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.
-10.32%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-13.87%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-72.60%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-51.78%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-53.37%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-49.18%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-49.18%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.03%
Share reduction more than 1.5x LSCC's 0.70%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.23%
Slight or no buyback while LSCC is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.66%
Dividend growth of 0.66% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
329.17%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 279.49%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
25.90%
FCF growth under 50% of LSCC's 775.00%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
53.79%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 519.99%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
17.67%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 112.27%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-2.29%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC stands at 17.66%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
582.23%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 381.76%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-38.49%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 200.76%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
392.80%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 392.80% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
140.03%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 224.43%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-41.82%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LSCC is 48.31%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
80.63%
Below 50% of LSCC's 255.08%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
71.68%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of LSCC's 140.31%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
104.00%
Dividend/share CAGR of 104.00% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-78.68%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while LSCC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
15.10%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 15.10% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.94%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
0.35%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. LSCC's 23.85%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.30%
Asset growth well under 50% of LSCC's 3.30%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.11%
Under 50% of LSCC's 3.56%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
14.36%
Debt growth of 14.36% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-3.29%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
1.26%
We expand SG&A while LSCC cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.