方法论
研究框架、选股思路、思维方式 · 共 663 条 · 滚到底自动加载更多
-
AEHR 还很早，近端已计价
@workoutwithp 从长期看 $AEHR 还非常早。他们才刚在一个客户身上开始量产爬坡…… 而其他客户（比如他们那个一线光收发器客户）会在未来几年陆续补上。 以当前估值来看，我会说近端已经计价得比较充分了。
英文原文
@workoutwithp $AEHR long term is very early. The only started volume ramp with one customer… And others will pick up (like their t1 optical transceiver one) over the next few years. For current valuations, I’d say it’s more priced in near term.
-
光子学正处于新超级周期
这件事非常微妙，我来解释为什么它不是“晚了”，只是对有些人来说已经晚了： 光子学是最新的超级周期（也许从 2025 年上半年到下半年就是起点）。 然后每个超级周期里都会有很多不同的架构变化： -> $LITE、$COHR、Innolight、$AXTI 这些名字引领了第一波 我之前那篇 thesis 把它们四个都列成了最大受益者（1 年涨幅都在 500%-1000%） -> $AAOI、$JBL 以及其他类似名字，会作为过渡桥梁受益巨大（例如 1.6T 可插拔） -> $SIVE、Celestial、Ayar、$POET 是未来几代，比如 CPO（我现在重点看的就是这个） -> VisEra、QD Laser、$ALMU 等等，若你把时间拉到 4 年后，很可能会是下一代（量子点、不同封装类型等） 当然，$LITE 什么都做，$AXTI 什么都能用。 但在每个小超级周期里，每次架构切换所对应的纯敞口是不一样的。 比如，量子点里 InP 还是会用，但占比会更少。或者 CPO 用 DFB 激光阵列而不是 EML。 $LITE 和 $COHR 也许还是会占 50%+。 所以你在“晚”的意义上确实有点靠后。 但对于新的架构世代，你其实又非常早。 我想做的，就是免费把普通散户往新金矿方向指一指。 在机构花 2 万美元买股票研究报告之前，先让大家知道这些。
英文原文
It's highly nuanced, and I'll explain why it's not late, but late to some: Photonics is the newest supercycle (maybe H1 into H2 2025 was the start). Then there's many different architectural changes in each supercycle: -> $LITE, $COHR, Innolight, $AXTI and these names led the first I did a thesis post on mentioning all four of them as the largest beneficiaries (all are up 500-1000% 1Y) -> $AAOI, $JBL and others types of names are benefit immensely as the transitional bridge (eg. 1.6T pluggable) -> $SIVE, Celestial, Ayar, $POET are others future gens eg. CPO (what I'm focusing on now) -> VisEra, QD Laser, $ALMU and others are likely going to be future gens (quantum dot, different packaging types, etc) if you fast forward 4 years. Of course, $LITE does everything. $AXTI will be used for everything. But the amount of pure play exposure for each architectural shift in each mini supercycle is different. For example, inp usage with quantum dot is still there, but less used. Or DFB laser arrays for CPO instead of EML. There's probably still 50%+ with $LITE and $COHR. And you're a little on the "late" side of things. But you're extremely early to new architecture generations. What I'm trying to do is point regular retail investors into the direction of new gold mines for free. Before institutions figure out sooner or later by paying $20k for equity research reports.
