个股论点
围绕单一股票的投资逻辑与仓位表态 · 共 2208 条 · 第 33 / 45 页
-
MSTR/BMNR 表现糟糕，ETH 高位做多风险大且网络用量不等于价格。
@a_little_tailor 拉大时间周期看，$MSTR 的情况甚至更糟。$BMNR 本月也遭重创，下跌 -47.1%。 为做多者感到难过，$ETH 在 $4k 以上做多非常糟糕，在 $4-5k 的顶部跟随 @fundstrat 而不是在 $1.5k 时跟随，这很不幸。 人们往往将 ETH 网络使用量与价格混为一谈。https://t.co/zdO3e8YsTC
英文原文
@a_little_tailor Zooming out is even worse for $MSTR. $BMNR also got nuked -47.1% this month. Feel bad for folks that went long, $ETH is a terrible long above $4k and following @fundstrat at the $4-5K top than at $1.5K is unfortunate. People tend to conflate ETH network usage with price. https://t.co/zdO3e8YsTC
-
CRWV 虽发行条款优，但高债高息致利润受损，评级为 F。
$CRWV 完全配得上 F 级评级。如果从发行条款(offering point)的角度看，它确实是一流的。但从资产负债表(balance sheet)来看，简直是一场噩梦，尤其是背负着 140 多亿美元的债务，加上为 OpenAI 建设所承担的 10 多亿美元债务利息，而 OpenAI 能否偿还尚不确定。此外，他们仅剩 19 亿美元现金。大量利润被用于支付债务利息，这严重损害了利润率(margins)（相比之下，其他通过可转换票据(convertible note)融资的新兴云厂商(neoclouds)没有这种利息负担）。
英文原文
$CRWV is well deserving of F tier. If we go from an offering point of view, then it’s top of the line. Balance sheet wise, it’s a nightmare, especially with the $14B+ in debt plus the $1B+ debt interest for the buildout for OpenAi which may or may not be able to pay. They also have $1.9B cash left. A lot of the profit goes off to paying debt interest which hurts margins a lot (compared to other neoclouds that don’t have that interest since they did convertible note).
-
对比WULF与IREN订单规模，批评无解释发帖。
@AustranSkolSwft 哪一个才具有侮辱性？是来自 $GOOGL/Anthropic 拥有数百亿积压订单的 $WULF，还是拥有来自 $MSFT 超90亿美元订单的 $IREN。发布这样的内容却不加任何解释，并没有太大帮助。
英文原文
@AustranSkolSwft Which one is insulting? $WULF with tens of billions of backlog from $GOOGL/Anthropic or $IREN with $9B+ from $MSFT. Posting that with no explanation is not very helpful.
-
分析GLXY评级高于APLD的原因及Coreweave风险
是的，如果仅如你所说比较高性能计算(HPC)板块，我可能会将 $GLXY 降级至与 $APLD 相同的 C 级。但由于其其他业务板块，其资产负债表要稳健得多，因此需要动用较少的债务/信贷额度，这就是它评级更高的原因。他们还从事大量其他业务，如与 $HOOD 竞争的经纪业务、加密货币流动性提供商等，这改善了自由现金流(FCF)，但这样比较有点不公平。他们确实通过与 $CRWV 在 Helios 园区的合作获得了长期的超大规模客户可见性，当时的利率约为 9.10%。但这方面的 downside 是 Coreweave，且其破产的可能性不为零。
英文原文
Yeah I'd might move $GLXY down to a C tier alongside $APLD if we just had to compare HPC sector as you mentioned. But because of their other segments, their balance sheet is vastly better so they had to tap into less debt/crdit facilitaties, which is why it's a grade higher. They do a ton of other stuff like $HOOD competitor brokerage, crypto liquidity providers, etc. and it improves fcf but a bit of an unfair comparison. They do have long term hyperscaler visibility with $CRWV on their Helios campus with the the interest rate was ≈9.10%. Downside of that is Coreweave, and there's a nonzero chance it goes under.
-
对比IREN与NBIS短期容量优势及长期利润率，并提及GLXY会计处理。
简单定性回复：$IREN 确实前置了连接容量(Connected Capacity)，若从该角度（例如 2026 年上半年 1+ GW）对比 $NBIS 2026 年下半年的 1 GW，$IREN 胜出，且应利用这段时间签署更多合同。长期来看，Nebius 在两者间实现容量持平，且凭借全栈(Full-Stack)而非纯 IaaS 拥有更高利润率，这在 $MSFT 合同的每兆瓦营收中已有所体现。我记得曾对电力成本与利润率做过定量拆解，发现在 Oracle TI 事件中，利用率/编排(Utilization/Orchestration)比廉价电力更重要。关于 $NBIS 的趣闻：他们在 NJ 300 MW 设施的新绿地(Greenfield)站点与 Dataone 合作采用新的表后(Behind the Meter)方案，但短期可能落后于 $IREN。我不是能源专家，所以不个人预测天然气管道改造估算，仅采用管理层对连接/签约容量的预测。关于 $GLXY，同意加密货币会计处理的观点。这在加权时并非考量因素。
英文原文
So just a quick qualitative reply, $IREN does frontload connected capacity and if you go from that standpoint (eg. 1+ GW H1 2026) vs. 1 GW from $NBIS H2 2026, $IREN wins and should be using that time to sign more contracts. Longer term, Nebius achieves capacity parity between the two and has higher margins from full-stack vs. pure iaas and you saw this from the revenue per mw from the $MSFT contract. I remember doing a quantitative breakdown on power costs with margins and found that utilization/orchestration mattered vs. cheap power during that Oracle TI fiasco. Fun fact about $NBIS, they have new behind the meter approaches with dataone on their greenfield sites with power generation on their 300 MW facility in NJ., but probably lags near term to $IREN. I'm not an energy expert so I won't personally go into projections regarding natural gas pipelines conversion estimates, so just going with connected/contracted capacity projections from management. For $GLXY agreed about the crypto accounting. That wasn't a factor when doing weighting.
-
讨论DGXX执行风险及CIFR受加密货币拖累，关注HPC板块。
是的，我很欣赏与你的交流，相比许多其他成员*咳咳 $IREN*，因为你补充了一些关于 $DGXX 的定性观点，并改变了我对执行风险的看法。对加密货币的依赖因比特币资产负债表拖累了 $CIFR 和许多其他公司，但我更关注高性能计算(HPC)板块。但正如你所说，这是主观排名，我相信每个人的名单都会不同。
英文原文
Yep, I appreciate talking with you compared to many other members *cough cough $IREN*, since you added some good qualitative points about $DGXX and changed my mind about execution risk. Attachment to crypto did drag down $CIFR and many others because of BTC balance sheets, but I paid more attention to HPC segments. But as you mentioned, it's subjective ranking, and I'm sure the list would be different per-person.
-
Coreweave全栈虽强但现金流紧张且依赖OpenAI，风险巨大。
同意。但关于 @_melonBird 引用的 SemiAnalysis 对 $CRWV 的排名，我认同该表格。Coreweave 和 $NBIS 是整个 Neocloud 领域中唯二在“全栈”方面做得扎实的。Coreweave 花了多年时间和数十亿美元进行收购，以完善软件。然而，当你查看公司财务报表时，该表格毫无意义。Coreweave 仅剩 19 亿美元现金等价物，且每年面临 12 亿美元以上的债务利息。在信贷收紧期间，他们还需要为其他超大规模云厂商合同的建设筹集更多资金（而像 $NBIS 这样规模小得多的玩家却有 49 亿美元以上用于资本支出）。此外，其 1/3（220 亿美元以上）的积压订单来自 OpenAI，而 OpenAI 尚未获得履行该 1 万亿美元以上承诺的资金，$CRWV / $ORCL 正在为他们建设产能，这构成了巨大风险。
英文原文
Agreed. But to @_melonBird with the SemiAnalysis ranking on $CRWV, I agree with that table. Coreweave and $NBIS are the two with full-stack nailed down in the whole Neocloud sector. Coreweave spent many years and billions of USD on acquisitions to get software right. However, that table doesn't mean anything when you look at company financials. Coreweave only has $1.9B cash equivalent left and faces $1.2B+ a year from debt interest. And they'd need to raise more for buildout for their other hyperscaler contracts during a period of credit tightening (when much smaller players like $NBIS has $4.9B+ to spend on capex) On top, 1/3 ($22B+) of their backlog comes from OpenAi which has no funding for that $1T+ promised yet, and $CRWV / $ORCL is building out capacity for them, which presents a massive risk.
