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.
-7.18%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-3.63%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-11.36%
Negative EBIT growth while AMD is at 25.90%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-11.36%
Negative operating income growth while AMD is at 25.71%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-10.69%
Negative net income growth while AMD stands at 93.54%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-9.76%
Negative EPS growth while AMD is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-10.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AMD is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.18%
Share reduction while AMD is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.22%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
1.20%
Dividend growth of 1.20% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-38.66%
Negative OCF growth while AMD is at 5.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-73.49%
Negative FCF growth while AMD is at 23.01%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
19.20%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 46.00%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
47.21%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
60.39%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 38.60%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
839.85%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 1476.45%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
422.47%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 161.40%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
199.68%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 635.25%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
243.23%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 335.67%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
183.91%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 0.38%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
427.26%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 193.97%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
154.02%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 32.39%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
-3.52%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
10.46%
Below 50% of AMD's 48.25%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
43.45%
Dividend/share CAGR of 43.45% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
44.81%
Dividend/share CAGR of 44.81% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
36.80%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 36.80% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
9.10%
Our AR growth while AMD is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-2.12%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-6.80%
Negative asset growth while AMD invests at 10.49%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.73%
We have a declining book value while AMD shows 38.13%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-51.89%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.60%
We increase R&D while AMD cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-0.94%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.