-
择时其实是有重复模式的
兄弟们……我的时点是不是离谱得过头了？ 像 $TSEM 这种名字全年几乎都没涨，我一做多它就翻倍。等我一买 $AEHR，它差点直接涨了三倍。 大家现在都开始觉得我是催化剂了，因为这种事一遍又一遍地发生……哈哈，这可是家 220 亿美元以上的公司。 我能把这些做对的一个有趣方法是： -> 找出那些关键但还没被注意到的公司 -> 把做多时点卡在像 $NVDA GTC 或 OFC 这样的催化剂前后 -> 再结合材料变化消息出现的时点 -> 然后找回调中的好入场点（这里就轮到你的占星派 TA 上场了） 做多不是随便挑个时间点就行！ 在别的名字上，比如 $ALRIB，则是新信息发现（比如 Microsoft Quantum），所以是两类不同的东西。 其实这里面是有重复出现的策略的……就像我之前那些 16 只三位数回报的股票一样。
英文原文
Uh chat... is my timing insane or what? Names like $TSEM are flat all year, I go long, then it doubles. The moment I go long on $AEHR, it almost triples. People are starting to think I'm the catalyst because this keeps happening over and over... lol this is a $22B+ company. Fun fact on how I get these right : -> Identify critical companies not really noticed -> I time my longs around catalysts like $NVDA GTC or OFC. -> And around when news about material changes comes about. -> Then look at good entry points on drops (this is where your astrology TA's get used). Going long isn't just picking a random point in time! On other names, like $ALRIB it's new information discovery (eg. Microsoft Quantum), so two different types. There's actually a strategy here that repeats... (as seen with the other 16 triple digit return stocks).
-
被市场看空反而是机会
你会看到媒体、银行、分析师去做空 $RKLB，因为大家都觉得他们不可能和 SpaceX 竞争。 后来媒体又去做空 $AMD，因为大家觉得他们不可能和 $INTC（现在是 $NVDA）竞争。 但他们当时确实就是那个领域里的领导者，Rocket Lab 小型可重复使用火箭的成功就是证明。 只是很难一开始看出来，因为情绪总是先站在这些小公司对面，直到它们被“验证”之后才转向。 等它们被验证的时候，你已经错过全部上行了。
英文原文
You had the media/banks/analysts going after $RKLB because everyone thought they couldn't compete against SpaceX. Then you have the media going against $AMD because they couldn't compete against $INTC (and now $NVDA). They were genuinely the leaders in the space, as seen with Rocketlab success with their small reusable rockets. But it's hard to find because sentiment is always going against these small players until they get "validated". By the time they do, you miss out on all the upside.
-
从小众领导者里复制人生级收益
$RDDT 上最火的两条故事： 1. 用 $AMD 把 25.2 万美元做到 770 万美元 2. 用 $RKLB 把 16.7 万美元做到 220 万美元。 这些故事大概率是真的，因为你确实能在半导体到太空等不同产业里，找到这些小众领导者，从而改变自己的人生。 一次又一次都是这样。 关键在于： -> 找到这些利基行业里稀有的宝石 / 领导者。 -> 仓位要足够集中，才有意义。 -> 要有足够的 conviction 去熬过波动。 -> 让 thesis 自己走完（哪怕要跨几年）。 你已经多次看到我在光子链条里这样做了，比如 $AXTI、$IQE、$SIVE 等等。 但现在一切都被 AI capex 加速，5 年的东西被压缩成几个月。
英文原文
Two most viral stories on $RDDT: 1. Turning $252K -> $7.7M with $AMD 2. Turning $167K -> $2.2M with $RKLB. These stores are likely true, since it's possible to find these niche leaders to change your life around: Again and again across different industries with semis to space. What matters is: -> Finding these rare gems / leaders in a niche field. -> Having enough concentration, for it to matter. -> Having enough conviction to sit through volatility. -> Letting the thesis play out (even if it's across multiple years). You've already seen me do it multiple times with photonics like $AXTI, $IQE, $SIVE, and others. But everything is just speedran from 5 years to months due to AI capex acceleration.
