个股论点
围绕单一股票的投资逻辑与仓位表态 · 共 2208 条 · 第 35 / 45 页
-
$SNAP 财报超预期且被低估，中期看涨但短期受市场抛售影响。
是的，$SNAP 的财报非常扎实，尤其是来自 Perplexity 的 4 亿美元年度经常性收入(ARR)。此外，明年还将迎来来自 memories Cloud 的运营支出(opex)削减，5 亿美元回购，且全面超预期。中期来看极度看涨，但它受困于更广泛的市场抛售。我同意其在 137 亿美元的市值下被极度低估，明年轻松有 50%+ 的上涨空间。但大量的期权流向(Option flow)加上更广泛的市场抛售正在影响短期股价。
英文原文
Yeah, $SNAP earnings were incredibly solid, especially with $400m ARR from Perplexity. Then you have opex cuts from memories Cloud coming in next year, $500m buyback, beat across the board. Incredibly bullish mid term, but it got caught in the broader selloff. I'd agree it's extremely undervalued at $13.7B, easy 50%+ going into next year. But there's a lot of option flow + broader sell-off affecting near term stock prices.
-
高贝塔股大幅回调，建议基本面完好者逢低布局。
全面的回调简直令人作呕。 高贝塔值成长股过去5天的表现： • $SMCI -26.11% • $RKLB -19.85% • $CRCL -19.81% • $NBIS -19.14% • $WYFI -18.55% • $ALAB -16.64% • $CRDO -16.8% • $HOOD -14.36% • $ASTS -14.09% • $IREN -13.22% • $AMD -11.63% • $CIFR -10.05% • $RDDT -9.00% 像 $RGTI (-27.33%)、$QBUT (-25.5%)、$QBTS (-25.43%)、$OKLO (-17.04%) 等没有收入的投机性股票，普遍出现了更大的回调。 当政府重新开放时，我预计许多投机性名称将继续下跌，而基本面完好无损的公司（例如 $CIFR、$NBIS、$TSM、$HOOD、$RDDT）将会恢复。 当前合约市场数据： 11月12日-15日：22% 11月15日：49%（下周某时约有一半几率） 11月30日：92% 在市场极度恐慌且下月第三次降息概率超过75%时，利用大幅回调布局高贝塔值股票（如果基本面完好）是绝佳时机。 像这样的大规模抛售也说明了为什么你不应该做剩余期限<30天的短期期权，即使你对 $SNAP 或 $CIFR 的财报判断正确。
英文原文
Pretty disgusting correction across the board. Last 5 days for high-beta growth stocks: • $SMCI -26.11% • $RKLB -19.85% • $CRCL -19.81% • $NBIS -19.14% • $WYFI -18.55% • $ALAB -16.64% • $CRDO -16.8% • $HOOD -14.36% • $ASTS -14.09% • $IREN -13.22% • $AMD -11.63% • $CIFR -10.05% • $RDDT -9.00% Speculative no revenue stocks like ( $RGTI -27.33%, $QBUT -25.5%, $QBTS -25.43%, $OKLO -17.04% etc), had larger corrections across the board. When the government reopens, I’d expect many of the speculative names to stay down, while companies where fundamentals are in tact (eg. $CIFR, $NBIS, $TSM, $HOOD, $RDDT) would recover. Current Contract Market data: Nov 12th-15th: 22% Nov 15th: 49% (~half chance sometime in the next week) Nov 30th: 92% Great time to position into higher-beta stocks during large corrections, (if fundamentals are in-tact), especially when we're in the extreme-fear part of markets and there's 75%+ of a third rate cut next month. Broad selloffs like these are also why you don't do short dated options <30dte, even if you are correct on earnings like $SNAP or $CIFR.
-
认为$NBIS受宏观影响被低估，基本面完好是买入良机。
@hereforgoodish $NBIS 在当前价位被严重低估。它只是一只受宏观环境影响的高贝塔（High Beta）股票。 如果基本面完好，这就是一个买入机会。 https://t.co/RTbdrjXqtx
英文原文
@hereforgoodish $NBIS is very undervalued at these levels. It’s just a high beta stock affected by broader macro. If fundamentals are in tact, then it’s a buying opportunity https://t.co/RTbdrjXqtx
-
澄清 $IREN 估值争议，指出原帖低估IRR，给出10%-28%的IRR区间。
当有人说“他讨厌x”或“他有偏见”时，你没有任何理由去反驳他的观点。我不确定很多 $IREN 社区成员是去攻击个人而不是数据，但这无助于解决问题。 回到主题，你说得对，原帖确实遗漏了 $IREN 200兆瓦数据中心（数据中心）的残值，其使用寿命通常长于5年。因此，这低估了内部收益率(IRR)。 但该表格在隔离合同经济学（而非企业价值EV）方面在数学上是正确的，所以你们争论的是两回事。 现实介于你的帖子和他们的帖子之间： -> 无杠杆内部收益率(IRR) ~10.2% -> 可能的IRR案例 <20% (14%-18%) -> 22-28% 是激进情况，且一切顺利（伴随显著的数据中心终端实现和融资）
英文原文
You have no argument when you say his point is wrong because "He hates x" or "He is biased". I'm not sure a lot of $IREN community members go after a person themself instead of the data but it's not productive. Going back to the topic, you're right that the original post is missing residual value for $IREN's 200 MW datacenter, which usually has longer life than 5Y. So it understates IRR. But the table is mathematically correct for isolating contract economics, not EV, so you're arguing two different things. Reality lies in between your post and theirs: -> Unlevered IRR ~10.2% -> Likely IRR case <20% (14%-18%) -> 22-28% aggressive and everything goes right (with significant terminal datacenter realization and financing)
-
分析 $OSS 与 Andruil 合作潜力及订单规模，仅少量持仓追踪。
很高兴看到关于 $OSS 的其他观点，我个人只有在他们与 Andruil 合作并成为像 $KRKNF 那样的核心供应商时才感兴趣。 看起来他们目前仅处于 $650 万合同订单的测试阶段。但话说回来，考虑到他们的市值仅为 1.2 亿美元，这已经是一笔不小的数目了。 _ 披露更新：我仅持有几百美元作为表现追踪器，并非投资。
英文原文
Good to know other thoughts about $OSS, I personally was only interested in it if they worked with Andruil and became a core supplier like $KRKNF. It looks like they're just in testing stage with the $6.5m contract order. But then again considering their marketcap is only $120m that's quite a lot. _ disclosure update: I have a few hundred dollars worth just as a performance tracker, not an investment.
-
看好AMD上行潜力及HOOD长期价值，短期略高估
两者都是优质的多头标的，$AMD 拥有极高的上行潜力（仅参考 $NVDA 的市值即可见），且 Sam Altman 和 Elon 确认 AMD 在前沿模型中具有极高效用，这是极其积极的信号。 $HOOD 是一家世代级的公司。高确信度的长期持有。短期来看，我认为它像 $RKLB 一样略微高估。
英文原文
Both good longs, $AMD has extremely high upside potential (just looking at $NVDA's marketcap) and Sam Altman/Elon confirming AMD has high utility for frontier models is extremely positive. $HOOD generational company. High conviction long term. Short-term I'd argue it's a tad overvalued like $RKLB.
-
TI文章揭示ORCL HPC低毛利，对比NBIS高毛利，市场因Altman承诺对ORCL存疑。
部分原因在于 TI 的抹黑文章，显示 $ORCL 因其 AI 高性能计算(HPC) 部门利用率低、编排失败，毛利率仅为 14%，而 $NBIS 等目前毛利率为 71.4%（平均 50-70%）。 这充分表明 HPC 部门是护城河，甚至超大规模云厂商在基础设施建设上也失败了。 除此之外，Sam Altman 向每家超大规模云厂商承诺了高得离谱的未来收入，因此市场对 Oracle 持有一定的怀疑态度。
英文原文
Well part of it is the TI hit piece which showed $ORCL was only doing 14% gross margins for their AI HPC segments due to low utilization, orchestration failures, while $NBIS and others were currently sitting at 71.4% (50-70% avg) Just goes to show HPC segments are moats and that even hyperscaleds failed on buildouts. Apart from that, Sam Altman has been promising every single hyperscaler stupidly high forward revenue, so markets are pricing in a bit of skepticism with Oracle.
-
AMD市值潜力取决于AI模型应用，但鉴于对台积电依赖，仓位较小。
嗯，如果萨姆·阿尔特曼(Sam Altman)和埃隆·马斯克(Elon Musk)关于前沿模型能充分利用AMD的说法属实，$AMD 的市值潜力有望达到 $NVDA 目前的水平。不过，OpenAI 目前承诺每年为 $AMD 带来额外数百亿美元的前瞻性收入，这显得有些过于乐观，让我们拭目以待。这也正是我的 $AMD 仓位相对于 $TSM 较小的原因，以及我说过无需将 AMD 与 NVDA 或 $IREN 与 $NBIS 进行比较的原因，因为所有环节都依赖于 $TSM。
英文原文
Hmm, $AMD has potential to be $NVDA’s current market cap if what Sam Altman + Elon Musk says is true in how frontier models can use it well. Then again OpenAi is promising too many things right now in terms of an additional tens of billions of forward revenue a year to $AMD, so we’ll see. That’s kind of why my AMD position sizes were small relative to $TSM, and why I’ve said you don’t need to compare AMD to NVDA or $IREN to $NBIS when every single thing is reliant on $TSM
-
建议RDDT收购SNAP并削减成本以盈利，同时推出新产品。
举个例子： $RDDT 应该尝试收购 $SNAP，然后通过削减增强现实(AR)业务部门、精简管理层以及降低谷歌云(GCP)成本来实现盈利（这很容易）。监管机构不会阻止这一收购，但会阻止 $META 收购它。 然后推出类似 X 银行服务的新产品。Reddit 在其 NFT 市场业务上曾有过一些活力，但从未跟进落实。
英文原文
So for examples: $RDDT should try and acquire $SNAP then turn it profitable (easy) by cutting AR segments, management, cutting GCP costs. (Regulators wouldn’t block this but they’d block $META acquiring it). Then go out and launch new products like what X does with banking. Reddit had some sparks of life with their NFT marketplace stuff, but they never followed through.
