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
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.
0.71%
Revenue growth under 50% of TSM's 20.41%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
8.96%
Gross profit growth under 50% of TSM's 45.97%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-912.75%
Negative EBIT growth while TSM is at 78.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-912.75%
Negative operating income growth while TSM is at 78.94%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-1025.69%
Negative net income growth while TSM stands at 86.12%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-966.67%
Negative EPS growth while TSM is at 111.72%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-966.67%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TSM is at 111.72%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.68%
Slight or no buybacks while TSM is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-9.15%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13562.28%
OCF growth above 1.5x TSM's 13.02%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
420.66%
FCF growth above 1.5x TSM's 16.17%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
240.58%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of TSM's 292.02%. Bill Ackman would press for new markets or product lines to narrow the gap.
240.58%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to TSM's 227.57%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
240.58%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 26.87%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
567.31%
OCF/share CAGR of 567.31% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
567.31%
OCF/share CAGR of 567.31% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
567.31%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 567.31% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-452.26%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TSM is at 165.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-452.26%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while TSM is 197.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-452.26%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
586.03%
Equity/share CAGR of 586.03% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
586.03%
Equity/share CAGR of 586.03% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
586.03%
Equity/share CAGR of 586.03% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
12.65%
Our AR growth while TSM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-28.14%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.90%
Asset growth above 1.5x TSM's 0.08%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-1.15%
We have a declining book value while TSM shows 17.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.51%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
0.96%
R&D dropping or stable vs. TSM's 8.30%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
7.76%
We expand SG&A while TSM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.