TSM
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
stock NYSE ADR

$GOOG, $DRAM, $TSM

I full ported TSM a while ago and have no intention of selling

Better to buy Intel than listening to everyone saying to buy TSM.

Good point about China and WW3. If TSM is undervalued due to geopolitical risk, that's a risk I'm willing to take and profit from. Besides, TSM is building fabs in Arizona, Japan, and Germany. As those progress, that may de-risk TSM sufficiently that the risk discount fades over time. I think it's a bit of theater, because apparently there's a Taiwanese law requiring the newest, smallest node manufacturing to remain in Taiwan. But like you said, it's highly improbably China's going to invade due to the economic consequences.

If this happens, ARM is cooked too.
OpenAI Jalapeño was designed with AVGO but they used OpenAI Astra (probably, they said AI, I am assuming it’s this ) instead of getting ARM designs.
So, your thesis is correct. ASML, TSM will be winners.

I went big on TSM last year for this reason. At the end of the day, TSM makes a physical product and cannot be replaced by AI, whereas literally every other chip company other than Intel (which, come on, lol) does not and is susceptible to AI designing its own chips.

Buy TSM is similar to buying VOO

TSM is one of the safest AI plays. Whether it's asics or gpu's they all get manufactured by TSM. I've been buying anytime it dips.

TSM wins no matter who wins the AI race. I hold it and looking around at my other AI related holdings I’m convinced more and more I should concentrate my investments in it. As far as geopolitical risk, if China were to move it would spark WW3.

I think TSM has a huge moat in the sense that it would be very difficult to replicate what they offer. They're not a monopoly like ASML but function as a high margin toll booth. Some say CUDA is NVDA's moat; maybe it was at one point, but I doubt it is any more. I'm not dumping NVDA, but I'm interested in taking some profits and moving them into TSM.

TSM looks like a company full of really smart people, so I bought.
I think I'm pretty stupid and ignorant though, so I probably won't make good stock picks unfortunately.
Go TSM!
**waves pom poms**

Unless you’re talking KO, AMZN and I guess NVDA these days, most stocks aren’t long term as in set it and forget it for 5 years. TSM MU just need to be monitored, trim as they increase and after accounting for taxes, why not beef up a decent “safe” etf with 50% of this and then deploy the other 50% to something a little more speculative… or keep this in the sidelines for a dip or correction.

I just paid Anthropic that pays xAI that pays Nvidia that pays TSM. I am the new cash

