COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
TIMB vs TMUS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TIMB scored 57.1, TMUS scored 71.4 — TMUS leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. TMUS'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.
TIMB
TIM S.A.
57.1
$17.84 · $8.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.3
TMUS leads
TMUS
T-Mobile US, Inc.
71.4
$183.04 · $196.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestTIMB10.3x
- Fastest growthTMUS+9.7%
- Strongest balance sheetTIMB0.66
- Highest qualityTIMB82 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueTIMB-76%
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)
TIMB
stronger →← stronger
TMUS
82
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
74
63
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
74
49
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
67
TMUS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TIMB
TMUS
$1.8bC+
FCF
$18.4bA-
+4.6%C+
Rev
+9.7%B
0.66B
D/E
2.14C
10.3xA-
P/E
19.2xB
1.51C+
PEG
0.84B+
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
TIMB
TMUS
76% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
48% below
~-23%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-5%/yr
+246%
1-yr DCF upside
+59%
+313%
5-yr DCF upside
+93%
+434%
10-yr DCF upside
+157%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
TIMB
Why this score
- Durable high returns
- Cut its dividend
- Foreign reporter (BRL)
TMUS
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
The companies
TIMBTIM S.A.
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $8.5b. Down 37% 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 +36% 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% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Down 37% 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 89% of earnings on a 9.0% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
TMUST-Mobile US, Inc.
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $196.3b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $258.66 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.84 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $243.38 (implying +33% upside).
Moat
ROE 19% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 174% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $196.3b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
D/E 2.14 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
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 TIMB and TMUS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.3 points in favor of TMUS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueTIMB 49.1 · TMUS 66.8TMUS +17.7
- GrowthTIMB 63.3 · TMUS 73.9TMUS +10.6
- QualityTIMB 82.4 · TMUS 73.6TIMB +8.8
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.