全部推文
共 6436 条 · 第 180 / 215 页 · 滚到底自动加载更多
-
回复用户并附带链接，无实质内容。
@hereforgoodish2 https://t.co/UCVdPiPP1N
英文原文
@hereforgoodish2 https://t.co/UCVdPiPP1N
-
对比NBIS全栈优势与CIFR低风险低上限，看好两者但首选NBIS。
感谢 @accounting_ds 总结我的观点。明天我会发布更深入的全面分析。 $NBIS 和 $CIFR 是我在 Neoclouder（新型云服务商）板块中最看好的两只股票。不过 CIFR 的地位略低于 Nebius。 Nebius 位居榜首，因为它拥有完整的 AI-cloud（人工智能云）价值链，具备更高的收入潜力和更强的回报，尽管这迫使它们承担编排、软件以及 GPU lifecycle（GPU 生命周期）风险，而非仅局限于 colocation（托管服务）。 我看好 $CIFR 是因为它规避了上述所有风险敞口，并拥有 $AMZN 和 $GOOGL 的支持作为长期收入锚点。它还免受 GPU 采购、管理和折旧的影响。 就 CIFR 的经济模型而言，我们得到的是基于为 hyperscalers（超大规模云厂商）提供空间、电力和冷却的高利润率、年金式结构。经风险调整后，它是该组别中最安全的标的之一。但权衡之下，其上行空间有限。 10年、15年的长期租约减缓了收入增长步伐，并削弱了相对于 NBIS 等全栈 Neocloud 运营商的回报，后者能在一年内将季度收入从 1.45 亿美元提升至 21 亿美元。
英文原文
Appreciate, @accounting_ds for summarizing my opinion. I'll post a deeper dive into everything tomorrow. $NBIS, $CIFR are my favorite two in the Neoclouder sector. CIFR sits right below Nebius though. Nebius is top because it owns the full AI-cloud value chain for higher revenue potential and stronger returns, even though it forces them to handle orchestration, software, and GPU lifecycle risk instead of sticking to colocation. I like $CIFR because it avoids that entire risk surface and has backing from $AMZN and $GOOGL for long term revenue anchors. It also stays insulated from GPU procurement, management, and depreciation. For CIFR's economics we get a a high-margin, annuity structure built on space, power, and cooling for hyperscalers. Risk-adjusted, it’s one of the safest names in the group. But the trade-off is capped upside Long leases like 10Y, 15Y slow the revenue ramp and mute the payoff relative to full-stack Neocloud operators like NBIS that go from $145m quarterly revenue to $2.1B in a year.
-
TSM盈利是AI核心指标，超大规模云厂商建设不受NVDA财报影响。
我的观点是，$TSM 的未来盈利（forward earnings）是迄今为止人工智能交易（AI trade）最大的指标，因为它涵盖了从 $GOOGL TPU 生产到 $AMZN，以及 $NVDA、$AMD 等所有超大规模云服务商（hyperscalers），且我们已看到其盈利和利润率大幅超出预期。 即使 $NVDA 的未来营收被大幅下调（我对此表示怀疑），也不会使 $MSFT 到 $IREN、$AMZN 到 $CIFR 等公司已签订的多年度算力（compute）积压订单失效。 我们已看到 Anthropic 与 $MSFT Azure 的算力协议（这将惠及 $NBIS、$IREN 和 $CRWV 等），$GOOGL 近日建设超 400 亿美元的数据中心（此前已与 $WULF、$CIFR/FluidStack 签署托管设施（colo）协议），$NVDA 的财报不会改变超大规模云服务商的建设步伐。 但它确实对整个 AI 交易产生重大影响，并直接影响 $NVDA GPU 板块（例如重度依赖 $NVDA 的 AI 云厂商）。
英文原文
My opinion is that $TSM forward earnings was the biggest indicator of the AI trade so far since they span from all hyperscalers such as $GOOGL TPU prod to $AMZN, as well as $NVDA, $AMD, and we've already seen them blow away earnings + margins. Even if $NVDA forward revenue is quoted heavily downward (which I doubt), it won't invalidate multi-year contracted compute backlog from $MSFT to companies like $IREN or $AMZN to $CIFR made already. We're already seeing Anthropic x $MSFT compute deals with Azure today (which flows down to $NBIS, $IREN and $CRWV others), $GOOGL build out a $40B+ datacenter the other day (they've made colo deals with $WULF, $CIFR / fluidstack previously), and $NVDA earnings won't the change the hyperscaler buildout. But it does have a large impact on the overall AI trade as well + directly affect $NVDA GPU parts of the sector (eg. $NVDA heavy AI clouds).
