Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ARM scored 51.8, TSM scored 72.6 — TSM leads.
Compare another set
ARM
Arm Holdings plc
Semiconductors · Quality-Growth
51.8
$266.28 · $284.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
20.8
TSM leads
TSM
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
Semiconductors · Quality-Growth
72.6
$453.31 · $2.4T
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthTSM+31.6%
Strongest balance sheetARM0.06
Highest qualityTSM89 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ARM
stronger →← stronger
TSM
66
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
89
87
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
94
24
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
63
TSM is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ARM
TSM
$1.5bC+
FCF
$35.2bA
+25.1%A-
Rev
+31.6%A
0.06A-
D/E
0.17B+
55.2xD
P/S
—
2.26C
PEG
0.87B+
—
P/E
33.3xB
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ARM
TSM
1226% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
243% above
>60%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~49%/yr
-94%
1-yr DCF upside
-77%
-92%
5-yr DCF upside
-71%
-89%
10-yr DCF upside
-58%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ARM
No notable signals flagged.
TSM
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Foreign reporter (TWD)
The companies
ARMArm Holdings plc
Semiconductors · $266.28 · beta 3.79
Why now
Semiconductors · market cap $284.4b. Down 41% from 52-week high of $452.70 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +25% — in hypergrowth territory. 40 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $290.70 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 20% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 144% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 41% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 3.79 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. P/S 55.2x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
TSMTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
Semiconductors · $453.31 · beta 1.24
Why now
Semiconductors · market cap $2.4T. 7% off the 52-week high of $487.47. Revenue growing +32% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.87 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $555.01 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Net margin 50% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 40% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $2.4T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Trailing P/E 33x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 16.9x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Semiconductor cyclicality — inventory corrections compress margins faster than analysts model. Monitor channel inventory and book-to-bill ratios as leading indicators.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ARM and TSM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 20.8 points in favor of TSM. The widest single difference is Value, where TSM leads by 38.9 points.
ValueARM 24.0 · TSM 62.9TSM +38.9
QualityARM 66.3 · TSM 89.3TSM +23.0
GrowthARM 87.4 · TSM 93.6TSM +6.2
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is TSM or ARM the better stock?
TSM scores higher: TSM 72.6, ARM 51.8 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do TSM and ARM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where TSM leads by 39 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. TSM leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are TSM and ARM scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.