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.
-0.63%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-0.43%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-2.53%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-0.40%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
9.72%
Positive net income growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.53%
Positive EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.71%
Positive diluted EPS growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.21%
Share reduction while LSCC is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.53%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.21%
Dividend growth of 0.21% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-51.48%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-56.63%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
37.56%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 19.04%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
18.56%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
4.90%
Positive 3Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
58.74%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
56.76%
Below 50% of LSCC's 122563.30%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
14.75%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 149.78%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
136.30%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
100.76%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of LSCC's 113.33%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
26.23%
Below 50% of LSCC's 201.85%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
4.46%
Below 50% of LSCC's 11.30%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-16.33%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-22.07%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while LSCC is at 16.32%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
647.52%
Dividend/share CAGR of 647.52% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
165.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 165.01% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
80.30%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 80.30% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
22.53%
AR growth well above LSCC's 5.74%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
0.10%
We show growth while LSCC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-4.08%
Negative asset growth while LSCC invests at 8.53%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-12.98%
We have a declining book value while LSCC shows 4.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
6.76%
Debt shrinking faster vs. LSCC's 25.68%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-2.33%
Our R&D shrinks while LSCC invests at 11.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.21%
SG&A declining or stable vs. LSCC's 7.78%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.