-
澄清对BITF、SLNH等股评级，讨论NBIS产能及SMCI、DGXX风险。
所以我认为你是在回复我从未提出的观点。澄清一下：我没有对 $BITF 进行评级。如果你读了我的帖子，它属于未评级类别，所以我不会辩论它与 $WYFI 或 $SLNH 相比的位置。 至于 $SLNH，我们在任何观点上都没有分歧，我也将其列为 F 级，因为它是一只炒作股，其“2.8GW 产能”建设计划需要过度的债务/稀释。 你说关于 $NBIS “它与比特币挖矿的关联程度以及他们是否拥有电力”——我会把这当作口误，认为你是在用比特币挖矿指代 $CLSK，而你指的是 $NBIS 的产能。 $NBIS 在产能方面实现了与 $IREN 的近乎长期平价，后者被认为是行业中 GW 产能最高的玩家。所以我认为那部分是不正确的。 至于关于 $SMCI 作为可靠/值得信赖的合作伙伴的论点，我某种程度上不同意，但你确实改变了我的想法，认为 $DGXX 具有更低的运营和技术执行风险。 除此之外，那部分并不会真正改变排名，例如将其与 $APLD 并列，后者有 2 个超大规模云厂商合同（如果包括 $CRWV），但存在垃圾债券（收入可见性）的下行风险。 如果你想仅因市值带来的回报潜力而将其与 $CLSK 并列，我会同意。
英文原文
So I think you're replying to points I never made. Just to clarify: I didn't rate $BITF. If you read my post, it fell into the unrated category, so I'm not debating where it goes in comparison with $WYFI or $SLNH. As for $SLNH, we're not disagreeing on anything I put it as F tier as well since it's a hype stock that requires excessive debt/dilution on their "2.8GW capacity" buildout plans. You said for $NBIS "how attached it is to Bitcoin Mining and if they own their power" - I'll take that as a mispeak and that you were using Bitcoin mining in reference with $CLSK, and that you were referencing capacity for $NBIS +. $NBIS achieved near long-term parity with $IREN from the capacity side, which is associated as the highest GW capacity player in the industry. So I'd argue that part is incorrect. So as for $SMCI being a reliable/trustworthy partner argument, I sort of disagree, but you did change my mind regarding $DGXX having lower operational and technical execution risk. That aside, that part wouldn't really change rankings, eg. putting it the same as $APLD which has 2 hyperscaler contracts (if you include $CRWV) but downside from junk bonds (revenue visibility) If you wanted to put it on par with $CLSK just due to return potential from MC size, I'd give you that.
-
分析NBIS融资优势及高利润率，认为其抗风险能力强于同行。
当然，我从产能融资的角度将 $NBIS 列为 S 级，因为它不受影响其他数据中心（DC）股票（如被迫发行垃圾债的 $APLD）的信贷紧缩影响。 从第三季度财报来看，$CRWV 面临 12.1 亿至 12.5 亿美元的利息支出，而现金等价物仅为 19.4 亿美元。 其他新云（neocloud）板块股票需要更多现金来资助建设并实现吉瓦（GW）产能变现，例如 $IREN，且将面临更高的利率或缺乏融资兴趣（如可转换债券）。 这大概就是板块抛售的原因，但部分抛售相对不合理（例如 $NBIS、$CIFR）。 对于 $NBIS，你可能关注的是其 25 亿美元的自动取款机（ATM）增发。凭借现有的 48 亿美元以上现金，他们足以支持全栈建设和产能变现，并可根据与 $META、$MSFT 的可见收入合同扩展未来产能。 但我个人对其 ATM 增发并不满意，因为这会增加成本影响股价，并抵消 11 月 24 日纳入 MSCI 指数带来的资金流入。 但 $NBIS 拥有 70-90 亿美元的年度经常性收入（ARR），拥有行业最高利润率，鉴于其 200 亿美元市值，这足以抵消 10% 的稀释和可转换债券的影响。
英文原文
Sure, I put $NBIS as S tier from that capacity funding angle because it's isolated from credit tightening affecting other DC stocks like $APLD (that had to sell junk bonds). From Q3 earnings, $CRWV is facing $1.21-$1.25B in interest expenses and only has $1.94 billion in cash equivalents. Other neocloud sector stocks will need more to cash fund buildout + monetize GW capacity ike $IREN, and will face higher interest rates or lack of funding interest (eg. convertibles). This is kind of why we're seeing a sector selloff, but some were relatively undeserved (eg. $NBIS, $CIFR). With $NBIS you're probably looking at their $2.5B ATM offering. With their existing $4.8B+ in cash, they have enough for their full-stack buildout and capacity monetization + and can scale future capacity from visible revenue contracts with $META, $MSFT. But I'm personally not happy with their ATM, since it's an overhead affecting stock price + balances out inflows from MSCI inclusion in 2 days Nov 24th. But $NBIS with $7-9B ARR has the highest margins in the industry, which would offset 10% dilution and convertibles given their $20B marketcap.
-
Coreweave因高债务和OpenAI依赖被评F级，NBIS更优。
如果你花30秒读一下帖子，就会发现我并没有给 $BITF 评级。 关于 $CRWV，短期有上涨空间，因为抛售至60美元区间确实过度了。但中长期的债务利息负担过重。 相比之下，$NBIS 和 $IREN 通过可转换债券融资或低利息，每季度对利润率的侵蚀很小；而 Coreweave 每年支付的债务利息超过12亿美元。 此外，OpenAI 占其总积压订单的三分之一。虽然他们拥有一些有防御性的大型超大规模客户（$META, $MSFT）以及 $NVDA 的背书，但像 $ORCL 那样为 OpenAI 建设基础设施，鉴于其缺乏收入以及 Gemini ($GOOGL) 的竞争，存在相当大的风险。 因此，尽管 Coreweave 是备受好评的全栈式服务供应商，但由于荒谬的债务利息侵蚀利润率，加上积压订单高度集中于 OpenAI（合同不确定性），其评级为 F 级，而这并不影响像 $NBIS 这样多元化的全栈式服务供应商。
英文原文
If you spent just 30 seconds reading the post, you would see I didn't rate $BITF. With $CRWV there's short term upside because sell-off was way too much to the $60s. But medium-long term they have way too much debt interest. While $NBIS and $IREN funds through convertibles or little interest cutting into margins every quarter, Coreweave pays over $1.2B+ in annual debt expense interest. OpenAI also makes up 1/3th of their total backlog, so while they have some defensible hyperscalers ( $META, $MSFT) + $NVDA backstop, building out for OpenAI like $ORCL, presents considerable risk given their lack of revenue + Gemini $GOOGL competition. So they are F tier despite being a highly rated full-stack offering due to absurd debt interest cutting into margins + large concentration of backlog from OpenAI (contract uncertainty) that don't affect diversified full-stack offerings like $NBIS.
