Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
Semiconductors
GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $39.47B | $37.81B | $2.07B | $550.40B | $13.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.79B | $240.73B | $22.81B | $53.76B | $1.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $885M | $50.11B | $247M | $-3.17B | $106M |
| Gross Margin | 25.2% | 29.6% | 9.5% | 35.4% | 48.8% |
| Operating Margin | 11.7% | 18.9% | 2.7% | -9.4% | 10.0% |
| Forward P/E | 38.5x | 22.2x | 0.8x | 105.1x | 38.7x |
| Total Debt | $1.64B | $59.78B | $15.16B | $46.59B | $17M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.81B | $110.66B | $15.22B | $14.27B | $346M |
GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS) | 100 | 145.5 | +45.5% |
| United Microelectro… (UMC) | 100 | 147.6 | +47.6% |
| ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIE… (IMOS) | 100 | 178.7 | +78.7% |
| Intel Corporation (INTC) | 100 | 223.7 | +123.7% |
| Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) | 100 | 346.0 | +246.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GFS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
UMC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.90, yield 3.0%
- Rev growth 2.3%, EPS growth -10.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -5.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.90, Low D/E 15.7%, current ratio 2.34x
- Beta 0.90, yield 3.0%, current ratio 2.34x
IMOS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.01 vs UMC's 3.05
- 6.3% revenue growth vs INTC's -0.5%
- Lower P/E (0.8x vs 38.7x), PEG 0.01 vs 1.12
INTC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +439.7% vs GFS's +101.0%
ONTO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 14.3% 10Y total return vs IMOS's 301.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.3% revenue growth vs INTC's -0.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.8x vs 38.7x), PEG 0.01 vs 1.12 | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.8% margin vs INTC's -5.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.90 vs ONTO's 2.66 | |
| Dividends | 3.0% yield, vs IMOS's 1.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +439.7% vs GFS's +101.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.8% ROA vs INTC's -1.6%, ROIC 10.0% vs -0.0% |
GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
UMC leads in 2 of 6 categories
ONTO leads 1 • IMOS leads 1 • INTC leads 1 • GFS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ONTO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UMC is the larger business by revenue, generating $240.7B annually — 233.6x ONTO's $1.0B. UMC is the more profitable business, keeping 20.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to INTC's -5.9%. On growth, ONTO holds the edge at +9.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.8B | $240.7B | $22.8B | $53.8B | $1.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.1B | $106.8B | $5.6B | $4.0B | $158M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $885M | $50.1B | $247M | -$3.2B | $106M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.0B | $50.1B | -$85M | -$3.1B | $239M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +25.2% | +29.6% | +9.5% | +35.4% | +48.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.7% | +18.9% | +2.7% | -9.4% | +10.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +13.0% | +20.8% | +1.1% | -5.9% | +10.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.9% | +20.8% | -0.4% | -5.8% | +23.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | 0.0% | +5.5% | +1.2% | +7.2% | +9.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +127.3% | +109.7% | +22.0% | -2.8% | -48.5% |
Valuation Metrics
IMOS leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 28.4x trailing earnings, UMC trades at a 71% valuation discount to ONTO's 98.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IMOS offers better value at 0.77x vs UMC's 3.90x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $39.5B | $37.8B | $2.1B | $550.4B | $13.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $39.3B | $36.2B | $2.1B | $582.7B | $13.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 44.61x | 28.43x | 48.23x | -1861.12x | 98.57x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 38.50x | 22.22x | 0.80x | 105.10x | 38.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 3.90x | 0.77x | — | 2.85x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 18.61x | 10.95x | 10.55x | 49.88x | 68.79x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.81x | 4.99x | 2.85x | 10.41x | 13.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.30x | 3.12x | 2.73x | 4.21x | 6.43x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 39.11x | 22.60x | 75.32x | — | 45.47x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UMC leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UMC delivers a 13.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $-3 for INTC. ONTO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IMOS's 0.61x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GFS scores 7/9 vs ONTO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.6% | +13.5% | +1.1% | -2.7% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.3% | +8.8% | +0.6% | -1.6% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.3% | +10.0% | +3.6% | -0.0% | +5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.6% | +9.0% | +3.4% | -0.0% | +6.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.14x | 0.16x | 0.61x | 0.37x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$171M | -$50.9B | -$63M | $32.3B | -$329M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.8B | $110.7B | $15.2B | $14.3B | $346M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.6B | $59.8B | $15.2B | $46.6B | $17M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 37.36x | 6.24x | 3.71x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
