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.
3.79%
Net income growth under 50% of TSM's 19.06%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
4.20%
Some D&A expansion while TSM is negative at -6.96%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
88.65%
Deferred tax of 88.65% 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.
20.22%
SBC growth while TSM is negative at -29.78%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-539.35%
Both reduce yoy usage, with TSM at -48.83%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
34.99%
AR growth while TSM is negative at -354.58%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
4.07%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. TSM's 94.82%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
-6.70%
Both negative yoy AP, with TSM at -77.35%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-841.00%
Negative yoy usage while TSM is 27.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-152.63%
Negative yoy while TSM is 66.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-43.36%
Negative yoy CFO while TSM is 21.79%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-20.77%
Both yoy lines negative, with TSM at -21.13%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-3960.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with TSM at -96.50%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-41.10%
Negative yoy purchasing while TSM stands at 20.87%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
12.58%
Below 50% of TSM's 310.80%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
-440.00%
We reduce yoy other investing while TSM is 189.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-75.21%
Both yoy lines negative, with TSM at -3.07%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
79.78%
We repay more while TSM is negative at -7.69%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
7350.00%
Issuance growth of 7350.00% while TSM is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
-19.95%
We cut yoy buybacks while TSM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.