-
不建议在NBIS暴跌时卖看跌期权，因低估且可能反弹。
@Mattyice112233 @Docofgothm 在 $NBIS 出现此类极端下跌时，我不卖出看跌期权(Cash-Secured Puts)，因为它随时可能反弹至 $130+ 的行权价。鉴于当前的权利金，像 $160+ 这样深度虚值(Far OTM)的期权并不值得操作。你并不总是需要卖出期权，尤其是当你认为某只股票被极度低估时。
英文原文
@Mattyice112233 @Docofgothm I don't sell CC's on $NBIS on extreme drops like this since it can rebound to $130+ strikes any day. Far OTM ones like $160+ are not worth it given current premiums. You don't always need to write options, especially if you think a stock is extremely undervalued.
-
类比$HOOD，看好$RDDT利用高利润进行收购以驱动营收增长。
与$HOOD（金融科技）类似的论点也适用于$RDDT（社交媒体）： 高粘性用户群，极高的盈利能力 -> 为该用户群推出新产品 -> 通过利润进行收购 -> 增长营收。 $RDDT -> 高粘性用户群，极高的盈利能力 -> 新产品发布（严格来说不是，但在某种意义上是，比如出售数据用于AI） -> 通过利润进行收购（缺失） -> 增长营收。 Reddit本季度才首次实现持续盈利，因此我希望未来几个季度能通过利润驱动收购来推动营收增长，就像Facebook通过收购WhatsApp/Instagram实现增长一样。
英文原文
Also similar thesis to $HOOD (fintech) for $RDDT (social media) Sticky customer base, extreme profitability -> new product launches for that customer base -> acquisitions through profitability -> grow revenue. $RDDT -> sticky customer base, extreme profitability -> new product launches (not really, but kinda in a sense, like selling data for AI) -> acquisitions through profitability (missing) -> grow revenue. Reddit only achieved consistent profitability this quarter, so I'm hoping acquisitions through profits would drive forward revenue like how Facebook grew acquiring whatsapp/instagram in the next few quarters.
-
看好RDDT网络效应及RKLB太空赛道潜力，类比META与HOOD估值逻辑。
是的，量子计算一直是个泡沫，但鉴于市场有时非理性，我不做空。至于互联网上最爱/最恨的社区，我个人认为 $RDDT 的规模化路径很清晰：作为全球第七大网站，凭借网络效应它将长期存在。回顾推特上市时，估值4000亿美元，年营收37-50亿（自由现金流为负），年增长20-30%。$RDDT 季度营收5.85亿，毛利率91%，EBITDA 2.36亿（占营收40%），估值约340亿。鉴于它不像 $META 那样每次收购都面临全球反垄断审查，我认为 Reddit 有潜力像 $HOOD 那样增长，即在IPO后不久就大量盈利并持续扩大利润率。因此，它可以专注于利用粘性用户群扩大营收/收购（例如 Robinhood 收购加密货币交易所）。是的，$RKLB 有清晰的轨迹走向3500亿美元+市值，像 SpaceX 一样，因为太空应用众多且涉及巨大国家安全风险，大量投资将涌入该领域。
英文原文
Yeah quantum was always a bubble, but I don't short given how irrational they are sometimes. As for the Internet's favorite/most hated community, I personally see the path to scale for $RDDT just how it's the 7th most popular website on the internet and it will be around for awhile just due to network effect. Just going back to Twitter when it was public, it was valued at $40B, doing $3.7-5B yearly revenue (with negative FCF) growing roughly 20-30% Y/Y. $RDDT is doing $585m quarterly revenue, 91% gross margins, 236M EBITDA (40% of revenue) ~34B valuation. And given it's not at the scale of $META where every acquisition has global anti-trust lawyers on their asses, I just see Reddit with the potential to grow like $HOOD where they're printing money so close to after IPO and keeps on expanding margins. So they can just focus on expanding revenue/acquisitions with their sticky userbase (eg. how Robinhood acquired crypto exchanges). Yeah $RKLB has such a clear trajectory toward $350B+ MC like SpaceX since there's so many applications you can do with Space + huge national security risk so lot of investments will pour into the sector.
-
分析CRWV收购失败及高息债务劣势，对比NBIS优势并指出政府合同潜力。
对于 $CRWV 而言，问题在于其收购 $CORZ 未能获批。Core Scientific 本应比那 90 亿美元的收购价带来更大价值。若能在其现有合同基础上，通过收购为全栈模型（Full Stack Model）增加更多 GW 级算力，将是极度看涨（omega bullish）的利好。 Coreweave 每年还有超过 10 亿美元的利息债务，这对自由现金流（FCF）和利润率造成了极大拖累（相比之下，$NBIS、$CIFR、$IREN 使用的是可转换票据）。 $NBIS 已经实现了 $CRWV 的全栈垂直整合，但拥有更高的利用率、更好的编排/性能（根据其白皮书）、无巨额债务利息以及高积压订单，因此市场看到了其他风险更低、上行空间更大的替代方案。 不过，如果 $CRWV 获得美国政府合同批准，那将是另一个巨大的看涨催化剂。但我们已经看到像与 $META 签订的 140 亿美元这样的大型合同积压订单，然而其债务利息确实荒谬。
英文原文
For $CRWV it was $CORZ acquisition failing to get approved. Core scientific would have delivered so much more value than that 9B price tag. Having more GW capacity added to their full stack model (on top of their existing contract with them), would have been omega bullish with the acquisition. Coreweave also has $1B+ in interest debt a year, which is an extremely big drag on FCF + margins (compared to $NBIS, $CIFR, $IREN with did convertible notes). $NBIS already achieved what $CRWV did with full-stack vertical integration, but higher utilization + better orchestration/performance (as per their whitepaper) + no massive interest on debt + high backlogs, so markets see other lower risk, higher upside, alternatives emerging. If $CRWV get approved for US Gov contracts though, that would be another huge catalyst upside. But we already have visibility into large contracted backlogs like $14B with $META but the debt interest is just ridiculous.
-
政府重开引发资产抛售，看好NBIS、META等优质资产错杀机会。
政府重新开放（可能在14号左右）真是个奇怪的催化剂，但确实如此。现在确实是资产抛售。没想到$BTC会再次跌破10万美元，但它确实跌了。然后是$NBIS，其核心业务（50-70%+利润率）明年ARR达50亿美元（无增长），净资产值110亿美元+，其中58亿为现金。市值270亿美元。$META，远期市盈率<22或更低？我听说有19倍市盈率的说法，我只是凭记忆。它仍在快速增长，在这个规模下更令人印象深刻。只是叙事和一次性税收导致价格下跌。还有其他有趣的买入如$RKLB、$RDDT等，但这类修正会抹去很多泡沫如$OKLO、$RGTI，但优质资产也遭殃。
英文原文
Gov reopening (likely around ~14th) is such a weird catalyst but it is. Yeah it's an asset fire sale right now. Didn't think $BTC would go below $100k again but it did. Then there's $NBIS, $5B ARR (50-70%+ margin) core business 1Y from now (without any growth), and NAV 11B+ with 5.8B of it cash. Valued at $27B. $META, <22 forward p/e or less? I've heard 19 p/e floated, I'm just going off the top of my head. It's still growing rapidly, which is even more impressive at that scale. Just narratives and one-time-tax dropped price. Lot of other fun buys like $RKLB, $RDDT and others too, but these types of corrections wipe off a lot of froth like $OKLO, $RGTI, but great assets get caught in the crossfire.