-
欧洲和美国的定价方式不同
你好，感谢更有建设性的讨论。 但除了欧洲人之外，我还真没见过谁会因为 2.5%、1300 万美元的稀释，就去抱怨一家要登陆纳斯达克的公司。 在美国……我们有些随机的比特币矿工，光为了试图转型和买 GPU，就能搞出 60 亿美元以上的稀释（超过公司一半市值）。所以对超大规模云厂商供应链来说，这点稀释其实非常小。 你也应该明白，你讨论的是美国超大规模云厂商的供应商，对吧？比如 $JBL、$MRVL……最近所有 CPO 时间表都被 $NVDA 提前了。 如果有什么的话，Sivers 是我见过最被低估的光子股票之一，而且绝对还没把上行计价进去。 美国市场通常会提前 12 个月定价，但我能理解欧洲是按过去 12 个月来看的。
英文原文
Hi, appreciate the more productive discussion. But I've never seen anyone aside from Europeans complain about 2.5% $13M dilution to get listed on NASDAQ. Over in the US... we have random Bitcoin miners with $6B+ dilution (over half the MC) just to attempt a pivot and buy GPUs. So the amount to hyperscalers supply chains is very tiny. And you do realize you're talking about US hyperscalers suppliers right? Like $JBL, $MRVL... All the CPO timelines have been accelerated by $NVDA recently. If anything Sivers is one of the most undervalued photonic stocks I've seen in the market and definitely not priced for upside yet. US markets typically price things 12 months in advance, but I understand if Europe does things previous 12 months.
-
不要追逐每一轮新瓶颈
别因为每个新闻周期里出现一个新的“瓶颈”就开始 FOMO。 它现在的轮动是： $NVDA GPU -> $MU 存储 -> $IREN 电力 -> $LITE EML -> $SNDK 存储 -> GPU -> $AAOI 收发器 -> 先进封装 -> 变压器 -> $INTC CPU……等等 然后下一个就会变成 $LPK 的玻璃基板，或者日本某种别的冷门材料。 这些大多都横跨好几年。 如果 $LITE 到 2028 年都卖完了，而现在才 2026 年上半年。超大规模云厂商其实已经在把 $AAOI 能做的产能都买走了。 最好的办法可能就是对现有仓位耐心一点。 因为你追当前新闻周期，大概率只会错过某个突然拉起来的绿柱。
英文原文
Not the best idea to feel FOMO about the new “bottleneck” in every news cycle. It’s going from: $NVDA GPUs -> $MU Memory -> $IREN Power -> $LITE EMLs -> $SNDK Memory -> GPUs -> $AAOI transceivers -> Advanced Packaging -> Transformers -> $INTC CPUs… etc And next would be stuff like $LPK glass substrates or some random niche material from Japan. Most of these span multi-years. If $LITE is sold out into 2028 and it’s H1 2026. Hyperscalers are buying out anything $AAOI can make. It’s probably good idea to just be patient with your existing positions. Because there’s likely going to be some random green candle that you miss out on chasing the current news cycle.
-
极致收益来自抓住每个卡点
@InvestorCanna @AtlasShrug1 因为如果你能把每一个卡点的动量都抓对，就有可能做到 10,000% 吗？
英文原文
@InvestorCanna @AtlasShrug1 Because you can hit 10,000% if you manage to ride every single bottleneck momentum correctly?
-
交易和投资分开看
有些东西是拿来交易的，有些东西是拿来投资的。 我自从上个月买了 $SIVE 之后，一股都没卖过。我觉得如果他们按正确方式出牌，它会是下一个 $LITE，这就是一笔长期投资。 至于像 $AXTI 这种，我已经涨了 1000%+，但我还是拿着。对于光子这类多年超级周期，不需要卖。 我确实会在看到周期接近尾声，或者有重大变化时，去交短期资本利得税。比如我之前就把 $HOOD、$MSTR 和加密相关名字都卖掉了。乌克兰和平协议出来后，军用无人机相关名字我也做过短线回撤交易。像 $META 或 $MSFT 这种短线修复交易我也会做。 其他长期投资就只要拿着，让它复利，再用保证金提取来避免触发资本利得税。
英文原文
There's stuff I trade, and stuff I invest in. I haven't sold a single $SIVE share since I bought it last month. I expect this to be the next $LITE if they play their cards right, and this is a long term investment. As for stuff like $AXTI, I'm up over 1000%+ but I'm still holding. For multi-year supercycles (photonics), don't need to sell. I do take short-term capital gains tax if I see an end of a cycle nearing or there's material changes, like took all of mine on $HOOD, $MSTR, and crypto names earlier. Or drone names after Greeland peace deal. There's also short term recovery trades like on $META or $MSFT that I take short-term on too. Otherwise, for long term investments, can just hold, let it compound, and use margin withdrawal to not trigger capital gains.
-
别按当前财报看 2027 爬坡股
@PeterSikachev 这是 2027 年的爬坡，我不会按当前财报去判断任何新出现的光子名字。
英文原文
@PeterSikachev It's 2027 ramp, wouldn't judge any upcoming photonic names based on current earnings.
-
这是卡点，不是短缺
这些是横跨多年超级周期的卡点，不是瓶颈。 $AXTI、$SNDK 符合瓶颈的定义。 但像玻璃核心或者 DFB 激光这类东西，应该能穿越 2028 年，而这就是光子学或先进封装架构变化带来的下一轮量产爬坡的开始。
英文原文
These are chokepoints over multiple year supercycles not bottlenecks. $AXTI, $SNDK fit the definition of a bottleneck. But stuff like glass core or dfb lasers should scale past 2028 and this is the beginning of the next volume ramp from architectural shifts in photonics or advanced packaging.
-
别盲目跟单
我真心佩服有一位朋友靠 copy trade 一路做到管理对冲基金。 但请不要盲目复制我谈到的东西，比如 $AXTI 或 $LPK。 这也是我一直没做 copy-trading app、也不告诉大家我什么时候卖出的主要原因。 我只是想在自己的旅程里，免费持续发布有趣的想法 / 研究。 目标是帮助你们把复杂信息整合起来，建立自己的 thesis / conviction。 不过，我还是很乐意免费分享我的想法。
英文原文
I’m genuinely impressed one of you copy traded your way into managing a hedge fund. But please don’t blindly copy stuff I talk about like $AXTI or $LPK. That’s the main reason I haven’t done copy-trading apps or tell people when I sell. I just want to publish interesting thoughts / research for free as I go along my journey. With the goal of helping you all synthesize complex information to build your own thesis/conviction. Happy to help share my thoughts for free though.
-
不要只看 meme 标签
就在一个月前，记者和媒体还在淡化我对 $SOI 和 $RPI 的 thesis。 他们引用我的 WSB 标签，把它说成是“注定要崩的 meme 股”，却没有分析底层 thesis。 结果这两只都涨了 100%，而且把涨幅守住了。 $SIVE 现在也是同样的情况。 我从来不靠权威说话……但既然他们想走这条路： 我就很好奇……他们的叙事里为什么总把我在 Nature 之类的地方发表过、被引用上千次的基础 AI 论文背景漏掉？ 又或者为什么今天 X 上那些看多 $SIVE 的分析师里，有些人是 UC Berkeley 的 Ph.D.，而且本身就在光子学领域发文？ 反而总是英语系或非技术背景的毕业生跑去媒体上，对 CPO 超大规模云厂商认证周期和供应链映射发表最强硬的意见。 我总觉得机构最不喜欢的，就是散户投资者在 X 上真的懂自己在说什么。 一个 thesis 应该靠本身的价值生死，而不是发言人是什么权威。
英文原文
Just 1 month ago, journalists and media tried downplaying my $SOI and $RPI thesis. As “meme stocks that were set to crash” citing my WSB tag without analyzing the underlying thesis. They’re both up 100% and held their gains. Same is happening to companies like $SIVE. I never argue from authority… but since they’re going that route: I’m curious why… in their narratives they just leave out the fact I published fundamental AI papers in places like Nature with thousands of citations? Other the fact other analysts on X positive about $SIVE today have Ph.Ds from places like UC Berkeley and publish in the photonics space? It’s always the English or non-technical graduates that go out in the media and have the strongest opinion about CPO hyperscaler qualification cycles and supply chain mapping. It just feels like institutions hate it when a retail investors on X know what they’re talking about. A thesis should live and die based on merit, not the authority of who is comes from.
-
AEHR 被重新定价
我说过了，$AEHR 正在起飞。 当你把市值做到一定程度，基本上就是机构在主导价格了。 如果你找到一家很多超大规模云厂商都在用的公司……它被重估几乎是注定的？
英文原文
Told ya. $AEHR is cooking. Once you reach a certain point with MC it’s mostly institutions driving price. If you find a name that a ton of hyperscalers use… it’s feels bound to get repriced? https://t.co/AHqpgbqHJK
-
批评仅看图表的技术分析谬误，强调基本面比K线更重要。
谢谢，我只是厌倦了人们在图表上画线，或者说'已经涨了200%，所以可能不会再涨了'。这可能是投资领域最大的谬误之一，尤其是欧洲当地人可能很难理解这一点。基本面相、market expansion、revenue acceleration、客户，比图表上的数字重要得多。
英文原文
Thanks, I'm just so tired of people drawing lines on a chart or saying "it's gone up 200%, so it probably can't go up more". This is probably one of the greatest fallacies in investing, especially one European locals might have a hard time understanding. Fundamentals, market expansion, revenue acceleration, customers, are much more important than numbers on a chart.
-
光子学是可扩张性的解法
@dontbuytops 光子学就是解决可扩展性的办法。 如果我们说的是像 EML / DFB 这种光子的大规模生产，那确实有瓶颈。 这也是我看多 $SIVE 的原因之一——他们从一开始就不会自己烧太多 capex 去处理这些问题。
英文原文
@dontbuytops Photonics is the solution to scalability. If we’re talking about mass production of photonics like EML/DFB stuff, there’s bottlenecks for sure. Which is why I’m long the entire supply chain from substrates to foundries to osats .
-
两周内多数持仓股大涨，长期逻辑不变，短期入场点决定10-20%收益差异。
哇，大部分这30只我喜欢的股票两周内都涨了很多（给新来的朋友们做个回顾）顺便说一下，我对它们任何一只的长期看法都没有改变，从$MRVL、$AMD、$ARM到其他的。短期入场点位是会变的，比如从$AAOI到$AEHR，而这些点位差异会产生+10-20%的不同。我在做新布局时，分析中会花很多精力在"未被发掘"的标的上，比如Riber或$SIVE或$RPI或$IQE->等待它演绎出来。但去年关于$LITE或$NBIS或$AXTI的论点还是一样的。我不需要反复发布相同的论点，因为它已经不是新东西了。但它们之所以不再是新的，是因为市场已经验证了这些论点，正在因此对股票进行实时重新定价。
英文原文
Wow, majority of these 30 stocks I’ve liked are up a lot in just two weeks (just a recap to new folks) By the way, my long term opinion doesn’t change on any of them from $MRVL, $AMD, $ARM and others. Short term entry points do though with names like $AAOI to $AEHR. And they make the difference between +10-20%. I focus a lot about the “undiscovered” ones like Riber or $SIVE or $RPI or $IQE in analysis when I make a new entry -> wait for it to play out. But the same thesis around $LITE or $NBIS or $AXTI from last year is still the same. And I don’t need to post that same thesis multiple times, since it’s not new anymore. But the reason they’re not new is because markets have validated the thesis and are repricing the stocks live because of them.
-
上涨时更应坚持
@amandaong23 对，我觉得美国前一阵刚经历过一次小崩盘。 我一直都认为，如果一只股票在那种调整期还能上涨，那它在后面正面宏观环境里大概率会涨得更多。
英文原文
@amandaong23 We literally just had a mini crash two weeks ago. I’ve always maintained that if a stock is up during that correction period, it will probably be up a ton more during a friendlier macro climate.
-
自建模型和数据管线
@PacificPal00 我最后还是自己搭了自定义模型和数据管线。 Frontier 模型半数时间都很烂，爱胡编，除非你做的是更基础的事。
英文原文
@PacificPal00 I ended up just building my own custom model and data pipelines. The frontier models suck and hallucinate half the time unless you’re doing something more basic
-
这是基于已确认协议的映射
@crux_capital_ 这就是基于已确认协议做的供应链映射。 $GOOGL 不会在新闻稿里突然跑出来说它的上游基板供应商是 $AXTI。 我在上面的说法里会用“很可能”这样的词，哪怕对第一轮量产周期来说几乎已经是板上钉钉。
英文原文
@crux_capital_ It’s supply chain mapping off confirmed agreements. $GOOGL won’t go out and randomly say in a press releases their upstream substrate provider is $AXTI. I use words like likely in my statements above even though it’s near certain for the first production cycles
-
认证周期不能短线拆解
@crux_capital_ 如果你觉得能在很短时间内把 $POET 从 Celestial 2028 的量产爬坡里设计掉，那你就是没理解认证周期。 $SIVE 和 $POET 也是一样，但我预计这些关系大多会随着时间变成多来源结构。
英文原文
@crux_capital_ That’s misunderstanding qualification cycles if you think they can design out $POET in a short timeframe for celestial 2028 volume ramp. Same with $SIVE and $POET but I expect most relationships to be multi source over time
-
就是供应链映射
@crux_capital_ 这是供应链映射。 https://t.co/loBcX9iRNp
英文原文
@crux_capital_ It’s supply chain mapping https://t.co/loBcX9iRNp
-
市场更爱确证型证据
@Gubloinvestor 我的意思是，谁都可以通过 AlChip、Marvell 之类把它映射到 Amazon，或者映射到 Microsoft，对吧？ 但市场有时候更喜欢一些更具体的“证据”，比如来自 $AMZN 的 photonic fabric 采购协议，而它又能映射回 $SIVE。
英文原文
@Gubloinvestor I mean anyone can just map it to Amazon through AlChip, Marvell, etc? Or Microsoft? But sometimes markets like more concrete“proof” like photonic fabric purchase agreements from $AMZN that maps to $SIVE
-
批评加密圈忘了区块链原本的用途。
这感觉就像……对冲基金 / VC 突然忘了区块链本来是干什么的？ 他们居然把数字资产变成了： 代币融资 -> 散户退出流动性，循环往复。 现在，没人再在乎“治理币”或 gas 代币了，因为那只是印钞后的更大傻瓜理论。 区块链最初的意义，是尽可能减少中间商，也顺带把费用降下来。 尽管如此： 1. 3 天 ACH 通道还在……虽然我们已经有 0 成本的支付通道。 2. 巨额 interchange 还在……虽然我们已经有 0 成本的支付通道。 3. 数字资产“信用卡”只是给 Visa/Mastercard 又包了一层更磨损的外壳。 4. 储蓄账户利率还是 0.3%，而现在法律还在试图堵住和稳定币相关的收益。 数字资产原本想做到的事，除了稳定币之外，几乎都没实现。 也许你们只是盲目追下一家 $HOOD / Hyperliquid（代币化、链上股票），或者盲目跟着 Ethereum，所以表现才会这么差。 重点不是靠代币价格上涨赚钱，再把 meme 币的癫狂变现。 而是要去资助真正有颠覆性的项目，比如 Bridge（稳定币出金/入金、interchange）之类。 这个圈子里绝大多数人毫无 alpha，因为他们都忘了它最初到底是为了什么。
英文原文
It's like... Hedge Funds/VCs suddenly forgot what blockchain was ever supposed to do? They somehow turned digital assets into: Token raise -> retail exit liquidity on repeat. Now, nobody cares anymore about "governance or gas" tokens since it's greater fools theory from printed money. The original point of blockchain is removing as many middlemen as possible, and as a byproduct, the fees. Despite all of this: 1. 3 Day ACH rails are still around... Even though we have payment rails for 0 cents. 2. Massive interchange is still around... despite having payment rails at 0 cents... 3. Digital Asset "Credit Cards" are just more friction-add wrappers around Visa/Mastercard. 4. Yields are still .3% in checking accounts and now laws are trying to bank stablecoin related yields. Very little that digital assets set out to do actually got accomplished, aside from Stablecoins? Maybe you all have bad performance by just blindly following the next L2 exchange token or blindly into Ethereum. It's not about making money from token prices going up + monetizing degeneracy from meme coins. It's to be funding any legitimate disruptors, like the next $HOOD/Hyperliquid (Tokenization, on-chain equities), Bridge (stablecoin off-ramps/intercharge), etc. 0 alpha from the vast majority of folks in that space, because everyone there lost vision on what it was originally supposed to do.
