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.
5.72%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of TSM's 10.87%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
3.20%
Gross profit growth under 50% of TSM's 23.23%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-37.64%
Negative EBIT growth while TSM is at 28.52%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-37.64%
Negative operating income growth while TSM is at 28.52%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-73.68%
Negative net income growth while TSM stands at 29.23%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-76.92%
Negative EPS growth while TSM is at 29.30%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-75.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TSM is at 29.30%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.89%
Share change of 0.89% while TSM is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
-0.85%
Reduced diluted shares while TSM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-145.79%
Negative OCF growth while TSM is at 4.44%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
32.57%
FCF growth 50-75% of TSM's 61.85%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
265.26%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 371.02%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
265.26%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 195.37%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
100.39%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of TSM's 130.34%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
-159.80%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-159.80%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-139.81%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-56.29%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TSM is at 363.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-56.29%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while TSM is 253.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-81.50%
Negative 3Y CAGR while TSM is 704.70%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
647.93%
Equity/share CAGR of 647.93% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
647.93%
Equity/share CAGR of 647.93% while TSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
128.20%
Equity/share CAGR of 128.20% 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.
-17.02%
Firm’s AR is declining while TSM shows 17.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
19.72%
Inventory growth well above TSM's 7.34%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-18.05%
Negative asset growth while TSM invests at 4.80%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.49%
Under 50% of TSM's 7.67%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-97.28%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
11.33%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. TSM's 4.14%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
6.28%
SG&A growth well above TSM's 4.80%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.