-
感冒简评：META/NBIS错杀强买，警示IREN/ETH，宏观看多AI基建。
11月4日 - 个股分析 + 宏观 清仓抛售：$META • $NBIS • $IBIT 强烈买入：$RDDT • $RKLB • $WLAC • $CIFR • $LTC • $SOL • $CORZ 存储：南亚科 $2408，SK海力士 $HXSCL，美光 $MU 买入：$AMZN • $DELL • $SMCI • $ALAB • $CRDO • $TSM • $AMD • $FLNC • $TE 警示：$IREN • $ETH • $BMNR • $CRCL 量子计算：$IONQ • $RGTI • $QBTS 通常我会逐一列表，列出更多的买卖建议并解释每一个原因，但我感冒了。 所以今天只做极简版，懒得研究更多股票。喝着汤，只关注几只股票并给出更广泛的概述。（如果有人问，我会帮忙解释。） $META： 再次强烈、强烈、强烈建议在财报大跌15%+及盘后下跌时买入。 营收超预期。每股收益(EPS)超预期。远期盈利完好。 如果计入一次性税收，EPS为$7.25对$6.67，但显示为$1.05（大幅不及预期），导致算法立即抛售。随后的抛售中，机械性资金流通常会将价格推得更低，但趋势通常在1-2周内反转。 利用这一点。 像“Meta在AI上花费太多”这样的叙事可能是噪音。每家Mag7公司都在增加AI资本支出，除非你从云/ASIC角度争论，否则Meta并没有做任何异常的事。有时真正的原因更愚蠢，比如算法未能识别一次性税收的标准化。 当低贝塔值的Mag7因非实质性原因下跌16%+时，有很大的获利潜力。 警示类别摘要： 不是叫卖，只是给出公平警示，让人们自行决定。 量子计算：仍无收入证明价格飙升的合理性。某些数据中心股票，即使回调后，也有远期营收+自由现金流支撑估值。 $ETH：高于$3K不是强买入（自$4.8K以来立场相同）。 $BMNR：ETH国库策略；以溢价追踪ETH价格。除非有国有化潜力（如$MSTR），否则国库策略不好。 $CRCL：下个月有巨大、巨大、巨大的股份解禁。 $IREN：$MSFT合同在标题上看起来很棒（$9B+营收，超大规模云厂商交易），但实际上利润率很差。 交易不是纯托管；$IREN吸收了~$5.8B的GPU+辅助设备资本支出。 毛利率：最好只有30%出头，自由现金流盈利能力可能降至个位数。相比之下，$NBIS的交易结构更好（$11.6M/MW/yr vs $9.7M/MW/yr）。 交易验证了超大规模云厂商将与IREN签约（正面），但交易本身很糟糕。不是卖出，只是警示那些因标题而FOMO的人。 如果你想FOMO进什么，$CIFR（AWS合同）更有意义。 _ 宏观观点： 市场一直在抛售高贝塔值股票，可能只是正常回调。 逆风： 鲍威尔暗示第三次降息不确定 -> 重新定价。 政府停摆可能延长（短期逆风）。历史上，重新开放后回调会迅速反转。 事件市场定价11月14日为结束日期（还有9天）。 如果像$NBIS（-7.9%）这样拥有惊人远期营收支撑的名字没有实质性变化，大跌时是极好的买入机会。还有像$RDDT这样发布了好财报却跌了7%的股票，也是强烈的买入机会。 泡沫在美联储收紧时破裂。我们已经有了两次降息，还有一次很可能。不要跟随那个预测了过去1次崩溃中5000次的《富爸爸穷爸爸》家伙。 AI ≠ 泡沫 yet - 由Mag7财报、真实营收和利润支撑。但如果OpenAI继续在没有资金的情况下过度承诺合同，以后可能开始像泡沫（1-2年后的投影风险）。 摘要：随着降息后的宽松，市场可能趋势向上。 数据中心建设保持完整（Mag7财报显示巨大的AI资本支出）。 回调中保持强劲的板块：存储 • 能源 • 半导体 • 连接 • 新云 保持多头，在这些回调中建立仓位
英文原文
November 4th - Stock Analysis + Macro Fire Sale: $META • $NBIS • $IBIT Strong Buys: $RDDT • $RKLB • $WLAC • $CIFR • $LTC • $SOL • $CORZ Memory: Nanya $2408, SK Hynix $HXSCL, $MU Buy: $AMZN • $DELL • $SMCI • $ALAB • $CRDO • $TSM • $AMD • $FLNC • $TE Warnings: $IREN • $ETH • $BMNR • $CRCLQuantum: $IONQ • $RGTI • $QBTS Normally I'd go down the list, have more buy/sells, and talk about every single explanation but I caught a cold. So just doing an extremely light version today and didn’t feel like researching more stocks. Just focusing on a few with a broader overview while I drink some soup. (Will help explain if someone asks though.) $META: Once again, Strong, Strong, Strong Buy on the 15%+ earnings drop and post-ER drop. Beat on Revenue. Beat on EPS. Forward earnings intact. If you factor in one-time tax, EPS was $7.25 to $6.67, but it showed as $1.05 (huge miss), which led to algorithmic sell-offs immediately after. Following sell-offs, mechanical flows often push prices lower, but trends usually reverse in 1–2 weeks. Take advantage of this. Narratives like “Meta spending too much on AI” are likely noise. Every Mag7 company is increasing AI capex, Meta isn’t doing anything unusual unless you argue from a cloud/ASIC standpoint. Sometimes the real reason is dumber like algorithms not recognizing one-time tax normalization. Lot of profit potential when lower-beta Mag7 drops 16%+ on nothing material. Warnings Category TLDR: Not calling sells, just giving fair warnings so people can decide for themselves. Quantum: Still no revenue to justify price surges. Certain data center stocks, even after corrections, have forward revenue + FCF to back valuations. $ETH: Not a strong buy above $3K (same stance since $4.8K). $BMNR: ETH treasury play; tracks ETH price with a premium. Treasury plays aren’t good unless potential for nationalization (eg. $MSTR). $CRCL: Massive, massive, massive share unlock coming next month. $IREN: The $MSFT contract looks great in headlines ($9B+ revenue, Hyperscaler deal), but in reality, margins are poor. Deal isn’t pure colo; $IREN absorbs ~$5.8B capex in GPUs + ancillary equipment. Gross margins: low 30s at best, can drop to single-digit FCF profitability. By comparison, $NBIS had a structurally better deal ($11.6M/MW/yr vs $9.7M/MW/yr). The deal validated that hyperscalers will sign with IREN (positive), but the deal itself was terrible.Not a sell, just a warning for people FOMOing the headline. If you want to FOMO into something, $CIFR (AWS contract) makes more sense. _ Macro View: Markets have been selling off high-beta stocks, likely just a normal correction. Headwinds: Powell signaling a third rate cut isn’t certain -> repricing. Gov shutdown likely extends (short-term headwind). Historically, corrections reverse quickly after reopen. Event markets price Nov 14th as end date (9 days out). If there’s no material change for names like $NBIS (-7.9%), backed by insane forward revenue, great buy on the dip. Also stuff like $RDDT that posted great ER but dropped 7.% also strong buying opportunity. Bubbles pop under Fed tightening. We've had two rate cuts, and another still likely. Don’t follow the Rich Dad Poor Dad dude who predicted 5000 of the last 1 crashes. AI ≠ bubble yet - backed by Mag7 earnings, real revenue, and profits. But if OpenAI keeps over-promising contracts without funds, it could start resembling one later (projection risk 1–2 years out). TLDR: Markets likely trend higher as easing follows rate cuts. Data center buildout remains intact (Mag7 earnings show huge AI capex). Sectors that stay strong on corrections: Memory • Energy • Semi • Connectivity • Neoclouds Stay long and build positions on these dips
-
计划向META定投并逢高加仓NBIS，视其为绝佳买入机会。
@rioferdy838 @Nykonikus @John12321043976 @DeepValueBagger 我将在 $610 的价格向 $META 定投(DCA)六位数的资金。对于 $NBIS，如果我会通过减仓其他头寸来获利了结，我会始终在多头仓位上进行向上摊平成本(Cost Average Up)。 但如果其他人目前没有在这些股票上持有头寸，这正是一个绝佳的买入机会。
英文原文
@rioferdy838 @Nykonikus @John12321043976 @DeepValueBagger I’ll DCA another 6 figures into $META at $610. For $NBIS I’ll always cost average up for longs if I trim other positions But if others don’t have positions they want in those right now it’s an amazing buying opportunity
-
宏观利空非个股问题，$NBIS基本面强劲，视为买入机会。
@John12321043976 @DeepValueBagger 这只是宏观层面的影响，并非个股自身的问题，因此这是一个买入机会。大多数高贝塔(高Beta)个股在没有消息的情况下今天都下跌了。但区别在于 $NBIS 拥有支撑基本面的极高远期收益(Forward Earnings)，所以这只是一个等待游戏。
英文原文
@John12321043976 @DeepValueBagger This is just macro, not happened to the individual stock so it’s a buying opportunity. Most high beta names without any news are down today. But difference is $NBIS has stupidly high forward earnings to back up fundamentals so it’s just a waiting game
-
澄清S+评级含义，指出NBIS因高利润和非对称回报入选。
@onceinliftime3 根据 @DeepValueBagger 的说法，S+ 等级是虚构的。但这仅意味着它是评级最高的类别。$NBIS 是唯一符合标准的 Neocloud（新云）公司，因其高利润率和非对称回报潜力。
英文原文
@onceinliftime3 According to @DeepValueBagger S+ is made up. But it just means it’s the highest rated category. $NBIS was the only Neocloud that fits due to high margins and asymmetrical return
-
IREN交易因承担高额CapEx且毛利远低于NBIS而显得糟糕。
当你关注自由现金流(FCF)而非营收数字时，$IREN 的交易看起来糟糕得多，因为它并非纯粹的托管服务(Colo)。当标准化至 300 MW 并对比微软(MSFT)的交易时，$IREN 预计毛利率仅为 30% 左右，甚至在悲观情景下为低个位数，而 $NBIS 则超过 50%（至少基于初步计算，我需要重新审视）。在这种情况下，$IREN 自行承担了 58 亿美元的 GPU 及辅助设备资本支出(CapEx)。
英文原文
The deal looks a lot worse for $IREN when you look into FCF generated more instead of revenue numbers since it's not pure colo. When you normalize to 300 MW and compare MSFT deals $IREN is projected to do ~30s gross or even low single digits in bear cases, and $NBIS ~50%+ (at least from initial calculations, I need to revisit) In this case, IREN is taking on the $5.8 billion CapEx for the GPUs and ancillary equipment itself.
