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.
0.17%
Revenue growth under 50% of TSM's 9.01%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-2.91%
Negative gross profit growth while TSM is at 25.18%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-56.82%
Negative EBIT growth while TSM is at 29.59%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-56.82%
Negative operating income growth while TSM is at 29.59%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-80.60%
Negative net income growth while TSM stands at 11.92%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-78.33%
Negative EPS growth while TSM is at 12.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-78.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TSM is at 12.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-1.46%
Share reduction while TSM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.11%
Reduced diluted shares while TSM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
16.92%
Dividend growth of 16.92% while TSM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-33.74%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-35.65%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
87.92%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of TSM's 184.32%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
50.48%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 100.59%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
26.33%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 42.27%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
222.52%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 132.34%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
402.48%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 69.05%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-7.16%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM stands at 41.77%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-67.45%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TSM is at 118.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
119.53%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 101.56%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
-75.01%
Negative 3Y CAGR while TSM is 39.94%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
207.45%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 174.53%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
60.50%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 112.02%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
7.51%
Below 50% of TSM's 60.39%. 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.
12.97%
AR growth well above TSM's 15.23%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
0.68%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. TSM's 6.05%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-4.28%
Negative asset growth while TSM invests at 4.52%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-6.78%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
0.50%
Debt shrinking faster vs. TSM's 1.93%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-5.60%
Our R&D shrinks while TSM invests at 8.22%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.97%
SG&A declining or stable vs. TSM's 16.05%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.