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.
-5.68%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-2.25%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-16.28%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-15.24%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-14.95%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-12.50%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-13.75%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.46%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.88%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.31%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-61.75%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 8.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-66.59%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 117.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
42.07%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 54.52%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
2.81%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 39.83%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
14.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 78.90%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
54.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 65.45%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
22.90%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 43.83%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
67.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 364.81%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
91.38%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of MU's 106.70%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
23.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MU's 24.93%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
116.01%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of MU's 173.37%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
37.06%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 30.44%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
7.25%
Below 50% of MU's 40.57%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-1.77%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MU is at 61.30%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
1156.44%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1156.44% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
190.22%
Dividend/share CAGR of 190.22% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
81.56%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 81.56% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.93%
Our AR growth while MU is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
6.74%
Inventory growth well above MU's 4.06%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-3.35%
Negative asset growth while MU invests at 1.01%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.19%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.05%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 0.39%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.23%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 11.08%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
8.89%
SG&A growth well above MU's 5.29%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.