PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
176.45 - 178.59
86.62 - 184.48
124.91M / 173.95M (Avg.)
50.81 | 3.50
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-93.69%
Negative net income growth while TSM stands at 170.71%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
9.66%
Less D&A growth vs. TSM's 25.46%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
100.00%
Deferred tax of 100.00% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
100.00%
SBC growth of 100.00% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.
58.56%
Slight usage while TSM is negative at -744.55%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
100.00%
AR growth of 100.00% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
21.54%
Inventory growth of 21.54% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
100.00%
AP growth of 100.00% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
-35.01%
Negative yoy usage while TSM is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-47.14%
Negative yoy while TSM is 36.32%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-98.63%
Negative yoy CFO while TSM is 28.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-31.33%
Negative yoy CapEx while TSM is 20.55%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
100.00%
Acquisition growth of 100.00% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-35.44%
Both yoy lines negative, with TSM at -301.71%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-100.00%
We reduce yoy sales while TSM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
2886.21%
Growth well above TSM's 29.16%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
20.16%
We have mild expansions while TSM is negative at -10.72%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-65.29%
Negative yoy issuance while TSM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.