Semiconductors
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
UMC vs GFS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
UMC vs GFS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Semiconductors | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $37.96B | $40.23B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $240.73B | $6.79B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $50.11B | $885M |
| Gross Margin | 29.6% | 25.2% |
| Operating Margin | 18.9% | 11.7% |
| Forward P/E | 22.3x | 39.2x |
| Total Debt | $59.78B | $1.64B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $110.66B | $1.81B |
UMC vs GFS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| United Microelectro… (UMC) | 100 | 148.2 | +48.2% |
| GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS) | 100 | 148.3 | +48.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UMC vs GFS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
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%
- 9.2% 10Y total return vs GFS's 55.8%
In this particular matchup, GFS is outpaced on most metrics by others in the set.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 2.3% revenue growth vs GFS's 0.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (22.3x vs 39.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.8% margin vs GFS's 13.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.90 vs GFS's 1.85 | |
| Dividends | 3.0% yield; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +112.2% vs GFS's +107.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.8% ROA vs GFS's 5.3%, ROIC 10.0% vs 5.3% |
UMC vs GFS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
UMC vs GFS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UMC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UMC is the larger business by revenue, generating $240.7B annually — 35.4x GFS's $6.8B. UMC is the more profitable business, keeping 20.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GFS's 13.0%. On growth, UMC holds the edge at +5.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $240.7B | $6.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $106.8B | $2.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $50.1B | $885M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $50.1B | $1.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +29.6% | +25.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +18.9% | +11.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.8% | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +20.8% | +14.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.5% | 0.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +109.7% | +127.3% |
Valuation Metrics
UMC leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 28.7x trailing earnings, UMC trades at a 37% valuation discount to GFS's 45.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, UMC's 11.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than GFS's 19.0x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $38.0B | $40.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $36.3B | $40.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 28.70x | 45.47x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 22.31x | 39.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.94x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.06x | 18.98x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.03x | 5.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.15x | 3.37x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.81x | 39.87x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UMC leads this category, winning 5 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UMC delivers a 13.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $8 for GFS. GFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to UMC's 0.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GFS scores 7/9 vs UMC's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.5% | +7.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.8% | +5.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.0% | +5.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.0% | +5.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.16x | 0.14x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$50.9B | -$171M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $110.7B | $1.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $59.8B | $1.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 37.36x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
UMC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UMC five years ago would be worth $18,832 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $15,582 for GFS. Over the past 12 months, UMC leads with a +112.2% total return vs GFS's +107.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors UMC at 26.9% vs GFS's 6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +94.1% | +96.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +112.2% | +107.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +104.5% | +20.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.3% | +55.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +915.2% | +55.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +26.9% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
UMC leads this category, winning 2 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 GFS's 1.85 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UMC currently trades 98.7% from its 52-week high vs GFS's 95.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.90x | 1.85x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.41 | $75.53 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $6.56 | $31.51 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.7% | +95.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 74.8 | 86.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 9.8M | 4.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates UMC as "Hold" and GFS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply -29.3% upside for GFS (target: $51) vs -43.5% for UMC (target: $9). UMC is the only dividend payer here at 3.01% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.60 | $51.14 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 19 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.0% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $14.41 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
UMC leads in 5 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics.
UMC vs GFS: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UMC or GFS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the stronger pick with 2.
3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 6% for GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS). United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) offers the better valuation at 28. 7x trailing P/E (22. 3x 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 — UMC or GFS?
On trailing P/E, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the cheapest at 28.
7x versus GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. at 45. 5x. On forward P/E, United Microelectronics Corporation is actually cheaper at 22. 3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UMC or GFS?
Over the past 5 years, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) delivered a total return of +88.
3%, compared to +55. 8% for GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UMC returned +915. 2% versus GFS's +55. 8%. 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 — UMC or GFS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
90β versus GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. 's 1. 85β — meaning GFS is approximately 105% more volatile than UMC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 16% for United Microelectronics Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UMC or GFS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is pulling ahead at 2.
3% versus 0. 6% for GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. grew EPS 431. 3% year-over-year, compared to -10. 7% for United Microelectronics Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, UMC leads at -5. 2% 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 — UMC or GFS?
United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) is the more profitable company, earning 17.
6% net margin versus 13. 0% for GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. — 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 11. 7% for GFS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UMC leads at 29. 0%, 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 UMC or GFS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) trades at 22.
3x forward P/E versus 39. 2x for GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. — 16. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GFS: -29. 3% to $51. 14.
08Which pays a better dividend — UMC or GFS?
In this comparison, UMC (3.
0% yield) pays a dividend. GFS does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is UMC or GFS 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, +915. 2% 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: +915. 2%, GFS: +55. 8%), 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 UMC and GFS?
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: UMC is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; GFS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. UMC pays a dividend while GFS does 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.