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.
1.55%
Positive revenue growth while ON is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.04%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-5.71%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-3.85%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-2.16%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2.27%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-1.54%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.22%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.33%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.06%
Dividend growth of 0.06% while ON is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-57.51%
Negative OCF growth while ON is at 3.90%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-134.00%
Negative FCF growth while ON is at 38.52%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
48.25%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of ON's 70.00%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
25.05%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 10.26%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
-15.86%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
60.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 638.61%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
2.07%
Below 50% of ON's 253.62%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-59.84%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON stands at 29.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
106.27%
Positive 10Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
2.74%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-45.67%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
81.59%
Below 50% of ON's 412.11%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
117.02%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of ON's 143.43%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
18.72%
Below 50% of ON's 65.23%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
299.12%
Dividend/share CAGR of 299.12% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
50.60%
Dividend/share CAGR of 50.60% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
18.13%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 18.13% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
77.72%
Our AR growth while ON is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
3.53%
We show growth while ON is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-4.93%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.73%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-5.50%
We’re deleveraging while ON stands at 0.10%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.30%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ON's 5.73%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
5.83%
We expand SG&A while ON cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.