Below 50% of ON's 682.29%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
40.58%
Below 50% of ON's 288.31%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
22.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 36.67%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
0.82%
Below 50% of ON's 12.09%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1263.46%
Stable or rising dividend while ON is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
181.31%
Dividend/share CAGR of 181.31% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
100.13%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 100.13% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.87%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ON's 7.79%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.22%
We show growth while ON is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.07%
Asset growth well under 50% of ON's 4.51%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.60%
We have a declining book value while ON shows 0.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
5.30%
Debt shrinking faster vs. ON's 18.52%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-5.33%
Our R&D shrinks while ON invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.06%
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.