-
对比CIFR与IREN，认为前者估值合理，后者合同条款差且利润率低。
对于 $CIFR，当前盈利无关紧要，市场定价基于远期盈利。乍看之下，除了通过 Fluidstack 现有的 $GOOGL 合作外，AWS 的交易看起来棒极了。因此其 20% 的涨幅实至名归。 另一方面，$IREN 的合同细看之下越来越糟。 营收不重要，重要的是该营收带来的自由现金流(FCF)/利润率，尤其是考虑到他们正在花费 58 亿美元购买 GPU。我看过一些保守情景测算，显示其年化营业利润仅约 9800 万美元/年，这真的太低了。 即便乐观估计，毛利率也在 30% 以下甚至 20% 出头，而非其他人引用的 90%+ 的高性能计算(HPC)板块。这才是规模化后的利润率现实。 $IREN 是在购买资产，而非人们一直声称的提供托管服务(colocation service)。 $NBIS 与微软(MSFT)的交易在标准化至 300MW 后，其盈利能力和毛利率远优于 $IREN。当然，我还需要花更多时间进行建模。
英文原文
For $CIFR, doesn't matter about current earnings, market prices in forward earnings. And at first glance AWS deal looks amazing on top of their existing $GOOGL deals through Fluidstack. So well deserving of their 20% bump. For $IREN on the other hand, the contract worse and worse when you examine it more. Revenue does not matter. FCF/margins from that revenue is what matters, especially since they're spending $5.8bn GPUs. I've seen some conservative-case calculations where they generate ~Annualized operating profit 98m+/year, which is really low. Even so optimistically, gross margins are in the <30s or even 20s, and not the 90%+ HPC segments that others are quoting. This is the reality of margins at scale. IREN is buying the asset, rather than the colocation service people kept claiming $IREN would do. $NBIS deal with MSFT was extremely better than IREN’s in terms of profitability and margins when normalized to 300 MW. But of course I need to spend more time on modeling.
-
对比NBIS与IREN微软合约，前者利润率更高且能产生自由现金流。
经过更深入的研究，$NBIS 与 $MSFT 的交易在标准化至 300 MW 后，其盈利能力和利润率似乎远优于 $IREN。 这不仅仅关乎营收，因为如果不能产生自由现金流(FCF)，营收就没那么有用。 对于 $IREN： 总合同价值 97 亿美元 GPU 资本支出(Capex) 58 亿美元，包括辅助设备 ~38% 的毛利率。 $NBIS 51.76%+ 的毛利率。 我需要做更多计算来验证，这只是在交易差异方面的一次快速深度研究计算。
英文原文
After looking into it more, looks like $NBIS's deal with $MSFT was largely better than $IREN's in terms of profitability and margins when normalized to 300 MW. It's not purely about revenue, since if you're not generating FCF from it, it's not that useful. For $IREN: $9.7bn total contract value $5.8bn GPU capex, including ancillaries ~38% gross margin. $NBIS 51.76%+ gross margin. I need to do more calculations to verify, this was just a quick deep-research calculation in terms of deal differences.
-
IREN/CIFR涨幅回吐，NBIS回调提供买入良机。
哇，$IREN 和 $CIFR 刚刚抹去了其涨幅。至少对于 $IREN 而言，我想市场已经提前计入了超大规模云服务商(hyperscaler)的合同预期。 不过 $CIFR 的 AWS 公告确实让所有人都大吃一惊。 $NBIS 随大盘下跌，但鉴于整个 Neocloud 行业因超大规模云服务商合同接连公布以及财报季(ERs)期间前景极为看涨，这 -5% 的回调买入机会极好。
英文原文
Wow $IREN and $CIFR just wiped out its gains. For $IREN at least, I guess the market was pricing in a hyperscaler contract already. $CIFR AWS announcement was a really big surprise to everyone though. $NBIS just dropped with the rest of the market but an extremely good -5% dip buy since the whole Neocloud industry is really bullish with hyperscaler contracts announced left and right + during ERs.
-
IREN完成重大去风险事件，值得重估，需时间建模。
@moninvestor 就像人们常说的手越大越好（~190亿美元 $NBIS 对比 ~90亿美元 $IREN）。 半开玩笑地说，这对 $IREN 来说是一个实质性的去风险事件，值得重新评级。我需要更多时间来进行估值。 （这是制作层级列表的人，如果其他金融X用户想做一个的话） https://t.co/oefhQy7Trn
英文原文
@moninvestor Like what they say with hands, the bigger the better (~$19B $NBIS vs ~9B $IREN). Half-joking aside, this was a material de-risking event for $IREN and deserves re-rating. Will need more time to do valuations (This was the tierlist maker if any other finx wanted to make one) https://t.co/oefhQy7Trn
-
维持NBIS看涨目标，看好新云服务商整体利好及NBIS高非对称性。
我仍维持 $NBIS 1年目标价 $400 的看涨观点，但逢低平均成本是个好主意。 $IREN 今天刚获得 $MSFT 的 90 亿美元订单，$GOOGL 也刚刚宣布融资，这对所有新云服务商(Neoclouds)来说总体是利好。 几家挖矿公司因该交易大幅降低了风险，但我仍认为 Nebius 具有最高的非对称性(Asymmetry)。
英文原文
I still maintain $NBIS $400 bull case 1Y PT but it’s good to cost average. $IREN just got a $9B deal from $MSFT today and $GOOGL just announced financing so it’s generally bullish for all Neoclouds. Several miners got de-risked a lot today from the deal, but I’d still say Nebius has highest asymmetry.
-
质疑Meta用户数据，建议资本支出聚焦基础模型竞争。
@doctarzz @zackslab 是的，我同意他们可能稍微夸大了10亿月活跃用户(MAU)的数据。 作为投资者，如果资本支出(capex)能用于在基础模型层面与ChatGPT/Gemini竞争，我会更高兴，因为FAIR/Meta超级智能正在做一些相当酷的事情。 我们很可能会很快看到他们推广独立的AI应用。
英文原文
@doctarzz @zackslab Yeah I'd agree they probably inflated 1B MAU a bit. I'd be happier as an investor if capex went to compete vs ChatGPT/Gemini on the foundational model side since FAIR/Meta Superintelligence is doing some pretty cool stuff. We'll likely see them promote the standalone AI soon
-
META财报后算法抛售属非理性，基本面强劲，正逢低买入。
就 $META 而言，我的观点是：每股收益(EPS) 1.05美元对比预估 6.67美元，是财报发布后算法抛售的主要触发因素，因为他们未计入 7.25美元的一次性税收细节。做市商(MM)的期权相关资金流和机械对冲触发 -> 做空股票以保持对冲，并引发次日抛售+散户清洗。每个人都需要一个“叙事”来解释这次下跌，所以这次是“天哪 $META 在AI资本支出(capex)上烧钱！”，尽管这很愚蠢且业绩其实很棒。下跌是算法性的，基本面不仅完好，而且好于预期。当然人们阅读叙事导致更多恐慌性抛售，但一旦消化信息，他们会发现抛售很愚蠢。所以我正在利用这次下跌。最好忽略媒体叙事，关注实际存在的情况，就像 $GOOGL 在 145美元时那样。我们可以争论 $META 的AI是否糟糕以及资本支出是否在全行业陷入黑洞，但基本面完好且在增长。
英文原文
So with $META at least, my take is that EPS $1.05 vs est. $6.67 was the primary trigger algorithmic selloff immediately after earning report since they didn't get the $7.25 EPS one-time tax nuance. Option related flows and mechanical hedging by MMs triggered -> short stock to stay hedged and there's day 2 selling + retail flush. Everyone needs some "narrative" to explain that drop so in this case, it was "omg $META spending money on capex on AI!", even though it's just stupid and earnings were amazing. Drop was algorithmic and fundamentals are not just in-tact, they're better than expected. Of course people read the narratives and this leads to more panic-selling, but once people digest the information, they'll see the selloff is stupid. So I'm taking advantage of the drop. Better to ignore the media narrative and go with what's actually there like with $GOOGL at $145. We can have another argument whether or not $META AI is crap or not and capex is going into a black hole across the board but fundamentals are intact and growing.
