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.
0.56%
Revenue growth under 50% of MCHP's 6.53%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-0.22%
Negative gross profit growth while MCHP is at 7.96%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-0.70%
Negative EBIT growth while MCHP is at 53.29%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1.65%
Negative operating income growth while MCHP is at 23.71%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
0.17%
Net income growth under 50% of MCHP's 45.79%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
1.21%
EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 45.45%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
0.82%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MCHP's 44.19%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.76%
Share reduction while MCHP is at 0.65%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.75%
Reduced diluted shares while MCHP is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.09%
Dividend reduction while MCHP stands at 5.50%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
56.45%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 39.51%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
68.74%
FCF growth above 1.5x MCHP's 43.04%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
91.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 268.80%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
37.79%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 64.15%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
42.33%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 9.07%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
184.81%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MCHP's 953.75%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
73.82%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 128.69%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
42.20%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MCHP's 51.21%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
262.30%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCHP's 214.48%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
93.27%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 156.52%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
64.93%
Below 50% of MCHP's 511.75%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
57.46%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 106.48%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
42.87%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MCHP's 76.18%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
65.35%
Positive short-term equity growth while MCHP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
570.52%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 33.05%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
129.76%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 28.63%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
49.28%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MCHP's 27.08%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-6.85%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.32%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 7.65%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
5.40%
Positive asset growth while MCHP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.73%
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.
9.57%
We have some new debt while MCHP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
4.11%
We increase R&D while MCHP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.13%
We expand SG&A while MCHP cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.