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 MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.53%
Positive EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.71%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.21%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.53%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 1.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.21%
Dividend growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 0.32%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders.
-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 under 50% of MCHP's 427.09%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
18.56%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 110.52%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
4.90%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 49.00%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
58.74%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 154.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
56.76%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 93.26%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
14.75%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 53.05%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
136.30%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 42.45% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
100.76%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCHP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
26.23%
Below 50% of MCHP's 140.28%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
4.46%
Below 50% of MCHP's 179.06%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-16.33%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 105.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.07%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MCHP is at 88.06%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
647.52%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 8.04%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
165.01%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 2.98%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
80.30%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 1.56%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
22.53%
AR growth well above MCHP's 6.38%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
0.10%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MCHP's 3.01%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-4.08%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-12.98%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
6.76%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-2.33%
Our R&D shrinks while MCHP invests at 2.05%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.21%
SG&A growth well above MCHP's 0.24%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.