DEEP RESEARCH · TES

TES: From Memory Equipment Name to Advanced-Process Partner

A portfolio-transition report across 3D NAND, GAA, HBM hybrid bonding, and BSPDN

Written: 2025-10-13 · Semiconductor front-end equipment/advanced packaging · Original Naver Blog post

0. Bottom line first

1. Old TES: a 3D NAND deposition specialist

Official fact: TES was founded in 2002 and listed on KOSDAQ in 2008. It is a semiconductor front-end equipment company focused on PECVD and Gas Phase Etch & Cleaning equipment. The headquarters is in Yongin, Gyeonggi-do, and the CEOs are listed as Joo Sung-il and Lee Jae-ho.

Official fact: The source states that 60~70% of revenue came from NAND, while Samsung Electronics and SK hynix represented about 95% of total revenue. 2024 revenue is presented as KRW 240.1 billion, with a 16.0% operating margin.

Interpretation: This structure is both strength and weakness. In 3D NAND scaling, TES has deep customer and process knowledge; when NAND CAPEX turns down, however, valuation pressure arrives quickly.

2. Demand drivers: AI, vertical scaling, and GAA

Official fact: The source links the rising difficulty of HAR etch in 3D NAND to etch equipment representing 35~40% of fab investment. It also cites an estimate that the hybrid bonding equipment market could reach about US$2 billion by 2028 as HBM4 ramps.

Interpretation: The important change is the blurring boundary between front-end and back-end processes. Hybrid bonding requires front-end strengths such as surface flatness, dielectric films, and plasma cleaning, which makes TES’s deposition and plasma know-how relevant to packaging.

3. Technology roadmap: reusing GPE and PECVD

Official fact: PECVD is described as TES’s core business, accounting for 60% to as much as 90% of revenue. Its ACL hard-mask equipment is a representative product for 3D NAND HAR structures. GPE started as dry-cleaning equipment that removes native oxide without damage.

4. Competitive position: Korean Big Four and global giants

Interpretation: Among Korean equipment companies, TES is differentiated less by portfolio breadth and more by process depth in GPE and ACL PECVD. Against AMAT, Lam Research, and TEL, it must win through localized process expertise and customer-specific execution.

5. Financial and valuation lens

The source expects the next three years to combine a recovery in the legacy memory business with growth from new businesses. GAA GPE, hybrid bonders, Low-k, BSD, and ALE will not all become large revenue lines immediately, but they may have higher barriers and more favorable competitive structures than legacy memory equipment.

Interpretation: I would track three re-rating conditions: whether GPE share expands inside Samsung’s GAA process, whether the hybrid-bonder prototype with Hanmi Semiconductor moves into real customer evaluation, and whether the new R&D center produces BSD, Low-k, and ALE qualifications or first orders.

6. Risks and final view

My conclusion is that TES should be viewed as an equipment company trying to build new revenue sources in advanced processes, not merely as a memory-cycle rebound name. But the transition is not yet a finished conclusion; it is an execution test. I would keep tracking GAA GPE, hybrid bonding, and BSD/Low-k/ALE qualification milestones.