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.
8.98%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of TSM's 14.84%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
49.12%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x TSM's 22.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
241.17%
Positive EBIT growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
241.17%
Positive operating income growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
204.73%
Net income growth above 1.5x TSM's 11.61%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
196.15%
Positive EPS growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
196.15%
Positive diluted EPS growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
9.26%
Share count expansion well above TSM's 7.51%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
9.26%
Diluted share count expanding well above TSM's 7.69%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
36.23%
Similar OCF growth to TSM's 38.31%. Walter Schloss would assume comparable operations or industry factors.
31.32%
FCF growth under 50% of TSM's 86.32%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
227.44%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 315.54%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
227.44%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 368.27%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
227.44%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 50.91%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
2003.06%
OCF/share CAGR of 2003.06% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
2003.06%
OCF/share CAGR of 2003.06% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
2003.06%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 2003.06% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
212.78%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 173.32%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
212.78%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 313.90%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
212.78%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 3.60%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
571.10%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 250.44%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
571.10%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 197.35%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
571.10%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 26.97%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
3.10%
AR growth well above TSM's 5.72%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-29.26%
Inventory is declining while TSM stands at 2.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.78%
Negative asset growth while TSM invests at 6.59%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.92%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.44%
We’re deleveraging while TSM stands at 26.33%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.70%
Our R&D shrinks while TSM invests at 40.60%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
145.70%
SG&A growth well above TSM's 196.68%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.