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.
8.81%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x ON's 7.42%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
9.81%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of ON's 11.76%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
15.53%
EBIT growth 50-75% of ON's 28.94%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
15.39%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of ON's 28.94%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
15.19%
Positive net income growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
15.71%
Positive EPS growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
14.49%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.32%
Share reduction while ON is at 0.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.20%
Reduced diluted shares while ON is at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.06%
Dividend growth of 0.06% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
95.43%
Positive OCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
115.37%
FCF growth above 1.5x ON's 24.29%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
37.03%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 81.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
9.05%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 4.22%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
18.09%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 38.54%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
158.94%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
95.19%
Positive OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
74.36%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 105.06%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-46.89%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
40.42%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
36.42%
Positive short-term CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
20.58%
Below 50% of ON's 1423.33%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
5.27%
Below 50% of ON's 16.95%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-1.05%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ON is at 28.85%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
1158.01%
Stable or rising dividend while ON is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
193.41%
Dividend/share CAGR of 193.41% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
35.90%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 35.90% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.23%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ON's 13.83%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
3.93%
We show growth while ON is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.04%
Asset growth well under 50% of ON's 58.17%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.17%
Similar to ON's 2.27%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
-12.29%
We’re deleveraging while ON stands at 155.19%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.90%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ON's 5.10%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
2.95%
SG&A growth well above ON's 5.34%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.