-
作者将DGXX评为D级，指出其营收无锚定租户且执行风险高，但现金充裕，区别于其他同行。
我确实做了评级，将 $DGXX 评为 D 级。最初我像对待 $CLSK 一样将其归为 U 级，但在进一步研究后忘记将其移除。 如果我没错的话，$DGXX 的 $65m 营收是无保障的，不像 $CIFR 之于 $GOOGL 或 $CORZ 之于 $CRWV 那样有锚定租户(anchor tenant)。 此外，由于它是微盘股(microcap)且在高性能计算(HPC)领域历史较短，其业务转型(pivot)的执行风险(execution risk)也更高。他们已通过 $100M 的自动取款机(ATM)增发进行了稀释，因此至少与未来需要大幅稀释的 $SLNH 相比，目前的稀释程度较低。但它更具投机性，类似于新加入的 $WLAC（WLAC 拥有 FluidStack 合作伙伴关系，因此存在 $GOOGL 兜底(backstop)的潜力）。 他们还有 $92M 的流动资产且无不良债务，考虑到其市值规模，这绝对是一笔巨款（但像其他公司一样，这些资金将用于建设），不过执行风险已反映在评级中。 这并不意味着它是一只坏股票，我也因高潜在上行空间而持有 $WLAC 并将其归为 D 级。只是想区分该板块内各公司在合同可见度(contract visibility)和执行方面的细微差别。
英文原文
I did, rated $DGXX D tier. Originally put it in U like $CLSK, but forgot to edit them out when I looked into them further. Correct me if I'm wrong but $DGXX $65m revenue is unsecured, there's no anchor tenant like $CIFR is to $GOOGL or $CORZ is to $CRWV. There's also more execution risk on pivot, just due to the fact it's a microcap company + little history in HPC. They've already diluted with a $100M ATM, so there's less dilution now at least compared to $SLNH, which will need to dilute heavily in the future. But it's more speculative along the lines of $WLAC (WLAC has fluidstack partnership so potential of $GOOGL backstop) that was added in. They also have $92M in liquid assets with no bad debt, which is absolutely huge given their marketcap size (but like others, that will be spent on the buildout), but execution risk is priced in to the Tier. Doesn't mean it's a bad stock, I own $WLAC because of high potential upside too and put it in D tier. Just wanted to distinguish between the nuances between companies in the sector (contract visibility + execution).
-
MSTR 大概率不被清算，Saylor 或选择让股价跌破 NAV 并放缓购币。
TLDR 如果你好奇研究结论： $MSTR 可能不会被清算。不太可能比特币在 2029 年（下一次减半）需要支付利息时仍低于他的成本均价。即使面临 MSCI 流出，Saylor 可能不会出售他购买的比特币，而是让 MicroStrategy 跌破净资产值（NAV）就像 Grayscale 那样，并放缓购买速度。 其他国库策略标的并非如此。
英文原文
TLDR if you were curious on the findings: $MSTR prob not going to get liquidated. Unlikely Bitcoin remains underneath his cost average (next halving) by 2029 when interest needs to be paid. Even with MSCI outflows, Saylor probably not going to sell Bitcoin he bought and just let Microstrategy fall under nav like grayscale + slow down purchases. Other treasury plays not the same
-
博主正研究MSTR清算场景，稍后回复。
@CB3409 我稍后会去研究一下，我现在正在研究 $MSTR 的清算场景。
英文原文
@CB3409 I'll look into it in a bit, I'm researching $MSTR liquidation scenarios right now
-
质疑Circle $400估值过高，指出其利息收入需与Coinbase分成。
关于 $CRCL - 人们忽略了它与 $COIN 共享 50% 的利息收入，而 Coinbase 在其平台上独享这部分收入的 100%。 如果 Circle 股价达到 $400，其市值将达到 920 亿美元，这超过了 Coinbase（690 亿美元）。而 Coinbase 还有交易所交易收入、ETF 托管收入等。 我同意 $150 的估值，但 $400 太牵强了，除非 $USDT 突然消失。
英文原文
So for $CRCL - people are missing it's 50% interest revenue sharing with $COIN and Coinbase has 100% of that revenue split on its platform. Circle at $400 would be a $92B marketcap which is more than Coinbase ($69B). And Coinbase has exchange trading revenue, ETF custody revenue, etc. I'd agree with $150 but $400 is a stretch lol unless $USDT suddenly disappeared.
-
CIFR获谷歌8.3亿长约，风险降低，看好下月股价破22美元。
天哪，$CIFR 刚刚通过 Fluidstack 与 $GOOGL 签署了一份价值 8.3 亿美元、为期 10 年的合同。下个月股价更可能突破 22 美元以上，而非低于 10 美元。长期超大规模云服务商（Hyperscaler）的收入可见性很高，因此风险已大幅降低。唯一的缺点是，与全栈产品（Full-stack offerings）相比，其收入爬坡速度较慢，且由于资产负债表上持有比特币，受到 BTC 价格拖累。
英文原文
bruh, $CIFR just signed a $830m 10y contract with $GOOGL through Fluidstack. More likely $22+ next month than sub $10. Long-term hyperscaler revenue visibility, so it's pretty de-risked. Just slower revenue ramp compared to full-stack offerings + BTC price drag since it holds Bitcoin on its balance sheet.
-
分析VRT受益于AI基建电力瓶颈，认为其将跑赢大盘，NVT风险回报更优。
哈哈，关于股票代码的评论太多了，无法一一回复。关于 $VRT，它是数据中心建设的高贝塔敞口。Q3 营收 26 亿美元，同比增长 29%，指引 FY 中值为 102 亿美元。整体利润率增长，例如 Q3 调整后营业利润增长 43% 至 5.96 亿美元。后者可能表明，由于电力基础设施组件严重短缺和电网容量限制，其拥有类似内存行业的定价权。 $NVT 在当前市值下（24.5 倍 EV/EBITDA，对比 33 倍）可能具有更好的风险调整后回报。但除此之外，能源并非我的专业领域，因此我无法像对 neoclouds 或金融科技那样提供详细细致的观点。 不过，我可以说 Vertiv 在 AI 基础设施建设和电力供应约束的背景下，凭借其角色（例如与 nvda 合作的冷却和 800vdc 电力），方向上应该会跑赢大盘。
英文原文
lol there's a lot of ticker comments, can't respond to every one. So for $VRT it's a high beta exposure to DC buildout, from Q3 earnings $2.6B revenue 29% y/y, guided FY $10.2B midpoint, overall margins grew eg. adjusted operating profit increased 43% to $596 million in Q3. The latter probably indicates better pricing power like memory sector from a severe shortage of power infrastructure components and grid capacity limitations. $NVT might be better risk-adjusted return at current marketcaps (24.5x EV/EBITDA), vs. 33x. But that aside, energy not my field of expertise so I can't give detailed nuanced opinions like neoclouds or fintech. However, I can probably say Vertiv directionally should be outperform due to backdrop of AI infra buildout + power supply constraints and it's role (eg. cooling, 800vdc power that they're doing with nvda)
-
澄清NBIS与IREN容量对比逻辑，反驳“文字混乱”论，强调前置容量价值。
重新阅读关于 $NBIS 和 $IREN 的表格及要点可能会有所帮助，而不是跳过并因为觉得这是“混乱的文字沙拉”就否定定量分析。 本着善意，为了帮助你理解：表格有三行。 - 当前已连接容量 - 2026年指导/预期已连接容量 - 指导签约容量。 这是关于将已获电力转化为运营数据中心容量（截至2026年底）或各公司签约容量指导的“苹果对苹果”（同等条件）比较。这与财报中的毛利率正常化不同。 因此，$IREN 1.4 GW 与 $NBIS 1 GW 的比较，或指导签约容量的比较，是各公司截至2026年底预期指导的同等条件比较。 3 GW 与 2.5 GW 的比较是指导数据，且是正确的。唯一的语义细微差别在于“已获、并网组合”与“预期签约扩张目标”（我之前用括号注明了前者），如果我想更清楚，本应再加一行。然而，你的说法并不能否定两种指导容量的比较。 $IREN 多头应该争论的细微差别是前置容量的价值（例如 $IREN 上半年 1.4 GW 对比 $NBIS 下半年）。不要说因为内容太长无法阅读 -> 所以无法比较。
英文原文
Might be helpful to read the table and the points again on $NBIS and $IREN rather than skipping it and dismissing something quantitative because you think it's "convoluted word salad". So coming in with good faith, just to help you understand: there's three rows. - current connected capacity - guided/expected connected capacity 2026 - guided contracted capacity. This is an apples to apples comparison regarding converting secured power into operational data center capacity by the end of 2026 or guidance for contracted capacity for each company. This is not the same as gross margin normalization on earnings reports. So, the comparison of $IREN 1.4 GW vs $NBIS 1 GW, or guided contracted capacity is an apples-to-apples comparison of each company's expected guidance by the end of 2026. The comparison of 3 GW to 2.5 GW was guidance and is correct. The only semantic nuance is "secured, grid-connected portfolio" vs. "expected contracted expansion target" which I put the earlier in parenthesis, and if I wanted to be extra clear, I should added another row. However, what you're saying doesn't dismiss the comparison of both guided capacities. The nuance $IREN bulls you should be arguing is the value of frontloading capacity (eg. $IREN 1.4 GW H1 vs H2 $NBIS). Not saying that something is too long to read -> you can't compare.
-
因执行风险及融资压力降级$IREN，维持$NBIS跑赢大盘评级。
我的措辞非常严谨。你在阅读关于“引导性签约容量”的讨论时，跳过了“预期”一词。 因此，我再次重申上述观点，但提供更详细的解释： $IREN 最初的护城河是吉瓦(GW)级容量+垂直整合。$NBIS 的护城河是全栈(Full-stack)。 然而，Nebius 在长期吉瓦级容量上实现了与原本被认为是 $IREN 最大护城河的平价。 以下是有帮助的解释： - 短期：$IREN 0.66 GW 已连接 vs. $NBIS 22 GW 已连接。目前，$IREN 拥有更多前置容量。 - 中期：$NBIS 和 $IREN 之间的已连接电力差距正在缩小，$IREN 2026年为 1 GW，Nebius 为 1.4 GW。 - 长期：$IREN 规划 3 GW 电力扩张，$NBIS 规划 2.5 GW 签约电力扩张，Nebius 在已连接电力方面实现长期平价。 Nebius 管理层还将容量预期提高了 150%，并且有很大可能再次增加，以超越其他新云(Neocloud)公司。 此外，$IREN 最终转向全栈 IAAS 而非风险较低的托管(Colo)($CIFR, $WULF)，以追求更高的收入和利润率潜力，正如他们的 ER 所述。 但考虑到 $CRWV + $ORCL 在软件/编排方面的建设难度，与拥有现成且即插即用现有堆栈的 $NBIS 相比，$IREN 的新转型执行风险极高。 如果 $IREN 能做好这一点，其上行潜力巨大，但由于执行风险以及为 AI 云转型的容量变现所需融资面临的信贷收紧，我已将其降级。 如上所述，Nebius 拥有更大且多元化的客户群，这增强了收入可见性和防御性，因此我维持对 $NBIS 的跑赢大盘评级，因其具有非对称上行潜力。
英文原文
I'm very precise with my wording. You skipped over "expected" while reading discussions about guided contracted capacity. So reiterating what I've said above but with a longer explanation: $IREN's original moat was GW capacity + vertical integration. $NBIS's moat was full-stack. However, Nebius achieved long-term parity with GW capacity that was originally thought to be $IREN's biggest moat. Here's a helpful explanation: - Near term $IREN .66 GW connected vs. 22 GW connected with $NBIS. Today, $IREN has more frontloaded capacity. - Mid-term, The connected power argument is closing between $NBIS and $IREN with 1 GW 2026 for IREN and 1.4 GW for Nebius. - Long term, $IREN projects 3 GW power expansion, $NBIS projects 2.5 GW contracted power expansion with Nebius achieving longer term parity with connected power. Nebius management also raised capacity expectations by 150%, and there's a large chance it increases again to exceed other Neocloud companies. On top of that $IREN ended up pivoting to full-stack IAAS instead of lower-risk colo ( $CIFR, $WULF ) for higher revenue potential due to "higher revenue and margin potential" as per their ER. But looking at $CRWV + $ORCL buildout difficulty with software/orchestration, this immensely raises execution risk for a new pivot with $IREN compared to $NBIS, which has it down + plug and play with existing stack. $IREN has high upside potential if they get this right, but due to execution risk and credit tightening required for future financing for capacity monetization for their AI cloud pivot, I've downgraded it. Nebius also has a much larger diversified client base as mentioned above for both revenue visibility + defensibility, which is why I maintain outperform on $NBIS due to asymmetrical upside.
-
深度解析9只个股基本面与目标价，指导散户建立独立估值模型。
基于权益排名表： 以下是对每只股票的深入分析，以及我如何重新调整投资组合以利用市场重置： · $NBIS 现价 $92，目标价 $400 / 1年 · $RKLB 现价 $43，目标价 $500 / 5年 · $CRCL 现价 $72，目标价 $150 / 8个月 · $ALAB 现价 $143.4，目标价 $250 / 6个月 · $SNAP 现价 $8.1，目标价 $22 / 1年 · $CIFR 现价 $14.8，目标价 $28 / 6个月 · $RDDT 现价 $185，目标价 $275 / 8个月 · $SMCI 现价 $34，目标价 $55 / 6个月 · $HIMS 现价 $35，目标价 $60 / 6个月 此顺序基于发布时的持仓集中度权重，以及基于现有信息对中型市值（$50亿+）板块的内部目标价推测。 以下是每只股票及目标价时间框架的深入拆解，以及“定性”理由： 1. Nebius ($NBIS)：市值 $230亿。极度低估且与基本面脱节。 $70-90亿远期年度经常性收入(ARR)，20-30%息税摊销前利润(EBIT)，来自 Shopify、埃森哲、Cursor、外国政府的企业合同，以及来自 Meta 和微软的超大规模客户合同，为 Nebius 提供了收入可见性。拥有 $48亿+现金，使其免受影响数据中心的信贷紧缩影响。预计 2026 年签约容量达 2.5 GW，可与许多其他公司（如 $IREN 的 2.8 GW）媲美，并击败许多关于容量/电力的论点。由于其许多投资组合公司支持 Tesla 和 Anthropic 等公司，它也具有更高的增长潜力（想想 $MSFT 及其投资组合公司带来的长期防御性）。 此外，随着 $NVDA 第四季度业绩爆发，Jensen 澄清了反对 GPU 折旧的论点，这有助于提升数据中心板块情绪。 1年目标价 $400，基于远期收入/利润率估值达 $1000亿+。 2. Rocketlab ($RKLB)：市值 $220亿。短期高估，长期潜力低估。 Rocketlab 是我与比特币并列的最高确信度5年长线标的。在太空领域，并非赢家通吃，我维持 $3500-5000亿长期目标价以匹配 SpaceX 的最新估值/能力。 目前它被高估。但从纯技术角度看，构建可重复使用火箭构成了惊人且具防御性的护城河，我们正处于其端到端太空产品大规模商业化（可能在 ~2028 年）的早期阶段。 然而，市场正在计入 Flatlite 商业化（如 Starlink）和中程有效载荷（SpaceX Falcon 9）的远期增长。市场也计入远期增长，但对于 Rocketlab 而言，关键在于未来有多远。这始终是一个坚实的买入机会，取决于你对公司执行的耐心程度。 3. Circle ($CRCL) - 市值 $160亿，低估。 对于 Circle，自其市值 $500亿以来我就看空，建议做空 Circle，做多 Coinbase，因为 $COIN 与 Circle 有 50% 的收入分成。 此前因流通股本数字和财报后/12月2日巨大的内部人锁定期导致抛售（类似 $BULL）而被高估。流通股本动态很重要，像 Cathie Wood 这样的 ETF 经理似乎不理解（因此我的警告）。 但现在我们达到了合理的估值水平。我预计 USDC 商业化将继续，鉴于数字资产市场的监管重点，我看到 $CRCL 将接管 Tether 的大部分市值。 话虽如此，一旦我们看到内部人股份重新分配给机构和长期持有者，计入稳定币交易量增长，它完全值得 $300亿+的市值定价。 4. Astera Labs ($ALAB) - 市值 $220亿，估值合理 ALAB 是我中期高确信度选股之一，因为 Mag7 采用其连接技术用于数据中心建设。 增长极高，利润率类似 $NVDA，约为 ~74%，最新估算：$2.3亿/季度（同比增长 101%）。我的论点是，如果 Mag7 依赖某家公司（$NVDA 用于 GPU，NBIS、IREN、CIFR 用于 DC AI 云建设），该公司将连续几个季度大幅超出预期，我们正看到这一点。 尽管全面超出业绩预期，Astera 最近从 $250 抛售回 $140 区间，这提供了一个良好的买入机会。 我维持中期目标价 $250，以在 NVDA 业绩后及 Anthropic $400亿 DC 到 $GOOGL 在德克萨斯州 $500亿 DC + 连接需求创纪录的数据中心建设后恢复。 5. Snapchat ($SNAP) 市值 $130亿，低估。 $SNAP 是我最不喜欢的股票和 CEO 之一（抱歉 Evan）。 然而，我无法反驳基本面的变化。我最近论点帖子的 TLDR 是，他们正在削减来自存储 10 年前记忆/视频的巨大运营支出膨胀，如果你查看他们的 GCP 托管费用，这会侵蚀利润率。 现在他们既减少了该 OPex 成本，又从中增加了收入。我们还有与 Perplexity 的 AI 交易，增加了 $4亿+的额外收入流，如 RDDT。 然而，短期内由于相对于 AI 公司的表现不佳，它正遭受税务收割。在 2026 年 Q1，我预计市场将开始大幅计入新的基本面，该公司将大幅超出预期。 话虽如此，随着市场计入新动态，我预计从此处 1 年内有超过 200%+ 的上涨空间。 5. CIFR ($CIFR) - 市值 $50亿，低估 $CIFR 是 Neocloud 板块中我最喜欢的第二只股票。据记忆，其资产负债表上持有大量比特币，并受到 BTC 价格从 $120k 跌至 $90k 的实质性影响。 然而，我预计随着级联保证金清算结束且机构以低价买入比特币，加密资产价格将在几个月内恢复。 Nebius 位居榜首，因为它拥有完整的 AI-云价值链，具有更高的收入潜力和更强的回报，尽管这迫使他们处理编排、软件和 GPU 生命周期风险，而不是坚持托管。 然而，$CIFR 避免了整个风险面，并拥有 AMZN 和 GOOGL 的支持作为长期收入锚点。它也免受 GPU 采购、管理和折旧的影响。 对于 CIFR 的经济模型，我们获得了一个基于超大规模客户空间、电力和冷却的高利润率、年金结构。经风险调整后，它是该组中最安全的名称之一。但权衡是上涨空间受限。像 10 年、15 年这样的长期租赁减缓了收入爬坡，并相对于从 $1.45亿季度收入到一年内 $21亿的全栈 Neocloud 运营商（如 NBIS）削弱了回报。 话虽如此，一旦市场计入 $AMZN、$GOOGL Fluidstack 收入且比特币价格恢复，我维持 1 个月后的 $28 目标价。 6. Reddit ($RDDT) - 估值适中 来自 WSB 子版块 Wendy's 垃圾桶的我，自然对这个平台有偏见。 