INTC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ONTO five years ago would be worth $41,263 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,287 for GFS. Over the past 12 months, INTC leads with a +439.7% total return vs GFS's +101.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INTC at 53.0% vs GFS's 5.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +92.4% | +93.4% | +94.6% | +178.4% | +65.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +101.0% | +109.4% | +251.8% | +439.7% | +118.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +18.6% | +103.8% | +146.7% | +258.3% | +218.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +52.9% | +81.3% | +98.5% | +95.8% | +312.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +52.9% | +895.3% | +301.1% | +299.2% | +1431.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.9% | +26.8% | +35.1% | +53.0% | +47.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — UMC and IMOS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UMC is the less volatile stock with a 0.90 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ONTO's 2.66 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMOS currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs ONTO's 86.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.85x | 0.90x | 1.36x | 2.15x | 2.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $76.37 | $15.45 | $60.47 | $114.51 | $315.86 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $31.51 | $6.56 | $15.06 | $18.97 | $85.88 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +92.9% | +98.1% | +98.3% | +95.7% | +86.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 80.1 | 79.6 | 70.5 | 85.9 | 61.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.2M | 9.9M | 65K | 110.6M | 832K |
Analyst Outlook
UMC leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GFS as "Buy", UMC as "Hold", IMOS as "Hold", INTC as "Hold", ONTO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 12.5% upside for ONTO (target: $308) vs -43.3% for UMC (target: $9). For income investors, UMC offers the higher dividend yield at 3.03% vs IMOS's 1.92%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $51.14 | $8.60 | — | $77.18 | $308.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 19 | 15 | 1 | 84 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.0% | +1.9% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $14.41 | $35.67 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.6% |
UMC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). ONTO leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
GFS vs UMC vs IMOS vs INTC vs ONTO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc.
(IMOS) is the stronger pick with 6. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation (INTC). United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) offers the better valuation at 28. 4x trailing P/E (22. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS) a "Buy" — based on 19 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO?
On trailing P/E, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the cheapest at 28.
4x versus Onto Innovation Inc. at 98. 6x. On forward P/E, ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc. is actually cheaper at 0. 8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc. wins at 0. 01x versus United Microelectronics Corporation's 3. 05x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO?
Over the past 5 years, Onto Innovation Inc.
(ONTO) delivered a total return of +312. 6%, compared to +52. 9% for GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ONTO returned +1432% versus GFS's +52. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
90β versus Onto Innovation Inc. 's 2. 66β — meaning ONTO is approximately 196% more volatile than UMC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Onto Innovation Inc. (ONTO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 61% for ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc.
(IMOS) is pulling ahead at 6. 3% versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation (INTC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. grew EPS 431. 3% year-over-year, compared to -31. 5% for Onto Innovation Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ONTO leads at 0. 0% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO?
United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the more profitable company, earning 17.
6% net margin versus -0. 5% for Intel Corporation — meaning it keeps 17. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UMC leads at 18. 5% versus -0. 0% for INTC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ONTO leads at 49. 7%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc. (IMOS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 01x versus United Microelectronics Corporation's 3. 05x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES Inc. (IMOS) trades at 0. 8x forward P/E versus 105. 1x for Intel Corporation — 104. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ONTO: 12. 5% to $308. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO?
In this comparison, UMC (3.
0% yield), IMOS (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. GFS, INTC, ONTO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is GFS or UMC or IMOS or INTC or ONTO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
90), 3. 0% yield, +895. 3% 10Y return). GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS) carries a higher beta of 1. 85 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UMC: +895. 3%, GFS: +52. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between GFS and UMC and IMOS and INTC and ONTO?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: GFS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; UMC is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; IMOS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INTC is a large-cap quality compounder stock; ONTO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. UMC, IMOS pay a dividend while GFS, INTC, ONTO do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.