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.
-3.77%
Negative revenue growth while MCHP stands at 15.39%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-7.59%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 18.38%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-25.49%
Negative EBIT growth while MCHP is at 23.07%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-26.18%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 23.44%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-29.30%
Negative net income growth while MCHP stands at 18.24%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-29.11%
Negative EPS growth while MCHP is at 20.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-28.57%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MCHP is at 20.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.43%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.42%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MCHP's 2.44%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.43%
Dividend growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 0.30%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if management’s capital return strategy is more aggressive yet sustainable.
-58.05%
Negative OCF growth while MCHP is at 23.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-65.34%
Negative FCF growth while MCHP is at 11.68%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
103.42%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to MCHP's 110.32%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
38.18%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 64.89%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
17.88%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 42.81%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
557.38%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 54.52%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
25.82%
Below 50% of MCHP's 59.30%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-8.46%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MCHP stands at 27.80%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
339.00%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 119.84% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
54.62%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 64.85%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
14.40%
Below 50% of MCHP's 31.13%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
23.29%
Below 50% of MCHP's 141.59%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
27.79%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 13.34%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
21.98%
Positive short-term equity growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
526.91%
Dividend/share CAGR of 526.91% while MCHP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
332.92%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 260.04%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
30.81%
3Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 22.04%. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the company's short-term profits or payout policy justify these higher hikes.
3.29%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MCHP's 40.41%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
10.39%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 9.91%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-0.68%
Negative asset growth while MCHP invests at 7.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.75%
Similar to MCHP's 1.74%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.65%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MCHP's 16.13%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
1.54%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MCHP's 14.95%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.