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 / 6.59M (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.
-11.16%
Negative revenue growth while ON stands at 1.45%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-14.27%
Negative gross profit growth while ON is at 2.21%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-19.78%
Negative EBIT growth while ON is at 416.40%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-21.40%
Negative operating income growth while ON is at 416.40%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-24.91%
Negative net income growth while ON stands at 193.08%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-25.00%
Negative EPS growth while ON is at 193.33%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-24.83%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ON is at 193.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.21%
Share reduction while ON is at 1.52%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.21%
Reduced diluted shares while ON is at 1.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
16.89%
Dividend growth of 16.89% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-11.95%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-13.67%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
48.40%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 192.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
14.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 72.12%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
4.75%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 12.92%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
133.26%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
54.69%
Positive OCF/share growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
35.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
117.46%
Positive 10Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
45.49%
Below 50% of ON's 1123.51%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
9.10%
Positive short-term CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
21.96%
Below 50% of ON's 247.27%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-3.83%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ON is at 114.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-9.21%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ON is at 83.96%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
651.36%
Dividend/share CAGR of 651.36% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
165.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 165.01% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.91%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.91% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-19.97%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.91%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.14%
Positive asset growth while ON is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-0.66%
We have a declining book value while ON shows 1.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.20%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
1.85%
We increase R&D while ON cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.26%
SG&A growth well above ON's 1.61%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.