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.
1.51%
Revenue growth under 50% of ON's 5.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
2.75%
Gross profit growth under 50% of ON's 15.51%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
2.63%
EBIT growth below 50% of ON's 40.18%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
2.40%
Operating income growth under 50% of ON's 40.18%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
2.95%
Net income growth under 50% of ON's 24.49%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
3.03%
EPS growth under 50% of ON's 23.23%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
3.96%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of ON's 22.92%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.11%
Share reduction while ON is at 0.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.21%
Reduced diluted shares while ON is at 0.81%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.20%
Dividend growth of 0.20% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-9.04%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
58.23%
Positive FCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
94.62%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 172.86%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
55.90%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 31.16%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
38.84%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 32.92%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
491.32%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 630.71%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
191.60%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 122.39%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
97.03%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 228.17%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
928.53%
Below 50% of ON's 1863.45%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
138.70%
Below 50% of ON's 556.88%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
83.99%
Below 50% of ON's 340.34%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
56.79%
Below 50% of ON's 246.04%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
42.46%
Below 50% of ON's 145.06%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
67.39%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ON's 48.09%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
575.06%
Dividend/share CAGR of 575.06% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
129.88%
Dividend/share CAGR of 129.88% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
49.37%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 49.37% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.53%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ON's 12.52%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
7.85%
Inventory growth well above ON's 8.45%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
2.43%
Asset growth well under 50% of ON's 6.09%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
5.24%
50-75% of ON's 8.43%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-5.65%
We’re deleveraging while ON stands at 4.27%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
0.51%
We increase R&D while ON cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
4.46%
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.