-
地缘风险被高估，美国必护台以保AI供应链核心。
关于 $TSM - 说得好。从美国投资者的角度来看，台积电（$TSM）在“台湾可能被入侵”这件事上，总是一个令人头疼的逆风因素。不过，这同时也是一个过于关键的国家安全议题。我相信，美国若有任何国家威胁到台湾，一定会出兵干预。原因很简单——台湾是整个供应链和人工智能基础设施的核心。而且，我也相信，没有任何国家愿意与美国直接开战。当涉及关键矿产贸易争端时，台积电和台湾方面也都会发表声明，表示他们的供应链并未受到影响。这就是为什么地缘政治风险并不像市场定价那样高的原因。
英文原文
For $TSM - 说得好。 从美国投资者的角度来看，台积电（$TSM）在“台湾可能被入侵”这件事上，总是一个令人头疼的逆风因素。 不过，这同时也是一个过于关键的国家安全议题。我相信，美国若有任何国家威胁到台湾，一定会出兵干预。原因很简单——台湾是整个供应链和人工智能基础设施的核心。 而且，我也相信，没有任何国家愿意与美国直接开战。 当涉及关键矿产贸易争端时，台积电和台湾方面也都会发表声明，表示他们的供应链并未受到影响。 这就是为什么地缘政治风险并不像市场定价那样高的原因。
-
看好ALAB/CRDO连接技术爆发，建议持有至明年，提及MINT非对称收益。
@soulbiri1 $ALAB 和 $CRDO 上涨 15%+ 是意料之中的，因为随着数据中心建设，连接技术（Connectivity）正像内存（Memory）$MU/三星海力士那样疯狂爆发。 我个人会持有它们到明年，也许稍微减仓一点点。 $MINT 只是非对称上行（Asymmetrical Upside）。致 @Neat_Lama，这是专辑的第二首歌。https://t.co/yvd68BBX0R
英文原文
@soulbiri1 $ALAB + $CRDO 15%+ increase was expected due to connectivity going insane like memory $MU/Sk Hynix on data center buildout. I'd personally hold them into next year, maybe trim a tiny bit. $MINT was just asymmetrical upside. To @Neat_Lama, here's another song #2 of the album. https://t.co/yvd68BBX0R
-
推荐年末满仓MINT组合（META/IBIT/NBIS/TSM），利用错杀与高非对称回报。
只有四只股票： 🍬 MINT 拥有极其高、非对称的回报。 意味着低资本风险，高上行回报。 这仅适用于2025年11月和12月。 就是它... MINT 关于为何在2025年底满仓MINT的解释： M = $META I = $IBIT N = $NBIS T = $TSM 将这些神圣的成长型公司纳入你的投资组合，你可以让呼吸更清新，从而吸引Sydney Sweeney： Mag7。加密货币。AI数据中心。半导体。 $META - Meta ___________ 愚蠢的抛售。 营收超预期。每股收益超预期。强劲指引。 当你看到营收512.4亿美元（同比+26.25%），净利润27.1亿美元（同比-82.73%）时，纸面上看起来极其糟糕。 🟢 营收：512.4亿美元 vs. 预期494.1亿美元 剔除一次性税收影响 → 🟢 每股收益：7.25美元 vs. 预期6.67美元 包含一次性税收影响 → 🔴 每股收益：1.05美元 vs. 预期6.67美元 我猜测最初的抛售是由算法驱动的，随后由机械性资金流引起。许多高频交易(HFT)和新闻解析系统会对直接从数据源（彭博、路透等）拉取的头条每股收益数字做出反应。 如果报告的GAAP每股收益（1.05美元）与共识预期（6.67美元）并列显示，系统会将其标记为大幅不及预期。显然这是推测性的，但许多模型并未编程以归一化处理一次性税收费用（这是新的），也不会知道去查看实际超预期的调整后每股收益（7.25美元）。 现在新闻声称抛售是由于AI资本支出惊喜所致。如果接受这个说法，因“AI资本支出增加”而下跌15%+纯粹是叙事，毫无意义，因为$MSFT、$GOOGL、$AMZN、$TSLA以及每一个Mag7都在增加资本支出。 $META做同样的事却遭到抛售说不通，除非人们认为它只是进入一个没有投资回报的黑洞（市场不同意，因为AI基本上在推动$SPY）。 一旦周末有时间让人们消化实际发生的情况，恢复将是极强的买入机会。误读+愚蠢的叙事可能导致短期过度反应（1-2个交易日），通常会被逆转。 $IBIT - 比特币 ___________ 它是比特币。目前位于11万美元。 随着美国政府的支持，以及持续的货币通胀+资金流向新一代人，没有比BTC更好的通胀对冲工具了。 Polymarket仍然定价比特币在2个月内上涨40%至13万美元，即使它上涨几个百分点，你也可以在加密货币和底层资产上获得上行空间。 $NBIS - Nebius ___________ 核心业务估值：310-365亿美元 分部加总（现金、资产、投资组合）：~106亿美元（削减40% = ~63亿美元） 基准情景估值：~390亿美元 → 即使零增长也有高上行空间 核心业务有望在FY26-27实现~50亿美元年度经常性收入(ARR)，60-70%毛利率，30%息税折旧摊销前利润(EBITDA)目标。 通过再达成一个超大规模云厂商协议+SMB扩张，实现80-120亿美元ARR可能证明~1000亿美元估值合理。 无有毒债务，高GPU利用率，全栈架构 → 更高的经营杠杆。 你可以看我引用的要点比较，以便你对$NBIS vs $IREN做出自己的判断。 然而，我将始终维持$NBIS拥有包括$IREN到$CIFR在内的最高非对称回报，因为现有的超大规模云厂商协议、企业客户（Shopify, Accenture）、政府客户、1GW容量、来自全栈的高毛利率等。 这并不是说来自$WULF的Fluidstack + Google协议以及其他容量方面没有高上行空间。 Nebius的下行风险最低。而且它真的、真的有高上行空间。 $TSM ______________ 它是AI交易的中心。 他们已经指引利润率增加——这是天文数字般的。 营收：331亿美元 vs. 315亿美元预期。 每股收益：2.92美元 vs. 2.59美元预期。 指引：322-334亿美元 vs. 320亿美元预期。 他们超收了营收指引，利润率增加，他们印钱的速度真是天文数字。 财报前交易在305-310美元，现在回到300美元。 这是一家万亿+美元的公司，同比增长30%+且利润率提升——到底怎么回事。 我之前在$GOOGL 145美元和$HOOD 20美元时说过同样的话。他们印钱。 没必要辩论$ALAB vs $CRDO，$IREN vs $NBIS，$AMD vs $NVDA。 $TSM是整个AI建设周期的中心，所以这只是等待游戏。 _ 就是它$MINT。 享受歌曲的预告，有点炸。🎶
英文原文
There’s only Four stocks: 🍬 MINT That have ABSURDLY HIGH, asymmetrical return. Meaning Low Capital Risk. High Upside Return. This is only for Nov + Dec 2025. Here it is... MINT An explanation of why to full port MINT for end of year 2025: M = $META I = $IBIT N = $NBIS T = $TSM With these four holy growth companies in your portfolio, you can make your breath smell better so you can pull Sydney Sweeney: Mag7. Crypto. AI Data Center. Semiconductor. $META - Meta ___________ Stupid sell-off. Revenue Beat. EPS Beat. Strong guidance. It looks extremely bad on paper when you look at Revenue $51.24B (+26.25% Y/Y), Net income $2.71B (-82.73% Y/Y). 🟢 Revenue: $51.24B vs. est. $49.41B Without one-off tax → 🟢 EPS: $7.25 vs. est. $6.67 With one-off tax → 🔴 EPS: $1.05 vs. est. $6.67 My guess was the initial sell-off was algorithmically driven, then caused by mechanical flows. Many high-frequency trading (HFT) and news-parsing systems react to headline EPS numbers pulled directly from data feeds (Bloomberg, Reuters, etc.). If the reported GAAP EPS ($1.05) is printed alongside a consensus of $6.67, the system flags it as a massive miss. Obviously this is speculative, but many models aren't programmed to normalize for one-time tax charges (which is new) and won’t know to look at adjusted EPS ($7.25), which actually beat. Now news are claiming the sell-off was due to AI capex surprise. If we go with this, -15%+ on “AI capex spending increasing” is just pure narratives and means absolutely jack since $MSFT, $GOOGL, $AMZN, $TSLA, and every single Mag7 is increasing on capex. $META doing the same and selling off doesn’t make sense, unless people believe it’s just going into a black hole with no ROI (which markets disagree since AI is basically running $SPY). Extremely strong buy on recovery once there’s time over the weekend for people to digest what actually happened. Misreads + stupid narratives can cause short-term overreactions (1–2 sessions), often reversed. $IBIT - Bitcoin ___________ It’s Bitcoin.And sitting at $110k. Bitcoin is here to stay with US government support, and with all the ongoing currency inflation + flow of money going to newer generation, there’s no better hedge against inflation than BTC. Polymarket still prices Bitcoin 40% to $130k in 2 months’ time, even if it moves up a few percent you can have upside on CCs and upside on the underlying asset. $NBIS - Nebius ___________ Core business valuation: $31–36.5B Sum-of-parts (cash, assets, portfolio): ~$10.6B (slashed 40% = ~$6.3B) Base case valuation: ~$39B → high upside even with zero growth Core business on track for ~$5B ARR (FY26–27), 60–70% gross margins, and 30% EBITDA target. Hitting $8–12B ARR (via one more hyperscaler deal + SMB expansion) could justify ~$100B valuation. No toxic debt, high GPU utilization, full-stack architecture → higher operating leverage. You can look at the bullet point comparison that I quoted so you can make your own judgement on $NBIS vs $IREN for example. However, I’ll always maintain $NBIS has the highest asymmetrical return over anything including $IREN to $CIFR due to existing hyperscaler deals, enterprise clients (Shopify, Accenture), Government Clients, 1GW capacity, high gross margins from full-stack, and many others. That’s not saying there’s not high upside from $WULF from Fluidstack + Google deals, and others from capacity. The downside risk on Nebius is the lowest. And it has really, really high upside. $TSM ______________ It’s the CENTER. OF. THE. AI. TRADE. They’ve already guided INCREASING MARGINS - which is astronomical. Revenue: $33.1B vs. $31.5B est. Earnings per Share: $2.92 vs. $2.59 est. Guidance: $32.2B – $33.4B vs. $32.0B est. They’ve beat revenue guidance, increasing margins, and it’s just astronomical how much money they’re printing. It was trading at $305–310 pre-earnings, now back at $300. It’s a $1T+ company that grew 30%+ Y/Y with their margins — what the actual. I said this about the money printer $GOOGL back at $145 and $HOOD back at $20. They print money. There's no need to debate $ALAB vs $CRDO, $IREN vs $NBIS, $AMD vs $NVDA. $TSM the center of the whole AI buildout, so it’s just a waiting game. _ There is it $MINT. Enjoy a teaser of the song, kinda a banger. 🎶
-
澄清对IREN的立场，指出其实际利润率低于宣传值，强调权衡取舍。
另外，当我发布关于 $IREN 和 $NBIS 的对比，或谈论 $IREN 拥有与 $RIOT 和 $MARA 相当的能力，并指出规模化后的利润率比算力更重要时，我并非看空 IREN，只是陈述现实情况。 同样，当人们声称他们拥有 92% 的毛利率时，如果你计入折旧和其他费用，事实并非如此。他们只是进入了另一个类别，如果你按照其他高性能计算(HPC)公司核算毛利率的方式进行标准化处理，利润率会低得多。 但这并不意味着情况糟糕，总是存在权衡取舍。
英文原文
Also when I post about comparisons between $IREN and $NBIS or talking about $IREN having comparable capacity to $RIOT and $MARA, and saying margins at scale matter more than compute, I'm not bearish on IREN, just giving the reality of the situation. Same when people try claiming they have 92% gross margins, they don't when yo factor in deprecation and other expenses. They just went into another category and if you normalize it with how other HPC companies do accounting for their gross margins, margins are a lot less. But that doesn't mean it's bad, there's always tradeoffs.
-
分析超大规模云服务商自建ASIC对NBIS等公司的长期下行风险及合约保护机制。
是的，长期来看，超大规模云服务商自建ASIC和产能，且在合约容量结束后不再使用Neoclouds，这是$NBIS等公司的下行风险。我在最初的投资逻辑中提到，$CRWV、$NBIS几乎充当$NVDA的“云业务部门”，有助于抵御来自超大规模云服务商的利润率压缩并实现业务多元化。这就是为什么超大规模云服务商将收入导向这些小型公司。但总体而言，如果你的合约条款是10年或15年，你会拥有更多保护，但收入增长幅度较小（例如$NBIS与$MSFT的交易，收入在1-2年内从约11亿美元ARR增长至38亿美元以上ARR）。话虽如此，那是4-5年后的事，目前推测为时过早。通常你会根据新信息的出现，按月进行重估或审视风险与回报。
英文原文
Yeah longer term that's the downside risk for $NBIS and others in terms of hyperscalers building out ASICs and capacity and not using Neoclouds after contracted capacity ends. I said in my original thesis that $CRWV, $NBIS and almost serve as $NVDA's cloud arm, and helps defend against margin compression from hyperscalers and diversify their business. That's why hyperscalers funnel revenue down to these small guys. But generally, you have more protection if your contract terms are 10Y or 15Y but less revenue ramp. (eg. with $NBIS $MSFT deal, revenue ramps to $3.8B+ ARR in 1-2 years on top of their ~1.1B ARR) That being said, that's 4-5 years from now, it's too far forward to speculate as of now. Usually you do things like re-rate or examine risk vs. reward month-by-month whenever new information comes out.
-
看好WEN，认为其垃圾桶后有巨大未变现收入潜力。
@moninvestor 那肯定是 @Wendys $WEN。垃圾桶后面有着巨大的、未被开发的、未变现的收入潜力。我认为 @DeepValueBagger 在他最近的帖子中也意识到了这一点。
英文原文
@moninvestor It’s gotta be @Wendys $WEN. Huge untapped, unmonetized revenue potential behind the dumpsters. I think @DeepValueBagger realized this too on his most recent post.
-
对比ASML、TSM和AMD，认为TSM在非对称回报上优势巨大。
@Docofgothm @pepemoonboy $ASML 追踪晶圆厂周期。$TSM 是对 AI 整体建设情况的衡量。在这种情况下，没有理由选择 ASML。就纯上涨空间而言，此时 $AMD 可能胜出，但在非对称回报（同等上涨空间下下行风险最低）方面，$TSM 以巨大优势胜出。
英文原文
@Docofgothm @pepemoonboy $ASML tracks fab cycles. $TSM is a measurement of AI buildout as a whole. No reason to go with ASML in that case. In terms of raw upside, maybe $AMD wins at this point, but asymmetrical returns (lowest downside for upside) $TSM wins by an enormous margin.
-
TSM凭借AI基建垄断地位可随意提价，无视下游竞争。
$TSM 可以随时提价以获得更高利润率（他们预测增长 3%），而 $NVDA 无论如何都将被迫使用其服务。此外，盈利预测如预期般大幅超预期，整个 AI 建设都建立在 $TSM 之上，它并不关心 $AMD 与 $NVDA 谁胜谁负。纯粹的垄断。
英文原文
$TSM can raise their prices anytime for higher margins (which they projected 3% increase) and $NVDA will be forced to use them anyway. Also earning projections were a blowout as expected, whole AI buildout is on top of TSM, it doesn’t care about who wins like $AMD vs $NVDA. Pure monopoly.
-
补充 $CORZ 分析：Coreweave 长期合同改善现金流并资助资本支出。
你说得对，我漏掉了 $CORZ。感谢指出，也感谢 @cazenove_uk 等人的提醒。 鉴于 $CRWV 的合并前几天已终止，现在应将其视为独立实体看待，不知怎么竟疏忽了。我会在下一篇 2/2 帖子中补充。 $CORZ 与 $CRWV 签署的 12 年期 87 亿美元 数据中心托管(Colo) 合同带来了更可预测的现金流，且约 80% 的资本支出(Capex)（约 1.96 亿美元/第三季度 2.445 亿美元）由 Coreweave 资助，这种模式对股东远比可转换债券或侵蚀利润的有毒债务利息友好。 此外，拥有约 13-15 GW 容量，Coreweave 仅占用 500 MW，且收入能抵消资本支出，这相当有趣。
英文原文
You’re right, I missed $CORZ. Thanks for pointing it out, and appreciate others like @cazenove_uk for that too. Should just treat it as standalone now given $CRWV merger got terminated the other day, don’t know how it slipped my mind. I’ll add that in the next 2/2 post. $8.7 billion colo with $CRWV over 12 years gives $CORZ more predictable cashflows, and majority of capex ~80% ($~196m/ $244.5 million Q3) or so was funded by Coreweave, which is a lot nicer of a model for shareholders than convertible debt or toxic debt interest cutting into margins. Also, with ~1.3-1.5 GW capacity, Coreweave only taking up 500 MW, and revenue offsetting capex, it’s quite interesting.
-
确认CRWV行使期权锁定110亿，将更新文章
@squarecapital3 @DeepValueBagger 是的，你说得对，$CRWV 行使了 150 兆瓦的期权，因此 110 亿美元已锁定，加上 160 亿美元的积压订单收入。我会更新我的下一篇文章，感谢指正。
英文原文
@squarecapital3 @DeepValueBagger Yeah you’re right, $CRWV exercised the 150 mw option so $11b is locked in with $16B backlog revenue. I’ll update my next post, thanks for the correction
-
SLNH依赖融资推进管线，成败取决于能否吸引资金。
谢谢！是的，对于 $SLNH 来说，其逻辑基本是：“我们有一个计划，能否通过足够的看多宣传(bullpost)来吸引更多投资者给我们资金？”如果这招奏效，上行空间巨大。如果人们不给钱，他们的整个计划就会崩溃，因为他们是一家市值很小的公司，没有其他东西来支撑其研发管线(pipeline)。是的，此时做研究很好，很多小市值公司都是绝对的宝石(gems)。
英文原文
Thanks! Yeah for $SLNH it's basically: "We have a plan, can we bullpost enough for more investors to give us money?" If that works, upside is big. If people don't give them money, their whole plan falls apart since they're a small marketcap company with nothing else to back it up their pipeline. Yeah it's good to do research during this time, a lot of small marketcaps were absolute gems.
-
SLNH产能规划难变现，下行风险致市值仅2.8亿
@_stockResearch 再次强调，$SLNH 是产能管道不等于自由现金流(FCF)/利润率(利润率)的完美例证。你可以拥有 2.8 GW 的规划产能，但这未必能实现规模化转化，且存在巨大的下行风险。这正是其市值仅为 2.8 亿美元的原因。
英文原文
@_stockResearch Also once again $SLNH is the PERFECT EXAMPLE of why capacity pipelines does not mean FCF/Margins. You can have 2.8 GW capacity lined up but that might not translate at scale and there's huge, huge downside risk. That's exactly why they're a $280m market cap.
