저자: PatrickAdamsCFA · 외국인
요약 보기
마이클 버리의 AI 버블 숏 베팅(팔란티어·엔비디아 풋옵션, 약 10억달러)을 소개. 팔란티어 EV/매출 87배는 5년 중앙값 약 18.5배 대비 과도하며 역사상 가장 높은 밸류에이션 수준. 순환 자금조달(엔비디아→오픈AI→오라클)과 자본지출 과잉, 영업이익률 하락이 버블 붕괴 근거로 제시됨. 기술주 비중은 S&P500의 약 48%로 닷컴 버블(30%) 대비 높음. 붕괴 시점은 불확실하나 1년 이상 걸릴 수 있다고 봄. 보유자에게는 일부 차익실현 또는 팔란티어 인버스 ETF(PLTD)·엔비디아 2배 인버스(NVD) 등 헤지를 제안.
다듬은 글
Hi, welcome to Market in a Minute. We got a fun uh video for you this week. So, we're looking at Michael Bur's Big Short idea. So, if you remember the the movie The Big Short, Micah Burray was the kind of frustrated doctor who was a good stock picker, decided to put the bulk of his funds money into shorting the mortgage back securities market back in ' 0708 and being very frustrated about it, but it ultimately paid off big for him.
Well, he's he's back. So, he's got, you know, short 2.0. he's taken a very aggressive position in shorting Palunteer and Nvidia through uh stock options. So the question is are we in AI bubble or not? We clearly think we're in AI bubble but bubbles take a while to burst. So remember that movie how frustrated he was on it it finally playing out and it finally did and it was a big winner for for his fun.
So maybe this plan kind of plays out the same way where, you know, we do have a bubble, but it's going to take a while to play out. We're seeing some initial signs now of cracks in the foundation of AI. We talked about that a little bit last week. Uh but maybe the market's not ready to to really go after these stocks on the downside.
So we're going to also talk about how to protect your portfolio, uh how to protect your big winners in the technology sector. So, the Monica Burray Short 2.0. Um, so he's got a hedge fund that is about 1.5 1.4 billion in size and he bought a billion dollar worth of stock options uh put options against Palunteer and Nvidia.
He disclosed that last week. So, this is a major bet by a smart guy. So, we thought it's good to take a look at what he's thinking and it's kind of what we're thinking as well, but he's betting in a huge way on this. So, if you simply look at Palunteer, and I like Palunteer's, you know, business model, the CEO is kind of wacky, but he's really, really driven.
Um, great business model. This company, it's a software company. It's really not AI per se, but it's getting swept up into the AI valuations in a big way. So if you look at Palanteer, okay, they're trading currently at enterprise value. So that's the total value of the company to revenues 12 months revenues, not trilling revenues, but 12 months in the future at roughly 87 times um enterprise value.
Okay, that's really high. sells enterprise value 87 times. So if you go back and you look at the last say five years, okay, what's the median? You look at okay 2020 it was 23 then 26 then it was 7 11 and 18 and a half. Say the average is around 18 and a half. That seems reasonable, right? Maybe the stock trades at 18 and a half again.
That would be a 78% decline in the stock. Obviously, the market's bought into this company and and likes the company a lot and has valuations of probably higher than any stock in history that I know of anyway. Um, so it's gotten excessive. So, you need to think about this a little bit if you own the stock, what to be doing with it.
Maybe trimming it back or protecting it, and we'll cover that in a little bit. So, that's his big play. Generally shorting on valuation alone doesn't work very well. You need a crack in the in the fundamentals or a crack in the industry. And I think that's what he's looking for. A crack in the overall industries industry of AI to bring this stock down.
So what's his thesis of the crack in the industry? So it's twofold. One is a circular circular nature of how the industry is being financed. And we've we've talked about this. And the other issue is just the excessive amount of capital spending, the impact on the um operating margins. So the profitability of these companies and we're seeing that occur at this point as well.
So the operating margins starting starting to drop. We talked about that last week. So if you look at some of these charts, okay, um this is the circular thesis that he's talking about. I think this is ultimately from U. Morgan Stanley, but this chart here shows um Oracle as an example buys a lot of Nvidia chips.
Nvidia takes that money and invests in OpenAI, hundred billion dollars in OpenAI. It's a $500 billion market cap company. OpenAI, they're only doing 20 billion a year in revenues. All right. So, OpenAI then invests uh through buying services from Oracle as much as 300 billion in services from Oracle.
That's a crazy amount of money. So, um we don't think that's sustainable. That's just not going to be able to happen. Um that's just too much money. So if there's a break in this in this circular nature, you know, if Oracle slows down the spending to Nvidia because they're not getting the uh the revenues from OpenAI in terms of purchasing product from them.
