Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TLK scored 51.9, TIMB scored 59.9 — TIMB leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. TLK's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but TIMB's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
TLK
Perusahaan Perseroan (Persero) PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk
Telecom Services · Quality-Growth
51.9
$12.83 · $12.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
8.0
TIMB leads
TIMB
TIM S.A.
Telecom Services · Quality-Growth
59.9
$17.98 · $8.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTIMB10.6x
Fastest growthTIMB+4.6%
Strongest balance sheetTLK0.60
Highest qualityTIMB83 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueTIMB-72%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
TLK
stronger →← stronger
TIMB
80
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
83
34
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
56
71
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
TIMB is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TLK
TIMB
$2.3bB
FCF
$1.8bC+
-2.2%D+
Rev
+4.6%C+
0.60B
D/E
0.66B
12.5xB+
P/E
10.6xA-
2.76C
PEG
1.35B
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
TLK
TIMB
60% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
72% below
~-19%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-23%/yr
+159%
1-yr DCF upside
+234%
+150%
5-yr DCF upside
+258%
+138%
10-yr DCF upside
+295%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
TLK
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Foreign reporter (IDR)
TIMB
Why this score
Durable high returns
Cut its dividend
Foreign reporter (BRL)
The companies
TLKPerusahaan Perseroan (Persero) PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk
Telecom Services · $12.83 · beta 0.15
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $12.6b. Down 45% from 52-week high of $23.52 — deep drawdown territory.
Moat
Net margin 12% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Down 45% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Dividend payout 117% of earnings on a 9.5% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
TIMBTIM S.A.
Telecom Services · $17.98 · beta 0.09
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $8.5b. Down 36% from 52-week high of $28.22 — deep drawdown territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $24.24 (implying +35% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($1.4b) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Down 36% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Dividend payout 88% of earnings on a 8.4% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
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 TLK and TIMB diverge
On the headline score the gap is 8.0 points in favor of TIMB. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthTLK 33.9 · TIMB 56.0TIMB +22.1
ValueTLK 70.7 · TIMB 64.0TLK +6.7
QualityTLK 80.1 · TIMB 82.5level
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 TIMB or TLK the better stock?
TIMB scores higher: TIMB 59.9, TLK 51.9 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 TIMB and TLK differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where TIMB leads by 22 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are TIMB and TLK 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.