然而，Reddit 最初从 $270 的抛售是由于对 ChatGPT 引用的担忧，这是不重要的。现在，最新数据显示引用回来了，但 Reddit 的价格仍停留在 $185（远低于该数字）+ 部分由于宏观因素。 Reddit 是最不臃肿、高利润的社交媒体公司之一。由于年轻和年长受众的网络效应的长期防御性（与 Snap 9亿+ MAU 主要为年轻一代相比），它将长存。 我预计 RDDT 将通过收购（如 $HOOD 交易所）扩大货币化途径，得益于其巨大的自由现金流(FCF)和盈利能力，或者像 Facebook 最初收购 WhatsApp、Instagram、构建 Messenger 一样。这是一只低风险、高增长的股票，因此我维持 8 个月后的 $275 目标价。 7. SMCI ($SMCI) - 低估，市值 $200亿。 $200亿市值是个笑话。无话可说。他们正在实现 $50亿季度收入（当然利润率较低）。然而，市场正在计入公司收入下降。 SMCI 将大部分积压订单推迟到 2026 年 Q2，这与 Neoclouds 到 Mag7 客户的许多数据中心建设相一致。 他们预计明年收入同比增长 50%+，至少 $360亿收入，但鉴于 NVDA 业绩爆发带来的数据中心建设，我预计服务器机架公司如 $DELL 和 SMCI 将在 2026 年 Q2 表现优异。 这就是为什么我利用当前季度的收入滞后延迟，并分配 6 个月后的 $55 目标价。 8. Hims and Her Health ($HIMS) - 低估（市值 $80亿） 个人而言，我仅将 HIMS 用于短期交易突破。我一直不长期持有高于 $50 的股票。 然而，回到 $35，它重置了今年大部分的增长，但收入同比增长 49% 至 $5亿，并产生大量自由现金流。 最被低估的叙事是 Zava 收购。这为 HIMS 平台增加了 130万+用户，并使公司能够扩展到欧盟市场。 类似于 META 收购 Instagram 等公司，扩大基础+货币化，我预计 HIMS 将对 Zava 做同样的事情 + 市场正在计入当前的 Zava 估算数字。 这可能是我信心最低的股票，尤其是 CEO 在离开后出售股份，在 $70 时的 SS 帖子让我味道不好 👀。 但话虽如此，这是一个在 6 个月时间内反弹至 $60 的好机会。 希望你喜欢我的观点。有很多关于价格的帖子，但我试图留下更定性的拆解（+ 部分定量，但省略很多技术内容以便阅读），以帮助散户建立自己的确信度和理解。 建立理解对于创建你自己的内部估值模型很重要，而不是盲目跟随 FinX 发帖人 + 当股价暂时下跌时投降。 如果你留下你的投资组合+集中度，我很乐意讨论更多。
英文原文
Based on the equity ranking table: Here's a deeper analysis of each stock, alongside how I reposition my portfolio to capitalize on the market reset: · $NBIS at $92, PT $400 / 1Y · $RKLB at $43, PT $500 / 5Y · $CRCL at $72, PT $150 / 8M · $ALAB at $143.4, PT $250 / 6M · $SNAP at $8.1, PT $22 / 1Y · $CIFR at $14.8, PT $28 / 6M · $RDDT at $185, PT $275 / 8M · $SMCI at $34, PT $55 / 6M · $HIMS at $35, PT $60 / 6M This is in order of concentration weighting from when posted and internal PT speculation based on existing information for mid-cap ($5B+) sections. Here’s a deeper breakdown on each one and PT timeframe, and a “qualitative”why: 1. Nebius ( $NBIS ): $23B marketcap. Incredibly undervalued and detached from fundamentals. $7-9B forward ARR, 20-30% EBIT, enterprise contracts from Shopify, Accenture, Cursor, foreign governments and hyperscaler contracts from Meta and Microsoft give Nebius revenue visibility. With $4.8B+ in cash, it's isolated from credit tightening affecting data centers. With 2.5 GW expected capacity contracted 2026, it rivals many others eg. $IREN at 2.8 GW, and defeats many of the capacity/power arguments. With many portfolio companies powering companies like Tesla and Anthropic, it also has higher growth potential (think $MSFT with its portfolio companies for longer defensibility). We also had stellar $NVDA earnings going into Q4 with their blowout, Jensen clarifying arguments against GPU depreciation, which helps with DC sector sentiment. $400 1 year price target, $100B+ valuation given forward revenue/margins. 2. Rocketlab ( $RKLB ): $22B marketcap. Overvalued current term, undervalued long term potential. Rocketlab is my highest conviction 5Y long alongside Bitcoin. With Space, it's not winner takes all, and I've maintained $350-500B long term PT to match SpaceX’s most recent valuation/capabilities. As of now, it's overvalued. But it's an incredible + defensible moat from purely a technological standpoint building reusable rockets and we're early in terms of commercialization of their end-to-end space products at scale (likely ~2028). However, we're pricing in forward growth with Flatlite commericalization (eg. Starlink), and medium-lift payloads (SpaceX Falcon 9). The market prices in forward growth as well but it’s more about how long in the future with Rocketlab. It's always a solid buy, depending on how patient you are with company execution. 3. Circle ( $CRCL ) - $16B marketcap, undervalued. With Circle, I've been bear posting it since it was a $50B marketcap, saying short Circle, long Coinbase, given $COIN has 50% revenue sharing with Circle. It was overvalued due to float numbers and massive insider lockups 2-3 days after earnings/Dec 2nd led to a sell-off (like $BULL). Float dynamics matter a lot that ETF managers like Cathie Wood seem to not understand (hence my warnings). But now we're reaching respectable valuation numbers. I expect USDC commercialization to continue and given a regulatory focus in the digital asset market, I see $CRCL taking over a lot of Tether's marketcap. That being said, it's well deserving of a $30B+ marketcap pricing in stablecoin volume growth once we start seeing insider shares redistributed to institutions and long term holders. 4. Astera Labs ( $ALAB ) - $22B marketcap, reasonable valuation ALAB was one of my mid-term high conviction picks, due to Mag7 adoption of connectivity for datacenter buildout. Incredibly high growth and $NVDA-like margins sitting at ~74%, latest er: $230m/q (101% Y/Y growth). My thesis was that if Mag7 is dependent on a company ($NVDA for GPUs) ( NBIS, IREN, CIFR for DC AI cloud buildout), the company will blow away expections quarter after quarter, and we're seeing this. There's been a recent sell-off on Astera from $250 back to $140 marks, depsite beating earning expectations across the board and this presents a good buying opportunity. I maintain a medium term PT $250 for recovery after NVDA earnings and record-high DC buildout from Antrophic's $40B DC to $GOOGL's $50B DC in Texas + connectivity demand. 5. Snapchat ( $SNAP ) $13B marketcap, undervalued. $SNAP is one of my least favorite stocks and CEO's (sorry Evan). However, I can't argue with fundamental changes. A TLDR of my most recent thesis post was that they're cutting their massive opex bloat from memories/videos stored 10 years ago and if you look into their GCP hosting fees, it's cutting in margins. Now they're both reducing that OPex cost and increasing revenue from that. We also have AI deals with perplexity adding $400m+ additional revenue streams like RDDT. However, short term it's suffering from tax-harvesting due to underperformance this year relative to AI companies. In 2026 Q1, I expect the market to start pricing in the new fundamentals Hard. and for this company to beat expectation soundly. That being said I expect over a 200%+ upside 1Y from here with the market pricing in the new dynamics. 5. CIFR ( $CIFR ) - Undervalued at $5B marketcap $CIFR is my second favorite stock in the Neocloud sector. From memory, it holds a lot of Bitcoin on its balance sheet and is materially affected by the selloff in BTC prices from $120k to $90k. However I expect crypto asset prices to recover in a few months once cascading margin liqudations finish and instituions buy-in Bitcoin at low prices. 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. However, $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. That being said I maintain a $28 PT in 1 month once market prices in $AMZN, $GOOGL Fluidstack revenue and Bitcoin prices recover. 6. Reddit ( $RDDT ) - Moderate valuation Coming from the Wendy's dumpsters on WSB subreddit, I am naturally biased toward this platform. However, the initial sell-off of Reddit at $270 was due to fears over ChatGPT citations, which was immaterial. Now, recent data shows that citations are back, but Reddit's price still sits at $185 (way below that number) + partly due to macro. Reddit is one of the least bloated, highly profitable social media companies. And it's here to stay due to long term defensibility of the network effect of both younger + older audiences (compared to Snap 900m+ MAU of mostly younger generation). I expect RDDT to scale up monetization avenues through acquisitions like $HOOD (exchanges) due to their massive FCF and profitability or how Facebook originally acquired WhatsApp, Instagram, built out messenger. It's a low-risk, high growth stock, which is why I maintain a $275 PT in 8 months. 7. SMCI ( $SMCI ) - Undervalued, $20B marketcap. $20B marketcap is a joke. Nothing else to say. They're doing $5B quarterly revenue (off lower-margins for sure). However, market is pricing in the company revenue dropping. SMCI quoted majority of the backlog delay to Q2 2026, which aligns with a lot of the DC buildout from Neoclouds to Mag7 customers. They expect revenue to grow 50%+ Y/Y next year, with at least $36 billion revenue, but judging from DC buildout from blowout NVDA earnings, I expect server rack companies like $DELL and SMCI to outperform Q2 2026. This is why I'm taking advantage of revenue lag delays from the current quarter and assigning a $55 PT in 6 months time. 8. Hims and Her Health ( $HIMS) - Undervalued ( $8B marketcap) Personally, I've used HIMS just for short term trading breakouts. And I've been one to not long-term hold the stock above $50. However, back at $35, it's reset most of the year's growth but grew revenue 49% Y/Y to $500m and is producing a good amount of FCF. The most under-priced narrative is the Zava acquisition. This adds 1.3M+ users to the HIMS platform and allows the company to expand to the EU market. Similar to how META acquires companies like Instagram, grows its base + monetizes, I expect HIMS to do the same with Zava + market is pricing in current est. Zava numbers. It's probably my least confident stock out of the bunch, especially leaving me with a bad taste with the CEO selling shares after leaving 👀 on SS posts back at $70. But that being said it's a great rebound opportunity to $60 in a 6 month timeframe. Hope you enjoyed my perspective. There's a lot of x at price posts, but I try to leave a more qualitative breakdown (+ part quantitative but leave out a lot of technical for easier reading) to help retail develop their own conviction and understanding. Building understanding is important to create internal valuation models yourself rather than blindly following along FinX posters + capitulating when stock prices temporarily drop. Happy to discuss more if you drop your own portfolio + concentrations.
-
不建议做空$NBIS看涨期权，MSCI流入及机构吸筹预示反弹。
同意，在股价下跌35%且财报大爆后，虽然期权已接近价内(ITM)，但此时做空$NBIS的看涨期权(CC)并非明智之举。 即将迎来众多催化剂，例如4天内MSCI指数将带来数亿至十亿美元级别的资金流入。相对于市值/流通盘而言，这一规模极大。 此外，AI板块的涨势在12月前依然完好，且过去两周做市商的对冲操作带来了机械性的向上资金流。既然散户已投降触底，且机构据实时指标已积累约50%的流通盘（尽管官方13F文件显示为44-46%），随着70-90亿美元年度经常性收入(ARR)预期的基本面匹配，可能会迎来一波有趣的上涨行情。
英文原文
agreed, not a good idea to write $NBIS CC's though so close to ITM on a 35% drop + blowout earnings. There's too many catalysts coming up like few hundred - low billion inflow from MSCI in 4 days. This is extremely large relative to marketcap/float. Then we have AI rally in-tact in time for December and mechanical flows upward from all the dealer hedging downward the past two weeks. Now that we've hit the bottom with retail capitulation and institution managed to accumulate ~50% of the float (according to some live metrics) was ~44-46% from official 13F filings though, might be a fun rally upward to match fundamentals from $7-9B ARR projections.
