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.
6.86%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 11.85%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
7.84%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of MRVL's 11.00%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
55.61%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MRVL's 31.41%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
50.63%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 31.41%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
68.30%
Net income growth above 1.5x MRVL's 31.00%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
65.22%
EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 39.13%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
72.73%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MRVL's 40.91%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.26%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.94%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.26%
Dividend growth of 0.26% while MRVL is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
50.33%
Similar OCF growth to MRVL's 48.70%. Walter Schloss would assume comparable operations or industry factors.
52.89%
FCF growth similar to MRVL's 49.74%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
157.09%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 877.27%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
22.78%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 50.62%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
50.86%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 6.23%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
190.70%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MRVL's 2315.05%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-5.25%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MRVL is at 50.73%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
34.69%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 43.64%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
682.46%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MRVL's 236.71% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-7.84%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MRVL is 312.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
90.65%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of MRVL's 168.85%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
63.47%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of MRVL's 73.49%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
22.37%
Below 50% of MRVL's 48.49%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
34.60%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to MRVL's 35.23%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
643.71%
Dividend/share CAGR of 643.71% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
113.74%
Dividend/share CAGR of 113.74% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
55.92%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 55.92% while MRVL is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
10.22%
Our AR growth while MRVL is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
1.73%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MRVL's 7.66%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.44%
Negative asset growth while MRVL invests at 2.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.05%
Under 50% of MRVL's 7.63%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-11.01%
We’re deleveraging while MRVL stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-5.70%
Our R&D shrinks while MRVL invests at 2.91%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.30%
We cut SG&A while MRVL invests at 1.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.