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.
2.97%
Revenue growth under 50% of MCHP's 9.57%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.03%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MCHP's 11.00%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
16.31%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 12.76%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
12.45%
Operating income growth similar to MCHP's 12.57%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
207.84%
Net income growth above 1.5x MCHP's 14.30%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
204.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x MCHP's 11.17%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
200.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MCHP's 11.82%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
4.94%
Share count expansion well above MCHP's 2.92%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
5.32%
Diluted share count expanding well above MCHP's 2.32%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-7.43%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
59.20%
Similar OCF growth to MCHP's 54.65%. Walter Schloss would assume comparable operations or industry factors.
136.40%
Positive FCF growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
36.04%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 186.42%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-23.23%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 147.66%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-0.63%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCHP stands at 55.46%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
277.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 417.99%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
42.76%
Below 50% of MCHP's 925.38%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-5.23%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 219.78%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
8874.99%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 399.74% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
307.63%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 185.57%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
365.54%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 84.22%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
292.02%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 556.49%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
211.37%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 317.37%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
153.92%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 93.65%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
7.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 7.92% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
29.26%
Dividend/share CAGR of 29.26% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-7.85%
Negative near-term dividend growth while MCHP invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
9.79%
AR growth well above MCHP's 5.40%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
8.75%
We show growth while MCHP is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
11.76%
Asset growth above 1.5x MCHP's 7.66%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
7.81%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 4.47%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-1.82%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-0.25%
Our R&D shrinks while MCHP invests at 3.35%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
3.09%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MCHP's 13.10%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.