-
NVDA财报暗示需求加速，利好CIFR等供应链个股。
@soulbiri1 是的，像 $CIFR 这样的股票盘后上涨了 17%。 这并不意味着开盘后价格能守住，但市场有时只需要一个借口来反弹。 从 $NBIS 到 $CIFR 的基本面依然完好，但 $NVDA 的财报只是指向需求加速。 https://t.co/oZqWb7jrL7
英文原文
@soulbiri1 Yeah stuff like $CIFR is up 17% after hours. Doesn’t mean the price will hold market open, but market just needs an excuse for things to rally sometimes. Fundamentals are already in-tact for $NBIS to $CIFR but $NVDA earnings just point toward accelerated demand. https://t.co/oZqWb7jrL7
-
分析AI基础设施供应商来自微软、Meta及企业客户的强劲收入与增长潜力。
$194亿 $MSFT 5年，$38.8亿/年 / 4 = $9.7亿。 $30亿 $META 5年，$6亿/年 / 4 = $1.5亿 这仅仅是两个超大规模云服务商(hyperscaler)的合同。他们的核心业务是企业客户，如 Shopify、Cursor、埃森哲(Accenture)以及政府等。（例如今年年化经常性收入(ARR)为$11亿，增长非常迅速）。 仅来自 Meta/MSFT 的季度收入为$11.2亿，来自企业客户的约$10亿/季度，再加上更多带有互联网关(GW)容量的合同。
英文原文
$19.4B $MSFT 5 years $3.88B/year / 4 = $970m. $3B $META 5 years, $600M/year /4 = $150m That's just two hyperscaler contracts. Their core business are enterprises like Shopify, Cursor, Accenture + Governments and so on. (eg. $1.1B ARR this year, growing very rapidly). $1.12B/quarter from just Meta/MSFT alone, ~1B/quarter from enterprise clients + more contracts with connected GW capacity.
-
Nebius股价严重低估，若市场认可2026年指引，现价应超140美元。
首先，它在94美元的价格下被极度低估。除非第一季度出现大量数据中心烧毁的情况，否则当前的股价才显得合理。 然而，若要符合我400美元的目标价，$NBIS 需要严格执行当前的指引，例如向2.5 GW产能迈进，实现1 GW产能并网，以及达成营收预测。 我们预计 $NBIS 在2026年第四季度的单季营收将达到21亿美元，这种增长简直令人难以置信。 市场已经计入了远期增长，但关键在于它计入了多远的未来。 对于Nebius而言，市场就像蒙着双眼。如果市场认真对待2026年的预测，股价现在轻松就能交易在140美元以上。
英文原文
For starters it's incredibly undervalued at $94. Q1 would need to have many DCs burn down for it to justify current prices. However, for it to be in line with my $400 PT, $NBIS needs to be executing current guidance eg.moving toward 2.5 GW capacity, 1GW capacity connected, revenue projections. We're expecting $2.1B/quarter 2026 Q4 for $NBIS which is absolutely mindblowing growth. Market prices in forward growth, but it's more of how long in the future it prices in. For Nebius, it's like it's wearing blindfolds. Stock should be easily trading $140+ right now if markets take 2026 projections seriously.
-
个股基本面优于宏观，NBIS强劲基本面使回调成买入良机。
因为个股基本面比宏观更重要。 $ETH、$SOL 等加密市场是另一回事，存在连锁的50倍杠杆保证金清算，但股票有自由现金流(FCF)/盈利支撑市值。 以 $NBIS 为例，当预期年度经常性收入(ARR)从20亿美元增至80亿美元，拥有来自 $META 和 $MSFT 的220亿美元+合同积压，且EBIT利润率达20-30%时，25个基点的降息并不会导致股价下跌30%。 如果盈利开始不及预期+预期收入/利润率开始下降，那么人们开始抛售是合理的。然而，当我们看到全面增长时，抛售就成了买入机会。
英文原文
Because individual stock fundamentals matter more than macro. $ETH, $SOL crypto markets are a whole different beast with cascading 50x leverage margin liquidations, but with stocks you have FCF/earnings backing up the market cap. With $NBIS for example, when you go from projected $2B ARR to $8B ARR, 20-30% EBIT margins backed by a $22B+ contract backlog from $META and $MSFT, 25BPS rate cut doesn't affect the stock price by -30%. If earnings started to miss + projected revenue/margins started to decrease, then people would be warranted to start selling. However, when we're seeing increasing growth across the board, the sell-off becomes a buying opportunity.
-
CRWV基本面强但负债高，建议短线交易而非长持
手滑发错了，重读时觉得没必要编辑。$CRWV 超卖，550亿美元积压订单，Neocloud 领域龙头，有 $NVDA 背书，业绩不及预期源于数据中心(DC)延迟，仅将收入推迟至后续季度。但我不会长期持有（220亿积压订单来自OpenAI），相比同行其高债务利息侵蚀自由现金流(FCF)/利润率，且资产负债表薄弱（如18亿美元现金），在当前信贷收紧环境下更易受冲击（尤其与未获融资的OpenAI高度相关）。若现价$75持有我不会卖出，但也不会长期持有（仅做短线交易）。发帖时大概就在纠结这算哪类。
英文原文
Accident, didn't feel like editing the post when I read it again. $CRWV is oversold, $55B backlog, Neocloud sector leader, backstopped by $NVDA, miss due to DC delays, just shifts revenue down toward later quarters. However, I would not hold it ($22B of backlog is OpenAI), high debt interest compared to others that cut into FCF/margins, and low balance sheet eg. $1.8B cash which makes it more susceptible to credit tightening right now (especially with correlation to OpenAI with doesnt have the funding). I wouldn’t sell it if I had it now at $75, but I wouldn’t long term hold it either (short term trade). I was probably wondering what category that fits in when I made the post earlier.
-
澄清IREN高短期持仓源于机构可转换票据套利对冲，非散户轧空。
关于 $IREN 投资者可能误解的几点：情况比“21.2%流通盘导致轧空(short squeeze)”要复杂得多。对于 IREN 而言，大量短期持仓(SI)来自可转换票据(convertible note)套利。当机构在发行后购入可转换票据时，他们会做空标的股票进行对冲。鉴于10亿美元的发行规模加上1.25亿美元的购买选择权，相应的对冲操作推高了该 SI 数值。其次，对于市值120亿美元以上的股票，如果该数值如此之高，参与者并非散户，而是机构。
英文原文
So few things $IREN investors might misunderstand: it's more nuanced than 21.2% float -> short squeeze. With IREN a lot of SI is convertible note arbitrage. When institutions acquire convertible notes after the offering, they short the underlying shares for hedging. Given the $1B offering, plus +125M purchase option, corresponding hedge inflates that SI number. Second if a number is that high with a $12B+ stock, it's not retail it's institutions.
-
ALPD高息债及OpenAI订单增加长期风险，新云板块或有更好标的。
$ALPD 承担了以 9.25% 利率发行的垃圾债券(junk bonds)等极差的债务，并与 $CRWV 有关联，后者也有大量不良债务严重侵蚀利润率/自由现金流(FCF) + OpenAI（目前也缺乏资金）占据了大量积压订单 + 产能建设。这在很大程度上增加了长期风险，我尚未对 $APLD 的利息成本进行定量建模。可能还有更好的新云(neocloud)板块标的，但这并不意味着我看空它。对于 $S，我研究得还不够深入，无法给出好的观点。
英文原文
$ALPD took on really bad debt with junk bonds at 9.25% and is connected with $CRWV, which also has a lot of bad debt really cutting into margins/FCF + OpenAI (which also doesn't have the funds yet) taking up a lot of backlog + capacity buildout. That kind increases long term risks by a lot, I haven't done a quantitative modeling yet on $APLD from interest costs. There's probably better neocloud sector picks out ther but that doesn't mean I'm bearish on it. For $S, I haven't looked into it enough to give a good opinion.
-
作者平仓$TGT看涨期权，认为长期持有仍具低估价值。
@h20kita 我此前已平仓 $TGT 的看涨期权(Call Options)。该股已过除息日(Ex-Dividend Date)，即11月12日。这更多是一次基于股息催化剂(Dividend Catalyst)的交易。如果你仍持有仓位并打算长期持有，其估值依然相当低。
英文原文
@h20kita I exited $TGT calls earlier. It passed ex-div date already which was Nov 12th. This was more of a dividend catalyst play. Still pretty undervalued if you still have positions and hold long term.
