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.
5.99%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of MCHP's 6.83%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
10.72%
Positive gross profit growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.22%
Positive EBIT growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
8.22%
Positive operating income growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-28.46%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-4.55%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-33.13%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-34.35%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 3.07%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
53.69%
Dividend growth above 1.5x MCHP's 20.03%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
-63.17%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 19.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-101.01%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 46.55%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
0.94%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 311.30%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
32.83%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 39.72%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
18.57%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-19.88%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 784.16%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
67.07%
Below 50% of MCHP's 142.10%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
237.16%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
130.60%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 221.01%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
32.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
62.90%
Positive short-term CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
309.80%
Below 50% of MCHP's 1671.41%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
66.92%
Below 50% of MCHP's 215.80%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-5.11%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 67.52%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
83.26%
Dividend/share CAGR of 83.26% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
3.43%
Dividend/share CAGR of 3.43% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
2.09%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 2.09% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
15.64%
Our AR growth while MCHP is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
16.67%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 5.81%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.77%
Asset growth above 1.5x MCHP's 0.29%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
52.33%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MCHP's 1.10%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.36%
We’re deleveraging while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.27%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
14.94%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 1.18%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.