| __timestamp | ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd. | Applied Materials, Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Wednesday, January 1, 2014 | 203051000000 | 5229000000 |
| Thursday, January 1, 2015 | 233153000000 | 5707000000 |
| Friday, January 1, 2016 | 221690000000 | 6314000000 |
| Sunday, January 1, 2017 | 237709000000 | 8005000000 |
| Monday, January 1, 2018 | 309929000000 | 9436000000 |
| Tuesday, January 1, 2019 | 348871000000 | 8222000000 |
| Wednesday, January 1, 2020 | 398994000000 | 9510000000 |
| Friday, January 1, 2021 | 459628000000 | 12149000000 |
| Saturday, January 1, 2022 | 535943000000 | 13792000000 |
| Sunday, January 1, 2023 | 490157339000 | 14133000000 |
| Monday, January 1, 2024 | 499722880000 | 14279000000 |
Data in motion
In the ever-evolving semiconductor industry, cost efficiency is a critical factor for success. This analysis delves into the cost of revenue trends for two major players: ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd. and Applied Materials, Inc., from 2014 to 2023. ASE Technology, a leader in semiconductor assembly and testing, has seen its cost of revenue grow by approximately 140% over the decade, peaking in 2022. In contrast, Applied Materials, a key supplier of equipment and services to the semiconductor industry, has maintained a more stable cost structure, with a 170% increase over the same period. Notably, 2024 data for ASE Technology is missing, highlighting potential data gaps. This comparison underscores the varying strategies in managing production costs, with Applied Materials showing a more consistent approach. Understanding these trends is crucial for investors and industry analysts aiming to gauge the financial health and operational efficiency of these tech giants.
Comparing Cost of Revenue Efficiency: Applied Materials, Inc. vs Western Digital Corporation
Applied Materials, Inc. and ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd.: A Comprehensive Revenue Analysis
Cost of Revenue Comparison: Applied Materials, Inc. vs Check Point Software Technologies Ltd.
Comparing Cost of Revenue Efficiency: Applied Materials, Inc. vs Pure Storage, Inc.
Analyzing Cost of Revenue: Applied Materials, Inc. and Zebra Technologies Corporation
Analyzing Cost of Revenue: Applied Materials, Inc. and FLEETCOR Technologies, Inc.
Comparing Cost of Revenue Efficiency: Applied Materials, Inc. vs VeriSign, Inc.
Cost of Revenue Comparison: Applied Materials, Inc. vs SS&C Technologies Holdings, Inc.
Gross Profit Comparison: Applied Materials, Inc. and ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd. Trends
Research and Development Expenses Breakdown: Applied Materials, Inc. vs ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd.
Selling, General, and Administrative Costs: Applied Materials, Inc. vs ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd.
A Side-by-Side Analysis of EBITDA: Applied Materials, Inc. and ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd.