Which cells can a regulatory filing actually fill?
A supply-chain map is only as good as its worst-sourced cell. This one separates four kinds of statement that usually get flattened into one: what the filing reports, what it quotes from an outside firm, what the company says about itself, and what the filing declines to state. The fourth kind is shown, not hidden β and more than once here, a cell one document leaves blank is answered by a different section, or a different company’s filing.
Filed
A number the filing itself reports. Traceable to a receipt number.
Cited
Printed in the filing but attributed to an outside research firm.
Claimed
The company’s own characterisation. No figure, or no source given.
Not stated
Absent β or the filing says outright that it cannot be computed.
Why the distinction is not pedantic
Three claims from a draft version of this map, checked against the filings
Each was presented under a single βDART Verifiedβ badge. None of the three appears in the half-year report it was attributed to. A fourth case came from our own work: PSK prints a five-year world-share series in its annual report and a different five-year series in the half-year report five months later, one year further forward and re-sourced. We published the older one, then found the newer one while building this map and corrected the article the same day.
| Claim as drafted | What the half-year filing says |
|---|---|
| No HBM share is given. The market-share table reports DRAM 29.1% and NAND 18.5% for Q1 2026, attributed to IDC. | |
| The company states the opposite is knowable: βμ μ¬ μ μ’ νμ¬μ 곡μμλ£ λΆμ‘± λ±μΌλ‘ μΈλΆνλ μμ₯μ μ μ¨ μ°μΆμ λΆκ°λ₯ν©λλ€β β share cannot be computed, for want of comparable disclosure. | |
| βNVIDIAβ and βμλΉλμβ appear zero times in the 371,545-character report. No customer is named anywhere in it. |
TIER 1
Memory maker
buys from tiers 2β4
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $97.99bnβ©131.90tn β six months to 30 Jun 2026. Q2 alone was β©79.32tn.
Operating margin 74.4%β©98.15tn on β©131.90tn. Reconciles: gross β©107.67tn less SG&A β©9.52tn.
Market share DRAM 29.1% Β· NAND 18.5% Q1 2026, revenue basis, credited to IDC (May/Jun 2026). The filing prints four years, and one number hides the shape: DRAM 29.9 β 33.4 β 34.8 β 29.1, NAND 19.6 β 21.4 β 20.9 β 18.5. Read the bases before the move: the first three are full years, the last is one quarter. Share rose for two years; the Q1 2026 reading sits 5.7 points below the 2025 full-year figure, and below 2023.
Customer concentration No 10%-customer note found We did not locate one in this report β not the same as none existing.
TIER 2
Process & packaging equipment
sells to tier 1
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $224.4mβ©302.1bn. Q2 alone β©251.2bn β 83% of the half landed in one quarter.
Operating margin 46.0%β©138.8bn cumulative; β©130.3bn of it in Q2.
Market share TC bonder 71.2% Which filing you open decides what you get. The half-year report offers only a claim β βμΈκ³ μμ₯μ μ μ¨ 1μβ for the MSVP saw and EMI shield, no number. The annual report (rcpNo 20260312001230) prints 71.2% for 2025 and credits TechInsights. And the half-year report’s contingent-liabilities note names the competitor that share figure implies: two patent suits with Hanwha Semitech, running both ways (2024κ°ν©113542, Hanmi plaintiff, β©2.5bn; 2025κ°ν©12443, Hanwha Semitech plaintiff, β©1.2bn). Distinct cases β unlike HPSP’s.
Customer concentration No 10%-customer note found Notable for an HBM bonder supplier β but we did not find one.
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $58.0mβ©78.1bn, separate basis. Not mixed with the consolidated rows above.
Operating margin 56.9%β©44,450,222,401 on β©78,062,950,623 β the highest of the four equipment makers here. Computed from the filed won, not from the rounded billions: β©44.5bn Γ· β©78.1bn would read 57.0%.
Market share Filing: cannot be computed βλΉμ¬κ° λ
보μ μ§μλ₯Ό λλ¦¬κ³ μκΈ° λλ¬Έμ β¦ μΈλΆνλ μμ₯μ μ μ¨ μ°μΆμ λΆκ°λ₯ν©λλ€.β Dominant position asserted; a number withheld, for want of comparable disclosure. It goes further: βκ²½μ μ νμ΄ μ‘΄μ¬νμ§ μλν©λλ€β β no competing product exists. Another company’s filing sits against that. YEST (122640) filed the same day and discloses pending patent-infringement litigation β plaintiff μμ΄μΉνΌμμ€νΌ, defendant μμ€ν°, Seoul Central District Court, first instance, β©100,000,000 claimed β over the same equipment category, while calling it immaterial. Neither report tells you this on its own.
Customer concentration 35.8%Four external customers, β©28.0bn of β©78.1bn. Largest alone 27.3%. A year earlier that customer billed β©0.
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $240.8mβ©324,067,591,071 β six months to 30 Jun 2026.
Operating margin 30.1%β©97,441,468,015 on β©324,067,591,071.
Market share 39% (2025) Β· dry stripThe one company here that prints a share series by year β and it printed two different ones. The FY2025 annual report gives 26 / 42 / 38 / 40 / 40 for 2020–2024, sourced to Gartner April 2025. The half-year report, five months later, gives 42 / 38 / 40 / 40 / 39 for 2021–2025, re-sourced to Gartner March 2026. They agree on the four overlapping years. The newer one adds the year the older could not have β and it is down. Neither states the denominator.
What the share is a share of 51.8%Only that much of first-half revenue was equipment. The rest β β©155.9bn, 48.2% β is the line the filing calls λΆν λ° μ©μμμλ£ μΈ. The world-share number covers the shrinking half.
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $283.3mβ©381,372,590,019 β six months to 30 Jun 2026.
Operating margin 7.6%β©29,117,870,941 on β©381,372,590,019.
Market share the filing says it cannot be estimatedβν μμμ
체μ λν μ΄ λ°μ£Όλ λ° μ
μ²΄λ³ μμ£Όλμ νμ
νκΈ° μ΄λ €μ΄ κ΄κ³λ‘ μ€μ§μ μΈ μμ₯μ μ μ¨ μΆμ μ λΆκ°λ₯ν©λλ€β β total orders placed with other device makers cannot be known, so a real share cannot be estimated. Techwing’s report carries the same sentence, word for word.
Where the profit came from β©89.3bnNet profit rose 388% while operating profit rose 0.16%. The gap is an unrealised mark on 1,120,000 shares of VM Inc. (KOSDAQ 089970) β and by the 4 September close that mark had given back 51.7%.
TIER 3
Substrates & process chemicals
sells to tiers 1β2
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $535.1mβ©720.2bn. The filing’s own line item is βμμ΅β, not β맀μΆμ‘β. Korea is 3.0% of it β the rest is billed abroad.
Operating margin 20.0%β©144.3bn on β©720.2bn.
Market share Intent, not measurement The report speaks of βexpanding shareβ as a plan. No figure is given, so no figure is shown.
Customer concentration 40.1%Consolidated basis, as the filing states; our recomputation lands at 40.08%. The separate-basis note gives 57.4%, which reconciles to no disclosed denominator β shown, not silently dropped.
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $501.5mβ©675.0bn.
Operating margin 18.7%β©125.9bn on β©675.0bn.
Market share Not mentioned The word βμ μ μ¨β does not occur in this report β alone among the six.
Customer concentration 74.0%β©499.6bn of β©675.0bn goods revenue. The IFRS note keeps the customers anonymous β but γλ§. μ£Όμ맀μΆμ²γ of the same filing names them: Samsung Electronics β©419.2bn (62.11%), SK hynix β©80.4bn (11.92%). The two sum to β©499,639m against the note’s β©499,638m, closing it to β©1m. Year-on-year comparison is not available on one denominator: 2025 counted operations now held for sale, and BOE β 13.15% of revenue then β is gone with them.
TIER 4
Test interface
sells to tiers 1β2 and to fabless
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $104.9mβ©141.2bn.
Operating margin 31.8%β©44.9bn on β©141.2bn.
Market share βaround 90%β β elastomer sockets The filing’s phrasing is passive ββνκ°λ°κ³ μμ΅λλ€β, is assessed at β with no source. Separately claims No. 1 in test sockets overall since 2015. Two different scopes.