-
看多WYFI，警示SLNH微盘股融资风险及产能变现不确定性。
我个人对 $WYFI 持看涨态度。至于 $SLNH，人们一直声称其拥有 2.8 GW 的订单管道（与 $IREN 合作拥有 3 GW 产能等），但显然存在不利因素。 关于 SLNH：据我了解，他们从事弃电能源货币化（curtailed energy monetization），即建设模块化数据中心或风能/太阳能农场，其产生的能源超过电网可接受的限度。 他们更像是一个开发商/运营商，试图建设这些站点并谈判获取廉价能源。但我们尚未看到这种模式实现规模化或获得全额融资。 这只是潜在产能。而且这通常无法转化为高利润率和高自由现金流（FCF）。 这也是为什么它的市值低于 3 亿美元，且起步时低于 7000 万美元。如果他们能说服足够的散户投资者通过稀释股权提供资金，然后用这些资金为其所有产能管道和 GPU 融资，那么风险/回报比是值得的。 否则，如果该板块发生什么事，或者人们对 $SLNH 转看跌，那么整个计划就会消失，公司就会倒闭。 这只是我个人的看法，人们不能指望一只从 8000 万美元涨到 2.8 亿美元的微盘股没有下行风险，然后只是盲目吹嘘 2.8 GW 的产能。
英文原文
I'm personally bullish on $WYFI. As for $SLNH, People keep claiming 2.8 GW pipeline (3 GW capacity with $IREN, etc) but obviously there's downsides. So for SLNH: from my understanding, they do curtailed energy monetization, where they build modular data-centers wind or solar farms that produce more energy than the grid can accept. They're more of a developer/operator trying to build these sites and negotiate cheap energy access. But we haven't seen this type of model scaled or fully financed yet. It's potential capacity. And that doesn't translate into high margins and FCF lot of time. There's a reason it's a sub <$300m marketcap and started off sub $70M. If they can convince enough retail to give them money for dilution, and then use that to finance all their capacity pipelines and GPUs, then the risk/reward is worth it. Otherwise if something happens with the sector or people grow bearish on $SLNH, then the whole plan just goes disappears and the company goes under. That's just my personal take, people can't really expect some $80m -> $280m microcap stock to not have downside risk and then just shill 2.8 GW capacity.
-
对比IREN与MARA/RIOT产能，质疑灵活性溢价是否合理
情况很微妙，但你确实可以将产能和管道与 $IREN、$RIOT、$MARA 进行比较，因为产能本身是不变的。主要区别在于灵活性（Optionality，即公司在需求变化时重新配置产能的能力）。如果你认为 $IREN 的定位更好，那当然可以。关于 $MARA，你提到了基于集装箱的 ASIC 矿场作为例子。然而，它们仍然可以改造为高性能计算(HPC)，只是成本稍高。正如你所说，$IREN 拥有设计建造的数据中心，配备架空地板、光纤互连、HVAC/液冷系统，因此非常适合 HPC。转型有不同的层级，但在转型过程中产能保持不变。我想表达的观点是，这是一个涉及利润率等多方面的复杂问题。你不能简单地说 X 产能 = X 收入/市值，否则你可以轻易指出 $MARA 和 $RIOT 拥有与 $IREN 相似的产能。至于这种灵活性是否值 100 亿美元的差价，我不确定。
英文原文
It's nuanced, but you can definitely compare capacity and pipeline with $IREN, $RIOT, $MARA, since capacity doesn't change. The main difference is optionality (how well a company can repurpose capacity as demand shifts). If you were to argue $IREN is better positioned, sure. With $MARA, you mentioned container-based ASIC farms as an example. However, they can still be retrofitted to HPC, it's just slightly more costly. $IREN as you mentioned, designed built data centers with raised floors, fiber interconnects, HVAC/liquid cooling. so it does well for HPC. There's different levels to pivots, but capacity remains the same through pivots. The point I was making was that it's multifaceted with margins, and everything else. You can't just say X Capacity = X revenue/Marketcap , otherwise you can easily just point to $MARA and $RIOT with similar capacities with $IREN. But whether or not optionality is worth a 10B difference, I don't know.
-
对比IREN与矿企估值，指出HPC转型执行风险及高估值隐忧。
关于 $IREN，人们不断提出论点：~3 GW 产能对应 ~170 亿美元市值，理应值 X 市值。 $RIOT 也有类似产能：1GW Corsicana，700MW Rockdale，加上其他，总计 ~3GW 产能（BTC 挖矿 + 管道项目合计）。~70 亿美元市值。 $MARA 也有 1.7GW，加上 3+ GW 管道项目。~67 亿美元市值。 $IREN 确实相比其他两家转向了高性能计算(HPC)，但我们肯定已经看到 480%+ 的涨幅已将其定价。 公允的观点是，H.C. Wainwright 的分析师表示“IREN AI 云业务已达到非理性繁荣的程度”。 此前我们仅关注产能，但市场将开始对利润率(execution risk)和执行风险进行定价。 取决于你的判断：你认为 $IREN 能否像 $CRWV 花费数年数十亿美元那样执行并扩展至 HPC？或者当 $ORCL 这样 7500 亿美元的超大规模云厂商以 14% 毛利率都未能做到时，他们能否做到？ 此外，如果那么容易，Riot 和 Mara 及其他高 GW 产能矿企早就全面转向 HPC 并达到类似的市值重估了。 这是人们不喜欢谈论的下行风险。然而，上行空间在于你提到的产能/基础设施 = 更高的收入潜力。
英文原文
With $IREN people keep making the argument about ~3 GW capacity at a ~17B marketcap, deserves to be X marketcap. $RIOT has a similar capacity too: 1GW Corsicana, 700MW Rockdale, and misc with ~3GW capacity (total if you combine BTC mining + pipeline). ~7B marketcap $MARA also has 1.7GW with 3+ GW pipeline as well. ~6.7B marketcap $IREN did make the HPC pivot compared to the other two but we've definitely seen that priced in with the 480%+ runup. Fair note is that analysts from H.C. Wainright have said "IREN AI cloud business has reached a point of irrational exuberance." Before, we looked solely at capacity, but markets will start pricing in margins and execution risk. It's up to your decision whether you think $IREN can execute and scale into HPC like $CRWV spent years and billions doing. Or if they can do so when $ORCL, a 750B hyperscaler failed to do so with 14% gross margins. Also if it were that easy Riot and Mara and other high GW capacity miners would have just full-sent HPC and would reach similar marketcap re-ratings too. That's the downside risk people don't like talking about. However, upside is that capacity/infrastructure = higher revenue potential that you mentioned.
-
澄清 $NBIS 全栈优势在于优化成本提升利润率，而非仅营销。
很多人对 $NBIS 的这一点存在误解： 全栈(Full-stack) 是一种护城河，因为它优化了内部运营支出(opex)并提高了利润率。这不仅仅是纯粹的外部营销手段。 我们已经看到过为什么在大规模扩张时利润率很重要，当市值 $8000 亿的巨头 $ORCL 在毛利率仅为 14% 的情况下进行建设时遇到了困难。
英文原文
A lot of people misunderstand this point with $NBIS : Full-stack is a moat because it optimizes internal opex and increases margins. It’s not just purely an outward marketing play. We’ve already seen why margins are important at scale when $ORCL a $800B giant had trouble with buildout with 14% gross.