-
建议无视短期噪音持有AI股，等待剧烈反弹。
🎯. 我们以前见过类似的情况，比如 $NBIS 从 $140 跌至 $94，然后在两周内暴力反弹至 $130。这次似乎更广泛且回撤时间更长，大多数高贝塔股票从 $SMCI 到 $RDDT 都在下跌，其中 AI 板块集中度最高。正如你所说，任何反弹可能都会很剧烈，因此最好在这些波动时期持有，以免错过 1-2 个最大的反弹日。显然，当前的市场下跌是多方面的，包括散户投降、保证金清算、宏观因素，以及对 GPU 过时/AI 交易信贷收紧的一些合理担忧。然而，最重要的是关注基本面而非短期噪音（目前恐惧与贪婪指数处于 9/100 的极度恐惧状态）。
英文原文
🎯. We've seen this before with stocks like $NBIS on the drop from $140 -> $94 and then the violent recovery to $130 all in the span of 2 weeks. This time it seems broader + longer drawdown with most high-beta stocks dropping from $SMCI to $RDDT with highest concentration of AI sector. As you mentioned, any recovery will likely be violent, which is why it's better to hold through these volatile times, than missing out 1-2 of the biggest recovery days. Obviously the current market drop multi-facted with retail capitulation, margin liquidation, macro, and some valid concerns over GPU deprecation/credit tightening of the AI trade added on top. However, the most important thing is to look at fundamentals over short term noise (with fear and greed being extreme fear right now at 9/100).
-
成长股因宏观恐慌错杀，机构逢低吸纳，是最佳买入窗口。
目前市场正目睹大多数成长股下跌。 过去5天： · Cloudflare [ $NET ]: $192.99 (-15.23%) · Rocketlab [ $RKLB ]: $42.50 (-19.35%) · Iren [ $IREN ]: $46.6 (-28.74%) · Hims [ $HIMS ]: $35.15 (-15.61%) 已失去近期涨幅。为何？ 目前我们看到机械性对冲下行，混合着类似加密市场的实时级联保证金清算。 这还混合了基于宏观的投降式抛售，包括对12月降息概率的半合理担忧、政府停摆导致的数据缺失，以及多家对冲基金发布的AI看空报告。 最重要的一点是：尽管许多个股基本面正在改善。 我们看到像： $NBIS 将ARR指引从分析师预期的$4B上调至$7-9B，本周却跌去26.85%。 我们也看到 $SNAP 在发布$4B惊喜的Perplexity交易后，吹爆营收指引，却失去了财报后的所有涨幅。 此时，我们正接近12月“圣诞老人行情”前的底部，机构正在暗池/大宗交易中买入杠杆交易者的比特币清算资金，转向$NBIS等优质股票。 如果未来增长和基本面放缓，此次下跌后的持续抛售是合理的。 然而，如果许多成长股的基本面完好，这次市场重置是自4月关税抛售以来，从$KRKNF到$ALAB的成长股最佳买入机会。 正如Robinhood [ $HOOD ]数据显示，散户在$IREN等热门股上，在$45-$50底部大量卖出，但在$MSFT交易后$80顶部买入。 散户往往在顶部追高，但在下跌后底部投降。 这是伟大的重置，而非导致熊市的持续崩盘。保证金清算后及弱势筹码向长期投资者转移，将带来新高。 话说回来：你认为目前被抛售最严重的高Beta股票是哪只？
英文原文
Markets are seeing a drop in most growth stocks right now. In the past 5 days: · Cloudflare [ $NET ]: $192.99 (-15.23%) · Rocketlab [ $RKLB ]: $42.50 (-19.35%) · Iren [ $IREN ]: $46.6 (-28.74%) · Hims [ $HIMS ]: $35.15 (-15.61%) have lost their recent gains. Why? Right now, we're seeing mechanical hedging downward, mixed with live cascading margin liquidations slightly mirroring the crypto markets. This is mixed with capitulation based on macro with semi-valid concerns from December rate cut odds, lack of data from Gov shutdown, and AI short reports from several hedge funds. The most important thing to note is that: This is despite improving fundamentals in many individual stocks. We've seen companies like: $NBIS raise ARR guidance from $7-9B from projected analyst $4B marks, and sell off 26.85% this week. and we've seen $SNAP lose any gain from post earnings, after blowout revenue guidance from a $400M surprise perplexity deal. At this point, we're nearing the bottom before the December Santa Rally, with institutions buying up leverage trader Bitcoin liquidations to quality stocks like $NBIS in dark pools/block trades. If forward growth and fundamentals were slowing, continued selling after this drop would be warranted. However, if fundamentals are in tact for many growth stock, this market-wide reset is the best buying opportunity for growth stocks from $KRKNF to $ALAB since the April tariff sell-off. As seen with Robinhood [ $HOOD ] data on popular retail stocks with $IREN, retail is heavily selling the bottom at $45-$50, but bought in at the top post $MSFT deal at $80. Retail is often the ones to chase buying at the top. But capitulate at the bottom after the drop. This is the great reset, but not a continued crash leading to a bear market. Stock post-margin liquidations and weak hands moving to long-term investors leads to new highs. That being said: what high-beta stock do you think is the most sold off right now?