Customer concentration 25.1%Two customers, β©35.4bn of β©141.2bn. The note calls them βAβ and βBβ β but B is SK hynix: the related-party note in the same filing carries the identical figure in all three periods (β©15,621,921k Β· β©3,822,475k Β· β©32,923,195k, to the won-thousand). That makes ISC’s second-largest customer an affiliate of its own controlling group, up 12.6Γ in two years. A is not identified. Direction: up 4.1Γ on the same half of 2025, down 46% on the second half β one alone misleads.
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $180.5mβ©242,958,602,798. Leeno files no consolidated statements at all β DART returns none β so this row cannot be placed beside the consolidated ones without saying so.
Operating margin 49.7%β©120,814,329,893 on β©242,958,602,798 β the highest here.
Market share the words never appearμμ₯μ μ μ¨ occurs zero times in either the annual or the half-year report. Not a refusal, not a claim β the subject is simply not raised.
The number English coverage got wrong β©90,000The founder sold 7,000,000 shares β 9.18% of the company β on 12 June 2026. The filing prices it at β©90,000 a share, β©630.0bn. English reports carried β©731.5bn and $605M; both are arithmetic on a screen price, not the disposal price.
Revenue Β· 1H cumulative $81.1mβ©109,176,416,870 β six months to 30 Jun 2026.
Operating margin 20.3%β©22,210,095,101 on β©109,176,416,870, up 172.7% year on year.
Market share the filing says it cannot be estimatedThe identical sentence to Wonik IPS’s, down to the clause order β ββ¦μ€μ§μ μΈ μμ₯μ μ μ¨ μΆμ μ λΆκ°λ₯ ν©λλ€β. Two unrelated companies, one boilerplate. βWe cannot knowβ is a sector convention here, not a company’s dodge.
What turned the profit into a loss $148.0mA book of sold USD forwards against five counterparties, struck between β©1,129.60 and β©1,437.90, the oldest from March 2021. Operating profit rose 172.7%; the half still closed at a net loss β all of it in Q1, since Q2 alone was net-profitable.
How this map is built
- Every figure carries its period and its basis. Half-year cumulative is never shown as if it were a quarter, and a separate-basis company (HPSP) is flagged rather than placed in the same column as consolidated ones. Two published errors this week came from exactly that confusion β the arithmetic was right and the column was wrong.
- A blank cell is a question, not a full stop. HPSP’s own report declines to give a market share; a competitor’s report, filed the same morning, supplies the fact that the category is contested. Cells get filled by reading across filings, and the map says which filing each fact came from.
- Read the refusals together, not one at a time. Three of the ten decline a market share, and two of those three β Wonik IPS and Techwing, in different tiers and different businesses β use the same sentence, word for word: ββ¦μ€μ§μ μΈ μμ₯μ μ μ¨ μΆμ μ λΆκ°λ₯ν©λλ€β. Read alone, each looks like a company avoiding a question. Read side by side, it is a sector convention. That distinction only appears on a map.
- Absence is a value. A blank cell reads βwe did not find thisβ, never βthis does not existβ. Where the filing itself refuses a number, the refusal is quoted.
- Korean labels are carried across verbatim, because translating a table header is already interpreting it. It is also how the map found its best cells. Twice in ten companies, an anonymous βcustomers above 10%β note was resolved by a different section of the same Korean filing β Dongjin’s named μ£Όμ맀μΆμ² list, and ISC’s related-party note β with nothing but arithmetic to join them. Neither join survives translation into an English summary, because summaries keep the headline note and drop the other one.
- Won converted at β©1,345.99/$1 β the close of Friday 4 Sep 2026, the last trading day. One dated rate, applied to every row. The rate is stamped because our own FX table carries weekend rows, and reading βthe latest rowβ on a Sunday returns a price no market made. Share prices, where shown, stay in won.
- Sources are half-year reports filed 14 Aug 2026, retrieved through
opendart.fss.or.kr. Receipt numbers are printed on each record so any figure can be traced back. - A company is on this map only once we have read its filing end to end. Each name links to that write-up. That is the entry requirement, and it is why the map is six rows rather than the whole KOSPI semiconductor list β twelve companies were probed for what their filings actually contain; six have been transcribed. Samsung Electronics, Samsung Electro-Mechanics, Wonik IPS, PSK, Leeno Industrial and Techwing are probed but not yet written, so they are absent rather than half-filled.
Flow footnote: Foreign Flow Watch, week of September 11, 2026 tracks what foreign investors did to this basket — a single Thursday carried 93% of the week’s selling.