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.
6.47%
Revenue growth under 50% of AVGO's 14.59%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
13.31%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x AVGO's 11.76%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
37.52%
EBIT growth above 1.5x AVGO's 18.64%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
-6.84%
Negative operating income growth while AVGO is at 18.64%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.70%
Negative net income growth while AVGO stands at 25.66%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.08%
Negative EPS growth while AVGO is at 23.91%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.45%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AVGO is at 24.44%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.63%
Share reduction while AVGO is at 0.81%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.54%
Reduced diluted shares while AVGO is at 0.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.31%
Dividend growth under 50% of AVGO's 9.75%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
70.77%
Positive OCF growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
77.99%
Positive FCF growth while AVGO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
100.90%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 26.59%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
13.95%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AVGO's 26.59%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-6.30%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO stands at 12.84%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
254.02%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AVGO's 97.03%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
30.17%
Below 50% of AVGO's 97.03%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-5.66%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
120.73%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AVGO's 178.48%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
32.93%
Below 50% of AVGO's 178.48%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-20.90%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AVGO is 11.26%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
51.69%
Equity/share CAGR of 51.69% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
30.26%
Equity/share CAGR of 30.26% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
19.84%
Below 50% of AVGO's 97.08%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
1205.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1205.79% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
179.73%
Dividend/share CAGR of 179.73% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
132.68%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 132.68% while AVGO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.21%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AVGO's 34.69%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.35%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AVGO's 24.02%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-0.79%
Negative asset growth while AVGO invests at 5.26%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.48%
Under 50% of AVGO's 3.56%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.08%
We’re deleveraging while AVGO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-5.40%
Our R&D shrinks while AVGO invests at 6.32%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.27%
We cut SG&A while AVGO invests at 9.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.