-
对比NBIS与IREN：前者低险高透，后者高险高赔。
是的，确实如此！别担心。 估值涉及产能（设备能力）以外的众多要素。以美国的 $ORCL（甲骨文）为例，他们最终失去了利润优势，因为即便在该规模下，其毛利率也仅为 14%。 利润率（Margin）至关重要。 $NBIS 像 Amazon Web Services 一样开展全栈业务，因此在 Neo-Cloud 行业中拥有最高的利润率。 另一方面，许多转向 AI 计算业务的较小公司，在规模化后的利润率尚不明确。 不过，$NBIS 在合同等方面具有最高的透明度，目前只需等待规模扩张。 对于 $IREN 而言，关键在于能否获得像 $NBIS（Nebius）那样的 $MSFT 超大规模云厂商合同，以及在规模化时能否维持高利润率，这是一场“赌注”。 正因如此，我说 Nebius “下行风险最低，明年有 300%以上的上涨空间”。 而 $IREN 风险较大，但由于估值较低，若成功则回报可能更大。
英文原文
Yes it does! No worries 評価にはキャパシティ（設備能力）以上の多くの要素が関わっています。 アメリカの $ORCL（オラクル）を例に見ると、彼らは最終的に利益を失いました。というのも、その規模でも粗利益率がわずか 14% にとどまったからです。 マージン（利益率）は非常に重要です。 $NBIS は Amazon Web Services のようにフルスタックで事業を展開しているため、ネオクラウド業界の中でも最も高い利益率を誇ります。 一方で、AI コンピュート事業へ転換した多くのマイナー企業については、スケールした際の利益率がまだ明確に見えていません。 とはいえ、$NBIS は契約面などで最も高い透明性を持っており、あとは規模拡大を待つだけという段階にあります。 $IREN の場合、$NBIS（ネビウス）が得たような $MSFT とのハイパースケーラー契約を結べるかどうか、そしてスケール時に高い利益率を維持できるかどうかという「賭け」になります。 だからこそ、私はネビウスについて「下方リスクが最も低く、来年には 300%以上の上昇余地がある」と述べました。 一方で $IREN はリスクが大きいものの、評価額がかなり低いため、成功した場合のリターンはさらに大きくなる可能性があります。
-
对比NBIS与IREN，认为NBIS因高ARR和现金储备更具优势。
两者都不错。无论选哪个都不会错。 但是，如果要在最小化风险的同时追求巨大回报，$NBIS 显然优于 $IREN。 他们的净资产超过 100 亿美元，其中 58 亿美元为现金，其余为处于超大规模扩展中的投资组合公司（如 Clickhouse）的股票。 Clickhouse 为 Anthropic 和 $META 提供基础技术。 此外，凭借与 $MSFT 的合同，其年度经常性收入（ARR）在基准情况下达到 49 亿美元。 即使增长完全停滞，其估值预计也将超过 400 亿美元。 然而，考虑到其季度营收增长率超过 1000%，我认为再获得一家超大规模云服务商的合同，其市值就有望达到 1000 亿美元。 相比之下，$IREN 以投资产能的形式存在，目前除 Poolhouse 外，没有明确的企业合同等前景。 在这方面，$NBIS 已经直接与微软、Shopify、埃森哲等政府机构和企业进行交易。
英文原文
Both are good. どちらを選んでも間違いではありません。 しかし、リスクを最小限に抑えつつ大きなリターンを狙うなら、$IREN よりも $NBIS が明らかに優れています。 彼らの純資産は 100 億ドル以上で、そのうち 58 億ドルが現金、残りは Clickhouse のようなハイパースケーリング中のポートフォリオ企業の株式です。 Clickhouse は Anthropic や $META を支える基盤技術を提供しています。 さらに、$MSFT との契約により、ベースケースでの年間経常収益（ARR）は 49 億ドルに達しています。 仮に成長が完全に止まったとしても、評価額は 400 億ドル以上と見込まれます。 しかし、四半期ごとの収益成長率が 1000% を超えていることを考えると、もう1件ハイパースケーラーとの契約を獲得すれば、時価総額は 1000 億ドルに達する可能性があると見ています。 一方で $IREN は、キャパシティへの投資という形になりますが、現時点では Poolhouse 以外に企業契約などの明確な見通しがありません。 その点、$NBIS はすでに Microsoft、Shopify、Accenture などの政府機関や企業と直接取引を行っています。
-
建议定投NBIS，认为其当前价格被低估，维持400美元目标价。
@blu400_ 我个人建议进行成本平均法（Cost Average）买入。 即使 $NBIS 接近历史最高价（ATH），它仍在快速增长，并且每周都会创下新的历史最高价。 我维持 $400 的目标价（PT）牛市情景，因此目前 $130 的价格似乎被严重低估。
英文原文
@blu400_ Personally I’d cost average. Even if $NBIS is near ATH, it’s growing rapidly and it will keep having new ATHs every week. I’ve maintained $400 PT bull case, so $130 now seems quite undervalued https://t.co/RTbdrjXqtx
-
看好WULF和CIFR因谷歌合同带来的高非对称回报潜力。
是的，我一直坚持认为这并非赢家通吃（GCP、Azure、AWS）。 $WULF 和 $CIFR 是两只我认为相比其他矿企具有更高非对称回报潜力的股票，主要得益于其与 $GOOGl（Mag7 成员）的合同可见性。 然而，令人沮丧的现实是，并非每一个高性能计算(HPC)矿企转型都能成功，因为难度极大。但部分企业会成功，市场也会对此进行定价。
英文原文
Yep, I’ve always maintained it’s not winner takes all (GCP, Azure, AWS). $WULF and $CIFR are the two I’d argue that has higher asymmetrical return compared to other miners just due to Mag7 contract visibility with $GOOGl. However, the sad reality of the situation is not every single HPC miner pivot will be successful, because it’s extremely hard. But some will be and the market will price that in
-
博主表示刚加仓 META，目标价看至 680 美元。
@daggarwal917 @m9jdn8yz9c @soulbiri1 刚刚又加仓了 $META，现价 $646，1 月目标价约 $680 左右。
英文原文
@daggarwal917 @m9jdn8yz9c @soulbiri1 Added more $META just now $646 Jan ~$680ish
-
确认META如期抛售，等待跌破650美元的机会。
@m9jdn8yz9c @soulbiri1 是的，正如预期，$META 迎来了第二天的抛售（flush）。正在等待任何跌破 650 美元的微小缺口。
英文原文
@m9jdn8yz9c @soulbiri1 yep second day flush on $META as expected. Waiting for any little break below $650
-
看好全栈新云$NBIS利润率优势，减持矿工股。
市场开始定价： 像 $NBIS 这样的 AWS 式全栈新云（Neocloud）与 $CIFR、$BITF、$CLSK 等矿工之间的分化。 这就是我卖出 $IREN、$WULF 等并集中持仓 Nebius 的原因。 为什么？ 💹 利润率 > ⚡️ 产能。 就在今天： Nebius 的 CTO 表示： “市场上几乎没有真正的‘新云’。所谓的新云不过是一堆裸金属服务器，上面堆砌了大量第三方软件。” 耸人听闻？完全不是——如果你认真对待“云”这个概念，而不仅仅是堆砌硬件盒子。 Danila 解释了裸金属运营商很快就会发现 Nebius 已经在大规模层面解决的那些挑战。 这正是我指出 $NBIS 拥有最高非对称上行潜力的原因，因为矿工在规模化时可能会在利润率上挣扎。 我们还看到 Nebius 联合创始人 Roman Chernin 在《福布斯》的文章中总结，AI 经济需要一种新的、全栈的、AI 原生基础设施，而不是拼凑起来的系统： “你可以从一个供应商购买机架，将它们连接起来……但从长远来看，经济性、灵活性和速度取决于你是否控制自己的全栈。” “如果你控制全栈，你就控制产品、性能和经济效益。” _ 这并不意味着像 $WYFI、$APLD、$WULF 等其他高性能计算（HPC）公司没有增长空间，新云板块才刚刚开始上涨（尤其是当我们看到 $META 或 $AMZN 的财报时）。 然而，在投机阶段，我们已经为矿工的产能建设定价——大多数已经上涨了 50–200%+。 但谈到执行层面，那些控制全栈的人将在利润率上获胜。 我们看到 $CRWV 亲自体会到了这一点，花费数十亿美元进行软件收购，利用率仍低于 $NBIS（根据白皮书）。 我们也看到一家市值 8000 亿美元的超大规模云厂商（Oracle）未能建立其全栈，毛利率仅为 14%。 如果 Oracle 都无法完全整合其软件，CoreWeave 仍在花费数年时间尝试这样做，小型矿工如何转型？ “仅 Type-1”运营商的论点将艰难地发现规模化时的利润率压缩是什么样子的。 正如《福布斯》文章总结： “归根结底，如果你只是连接盒子或在无法控制的基础设施上构建服务，你在规模和效率的游戏里将受到限制。” $NBIS 今天就已经拥有全栈。
英文原文
Markets are starting to price in: A divergence between AWS-style full-stack Neoclouds like $NBIS and miners such as $CIFR, $BITF, $CLSK, and others. This is the reason I sold off $IREN $WULF and others, and consolidated into Nebius. Why? 💹 Margins > ⚡️Capacity. Just today: The CTO of Nebius stated: “Almost no Neocloud in the market is actually a cloud. As in a bunch of baremetal with a ton of third-party software slapped on top.” Provocative? Absolutely not — if you take the term “cloud” seriously, not just as slapping on a bunch of hardware boxes. Danila explained how baremetal operators will soon discover the challenges Nebius has already solved at scale. And that’s exactly why I stated $NBIS has the highest asymmetrical upside, since miners may struggle with margins at scale. We’ve also seen a Forbes article by Nebius Co-Founder Roman Chernin, summarize how the AI economy requires a new, full-stack, AI-native infrastructure, not the stitched-together systems: “You can buy racks from one supplier, cable them together... but in the long term, economics, flexibility and speed depend on you controlling your own stack.” “If you control the stack, you control the product, the performance, and the economics.” _ This doesn’t mean there’s no room for other HPC companies like $WYFI, $APLD, $WULF, and others to grow, and the Neocloud segment is just beginning its run-up (especially when we look at $META or $AMZN earnings). However, during the speculation phase, we’ve already priced in capacity buildout with miners - most are already up 50–200%+. But when it comes to execution, those who control the full stack will win on margins. We’ve seen $CRWV figure that out firsthand, spending billions on software acquisitions and still maintaining lower utilization than $NBIS (as per the whitepaper). We’ve also seen how an $800B hyperscaler (Oracle) failed to build out its stack, running at 14% gross margins. If Oracle couldn’t fully integrate its software, and CoreWeave is still spending years trying to do so, how will small miners pivot? Arguments from “Type-1 only” operators will find out the hard way what margin compression at scale looks like. As the Forbes article concludes: “At the end of the day, if you’re just cabling the boxes or building service on top of infrastructure you don’t control, you’re limited in the game of scale and efficiency.” $NBIS already has that full stack today.
-
等待股价跌至640-655区间进行成本平均。
@soulbiri1 我正在等待价格跌至 $640-$655 区间以进行成本平均(Cost Averaging)，但我可能会再发一篇简短的帖子。
英文原文
@soulbiri1 I’m waiting for $640-$655 levels for cost averaging but I’ll probably make another mini post