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.
-11.53%
Negative revenue growth while TSM stands at 13.70%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
8.99%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of TSM's 14.38%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
20.44%
EBIT growth above 1.5x TSM's 12.84%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
20.44%
Operating income growth above 1.5x TSM's 12.84%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
3.66%
Net income growth under 50% of TSM's 16.06%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
3.85%
EPS growth under 50% of TSM's 16.12%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
3.85%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of TSM's 16.12%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.48%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.68%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.48%
Dividend growth above 1.5x TSM's 0.00%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
-69.13%
Negative OCF growth while TSM is at 76.17%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-116.49%
Negative FCF growth while TSM is at 181.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
393.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 236.38%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
118.57%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to TSM's 110.02%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
93.37%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 53.39%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
116.55%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 207.54%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
-67.09%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM is at 213.19%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-76.51%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while TSM stands at 54.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
226.07%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TSM's 306.13%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
-21.17%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while TSM is 136.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-25.67%
Negative 3Y CAGR while TSM is 53.67%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
353.20%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x TSM's 316.51%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
226.49%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TSM's 112.58%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
87.08%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to TSM's 87.34%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.64%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while TSM is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
1.31%
Below 50% of TSM's 10.00%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-7.69%
Firm’s AR is declining while TSM shows 16.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
14.53%
Inventory growth well above TSM's 11.85%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-6.87%
Negative asset growth while TSM invests at 6.51%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-10.06%
We have a declining book value while TSM shows 5.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-6.35%
We’re deleveraging while TSM stands at 7.09%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
6.63%
R&D dropping or stable vs. TSM's 22.73%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
6.59%
SG&A growth well above TSM's 10.15%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.