-
说这些名字大概率还会继续冲，自己是在抢跑机构。
@Lee_Trades 我提到的这些名字大概率还会继续往上冲。 三位数回报看起来很多……但那不是因为我个人在追 10 倍。 这更像是在一个超级周期最早期抢在机构前面。
英文原文
@Lee_Trades All of the names I’ve mentioned are likely to keep on running. The triple digit return looks like a lot… but it’s not cause I’m personally chasing 10x. This is what it feels like to frontrun institutions at the very beginning of a supercycle
-
建议写 16 个名字的 thesis 并高集中做多。
@UntappedAlpha 给 16 个单独名字各写一篇 thesis 帖。 高集中度做多。 4 个月里让它们都涨 100-1000%+？其实很简单，说真的。
英文原文
@UntappedAlpha Write a thesis post on 16 individual names. Go long on them with high concentration. The have them all return 100-1000%+ in 4 months? Pretty simple tbh
-
股票市场是正和游戏，可从AI瓶颈中获利而非投资传统公司
随时哈哈..我不认为大多数人已经意识到股票是正和(Positive Sum)游戏，每个人都能从中受益。我也不认为他们意识到你可以从AI瓶颈中获利，而不是做多像$PYPL或$CRM这样的传统公司。
英文原文
@pennycheck Anytime lol.. I don't think majority of people realize yet stocks are positive sum, where everyone benefits. Also don't think they realize you can make profit off AI bottlenecks, instead of going long on traditional companies like $PYPL or $CRM.
-
区分自己与 Roaring Kitty 的做法。
当然尊重 Roaring Kitty，但他买 meme 股是为了逼空机构。 而我做的是指出那些基本面扎实、无论我是否发声都会继续上涨的公司。 而且我会先把它们分享给散户。
英文原文
All respect for Roaring Kitty but he buys memestocks to short squeeze institutions. What I do is point out fundamentally sound companies that would keep going up with or without me. And I point them out to retail first. FOR FREE. Instead of selling to institutions for $20k/article so they can frontrun retail investors.
