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.
0.00%
Positive revenue growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
2.44%
Positive gross profit growth while TSM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
7.81%
Positive EBIT growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
7.81%
Positive operating income growth while TSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-6.26%
Negative net income growth while TSM stands at 0.54%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-3.33%
Negative EPS growth while TSM is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-8.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TSM is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.16%
Share reduction while TSM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.03%
Diluted share count expanding well above TSM's 0.00%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
1.66%
Dividend growth of 1.66% while TSM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-36.25%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-39.52%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
116.05%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of TSM's 267.55%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
39.07%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of TSM's 95.54%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
16.87%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of TSM's 60.48%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
397.76%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 319.62%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
-30.22%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM is at 126.79%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
26.45%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of TSM's 58.67%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
2133.69%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 371.78% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
219.01%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 96.96%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-9.05%
Negative 3Y CAGR while TSM is 89.73%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
251.20%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 190.14%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
87.57%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of TSM's 116.27%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
25.69%
Below 50% of TSM's 69.92%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
18.46%
AR growth well above TSM's 0.62%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-1.49%
Inventory is declining while TSM stands at 2.60%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
1.01%
Asset growth well under 50% of TSM's 3.34%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
3.47%
Positive BV/share change while TSM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.44%
We have some new debt while TSM reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.86%
We increase R&D while TSM cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
0.08%
SG&A declining or stable vs. TSM's 3.23%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.