| Window | Theses | Resolved | Wins | Win rate | Avg return | Median return |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1d | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 3d | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1w | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1m | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 3m | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 6m | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1y | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Past performance does not predict future results. Informational only, not investment advice.
FICO at $864 offers approximately 5% economic FCF yield with 11% growth requirement to meet the hurdle, though the author has slight debt concerns; still preferable to overvalued AI names.
Uber at $70 delivers roughly 6% economic FCF yield needing only 10-11% growth to clear the hurdle rate, presenting a better-priced alternative to high-multiple AI stocks.
Intuit at $276 provides a 7% normalized FCF yield requiring only 7-8% growth to meet hurdle rate, offering reasonable value compared to richly-valued AI names.
Adobe at $235 offers an attractive 9% economic FCF yield and needs only 6% FCF/share growth to clear the author's 12.5% return hurdle, representing a better risk-reward than overvalued AI stocks.
Marvell's valuation similarly demands roughly 60% FCF/share growth, marking it as overpriced relative to realistic growth prospects despite company capabilities.
At $630, AMD's sub-1% economic FCF yield requires unrealistic 55% annual FCF/share growth to meet the author's 15% return hurdle, making current valuation unjustifiable even if growth is possible.
At $190, Palantir trades at unsustainable multiples requiring 50%+ annual FCF/share growth for five years to justify the valuation against a 12.5% return hurdle. The author is taking profits and rotating away despite believing in the business fundamentals.
End of results.