-
澄清全栈基础设施定义，辨析IREN与NBIS等技术层级差异。
我觉得你可能把自己搞糊涂了，我只是想澄清一下术语。你在第一条评论中说 $ORCL 不是全栈(full stack)，因为他们做了数据中心租赁(DC leasing)，而 $IREN 是全栈。 现在你从 $ORCL 转移话题，开始谈论 $IREN。 我们只是在争论“全栈”服务提供的语义定义。如果你想论证 $IREN 不是全栈，而是做垂直整合的基础设施，那部分也是成立的。 我提到的 $IREN + 软件编排，是指调度、监控分配、故障恢复、集群配置(cluster prov)、容器运行时(container runtime)等，这些是为 $MSFT 提供算力所需的 GPU 编排。 集群编排 + 配置层 + 购买 GPU 而不仅仅是托管机房(colo)，我认为这就是你提到的全栈基础设施。 如果你想再深入一步，$NBIS $CRWV 做的是模型 API、推理运行时（平台/运行时层），比如 $NBIS 的代币工厂(token factory)，这是更深层次的全栈服务，所以 $IREN 确实不算全栈。 这只是在争论全栈之上叠加更多软件的语义问题。如果你接受这个论点，那么对于 $IREN 来说确实如此，且因公司而异。
英文原文
I think you might be confusing yourself and I'm just trying to clarify the terms. You were saying $ORCL is not full stack because they did DC leasing and $IREN is full stack in your first comment. Now you're shifting from $ORCL and talking about $IREN. And we're just going into semantic definition on full-stack offerings and if you wanted to argue $IREN is not full stack but does vertically integrated infrastructure, then that's partially valid too. With $IREN + software orchestration I was referring to scheduling, monitoring allocation, fault recoveriy, cluster prov, container rutime, etc for GPU orchestation needed to deliver compute to $MSFT. Cluster orchestration +provisioning layer + buying GPUs rather than just colo I'd argue is full-stack infrastructure as you mentioned. If you wanted to go one-step deeper that $NBIS $CRWV does it's model APis, inference runetimes, (platform/runtime layer) like $NBIS token factory which is a deeper full-stack offering, so $IREN is not full-stack sure. This is just arguing semantics of more software on top of full-stack and if you go with that argument, sure with $IREN and it differs company-to-company.
-
对比加密控股公司，建议直接持有资产，视MSTR为例外。
如果观察灰度投资（Grayscale Investments）等历史模式——在ETF出现前，这是通过控股公司获取加密货币敞口的方式——它们曾长期大幅折价于净资产值(NAV)交易。 对于许多像 $BMNR 这样的公司，直接持有底层 $ETH 资产是更好的选择。对于 $MARA，则是持有 $BTC 以及挖矿业务，并可能向高性能计算(HPC)转型的混合体。 我认为 $MSTR 是控股公司的例外，这归因于其积累的巨额 $BTC，以及美国政府将其国有化以获取比特币敞口的潜在可能性。
英文原文
If you look at historical patterns such as grayscale investments, which was the way to get crypto exposure from holding companies pre-ETF, they traded way under-NAV for the longest time. With many companies like $BMNR, you’re better off holding the underlying $ETH asset. With $MARA it’s a mix of holding $BTC as well as the mining business + optionally to transition to HPC. I would only argue $MSTR is an exception to holding companies due to how much $BTC they’ve accumulated and the potential for nationalization for the US government to get exposure to Bitcoin.
-
澄清NBIS与CRWV利润率差异，指出NBIS处于更优位置。
再次强调，情况非常微妙，我只是想指出你可能混淆或误解的地方。 $NBIS 和 $CRWV 拥有最高的标准化利润率(normalized margins)，但 $CRWV 之所以亏损，是因为其巨额债务利息。 如果从公式中剔除这一因素，并保持较高的利用率(utilization) + 改善导致利润率计算的复杂公式中的其他部分，那么 $NBIS 就处于那个“甜蜜点(sweet spot)”，这就是我试图表达的观点。
英文原文
Again it’s very nuanced and I’m just trying to point out what you might be conflating or misunderstanding. $NBIS and $CRWV have the highest normalized margins but the reason why $CRWV is unprofitable is because of their large debt interest. If you remove that from the equation and maintain higher utilization + improve other parts of the multifaceted equation that leads to margin calculations, then that’s where $NBIS sits in that sweet spot was the point I’m making.
-
认可对ONDS的技术分析，考虑建仓。
@sasaa1363 对 $ONDS 的技术分析(TA) 画得很棒，我无法反驳那个分析。看完后我可能会建立仓位。
英文原文
@sasaa1363 Well drawn TA on $ONDS, can’t argue with that analysis. I might initiate a position after looking at it.
-
澄清AI算力租赁中软件编排对利润率及自由现金流的关键作用。
将全栈定义为GPU之上的软件层是正确的，因此$ORCL符合这一标准。你之前混淆了垂直整合和全栈服务，这是两个截然不同的概念。 这是一个非常细微的差别，在讨论$NBIS和$CRWV时，你混淆了“纯GPU租赁”与包含编排能力的收入/利润率。 让我再次澄清： 对于$NBIS和$CRWV，人们说其收入来自纯GPU租赁是一种过度简化。以$NBIS为例，它包含一个优化GPU利用率和整体效率的管理软件栈，这就是为什么他们相比$IREN在与$MSFT的交易中获得了更好的价格/兆瓦(MW)优势。这不仅仅是任何人都能做的纯GPU租赁。 再次强调，$CRWV表示软件是其护城河，正是软件将$NBIS和$CRWV的利润率与$ORCL等市场其余部分区分开来（后者毛利率极低，例如14%）。 你可以通过购买GPU并出租来获得极高的营收数字，但如果不能转化为自由现金流(FCF)和利润，那就毫无意义。而这正是通过增加内部运营支出(opex)进行软件编排发挥作用的地方。
英文原文
That's a correct with full-stack as software as a layer on top of GPUs, so $ORCL would fit that mark. Earlier you were conflating vertically integrated and full-stack offering, which are two distinct terms. This is a very nuanced, with $NBIS, $CRWV you're confusing you're confusing "straight GPU leases" and revenue/margins + orchestration. Let me clarify again: For $NBIS, $CRWV, it's a oversimplification when people say it comes from straight GPU leases. When you use $NBIS for example, it includes a managed sfotware stack that optimizes GPU utilization and overall efficiency, which is why they got a better deal/MW compared to $IREN with $MSFT. It's not just straight GPU leases that anyone can do. Again $CRWV said software was their moat, it's what differentiates margins between $NBIS | $CRWV, and the rest of the market like $ORCL (which had incredibly low gross margins, eg. 14%). You can have the extremely high revenue numbers just by buying GPUs and leasing them out, but if it doesn't convert to FCF, profit, it doesn't mean anything. And that's where increasing internal opex with software orchestration comes in.
-
澄清AI云全栈与裸金属区别，指出$IREN因执行风险派发股息。
我觉得你有点混淆了这些术语，让我澄清一下。 全栈服务(Full stack offering) = AI云 $NBIS $IREN $CRWV 裸金属(Bare Metal) = $CIFR, $WULF 类型的服务（AWS将自家GPU接入 $CIFR） $IREN 在决定为 $MSFT 交易购买数十亿美元GPU时，转向提供全栈AI云服务。这导致了因执行风险而产生的特别股息(DG)。 $IREN 在财报电话会上明确表示，他们之所以做全栈（包括GPU采购+软件编排），是因为“更高的收入潜力和更强的回报”。 关于你提到的软件编排，它主要用于改善内部运营支出(opex)和利润率，但在面向客户的差异化方面略有优势。 与电力相比，GPU利用率和编排对最终利润率的影响巨大，我在之前的帖子中做过定量分析。 对于为 $NBIS 等支付裸金属服务的客户，他们购买的不仅是原始硬件，而是经过优化的软硬件堆栈。
英文原文
So think you're confusing the terms a bit, let me clarify. Full stack offering = AI Cloud $NBIS $IREN $CRWV Bare Metal = $CIFR, $WULF type offerings (AWS plugs in their own GPUs into $CIFR) $IREN is pivoted to doing a full stack offering AI cloud when they decided to buy billions in GPU for the $MSFT deal. This is what led to the DG due to execution risk. $IREN on their earnings call said it themselves that they did full-stack (including GPU purchases + software orchestration) due to "higher revenue potential and stronger returns" For software orchestration that you mentioned, it's mainly for improving internal opex and margins, but is a slight advantage for customer facing differentiators. GPU utilization and orchestration plays an incredible difference in terms of final margins, when comparing to power and I did a quantitative breakdown in an earlier post. For customers that pay for bare metal for $NBIS and others, they are paying for an optimized hardware and software stack, not just raw hardware.
-
因全栈执行风险高且难超巨头，作者做空IREN。
我不会将全栈(Full-stack)和垂直整合(Vertically integrated)混为一谈，我在谈论 $ORCL 时措辞非常精确。 $NBIS 采用混合模式以扩大利润率。 $IREN 的主要问题在于他们正在做全栈业务，其中软件编排(Software orchestration)是一个令人难以置信且被误解的护城河，但这将执行风险放大了数个数量级。 如果你做对了，你将拥有行业内最高的利润率/收入。但 $CRWV 花了数年和数十亿美元通过收购才做对，其CEO在电话会议上表示软件是他们的护城河。 很难让市场相信，$IREN 作为一个全新转型进入高性能计算(HPC) AI 云的公司，其全栈能力会优于 $CRWV 花数年构建的能力，甚至优于市值5000多亿美元的 $ORCL 至今未能做到的程度。这就是导致我做空(DG) $IREN 的持续执行风险。 但当然，如果他们能精准做到（这很难），那么其回报潜力将极其巨大。
英文原文
I don't use full-stack and vertically integrated interchangeably, my wording is very precise when I talk about $ORCL. $NBIS does mixed to expand margins. The main issue with $IREN is that they're doing full-stack where software orchestration is an incredible and misunderstood moat and it increases execution risk by magnitudes. If you get it right you have the highest margins/revenue in the industry. But $CRWV spent years and billions in acquisitions to get it right and the CEO said on call that software was their moat. It's hard to convince the market that $IREN, which is doing a brand new pivot into HPC AI cloud, will have better full-stack that $CRWV spent years building and that $ORCL a $500B+ company failed ot do so far. This is the lingering execution risk that led me to DG $IREN. But of course if they get it spot-on (which is difficult), then it has incredibly high return potential.
-
高贝塔资产遭抛售属市场重置，基本面改善应耐心持有。
从 $RKLB、$HOOD、$BTC（现89k）、$HIMS 等所有高贝塔/“风险”/成长型资产都在被无情抛售。尽管基本面全面改善，但这源于连环保证金清算和投降式抛售（基于部分合理的担忧）后的良好重置。以 $IREN 为例，散户仅因 Robinhood 数据就在股价创新低时抛售。但散户通常是在 $MSFT 交易后 $80 高点买入，而在崩盘后 $45 低位最后卖出。此时只需关注新周期、降息、期权到期，并耐心等待，因为基本面正在全面改善。如果盈利和远期收入放缓，我会大幅减仓（但事实并非如此，我们看到的是创纪录的增长）。
英文原文
Every high beta/“risk”/growth asset from $RKLB, $HOOD, $BTC (89k now), $HIMS is being obliterated. It’s a great reset from cascading margin liquidations and capitulation (based on semi-valid concerns) despite seeing improving fundamentals across the board. $IREN retail is selling off for example just based on Robinhood data even while stock is at new lows. But retail is typically the one to buy at the highest point $80 post $MSFT deal and and last to sell eg. $45 post crash. At this point it’s just new cycles, rate cut, option expirations, and waiting since fundamentals are improving across the board. If earnings were slowing and forward revenue was slowing, I would be selling well (but it’s not, we’re seeing record growth)
-
市场急跌时，$NBIS因隔离风险且基础稳固，具最大上行潜力。
感谢分享！在市场急跌、许多高贝塔（High Beta）成长资产下跌30%至50%之际，正是重新配置到基础稳固甚至得到强化的股票的时机。在AI数据中心领域，$NBIS 拥有最不对称的上行空间。尽管信用收缩或GPU执行风险影响了 $IREN 和 $CRWV 等新型云（Neo-cloud）企业，但 NBIS 相对隔离于这些担忧之外。
英文原文
Thanks for sharing! 市場急落で多くの高ベータ成長資産が30〜50%下落している今、基礎が揺らがずむしろ強化された銘柄へ再配置する局面。AIデータセンター分野で最も非対称な上昇余地を持つのは $NBIS 。 信用収縮やGPU実行リスクで $IREN $CRWV などのネオクラウド企業が影響を受けた一方、NBIS はその懸念から相対的に隔離されている。
-
Weebius逆势翻绿，但NBIS期权目标价在宏观环境下显得激进。
@Perugius__ Weebius 是少数几只翻绿的“高贝塔(high-beta)”股票之一。话虽如此，鉴于当前的宏观环境，$NBIS 180 美元的行权价略显激进。高贝塔股票的暴跌简直令人难以置信。https://t.co/M4c1lPPsNU
英文原文
@Perugius__ Weebius is one of the few high-beta stocks green. That being said $NBIS $180 strike is a bit ambitious given the current macro climate. The market crash on high-beta stocks is kind of insane. https://t.co/M4c1lPPsNU
-
认为$HIMS被低估，看好Zava收购及回购计划，但更倾向资金用于增长。
@himshouse $HIMS 目前似乎被低估，尤其是随着 Zava 收购案的完成，将很快助力营收增长。拥有 2.5 亿美元的回购计划对此叙事有所帮助。不过，我仍然更希望这笔资金用于收购和增长。
英文原文
@himshouse $HIMS is seems undervalued at this point, especially with the Zava acquisition coming into help revenue growth soon. Having a $250M repurchase program helps a bit with that narrative. Still would prefer that going toward acquisitions and growth though.
-
澄清 $NBIS 收入预测，强调其受超大规模云厂商驱动的惊人增长。
这里没人说过 $NBIS 在 2026 年会有 80 亿美元的实际收入(Realized Revenue)。不太明白你想表达或争论什么。 自财报发布以来，我一直坚持 80 亿美元的中位年化经常性收入(ARR) 观点，预计实际收入约为 36 亿至 42 亿美元，第四季度季度收入约为 21 亿美元。 $NBIS 正从 1.46 亿美元的季度收入增长至 21 亿美元，耗时略超 1 年，这种令人瞠目的增长仅在本十年因 $MSFT 和 $META 等超大规模云服务商(AI Hyperscalers) 的 AI 收入漏斗而实现。 这是十年一遇的机会，但你做的这种区分没有必要，因为我还没在评论区看到有人产生这种混淆。
英文原文
Nobody said here $NBIS would do $8B realized revenue in 2026. Not quite sure what you're trying to say or argue. I've been consistent on $8B midpoint ARR after earnings with likely ~$3.6B-4.2B realized revenue and ~$2.1B quarterly revenue Q4. $NBIS is ramping up from $146M quarterly revenue -> $2.1B in slightly over 1Y time, which is just mind-numbing growth and only achievable in this decade because of $MSFT $META hyperscaler revenue funnel from AI. Once in a decade opportunity, but the distinction you're making isn't necessary since I haven't seen anyone make that confusion in the comments yet.
-
祝贺博主新创业并期待后续更新
@platochi 祝你的新创业公司好运！祝你在未来的征程中一切顺利，很期待以后能收到你旅程的更新😄
英文原文
@platochi good luck on your new startup! best of luck moving forward and would love updates on your journey in the future😄
-
看好NBIS非对称收益，同时维持对CIFR等标的的多头观点。
@babyfolio 确实，$NBIS 在 Neocloud 领域的每一家公司中都具有明显的非对称上行潜力，我很乐意且能轻松解释原因。但这并不意味着我对 $CIFR、$WULF 等其他股票不看好。
英文原文
@babyfolio True, $NBIS has clear asymmetrical upside over every other company in the Neocloud sector and I'm happy + easily can explain why. That doesn't mean I'm not bullish on $CIFR, $WULF, and others though.
-
对比CIFR与NBIS，认为CIFR风险更低但上行空间有限。
$CIFR 实际上是我下一个最看好的新云(Neocloud)板块标的。 我之前做过一个梯队排名，$NBIS 是 S+ 级，$CIFR 是 S 级。 但这里有个细微差别，很多人可能不知道： Nebius 捕获了 AI 云业务的整个价值链。$IREN 在其财报电话会议中明确表示，他们之所以选择与 $MSFT 进行全栈合作，是因为“更高的收入潜力和更强的回报”，同时承担了编排、软件、折旧以及 GPU 采购，而非仅做数据中心(Colo)。 正如你所说，$CIFR 因为 AWS、$GOOGL 以及 Secure 而降低了风险，这也是我喜欢这个标的的原因。通过做数据中心(Colo)，他们避免了购买和管理 GPU 集群，这也是我下调 $IREN 评级的原因，因为 $IREN 面临一个新的风险因素，而 $NBIS 没有，且此前也不存在。 超大规模客户在空间、电力和冷却方面的高利润率、类年金收入。它是该板块中风险调整后风险最低的股票之一。 然而，其上行空间远不如其他标的。特别是当你看到租赁（例如 10-15 年）时，收入爬坡要慢得多，上行空间也远小于像 $NBIS 这样的全栈纯新云标的。
英文原文
$CIFR is actually next favorite Neocloud sector pick. I made a tierlist earlier and $NBIS was S+ and $CIFR was S. But here's the difference and nuance people might not know: Nebius captures the entire value chain of the AI cloud business. $IREN said it themselves in their ER call that they did full-stack with $MSFT because of to "higher revenue potential and stronger returns", while taking on orchestration, software, and deprecation with GPUs purchases vs. colo. $CIFR is de-risked as you mentioned because of AWS, $GOOGL and finally secure, which is why I love the pick. Doing colo, they avoid purchasing/managing GPU fleets, which is why I downgraded $IREN due to a new risk factor that isn't quite present with $NBIS and wasn't there before. There's high-margin, annuity-like revenue for space, power, and cooling for hyperscales. It's one of the lowest-risk adjusted stocks in the sector. However, upside is not anywhere as high. Especially when you look at leases (eg. 10Y-15Y) revenue ramp is a lot slower, and upside is a lot less compared to full-stack pure Neoclouds like $NBIS.
-
澄清NBIS产能售罄非瓶颈，指出新云厂商执行与第三方依赖风险。
我仅针对之前关于 $NBIS 的错误框架进行回应，因为我也看到其他人有类似说法。它并未触及产能天花板，而是新上线的产能立即售罄，这是积极信号。不过你的后续观点是正确的，新云厂商在转换和连接产能方面面临执行风险，正如你提到的，$CRWV 是第三方依赖风险的良好案例研究。
英文原文
I'm only addressing the earlier incorrect framing because I've seen it from others too when talking about $NBIS. It's not hitting capacity ceiling. It's immediately selling out of capacity they bring online, which is positive. Your follow up is correct though, it's an execution risk that Neoclouds face converting and connecting capacity and $CRWV is a good case study as you mentioned on 3rd party dependency risks.
-
澄清NBIS产能售罄是需求旺盛而非瓶颈，收入受限于上线速度。
我不确定这种错误的框架来自哪里？ $NBIS 已售罄 220MW 的现有及近期互联电力，因为任何新增产能都在被全部分配。 这并非触及最大结构性产能天花板，而是对极端市场需求的验证。 预计 2026 年互联电力将达到 1 GW，他们拥有 2.5 GW 的合同产能来支撑 $7-9B 的年度经常性收入(ARR) 目标。 这并不意味着他们不能像从 Q2 到 Q3 财报期间从 1 GW 扩展到 2.5 GW 那样扩大产能。他们只是售罄了任何上线的产能，而收入受限于他们能上线多少产能。
英文原文
I'm not sure where this incorrect framing comes from? $NBIS sold out of 220MW of existing and near-term connected power because any new capacity is being fully allocated. That's not hitting a maximum structural capacity ceiling, that's validation of extreme market demand. 1 GW of connected power is projected 2026 and they have 2.5 GW of contracted capacity to support the $7-9B ARR figure. That doesn't mean they can't expand their capacity like they've done from 1 GW to 2.5 GW from Q2 to Q3 earnings. They just sell out of any capacity they bring online, and revenue is limited by how much capacity they can bring online.
-
Nebius是纯新云AI基建标的，无债务与执行风险，具极高非对称上行潜力。
Nebius [ $NBIS ] 现价 $86.69，是剩余最纯粹的“新云”(Neocloud) 和 AI 基础设施非对称性机会。 这是收入最高的、未受 $CIFR | $WULF 及数据中心(Colo) 提供商影响的 Neocloud 标的，且没有以下问题： - 不像 $IREN、$ORCL 那样面临全栈执行带来的巨大不确定性。 - 不像 $CRWV、$APLD 等那样背负高额利息债务。 - 不像 $CLSK、$BITF、$WYFI、$SLNH 等那样在超大规模超大规模云服务商(Hyperscaler) 合同上存在收入不确定性。 在 AI 板块因恐惧情绪蔓延而普遍下跌后： Nebius 依然推进：明年年化经常性收入(ARR) 中值为 $80 亿，现金超 $47 亿，企业客户多元化（包括 $META、$MSFT、$ACN、$SHOP、政府机构），高增长投资组合公司，以及经过验证的高利润率全栈业务。 鉴于需求极度旺盛、执行不确定性（利润率）以及与当前困扰市场的 OpenAI 合同依赖和信贷收紧问题相隔离： 在非对称上行潜力方面，没有任何标的能接近 Nebius。 你只需等待公司的执行落地。
英文原文
Nebius [ $NBIS ] at $86.69 is the purest Neocloud and AI-infra asymmetry left. This is the highest revenue Neocloud untouched by $CIFR | $WULF and colo providers that has no: - Plaguing uncertainty that $IREN, $ORCL face from full-stack execution. - High interest debt that $CRWV, $APLD, and others face. - Revenue uncertainty at scale with Hyperscaler contracts that $CLSK, $BITF, $WYFI, $SLNH, and others lack. After the market-wide drop with the AI sector overrun by fear: Nebius is going forward with: $8B midpoint ARR next year, $4.7B+ in cash, diversification in enterprise clients from ( $META, $MSFT, $ACN, $SHOP, Governments), hyper-growth portfolio companies, and a proven full-stack high-margin business. With extreme demand, execution uncertainty (margins), and isolation from current issues plaguing the markets with OpenAI contract dependency and credit tightening: Nothing even comes close to Nebius in terms of asymmetrical upside. You are simply just waiting for company execution.
-
NBIS虽脱离基本面但获MSCI大额流入，强烈建议买入。
@YodaStockInvest $NBIS 目前与基本面严重脱节，且我们在短短一周内获得了 MSCI 指数基金数千万至低十亿级别的资金流入。这不仅是买入，更是极其强烈的买入信号！话虽如此，目前大多数资产都在全线暴跌。
英文原文
@YodaStockInvest $NBIS is incredibly detached from fundamentals right now and we have MSCI few hundred million-low billion inflow in a week. Not just a buy but incredibly strong buy! That being said most assets are dropping like flies across the board right now.
