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.
8.61%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ON's 1.54%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
11.90%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ON's 3.55%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
22.28%
Positive EBIT growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
24.52%
Positive operating income growth while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
20.85%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x ON's 18.78%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
20.33%
EPS growth similar to ON's 18.99%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
20.49%
Similar diluted EPS growth to ON's 19.23%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.11%
Slight or no buybacks while ON is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.11%
Slight or no buyback while ON is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.06%
Dividend growth of 0.06% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
10.25%
OCF growth under 50% of ON's 28.60%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-17.95%
Negative FCF growth while ON is at 32.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
37.66%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 118.17%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
12.73%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 20.84%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-9.62%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ON stands at 1.99%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
45.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 420.85%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-10.96%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ON is at 82.26%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-27.88%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON stands at 4.64%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
91.44%
Below 50% of ON's 923.67%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-2.12%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ON is 727.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-29.28%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ON is 30.80%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
91.46%
Below 50% of ON's 439.36%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
96.82%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 153.01%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
43.67%
Below 50% of ON's 109.92%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
332.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 332.01% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
68.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 68.60% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
27.39%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 27.39% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.83%
Our AR growth while ON is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
4.63%
Inventory growth well above ON's 0.82%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.78%
Asset growth well under 50% of ON's 1.94%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.20%
Under 50% of ON's 3.44%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.92%
We have some new debt while ON reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-1.20%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-7.96%
We cut SG&A while ON invests at 4.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.