-
作者解释其研究方法论：提前发现被低估的小盘股，在机构买入前将信息分享给散户
不。这种扯淡的思维模式该停止了。 我的做法是在这些股票实现100-500%+回报之前，先向散户指出它们。 美国机构如Point72或Apollo最终会把它们买下来的。 1. $IQE上涨是因为它们坐拥全球最大的InP反应器隐性代工产能，当时市值仅1亿欧元，而Landmark等公司交易在38亿美元。 它们还是$LITE的供应商，而光子学/epiwafer需求今年爆发了。 2. $SIVE上涨是因为它们与$JBL和O-Net签订了新协议。 但当我首次建仓时，它们还鲜为人知——作为$MRVL CPO项目的激光供应商。 如果我没有引起关注，像$AVGO这样的美国机构很可能会像高通收购Alphawave那样，直接收购这家公司——在openlight那边发生的事情。 那样的话瑞典散户投资者就得不到任何上涨收益了。 3. $ALRIB上涨是因为它们的财报将市盈率压低至远期26倍，尽管在MBE领域与$VECO保持双头垄断地位。 加上新的SiPH设备，以及$IQE和QD Laser（量子点）都是它们的客户。 这是我十年来最原始的信息发现——原来$MSFT Quantum是它们的买家。 你不会看到直接的超大规模云厂商前沿量子计算项目依赖一家市值不到10亿美元的公司。 4. $SOI上涨208%是因为它在硅光子学和CPO用的SOI基材上拥有不为人知的垄断地位。 这更多是信息整合加上在它们传统业务周期底部买入的时机把握。 5. $RPI上涨是因为财报和AI硬件使用量。 我只是第一个指出它的人。 我预测营收增长55%，而分析师预测14%。它们实际做到了58%。 我只是给了散户在机构有机会发现并定价之前买入的机会。 即使我不发我的分析报告，这只股票也会基于纯基本面上涨——作为一家无晶圆厂公司，你不可能用5亿美元市值做出5.11亿美元营收。 我只是给散户在机构之前获得信息发现的所有机会。 这与那些机构告诉你买指数基金或已经涨了1500%的股票——让你当退出流动性的完全不同的模式。
英文原文
No. This type of BS mindset needs to stop. What I do is point them out to retail first before the 100-500%+ returns. US institutions like Point72 or Apollo would have bought them out eventually. 1. $IQE went up because they're sitting on the most latent merchant capacity in the world for InP reactors back at a 100M euro marketcap. While companies like Landmark were trading at $3.8B. They were also the supplier to $LITE, and photonics/epiwafer demand took off this year. 2. $SIVE went up because they had new deals with $JBL and O-Net. But they were already unknown as the laser supplier to $MRVL's CPO program when I first went long. American institutions like $AVGO would have likely just bought the company directly like what Qualcomm did with Alphawave over in the openlight side of things if I didn't bring attention to it. Then Swedish retail investors wouldn't get any of the upside. 3. $ALRIB went up because their earnings sent their P/E down to fwd 26, despite holding a duopoly in the MBE category with $VECO. This combined with new SiPH equipment, as well as $IQE + QD Laser (for quantum dot) being their customers. This was combined from raw information discovery of the decade that $MSFT Quantum was their buyer. You don't see direct hyperscaler frontier programs in quantum computing dependant on some <$1B MC company. 4. $SOI is up 208% because it has an unknown monopoly over SOI substrates for silicon photonics and CPO. This was more information synthesis combined with timing the bottom of their legacy cycle. 5. $RPI went up because of earnings and AI hardware usage. I was just the very first person to point it out. I projected 55% revenue growth compared to 14% from analysts. They did 58%. I just gave retail the chance to buy it before institutions. The stock would have gone up off of pure fundamentals without me posting my thesis because you don't do $511m in revenue off a $500m MC as a fabless company. I'm just giving retail the all the information discovery before institutions have a chance to find it and price it in. This is a completely different model than the same institutions telling you to buy index funds or stocks that already went up 1500% so you're exit liquidity.
-
说明公司增长对整个经济是正和的。
但这对他们整个经济来说是正和效应啊，而且会把整个本地人口都带起来？ 如果公司拿到更多资金，他们就能雇更多本地人做研发，capex 还会继续向上游供应商传导（而这些供应商也会受益于融资）。 然后如果利润更多，交的税也更多…… 那就会有更多钱流进社会福利项目或者基础设施。 我真的不理解，公司增长本来就是正和的，它们不是在吸当地人的血来建立财富。 这又不是 $SNAP。
英文原文
It’s a positive sum effect for their entire economy though and brings up the whole local population together? If companies have more funding, they can hire more locals for R&D, the capex goes upstream to all their suppliers (who also benefit from funding). Then more taxes are paid if they make more profits… So more money goes into social welfare programs or infrastructure. I genuinely don’t understand, company growth is positive sum, they’re not leeching off the population to build wealth. This isn’t $SNAP.