· 个股论点
涉及标的： $AIRO$AVAV$MSTR$ONDS$SMCI
从基金/垂直领域而非高管团队的角度来看待 $AIRO。例如，@chamath 直到获得 Groq 200 亿美元退出才摆脱负面评价；Saylor 直到 $MSTR 完成“劫案”式操作前只是个梗。这确实有很大影响，但并非全部。 就 $AIRO / $ONDS 而言，鉴于俄乌冲突、北约及国防部向无人机领域注资，该垂直领域应享有溢价（但 Airo 却像困境股一样交易）。 RQ-35 Heidrun 知识产权在无 GPS 环境中极具吸引力。但他们有大量如培训等杂项业务，只是支线任务。 类似 $SMCI，$AIRO 的暴跌也是由积压订单延迟导致（630 万美元 vs 2370 万美元的不及预期）。但 2000 万美元的无人机发货只是推迟而非取消。 净现金 6880 万美元，考虑到其 2.5 亿美元的小市值，这非常稳健。其企业价值/收入倍率为 2.1 倍，而 $AVAV 为 9.4 倍。我印象中 $ONDS 约为 20-30 倍。 总之：现金状况稳健，垂直领域具吸引力，下跌源于收入递延而非取消，低市值带来良好上行空间。 鉴于现金状况及仅属收入递延，它不应像困境股那样交易。
Looking @ $AIRO from the fund/vertical not the exec team. For example, @chamath was frowned upon until he got that 20B Groq exit. Or Saylor was a meme until $MSTR pulled off a heist. It does make a large difference, but it's not everything. In terms of $AIRO / $ONDS, especially with Russia/Ukraine conflicts + NATO + DoD funneling money into drone segments, the vertical should command a premium (but Airo, trades like it's distressed). The RQ-35 Heidrun IP, seemed extremely interesting for GPS-denied environments. But they have a ton of misc companies like training that are just side quests. So similar to $SMCI, there was also backlog delays with caused the crash in Airo (the $6.3M vs $23.7M miss). But the $20m drone shipments was just shifted not cancelled. Net cash is $68.8M which is extremely solid given its mini $250m MC, and it trades at 2.1x EV to revenue, compared to others like $AVAV at 9.4x. I think $ONDS was like 20-30 off the top of my head. So TLDR: solid cash position, attractive vertical, drop based on differed revenue not cancelled, low market cap presents good upside. It shouldn't trade like a distressed company because of cash position + just deferred rev.