Tuas Ltd vs Temple & Webster Group shares

If you’re weighing up Tuas Ltd (ASX: TUA) against Temple & Webster Group Ltd (ASX: TPW), you’re probably searching for deep value – after all, both shares have crashed over 65% year to date. While they live in entirely different industries (telecommunications for Tuas and online retail for Temple & Webster), this level of sell-off could have left one or both looking like bargains. Let’s compare their business models, recent results, and what stands out before I give my verdict on which might be the better value buy.

The case for Tuas

Tuas operates a mobile telecommunications network and provides mobile services, focusing on the Singaporean market. Headquartered in Sydney and founded in 2020, it’s a newer player, targeting SIM-only value plans in a highly competitive sector. Its lean operating footprint helps keep costs low.

Notably, Tuas:

• Has a market capitalisation of $907.60 million, the larger of the two companies in this comparison.
• Trades on a P/E ratio of 30.99 with earnings per share of $0.048.
• Has a 0% dividend yield, so you won’t get any income return at current prices.

The company appears growth-focused and is not aimed at income investors just yet.

The case for Temple & Webster

Temple & Webster is an online-only retailer specialising in furniture and homewares. Its huge web-based offering, including office furniture, lighting, and home décor, sets it apart from physical retailers. According to its most recent public description, the company offers a wide product range (over 200,000 items) and a strong online subscriber base, building scale since its 2011 founding.

For Temple & Webster:

• Market cap sits at $517.47 million – notably less than Tuas.
• Its shares command a hefty P/E ratio of 127.95, and earnings per share sit at $0.035.
• Like Tuas, Temple & Webster doesn’t currently pay a dividend.

Valuation comparison

Here’s how the fundamentals stack up side by side:

Metric	Tuas	Temple & Webster
Market Cap	$907.60 million	$517.47 million
P/E Ratio	30.99	127.95
Earnings per Share (EPS)	$0.048	$0.035
Dividend Yield	0.00%	0.00%
Year To Date Return	-76.59%	-67.54%

It stands out to me that Tuas now trades on a much lower P/E ratio than Temple & Webster – 30.99 vs 127.95. This suggests investors demand far more growth from Temple & Webster and are willing to pay up for its potential, despite both companies posting profits. Neither pays a dividend at present.

Recent share price momentum

Comparing recent share price performance up to 9 October 2026:

• Tuas closed at $1.66, essentially flat over its last two trading sessions, and down sharply over the year (YTD return: -76.6%).
• Temple & Webster closed at $4.44, having gained 4.5% on the day, but still deep in the red for 2026 (YTD return: -67.5%).

Which is the better buy?

If I’ve got to pick between two shares smashed more than 65% this year, my pick would be Tuas. There are a few reasons for this call. While both still look risky and could have question marks about their future growth, Tuas trades at a far lower P/E multiple than Temple & Webster. That means, for every dollar of earnings, you’re paying a lot less for Tuas than for Temple & Webster – and both have posted profits in the latest data. Neither stock is paying a dividend, so income-seekers won’t find a winner here.

Temple & Webster has that classic high-growth online retailer story, and sometimes those stories come with extreme valuations. Right now, that shows up as a P/E of nearly 128, versus about 31 for Tuas. Unless Temple & Webster can accelerate earnings growth sharply from here, I’m wary of buying at that kind of multiple after a big fall.

Both shares carry risk, but on valuation grounds, Tuas looks like better value right now. If I had to choose where to hunt for a deep-value rebound, I’d lean toward Tuas.

The post Tuas vs Temple & Webster: Which beaten-down ASX share offers better value? appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Temple & Webster vs Harvey Norman: Which beaten-down ASX retailer offers better value?
• Adairs vs Temple & Webster: Which ASX retail stock wins for October?
• Where I’d invest in ASX shares after the recent RBA rate rise
• Temple & Webster vs Nick Scali: Which furniture share is better?
• Which ASX telco could jump 140% according to Morgan Stanley?

Motley Fool contributor Laura Stewart has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has positions in and has recommended Temple & Webster Group. The Motley Fool Australia has recommended Temple & Webster Group. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips. This article was prepared with the assistance of Large Language Model (LLM) tools for the initial draft. Any content assisted by AI is subject to our robust human-in-the-loop quality control framework, involving thorough review, substantial editing, and fact-checking by our experienced writers and editors holding appropriate credentials. The Motley Fool Australia stands behind the work of our editorial team and takes ultimate responsibility for the content published by The Motley Fool Australia.

