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.
13.53%
Revenue growth above 1.5x TSM's 6.73%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
2.69%
Gross profit growth under 50% of TSM's 12.22%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-6.51%
Negative EBIT growth while TSM is at 13.57%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-6.51%
Negative operating income growth while TSM is at 13.57%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
22.30%
Net income growth above 1.5x TSM's 12.73%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
30.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x TSM's 0.49%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
20.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x TSM's 0.49%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.92%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TSM's 11.83%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
3.95%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x TSM's 11.83%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-53.46%
Negative OCF growth while TSM is at 11.02%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-419.88%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
310.99%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to TSM's 325.07%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
310.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 165.95%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
335.67%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 108.85%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
497.51%
OCF/share CAGR of 497.51% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
497.51%
OCF/share CAGR of 497.51% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
26.22%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 26.22% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
151.32%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 258.48%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
151.32%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of TSM's 172.82%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
73.14%
Below 50% of TSM's 525.94%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
741.63%
Equity/share CAGR of 741.63% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
741.63%
Equity/share CAGR of 741.63% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
680.22%
Equity/share CAGR of 680.22% 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.
22.13%
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.
31.41%
Inventory growth well above TSM's 6.72%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
5.49%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x TSM's 4.81%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
2.70%
Positive BV/share change while TSM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.11%
We’re deleveraging while TSM stands at 0.29%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.64%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. TSM's 1.78%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-2.90%
We cut SG&A while TSM invests at 14.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.