vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Texas Instruments (TXN) and Venture Global, Inc. (VG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Texas Instruments is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($4.8B vs $4.4B, roughly 1.1× Venture Global, Inc.). Texas Instruments runs the higher net margin — 32.0% vs 26.8%, a 5.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Venture Global, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (191.7% vs 18.6%). Texas Instruments produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.4B vs $-1.5B). Over the past eight quarters, Venture Global, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (77.3% CAGR vs 12.4%).
Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI) is an American multinational semiconductor company headquartered in Dallas, Texas. It is one of the top 10 semiconductor companies worldwide based on sales volume. The company's focus is on developing analog chips and embedded processors, which account for more than 80% of its revenue. TI also produces digital light processing (DLP) technology and education technology products including calculators, microcontrollers, and multi-core processors.
S&P Global Inc. is an American publicly traded corporation headquartered in Manhattan, New York. Its primary areas of business are financial information, analytics, and energy and commodities intelligence. It is the parent company of S&P Global Ratings, S&P Global Energy, S&P Global Market Intelligence, S&P Global Mobility, and the Indian credit rating agency CRISIL. It is also the majority owner of the S&P Dow Jones Indices joint venture. "S&P" is a shortening of "Standard and Poor's".
TXN vs VG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $4.8B | $4.4B |
| Net Profit | $1.5B | $1.2B |
| Gross Margin | 58.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | 37.5% | 38.7% |
| Net Margin | 32.0% | 26.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 18.6% | 191.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | 31.0% | 20.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.68 | $0.41 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.4B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.7B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.4B | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.1B | $2.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.2B | $926.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.8B | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $550.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $475.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $517.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $990.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $-294.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $352.0M |
| Q1 26 | 58.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 55.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 57.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 56.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 57.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 59.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 57.8% | — |
| Q1 26 | 37.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 33.3% | 38.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 35.1% | 39.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 35.1% | 33.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 32.5% | 37.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.4% | 39.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 37.4% | 20.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 32.7% | 32.8% |
| Q1 26 | 32.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 26.3% | 26.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 28.8% | 16.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.1% | 15.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 29.0% | 17.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 30.1% | 65.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 32.8% | -31.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 29.5% | 31.8% |
| Q1 26 | $1.68 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.28 | $0.41 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.48 | $0.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.41 | $0.14 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.28 | $0.15 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.31 | $0.35 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.47 | $-0.15 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.22 | $0.12 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $5.1B | $2.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $14.1B | $34.2B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $16.8B | $6.7B |
| Total Assets | $34.4B | $53.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.84× | 5.07× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $5.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.9B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.2B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.4B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.0B | $3.6B | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.6B | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.7B | — |
| Q1 26 | $14.1B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.0B | $34.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.0B | $32.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.0B | $30.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.8B | $29.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.6B | $29.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.9B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.9B | — |
| Q1 26 | $16.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $16.3B | $6.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $16.6B | $5.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $16.4B | $5.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $16.4B | $4.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.9B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.3B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.2B | — |
| Q1 26 | $34.4B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $34.6B | $53.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $35.0B | $50.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $34.9B | $46.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $33.8B | $45.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $35.5B | $43.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $35.3B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $35.0B | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.84× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.86× | 5.07× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.84× | 5.73× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.86× | 5.69× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.78× | 6.01× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.80× | 10.11× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.80× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.81× | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | — | $2.1B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.4B | $-1.5B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 29.0% | -34.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 14.0% | 81.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.77× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $4.3B | $-6.8B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | $2.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $849.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6B | — |
| Q1 26 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $-1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $993.0M | $-1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $555.0M | $-1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-274.0M | $-2.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $806.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $416.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $507.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | 29.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 30.0% | -34.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.9% | -42.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | -49.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.7% | -81.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | 14.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 20.9% | 81.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.2% | 98.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 29.3% | 96.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 27.6% | 119.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 29.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.8% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.94× | 1.77× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.61× | 3.42× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.44× | 3.07× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.72× | 2.15× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.66× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.27× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.39× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
TXN
Segment breakdown not available.
VG
| Plaquemines Project Segment | $3.4B | 76% |
| Calcasieu Project Segment | $841.0M | 19% |
| Other | $208.0M | 5% |