Megaport Ltd (ASX: MP1) has quickly become one of the most exciting growth shares on the ASX.

Its expansion into artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure has opened up an enormous new market, and recent contract wins suggest the opportunity could be much bigger than investors previously imagined.

But with the shares already enjoying a strong rally, how much upside could still be ahead?

Could a $10,000 investment in Megaport shares today realistically grow to $20,000 by 2030?

A business with much bigger ambitions

The first reason I think Megaport shares have the potential to double is how dramatically its business has changed.

Megaport originally made its name by helping businesses connect to cloud providers and data centres through its global network.

That remains a valuable business, particularly as companies continue moving more of their operations online and need reliable connections between different systems.

But the acquisition of Latitude.sh has taken Megaport into a much larger growth market.

Latitude.sh provides GPU and CPU computing infrastructure, along with networking and storage, allowing customers to run demanding AI workloads.

This gives Megaport direct exposure to the computing power required as artificial intelligence becomes more widely adopted.

And the early results have been impressive. Since April, Megaport has announced approximately $2.3 billion worth of strategic AI infrastructure contracts.

Those agreements have helped lift the company’s pro forma annual recurring revenue to around $1.1 billion, although not all of that revenue is being billed yet.

For me, this is an important development. Megaport has moved beyond demonstrating that demand exists. It now has substantial contracted business to deliver.

What could Megaport look like in 2030?

AI adoption is still developing, and the demand for computing infrastructure could grow substantially as more businesses put AI applications into everyday use.

Megaport is positioning itself to benefit from that spending through Latitude.sh, while its original connectivity business can continue expanding alongside the broader cloud computing market.

The combination could make Megaport a much larger digital infrastructure company by the end of the decade.

We are already seeing how quickly its financial outlook is changing. Following its latest contract wins, Megaport upgraded FY27 revenue guidance to between $720 million and $810 million, with an expected EBITDA margin of 42% to 44%.

If the company delivers on those expectations and maintains strong momentum into FY28, FY29, and FY30, I think its earnings could look significantly different in a few years.

That would provide a foundation for further share price growth.

Could $10,000 in Megaport shares really become $20,000?

Using the recent Megaport share price of approximately $19.69, the shares would need to reach $39.38 for a $10,000 investment to double, excluding costs.

That is an ambitious target, particularly after the company’s recent rally. But I do not think it is beyond reach by 2030.

For that to happen, Megaport would need to successfully convert its existing contracts into revenue and profits, continue winning new customers, and demonstrate that its AI infrastructure business can deliver attractive returns. I would also want to see strong growth continuing beyond the current wave of contracts.

There are risks here. Building AI infrastructure requires substantial capital investment. Megaport is planning to spend between $1.78 billion and $1.88 billion in FY27, reflecting the scale of its expansion.

It also faces rapidly changing technology, competition, and the possibility that AI infrastructure demand develops differently from current expectations.

With so much growth already anticipated, disappointing execution could have a significant impact on the share price.

Foolish takeaway

I think Megaport shares have a realistic chance of doubling by 2030, although I would not treat that outcome as a certainty.

The company has secured a significant foothold in AI infrastructure, and I believe the next few years could see the business grow considerably.

There is still plenty to prove, but if Megaport can turn its growing contract pipeline into sustained earnings and cash flow, I would not be surprised to see the shares trading near $40 before the decade is over.

The post Could $10,000 invested in Megaport shares double by 2030? appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Buy, hold, sell: Resmed, Megaport, ANZ shares
• Xero vs Megaport: Which ASX tech stock suits young investors better?
• Top brokers name 3 ASX shares to buy next week
• 2 ASX 200 shares tipped to rise 39% to 130%
• Buy, hold, sell: Orica, Bank of Queensland, Megaport shares

Motley Fool contributor Grace Alvino has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has positions in and has recommended Megaport. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.

This time last week, Firmus Technologies was gearing up to launch the biggest ASX initial public offering (IPO) in 30 years.

On the back of the artificial intelligence (AI) boom and Space X‘s Nasdaq listing earlier this year, it was being sold as the biggest ASX listing in a generation. With little opportunity to invest in the local market, ASX tech enthusiasts faced a rare opportunity.

