· 方法论

博主认为当前崩盘源于杠杆而非基本面,强调建立独立投资逻辑的重要性。

涉及标的:

相关概念: CPO 共封装光学机器人产业链

中文翻译

同意!在市场崩盘时回顾自己的投资逻辑是很好的。以我个人的逻辑为例,如果 $AAOI 在 2027 年 Q3 初达到 14 亿美元季度营收(年化 56 亿美元),对应 80 亿美元市值。如果到 2026 年这种营收增长尚未体现在季报中,该公司就“完蛋”了吗?这同样适用于我在共封装光学(CPO)领域的持仓如 $SIVE,这是由 $NVDA 引领的架构转变。如果规模化扩展(scale out)出货量从 2026 年下半年增至 2027 年,而规模化堆叠(scale up)大幅放量至 2028 年。如果高盛(GS)预测的从 0 到 910 亿美元的潜在市场(TAM)扩张尚未实现,就认为它“结束了”吗?对于像 Agility 这样的机器人公司,如果上市尚未发生且人形机器人未放量,2026 年就“结束了”吗?我个人认为当前市场状况反映的是流动性和杠杆问题,而非个股基本面。最近看到 KOSPI、台湾、日经指数以及 AI、太空、机器人板块股票暴跌,对每个人来说都很残酷。尤其是当大量非理性行为源于杠杆时。最终,我们无法告诉你买什么股票、何时卖出、如何仓位管理或该做什么。只分享个人想法或研究,并追踪它们是否随时间得到验证。因此,建立自己的投资逻辑至关重要,因为每个人的风险承受能力或投资期限都不同。这通常能在崩盘时带来更高的信念。

英文原文

Agreed! It’s nice to remember your thesis during a market crash. From my own personal thesis, if $AAOI hits $1.4B quarterly revenue start of Q3 2027. Which is annualized $5.6B off a $8B MC. Is it “over” for the company if that revenue ramp hasn’t even shown up in the quarterly earnings… when it’s 2026? Same applies to my CPO sector exposure like $SIVE, an architecture shift led by $NVDA. If scale out volume ramps from H2 2026 into 2027, and scale up heavily volume ramps into 2028. Is it “over” that $0 -> $91B TAM expansion (per GS) hasn’t even hit yet? With robotics like Agility, is it over in 2026 if the listing hasn’t even happened yet and humanoids haven’t ramped? I personally think current market conditions are a reflection of liquidity and leverage, not individual fundamentals. It’s brutal for everyone to see KOSPI, TW, Nikkei, and AI, space, robotics sector stocks crash recently. Especially when there’s a lot of irrational behavior stemming from those leverage. In the end, we can’t tell you what stocks to buy, what timeframe you should sell, how to size your positions, or what you should do. Only share personal thoughts or research and track if they get validated over time. So it’s extremely important to build your own thesis, since everyone has unique risk tolerance or investing timeframes. And that usually leads to having higher conviction during crashes.

在 X 上查看原推 ↗