U sure bro?
|**Ticker**|**Report Date**|**Rev ($B)**|**Rev Growth (YoY)**|**Beat/Miss**|**Guidance**|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|**MSFT**|Jul 29 (FY26 Q4)|$90.0|**+18%**| Beat ($90.0 vs $87.7 exp)|FQ1 rev $89.85–$90.95B (+16% mid); Azure/cloud strength|
|**AAPL**|Jul 30 (FY26 Q3)|$109.4|**+16%**| Beat (vs \~$108.9 exp)|Sept-qtr growth 9–11% (**missed** \~12% exp); supply constraints|
|**GOOGL**|Jul 22 (CY Q2)|$119.8|**+24%**| Beat|Cloud +82% to $24.8B; Cloud backlog $514B; op margin 34%|
|**AMZN**|Jul 30 (CY Q2)|$200.6|**+20%**| Beat (vs \~$196.5 exp)|Q3 net sales $197–$202B (+9–12%); AWS +37% to $42.2B|
|**META**|Jul 29 (CY Q2)|$60.8|**+28%**| Mixed (rev beat $60.8 vs $60.2; **EPS missed**)|Q3 rev $61–$64B (mid $62.5B, **below** \~$63.1B exp) → stock plunged|
|**NVDA**|Aug 26 (FY27 Q2)|$96.2|**+106%**| Beat (vs \~$92.2B exp)|DC rev $89B (+117% YoY, beat $86.3B exp); Q3 guide \~$108B (+70% YoY)|
|**AMD**|Aug 4 (CY Q2)|$11.54|**+50%**| Beat (vs $11.28B exp)|DC rev $6.7B (+107% YoY); raised growth outlook|
|**INTC**|Jul 23 (CY Q2)|$16.13|**+25%**| Beat (vs \~$14.45B exp)|Q3 rev $15.8–$16.8B, adj EPS $0.38; DC +59%|
|**AVGO**|Sep 2 (FY26 Q3)|— (reports after close)|—|—|Guided Q3 rev \~$29.4B (+84% YoY); AI semi rev \~$16B (+200% YoY)|
|**QCOM**|Jul 29 (FY Q3)|$9.9|**−4%**| Beat (rev at high end; EPS $2.21)|Q4 rev $9.7–$10.5B, adj EPS $2.05–$2.25|
|**MU**|Q3 Jun 24 / Q4 Sep 30|Q3 $41.46|**+346%**| Crushed (vs $35.8B exp)|Q4 rev \~$50B (±$1B), GM \~86%; HBM4 ramp|
|**SNDK**|Aug 5 (FY26 Q4)|$8.97|**+372%**| Beat (vs \~$8.3–8.42B exp)|FY26 rev $20.25B (+175%); DC rev +645% YoY; AI memory buildout|
|**TSM**|Jul 16 (CY Q2)|$40.2|**+36%**| Beat (high end)|Q3 rev $44.6B+; raised FY26 growth to **>40%**; GM 67.7%|
|**MRVL**|Aug 27 (FY27 Q2)|$2.74|**+37%**| Beat|Q3 rev \~$3.15B; raised FY27 to \~$12B (+45% YoY)|
|**ARM**|\~Jul 29 (FY27 Q1)|$1.29|**+22%**| Beat (record)|Royalty +22%, licensing +23%; record quarter|
|**SMCI**|\~Aug 5 (FY26 Q4)|$11.12|**+93%**| Beat|FY26 rev $39.1B (+78%); record AI server demand|
|**TXN**|Jul 21 (CY Q2)|$5.46|**+23%**| Beat (vs $5.24B exp)|Industrial/DC/auto-led growth; EPS $2.14 (+52%)|
|**ASML**|Jul 15 (CY Q2)|€9.3|**\~+50%+** (net sales)| Beat|Raised FY26 to €43–45B, GM 54–56% (2nd raise)|
|**AMAT**|Aug 13 (FY26 Q3)|$9.12|**+25%**| Beat (adj EPS $3.50 vs $3.40)|Packaging rev >70% growth CY26 (raised from >50%)|
|**LRCX**|Jul 29 (FY26 Q4)|$6.72|**+30%**| Beat (vs $6.66B exp)|Sept-qtr rev \~$8.1B (±$400M); FY26 record $23.2B|
|**KLAC**|Jul 30 (FY26 Q4)|$3.66|**+15%**| Beat (record qtr)|Q1 rev \~$4.0B; raised CY26 WFE outlook|
|**ORCL**|Q4 Jun (outside) / Q1 \~Sep 8–9|Q4 $19.2|**+21%**| Beat (Q4)|Q1 rev growth 27–29%; OCI +93%; raised FY27|
|**PLTR**|Aug 3 (CY Q2)|$1.94|**+93%**| Beat (+7.6%)|Raised FY26 to $8.15–$8.16B (+82% YoY); US comm +149%|
|**SNOW**|Sep 2 (FY27 Q2)|— (reports today)|—|—|Prior Q2 guide: product rev $1.415–1.420B (+30%)|
|**CRM**|Aug 26 (FY27 Q2)|$11.35|**+11%**| Beat (above high end)|Raised FY27 to $46.1–$46.4B (+11–12%)|
|**NOW**|Jul 22 (CY Q2)|\~$3.9 (sub)|**+23%** (sub, cc)| Beat (all lines)|Raised FY26 sub rev to $15.76–$15.78B (+21% cc)|
|**ADBE**|Jun 11 (FY26 Q2, outside)|$6.62|**+13%**| Beat (+2.6%)|Raised FY26 to $26.5–$26.6B; stock sank to 7-yr low|
|**PANW**|Sep 1 (FY26 Q4)|$3.41|**+34%**| Beat (vs \~$3.35B exp)|FY26 rev $11.5B (+24%); NGS ARR +34% to $21.2B|
|**CRWD**|Aug 26 (FY27 Q2)|$1.47|**+26%**| Beat|ARR $5.84B (+25%); record net-new ARR $333M; raised FY27|
|**NET**|Aug 6 (CY Q2)|$0.696|**+36%**| Beat|Raised FY26 to $2.864–$2.870B (+32%)|
|**DDOG**|Aug 6 (CY Q2)|$1.12|**+36%**| Beat (vs $1.08B exp)|Raised FY26 to $4.45–$4.47B (+30%); stock fell \~17%|
|**UBER**|Aug 5 (CY Q2)|$14.2|**+12%**| Mixed (GB +22% beat; rev miss)|Q3 GB $58.25–$60.25B (+18–22% cc); stock fell \~5%|
|**DELL**|Sep 1 (FY27 Q2)|$31.8|**+89%**| Beat|AI-optimized server rev $16.4B (+100%); FY27 rev \~$167B|
|**HPQ**|Aug 27 (FY26 Q3)|$15.7|**+12.5%**| Beat (record)|Lifted FY26 outlook; PC +18%|
|**HPE**|Sep 2 (FY26 Q3)|— (reports today)|—|—|Prior Q3 guide $11.5–$12.1B; Q2 was +40%|
|**ANET**|Aug 4 (CY Q2)|$3.04|**+37.7%**| Beat (vs $2.8B guide)|Raised FY26 to \~$12.6B (+40%); Q3 \~$3.03B|
|**CSCO**|Aug 12 (FY26 Q4)|$17.3|**+18%**| Beat (vs $16.8B exp)|FY26 rev $63.3B (+12%); product +24%; stock slid 8%|