-
转发推文，无实质内容。
@goodserdboy https://t.co/W7quCH4kqt
英文原文
@goodserdboy https://t.co/W7quCH4kqt
-
分析NBIS高增长与融资优势，认为综合估值被低估。
我认为你的评论正好指出了 $NBIS 增长有多疯狂：从本季度1.46亿美元营收跃升至明年单季度21亿美元以上。 因此，我们应基于 $MSFT 合同（约190亿美元，5年）、$META（30亿美元，5年）、常规客户（Cursor、Shopify等）及政府合同来审视其未来增长（明年营收），而非当前数据。 他们像 AWS 一样提供全栈 AI 云；Nebius 获取 GPU 和基础设施初始资金的方式是股份销售（可转换票据，在138美元估值下稀释40亿美元）及随时出售2500万股。这远比 $CRWV 那样承担数十亿9%-10%利息更优，因为后者会随时间直接损害利润率。 这立即为其资产负债表增加数十亿（目前现金47亿美元），用于购买 GPU 等。 然而，规模化所需的大部分现金来自合同营收，$NBIS 毛利率达50-70%，预计 EBIT 为20-30%，是利润率最高的新型云厂商之一。 话说回来，若计入现有稀释（10%+可转换票据），再看47亿美元现金、来自 Clickhouse 等投资组合资产的70多亿美元净资产值(NAV)，以及明年80亿美元预计年化经常性收入(ARR)及其利润率，它看起来完全被低估。 但若仅看本季度营收，它看起来则被高估。
英文原文
I think your comment just pointed out at how crazy $NBIS growth is going from $146m revenue this quarter to $2.1B+ next year a quarter. So we look at future growth (next year), rather than current numbers based on $MSFT contract (~$19B, 5 years), $META ($3B, 5 years), and their regular clients (cursor, shopify, etc) + government contracts for revenue. They do full stack AI cloud like AWS; how Nebius gets their initial funding for GPUs and infrastructure is share sales (convertible notes, $4B dilution at $138) and 25m share sales anytime. This is much preferred over 9%-10% interest on billions like what $CRWV is doing, since this directly hurts margins over time. This immediately adds billions into their balance sheet (they have $4.7B cash now), which they use on GPU purchases, etc. However, majority of the cash needed for scaling comes from contract revenue, $NBIS was doing 50-70% gross margins and projected 20-30% EBIT and is one of the highest margin neoclouds. That being said when you price in existing dilution (10% + convertibles), then look at the $4.7B cash on hand, $7B+ in NAV from portfolio company assets like Clickhouse, $8B projected ARR next year with thier margins, it looks completely undervalued. But if you look at it at just this current quarter's revenue, it looks overvalued.
-
博主嘲讽某用户用自设账号点赞及用HTML编辑评论的行为。
@fin_anthro @ArchegosIntern 哈哈，这家伙用自设账号给自己帖子点赞，真是 pathetic（可悲/可怜）。 但用 HTML 文本编辑评论，更是 sad（悲哀）到了另一个层级。 https://t.co/LJLweuJDD0
英文原文
@fin_anthro @ArchegosIntern lol it's pathetic this guy is using self-accounts to like his own posts. But HTML text-editing comments is just another level of sad. https://t.co/LJLweuJDD0
-
博主调侃互动数据，建议双方提升内容质量。
@fin_anthro @ArchegosIntern 别担心，我有1.1万+粉丝，在获得几百次观看后，每隔一段时间就能得到4个赞。 这家伙在前30秒内的5次观看中就获得了4个赞（其中1个是我的）。 我觉得我们俩都需要发布更好的内容 @fin_anthro。 https://t.co/P05FphikVZ
英文原文
@fin_anthro @ArchegosIntern Don't worry, I have 11k+ followers and get 4 likes every few hundred views after some time. This guy gets 4 likes in 5 views (when 1 is mine), within the first few 30s. I think we both just need to post better content @fin_anthro. https://t.co/P05FphikVZ
-
建议停止使用多账号自赞以操纵互动，此举伤害社区。
建议是，最好停止使用备用账号+你自己的账号在评论发布的前几秒内给自己点赞。 让你的论点（Thesis）独立存在，而不是通过非有机的方式试图影响互动数据。 在你发表的每条评论中，前5-10次浏览就获得3-4个赞，这是一种可悲的操纵X平台讨论的尝试。 我通常避免在这类讨论中谈论品格（Character），但这确实伤害了社区。
英文原文
The word of advice was that it's probably good to stop using alt-accounts + your own account to self-like your own comments in the first few seconds. Just let your thesis stand on your own instead of inorganically trying to influence engagement. Having 3-4 likes in the first 5-10 views on every comment you make is a sad attempt to manipulate discussion on X. I normally avoid talking about character in these types of discussions, but it's pretty hurtful to the community.
-
反驳股价下跌归因谬误，并批评对方自赞行为。
@ArchegosIntern 该股下跌是受宏观因素影响，并非因为“机构无所不知”并在建模$2B时就将$80亿+ ARR（年度经常性收入）计入定价，且你可以指出卖方报告作为证据。 仅提一句建议，在发布后第一分钟内给自己点赞并不会改变论点的价值。 https://t.co/YMRpByXqz7
英文原文
@ArchegosIntern The stock sold off due to macro, not because "institutions know everything" and priced in $8B+ ARR when they were doing modeling $2B and you can point to sell-side reports. Just a word of advice, self-liking in the first minute doesn't change the merit of an argument. https://t.co/YMRpByXqz7