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.
1.04%
Revenue growth under 50% of LSCC's 3.52%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
0.29%
Gross profit growth under 50% of LSCC's 10.36%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
0.32%
Positive EBIT growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-0.96%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
297.09%
Net income growth above 1.5x LSCC's 17.48%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
294.29%
EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 17.76%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
297.06%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x LSCC's 17.81%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.20%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.20%
Reduced diluted shares while LSCC is at 0.43%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.20%
Dividend growth of 0.20% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-42.35%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-45.64%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
56.33%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 68.53%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
47.90%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 34.35%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
27.80%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 9.28%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
134.19%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
247.85%
Positive OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
94.00%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 16186.99%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
178.55%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
324.95%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
121.24%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 89.05%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
45.75%
Positive growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
9.43%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
9.04%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
520.16%
Dividend/share CAGR of 520.16% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
196.58%
Dividend/share CAGR of 196.58% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
82.35%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 82.35% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
13.77%
AR growth well above LSCC's 19.37%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
3.83%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.77%
Negative asset growth while LSCC invests at 1.40%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
3.16%
Under 50% of LSCC's 12.51%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
0.02%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.26%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
5.87%
SG&A declining or stable vs. LSCC's 14.66%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.