$NVDA $MU $KLAC $AMAT $ASML $LRCX $TSM all got upgraded

$TSM burnt me extra crispy

\+4% minimum on $TSM

TSM

Yes, that's exactly it. Additionally, and this kind of sucks to say but if A.I takes a ton of jobs the companies like NVIDIA who supply the compute get paid and their earnings go up which means their stocks will go up. It's almost like investing in companies like NVIDIA is the UBI people were expecting to get.
I think all those companies you mentioned will win in the long run. Another one is TSM but we have to factor in invasion risk (which I personally can't see happening). Nobody does what TSM does though: they actually physically make the chips that companies like NVIDIA design.
In terms of moat, there are a few categories by Pat Dorsey (what Morningstar uses):
* **Intangible assets:** patents, brands, or regulatory licenses that let a company charge more or legally block copycats.
* **Switching costs:** it's expensive, risky, or just a hassle for a customer to leave, so they keep paying even when a cheaper option exists.
* **Network effect:** the product gets more valuable to every user as more people join it, which is why network-based businesses tend to end up as near-monopolies.
* **Cost advantage:** the company can make or deliver the same thing for less than anyone else, usually through scale, a proprietary process, or a uniquely cheap location, and can underprice rivals while staying profitable.
* **Efficient scale** (added in later versions of the framework): the market is only big enough to profitably support one or two players, so a new entrant would wreck returns for everyone, including itself.
NVIDIA's main two moats are the network effect and switching costs. What can't be matched on any reasonable timeline by a competitor is the network effect sitting on top of the silicon: every major AI framework, every performance library, millions of trained developers, and nearly every new model or research paper get built and optimized for CUDA first, which is exactly why the ***next*** developer picks CUDA too: a self-reinforcing loop that took two decades to build and would take a rival at least that long to unwind even with equally good chips tomorrow. That's a genuine switching-cost moat in the mold of Windows or iOS, and everything else we've talked about.

NVDA, GOOG, TSM, META, SKHY