Firmus’ broker syndicate had told prospective investors that early indications of interest were well above the offer size. They said that more than half the raise would likely go to existing investors. This implied that there would be very little left for retail investors to participate. In other words, most would miss out.

By Thursday morning, the narrative began to swiftly change.

First came news of repricing. As institutional enthusiasm began to dwindle, it was revealed that the offer price had been reduced. Initially from $11 to $9, then $8.25. According to the Australian Financial Review, a figure as low as $6 was considered. This represented a nearly 50% decline from the starting offer price in less than 24 hours.

Not long after, Bloomberg News broke the news that the IPO had been cancelled. Several other news organisations quickly confirmed it.

The blame game then began. What would happen to Firmus now? How could things go so wrong so quickly? 

Many echoed the sentiment of long-time Firmus backer David Paradice, Managing Director of Paradice Investment Management, who was puzzled as to how demand could evaporate so quickly.

According to the Australian Financial Review, he said:

We were told there were massive bids coming out of America, which clearly never eventuated. There was a big difference between what the underwriters were saying and the outcome.

At least two major groups of stakeholders will come off most bruised. Of course, the founders and existing investors who stood to book an enormous profit, should the IPO have gone ahead at $11. However, the broker syndicate will also have a lot to answer for. At the very least, there will be reputational damage and lost fees.

While plenty of stories will be written about the losers of the abandoned Firmus IPO, we should take a moment to mention the group of investors who have most certainly come out on top.

A victory for retail investors

When investing alongside insiders and institutional investors, retail investors often feel like they are at a disadvantage. Not just because they lack professional expertise, but also because they feel they have an information handicap. 

In the case of IPOs, this is often magnified. The Firmus listing was no exception. 

In fact, Ten Cap portfolio manager Jun Bei Liu described the Firmus IPO as “probably one of the most polarising IPOs [she has] ever seen”, and noted that “the lack of detail they disclose [was] unprecedented.”

Companies like Firmus, with little operating history, are difficult to value. Without adequate disclosure in other areas, it brings a whole other layer of challenge.

This makes it even harder for retail investors to decide whether to participate. 

According to the Australian Financial Review, Firmus’ targeted valuation of $43.7 billion on FY26 and its operating revenue of around $70 million implied a price-to-revenue of around 860 times!

For context, SpaceX listed at a price-to-revenue multiple of 94 times, which was widely considered as lofty.

By pulling the IPO, retail investors were spared from having to value Firmus and decide whether it was worth the hype. 

Saved from the winner’s curse

Behind this phenomenon is a theory known as the ‘winner’s curse’.

The winner’s curse suggests IPOs favour the well-connected with deep pockets. 

In an underpriced IPO, institutional investors act on their advantage to take up a large allocation, pricing retail investors out. 

When an IPO is overvalued, the opposite occurs. Institutional investors may bail after learning that it is overvalued. Retail investors then end up getting their full allocations. When the company lists, the valuation drops, and retail investors are left to watch their investment crater.

However, in Firmus’ case, this played out before it listed. Reports of an excessive valuation and a lack of interest were made public, leading to its cancellation. Retail investors were spared.

Retail investor JOMO (joy of missing out!)

Now that the IPO has been called off and the blame game has started, many will argue that Firmus’ IPO was always destined to fail. They will say they never would have invested. 

However, hindsight is a powerful thing, and the Firmus hype was real. The float was backed by some very big players, including Nvidia, Blackstone, and some of the world’s biggest investment banks.

It’s likely that many retail investors would have been caught up in the euphoria and invested in the ‘biggest IPO in a generation’ at the earliest opportunity.

There are certainly lessons to be learnt.

However, for now, retail investors should take the win.

Should the ASX IPO have proceeded at the original price of $11, Firmus’ banking syndicate stood to earn fees of around $215 million.

Instead, Firmus was forced to abandon the IPO and will have a lot to answer for. 

Retail investors walk away unscathed, free to allocate their capital to their next promising investment. 

The post The real winners of the Firmus fiasco appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Could $10,000 invested in Megaport shares double by 2030?
• Buy, hold, sell: Mesoblast, Transurban, NextDC shares
• Buy, hold, sell: Resmed, Megaport, ANZ shares
• Summerset Group Q3 FY26 earnings: Sales up 10% on strong resales
• GQG Partners posts FUM of US$149.2bn in September 2026

Motley Fool contributor Laura Stewart has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has positions in and has recommended Blackstone and Nvidia. The Motley Fool Australia has recommended Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.