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.
9.31%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
11.33%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
14.74%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
18.05%
Positive operating income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
9.84%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.85%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.16%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.22%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.44%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.09%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.02%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
119.08%
OCF growth above 1.5x MU's 21.52%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
302.55%
FCF growth under 50% of MU's 18710.53%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
56.74%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 86.19%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
38.54%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 67.27%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-13.53%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU stands at 3.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
158.33%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 203.52%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
9.09%
Below 50% of MU's 96.29%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
6.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 9.04%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
111.90%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 63.25% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-5.33%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MU is 289.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-42.73%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
83.06%
Below 50% of MU's 276.99%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
116.48%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 30.89%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
17.94%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 2.01%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
297.32%
Dividend/share CAGR of 297.32% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
51.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 51.38% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
18.05%
3Y dividend/share CAGR similar to MU's 16.49%. Walter Schloss finds parallel short-term dividend strategies for both companies.
-36.69%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
2.67%
Inventory growth well above MU's 3.47%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
3.48%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 2.23%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
0.20%
Under 50% of MU's 3.55%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
9.30%
Debt growth far above MU's 8.05%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
1.93%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 1.13%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
2.75%
We expand SG&A while MU cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.