VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 0 CENTS
Monday, December 29, 2025
ASM International N.V.
ASM · Euronext Amsterdam
Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.
Request update
Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.
Overview
ASM International designs and manufactures deposition equipment and process solutions for semiconductor wafer processing, with a core position in atomic layer deposition (ALD) and a growing footprint in silicon epitaxy. Management describes ASM as the ALD market leader (mid-50s% share), supporting learning-curve and qualification-based switching-cost moats in advanced-node layers. A meaningful spares and services business is supported by the installed base of tools and ongoing OEM service requirements.
Primary segment
ALD equipment
Market structure
Quasi-Monopoly
Market share
55%-60% (reported)
HHI: —
Coverage
3 segments · 6 tags
Updated 2025-12-29
Segments
ALD equipment
Single-wafer atomic layer deposition (ALD) equipment for semiconductor manufacturing
Revenue
—
Structure
Quasi-Monopoly
Pricing
—
Share
55%-60% (reported)
Peers
Silicon epitaxy equipment
Silicon epitaxy (Si Epi) equipment for advanced logic/foundry and memory manufacturing
Revenue
—
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
—
Share
14%-18% (reported)
Peers
Spares and services
Aftermarket spares and services for ASM deposition equipment installed base
Revenue
—
Structure
Quasi-Monopoly
Pricing
—
Share
—
Peers
—
Moat Claims
ALD equipment
Single-wafer atomic layer deposition (ALD) equipment for semiconductor manufacturing
Learning Curve Yield
Supply
Learning Curve Yield
Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence
Process/chemistry know-how accumulated over many technology generations; leadership share suggests superior performance/yield in advanced-node ALD layers.
Erosion risks
- Competitor process catch-up (Applied Materials, Tokyo Electron)
- Process substitution reduces ALD steps per wafer (alternative deposition/etch integration)
- Customer in-sourcing of process modules or tighter co-optimization with rival toolsets
Leading indicators
- ALD market share trend (e.g., TechInsights)
- Share of revenue from advanced logic/foundry and HBM-related DRAM layers
- R&D intensity and cadence of new ALD layer wins
Counterarguments
- Large fabs can qualify multiple suppliers to reduce dependence
- Some ALD sub-applications may commoditize as recipes mature
Design In Qualification
Demand
Design In Qualification
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Tool-of-record positions are won layer-by-layer; qualification cycles and yield risk make swapping ALD toolsets costly once qualified in high-volume production flows.
Erosion risks
- Customers standardize process flows to enable easier multi-sourcing
- Node transition delays or architecture shifts reduce re-qualification cadence
Leading indicators
- Announcements of multi-source qualifications by leading fabs
- Share gains/losses in new-node layer additions (GAA, HBM, advanced packaging)
Counterarguments
- For mature nodes, switching/qualification costs are lower and pricing becomes more competitive
- Some customers may accept short-term yield hits to diversify suppliers
IP Choke Point
Legal
IP Choke Point
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence
Large and growing patent estate, including hundreds of ALD-related patents; helpful defensively and to protect key tool features, but rivals can sometimes design around.
Erosion risks
- Patent expirations and workarounds over time
- Cross-licensing among large equipment suppliers
Leading indicators
- Material IP litigation outcomes
- Patent grant/expiration cadence in key ALD families
Counterarguments
- Many equipment patents are narrow and can be engineered around
- Process know-how can matter more than formal IP in tool performance
Silicon epitaxy equipment
Silicon epitaxy (Si Epi) equipment for advanced logic/foundry and memory manufacturing
Design In Qualification
Demand
Design In Qualification
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Epitaxy steps are tightly tied to device performance; once qualified for a given node/device architecture, switching toolsets can be costly and risky.
Erosion risks
- Incumbents defend share with aggressive pricing and bundled deals
- Process standardization reduces differentiation across vendors
Leading indicators
- Epi share progression vs stated targets
- Disclosures of Epi wins in leading-edge DRAM and logic/foundry ramps
Counterarguments
- Epi markets can be more competitive than ALD in some layers
- Customers may dual-source epitaxy for bargaining power
Learning Curve Yield
Supply
Learning Curve Yield
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Process learning and metrology integration improve uniformity and defectivity; share gains depend on executing at leading-edge specs.
Erosion risks
- Slower adoption of GAA or alternative transistor architectures
- Competitors match performance specs, compressing differentiation
Leading indicators
- Epi gross margin/mix commentary (if disclosed)
- R&D roadmap updates tied to GAA and HBM process requirements
Counterarguments
- Epi share targets may not materialize if customers consolidate spend with larger tool vendors
- Yield/performance parity can reduce switching costs over time
Spares and services
Aftermarket spares and services for ASM deposition equipment installed base
Installed Base Consumables
Demand
Installed Base Consumables
Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence
Growing installed base of tools drives recurring spare parts, upgrades, and service revenue; OEM parts and process support are sticky once tools are in fabs.
Erosion risks
- Third-party service providers and refurbished parts
- Customers negotiate broader service terms during downturns
Leading indicators
- Spares & services revenue growth vs equipment shipments
- Attach rate of preventative maintenance / service contracts
Counterarguments
- Some customers self-maintain or qualify third-party parts for non-critical components
- Service revenues are still exposed to fab utilization cycles
Service Field Network
Supply
Service Field Network
Strength: 3/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence
Global service capabilities improve uptime and cost of ownership, reinforcing customer preference for OEM support.
Erosion risks
- OEM service commoditization as tools mature
- Localized service competition in major fab regions
Leading indicators
- Customer uptime/MTBF metrics (if disclosed)
- Service gross margin trend (if disclosed)
Counterarguments
- Leading fabs may build internal teams that reduce reliance on OEM field service
- Some service elements can be sourced locally at lower cost
Evidence
We are market leader in ALD (mid-50s % share).
Leadership implies learning-curve advantages in recipes, throughput, and yield.
new wins in Epi and ALD dipole and work function related layers in DRAM HBM
Indicates layer-specific design wins that typically require lengthy qualification.
ASM classifies installation and qualification revenue from equipment sales as spares and services revenue.
Highlights that installation/qualification is a material part of deployments, consistent with high switching/qualification costs.
we currently have over 2,953 patents in force.
Signals scale of the IP portfolio.
hundreds of issued patents relating specifically to the ALD process technology platform.
Supports the claim that ALD-specific IP is substantial.
Showing 5 of 11 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- Competitor process catch-up (Applied Materials, Tokyo Electron)
- Process substitution reduces ALD steps per wafer (alternative deposition/etch integration)
- Customer in-sourcing of process modules or tighter co-optimization with rival toolsets
- Customers standardize process flows to enable easier multi-sourcing
- Node transition delays or architecture shifts reduce re-qualification cadence
- Patent expirations and workarounds over time
Leading indicators
- ALD market share trend (e.g., TechInsights)
- Share of revenue from advanced logic/foundry and HBM-related DRAM layers
- R&D intensity and cadence of new ALD layer wins
- Announcements of multi-source qualifications by leading fabs
- Share gains/losses in new-node layer additions (GAA, HBM, advanced packaging)
- Material IP litigation outcomes
Curation & Accuracy
This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).
Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.