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.
6.79%
Revenue growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.01%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
7.87%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x LSCC's 4.10%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
20.72%
EBIT growth 50-75% of LSCC's 35.26%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
12.68%
Operating income growth under 50% of LSCC's 35.26%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
24.76%
Net income growth comparable to LSCC's 26.83%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
24.49%
EPS growth at 50-75% of LSCC's 33.33%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
24.14%
Similar diluted EPS growth to LSCC's 22.22%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.22%
Share count expansion well above LSCC's 0.37%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.32%
Diluted share count expanding well above LSCC's 0.13%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
13.33%
Dividend growth of 13.33% while LSCC is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
47.26%
Positive OCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
47.49%
Positive FCF growth while LSCC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
47.46%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 27.05%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
40.65%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
16.50%
Positive 3Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
120.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 31.07%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
63.52%
Below 50% of LSCC's 962.47%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
18.07%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of LSCC's 616.04%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
128.52%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSCC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
122.19%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to LSCC's 130.15%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
425.94%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LSCC's 293.30%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
12.26%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LSCC's 4.49%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
1.64%
Below 50% of LSCC's 7.86%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-4.74%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while LSCC is at 53.99%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
681.02%
Dividend/share CAGR of 681.02% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
167.12%
Dividend/share CAGR of 167.12% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
64.37%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 64.37% while LSCC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
1.58%
Our AR growth while LSCC is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-5.65%
Inventory is declining while LSCC stands at 8.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
6.28%
Positive asset growth while LSCC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
10.11%
BV/share growth above 1.5x LSCC's 1.62%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
4.74%
We have some new debt while LSCC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.52%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. LSCC's 0.86%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-2.21%
We cut SG&A while LSCC invests at 3.27%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.