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.
4.70%
Revenue growth similar to MRVL's 4.29%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
171.79%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MRVL's 3.82%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-1233.33%
Negative EBIT growth while MRVL is at 8.09%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1233.33%
Negative operating income growth while MRVL is at 15.99%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-700.00%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-445.24%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-445.24%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.04%
Slight or no buybacks while MRVL is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.04%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MRVL's 1.17%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.04%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
3256.25%
Positive OCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
223.77%
Positive FCF growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
34.49%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MRVL's 56.20%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
34.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 109.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
10.19%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 25.49%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-25.93%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is at 653.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-25.93%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 220.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-169.92%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MRVL is 202.86%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
52.64%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with MRVL's 54.87%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
52.64%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 19.67%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
31.37%
Positive short-term equity growth while MRVL is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-15.63%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MRVL stands at 0.04%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-15.63%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
56.25%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while MRVL cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-19.11%
Firm’s AR is declining while MRVL shows 11.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-1.00%
Inventory is declining while MRVL stands at 4.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
1.45%
Positive asset growth while MRVL is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-3.32%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-4.34%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 3.89%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.16%
We expand SG&A while MRVL cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.