-
基于支付使用量及ETF预期，看好莱特币投资潜力
这就是我对 $LTC 看法的由来。我经营一家金融科技(Fintech)公司，看到莱特币(Litecoin)作为支付工具在行业内有着惊人的使用量，即使与 USDC、$SOL、$BTC 等其他资产相比也是如此。现在随着 ETF 的推出，它市值 70 亿，像比特币一样供应有限，加上可能大量囤积供应量的国库型公司，以及市场随机炒作 ZCash 等山寨币，在我看来这其实是一个非常好的买入机会。
英文原文
Oh here’s where my thoughts about $LTC comes in. I run a fintech company and I see Litecoin surprising amount of usage as a payment vehicle across the industry, even when you compare it to USDC, $SOL, $BTC and others. And now when you get a ETF, it’s sitting at 7B MC with finite supply like Bitcoin, + treasury companies that can buy up a lot of supply over time + market randomly pumping altcoins like ZCash, it’s actually a pretty great buy in my view.
-
RKLB长期看好但短期因商业化延迟被高估，需耐心持有。
我可能是 $RKLB 最大的多头之一，它与比特币是我最高确信度的5年期长线持仓。自SpaceX最近的估值/能力以来，我一直维持3500亿-5000亿美元的长期目标价，因为太空领域可能并非赢家通吃。 话虽如此，我最近一直认为它有点被高估（回到60美元时），主要是因为缺乏Neutron/flatlite的商业化，这可能要等到2028-2029年，鉴于当前的营收数据，我们稍微有点早。但只要你等待足够长的时间，它总是一个不错的买入机会。 市场计入的是远期增长，但关键在于这个“未来”有多远（例如对于Rocketlab，就像Snapchat、Nebius一样，其实并不遥远）。
英文原文
I’m probably one of the biggest $RKLB bulls and it’s my highest conviction 5Y long alongside Bitcoin. I’ve maintained $350B-500B long term PT to match SpaceX’s most recent valuation/capabilities since it’s likely not winner takes all in space. That being said I’ve maintained recently it is kinda overvalued (back at $60) just due to lack of Neutron/flatlite commercialization which is likely 2028-2029, and we’re a tad early given current revenue numbers. But always a good buy if you just wait long enough. Market prices in forward growth but it’s more about how long in the future with Rocketlab (eg. With Snapchat, Nebius, it’s not that far).
-
批评IREN等股缺乏基本面逻辑的“看价格”论调
只是提醒一下，关于 $IREN、$XRP、$BMNR 等“我知道很多但说不清原因，所以看一年后的价格，自行研究(DYOR)”的论调，让圈外人直翻白眼。你提到的“人们因恐惧且其为矿企而认为价格被低估”的弱点，与基本面毫无关系。我本以为会看到关于 GPU 折旧或编排(Orchestration)风险的论点，哈哈。
英文原文
Just letting you know, the “I know a lot but can’t tell you why” argument about $IREN, $XRP, $BMNR, etc. so just look at the price 1 year later DYOR, makes people outside the community roll their eyes. The weakness you mentioned that people are scared and that it’s a miner so price is undervalued has nothing to do with fundamentals. I was expecting GPU depreciation arguments or orchestration risks lol
-
回应评论并探讨IREN与TSSI的投资逻辑及评级调整。
感谢你在嵌套回复中列出了所有价格，这确实节省了大量时间！我也很好奇它们的实际表现如何。 你对 $IREN 有特定的投资论点想要辩论吗？如果有人能提出令人信服的论据，我很乐意改变我的想法。 我也很乐意进一步阐述每只股票背后的逻辑，因为原帖篇幅有限，无法容纳所有解释。 我在另一条回复中分享了关于 $TSSI 和 $IREN 的内容，解释了我为何将其中一只降级为“买入”评级。
英文原文
Thanks for commenting all the prices down in your nested reply. it actually saves a lot of time! I’m curious how they all perform too. Did you have a specific thesis behind $IREN that you’d like to debate? Happy to change my mind if someone has a convincing argument. Happy to elaborate more on explanations too behind each stock, since there’s not enough room in the original post. Shared in one of the other replies about $TSSI and $IREN why I’ve downgraded the other to buy.
-
NBIS超卖待反弹，MSCI资金流入对220亿市值影响巨大。
@rioferdy838 @hereforgoodish2 $NBIS 显然超卖且即将迎来剧烈反弹，但也许是在提前博弈11月24日的 MSCI 指数资金流入，叠加的流入量从数亿到数十亿美元不等。鉴于 Nebius 的市值仅为 220 亿美元，这种规模的资金流入会产生巨大的实质性影响。
英文原文
@rioferdy838 @hereforgoodish2 $NBIS is obviously oversold and due for a violent rebound but maybe frontrunning for Nov 24th MSCI index inflow on top which is a few hundred million to low billions inflow. That much makes a huge material difference when Nebius is only a $22B marketcap.
-
看好美股基本面改善，逢低买入，若业绩不及预期则退出。
@platochi 的观点也很有道理。当然没有唯一正确的答案，但我核心的逻辑是基本面正在改善（前瞻盈利、利润率、增长），从 $GOOG、$AMZN 等超大规模云服务商(hyperscalers)到 $HOOD、$RKLB 等成长股，全线受益。如果公司开始像 $FISV 那样不及预期并下调指引（当然可能没那么夸张 lol），那我就会考虑退出市场，而不是逢低买入。
英文原文
@platochi has a valid thesis too. There's not one correct one for sure, but my core reasoning is that there's improving fundamentals (forward earnings, margins, growth), across the board from hyperscalers like $GOOG, $AMZN down to growth stocks from $HOOD, to $RKLB. If companies started missing earnings and revising downward like $FISV, (maybe not to that extent lol) then I would be looking to exit the market instead of buying dips.
-
建议趁市场广泛抛售，买入基本面增长的股票。
@hereforgoodish2 现在有太多优质的买入机会了。买入 $META、$NBIS、$SNAP、$RDDT、$ALAB、$IBIT、$WULF、$CIFR、$RKLB、$WLAC 或 $TSM 都不会出错。 我肯定还漏掉了一些，但这次抛售范围很广，所以这是买入基本面正在增长的股票的好时机。
英文原文
@hereforgoodish2 There's too many good buys right now. Can't go wrong with $META, $NBIS, $SNAP, $RDDT, $ALAB, $IBIT, $WULF, $CIFR, $RKLB, $WLAC, or $TSM. I'm sure there's more I missed out but the selloff was broad so it's a good chance to buy into stocks with growing fundamentals.
-
IREN若做好基础设施编排具高上行，但GPU全栈执行风险剧增。
如果 $IREN 能在基础设施层面做好编排(Orchestration)，其上行空间极大；$1000亿+市值（$400股价）略显激进但有可能。垂直整合、高互联GW容量以及与 $MSFT 等超大规模云厂商的合作，使 $IREN 在 $49 时具备买入价值。然而，随着决定购买GPU，微软交易带来的执行风险已大幅上升。管理包括系统集成、软件、驱动和网络在内的完整GPU栈（$ORCL 未能做好的部分）远超传统托管(Colo)范畴。
英文原文
$IREN has extremely high upside if they get orchestration right on the infrastructure level and a $100B+ marketcap ($400) is a tad-overly ambitious but possible. Vertically integrated, high connected GW capacity, and hyperscaler deals like $MSFT make $IREN a buy at $49. However, execution risk is a much, much higher now with the Microsoft deal, now that they decided to buy GPUs. Managing the full GPU stack, including system integration, software, drivers, and networking (that $ORCL failed to do well) goes far beyond colo.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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 $IREN. But of course if they get it spot-on (which is difficult), then it has incredibly high return potential.
-
市场急跌时，$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 $META hyperscaler revenue funnel from AI. Once in a decade opportunity, but the distinction you're making isn't necessary since I haven't seen anyone make that confusion in the comments yet.
-
看好NBIS非对称收益，同时维持对CIFR等标的的多头观点。
@babyfolio 确实，$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.