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.
6.98%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 16.68%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
7.66%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 32.09%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
11.16%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 30.12%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
10.84%
Operating income growth under 50% of MU's 30.12%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
11.70%
Net income growth under 50% of MU's 157.26%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.70%
EPS growth under 50% of MU's 146.51%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
14.52%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MU's 135.90%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.99%
Share reduction while MU is at 4.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.05%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 4.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.75%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
134.52%
OCF growth above 1.5x MU's 10.57%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
230.47%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 9.00%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
72.02%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
42.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 58.89%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
22.19%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 53.75%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
292.55%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 17.46%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
19.41%
Below 50% of MU's 95.09%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
3.03%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 903.94%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
83.88%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 112.57%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
86.72%
Below 50% of MU's 637.48%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
32.48%
Below 50% of MU's 462.89%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
16.38%
Positive growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
15.09%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
7.05%
Positive short-term equity growth while MU is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
493.84%
Dividend/share CAGR of 493.84% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
784467.57%
Dividend/share CAGR of 784467.57% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
50.12%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 50.12% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
2.27%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 46.27%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
5.56%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MU's 62.51%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
3.99%
Asset growth well under 50% of MU's 20.29%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
4.19%
Under 50% of MU's 22.17%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.38%
We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.44%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MU's 90.00%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.