Uh you can see that um you got three stocks that are come down going to come down in a big way in terms of valuation. there's other the sorts of circular um you know nature to this industry here as well. So you can see how if there's a slowdown it's going to impact the whole group in a big way. So this is the other point he's looking at is the capital spending.
So here here in the dark green is the capital spending line. Um, you can see that in 99 it hit a peak and ultimately came down to very very low levels as we went through the two 2000s. Had had that tech recession here as well. Uh, but really really came apart and then again did the same thing into 0708 um and then came down in a huge way.
So we had two bubbles bursting in here and here. one, this is more mortgage related, but this is just a huge, you know, dot uh spending cycle. Here we are again, right? Back above the levels that we were before. So that's his point is that okay, this is excessive. It's too much. You got a circular nature going on in this industry.
You got operating margins starting to break. That's his thesis on AI. hard is to argue against, you know, the overall thesis. The question is the timing, right? So, good short sellers can time these things really well. Um, so we don't think we're quite there yet. You know, we think that over time what happens is that you get these big runups in these stocks and they break.
Maybe we saw a little bit of a break last last week or so. we we get a break and then they try to rally some more and then they they ultimately fail. So, you know, investors don't believe the break because the fundamentals are still good. So, that's probably likely kind of we're somewhere in that cycle of it rolling over, but maybe last another year or more as that supply and demand are not in balance.
So, there's more demand for AI computing that there there is supply. Um, we think that probably next year the capital spending is going to slow some, but the market may force these companies to cut back their capital spending because their stocks are going down. So, Meta, as we discussed last week, Meta and Microsoft both saw big margin uh pressure and what happens to the stocks?
Stocks pull back in a in a big way. So the CEO of Nvidia, I don't know why he's really doing this. Maybe to keep the story going to keep, you know, keep it pumped up. Uh but he's really brought forward forward the expectations of capital spending in this sector of the next six quarters. So it's kind of taken away some of the upside, you know, some of the surprise you get from the quarters.
Maybe to kind of help support the overall industry and keep the spending going. Technology is now 35.6% of the S&P 500, the technology sector itself. But you have to add back Amazon, Google, and Tesla because those are actually tech stocks, but they're not included in the in that se in the sector of of how the S&P is put together, but those are tech stocks.
So you add those three names back into technology and you get 48% that's in tech and techreated. So if you look at that, that's roughly half of the S&P 500 that's in technology. That's an incredible amount of money. Um if you are a money manager, you can't possibly put half of half of your client's portfolio into technology.
And if you don't, then you're probably going to underperform. But you go back to the um dot phase, the.com bubble. Okay, technology was only 30% of the S&P 500 in 1999. So you got 48 versus 30. I call that a bubble. Um now comparing Nvidia because you can't can't can't compare Palunteer to anything.
It's just a remarkable story with a crazy valuation. Sometime is at some point it's going to get resolved but it's hard to compare the that with going back in time but you can with Nvidia. So the best comparison with Nvidia is Cisco systems. So like this cycle Cisco was the driver in in the dot bubble.
Nvidia is the driver of this bubble. So John Chambers, he was awesome. You know, he did a great job. Um, two years prior to the peak in Cisco's stock. So you go back to 98, it had a 10x move. U, so I was managing large mutual funds at that time and you you had to own this stock, but then you also had to get out of the way of it.
So that's something I also did, but you had to get out of the way of it because it had a massive decline. So t-fold increase and then it basically went back to where it started. Um and and this took a couple years to to happen. You can see this kind of disbelief in in Cisco itself. So this is what I I described this massive move up, right?
Massive move up, decline, market doesn't believe it because the fundamentals are still good. Goes back up and then it ultimately breaks down. So, it goes back up and ultimately breaks down. So, that's how these cycles tend to work. Where are we now? Well, we're, you know, we're up here and maybe we've pulled back a little bit.
So, we're in this massive move higher stage. Well, we'll continue to last uh much longer. I don't know. Um but the risk are very high and you got to really protect yourself from this. So, this is Nvidia. Okay. Nvidia over two years, 10x move. Huh? Very similar. It took Cisco 25 years and it's still not back to even.
25 years and not back to even. Nvidia big move up. Okay. Sometime in the next, say, 3 years. The capital spending cycle is likely to break down in a big way. Now, is it 3 years or is it 12 months? Well, the market's starting to force these companies by their stock price to be more prudent, and we'll see what happens.
Maybe we'll we'll see some cutting of capital expenditures as we go into next year. But remember, Meta was going to spend all this money on their metaverse and they ended up cutting that back in a big way. Um, you know, I'd rather see, you know, Meta have a good stock than try to be the leader in AI.
You just have to be a player in it. You don't have to be the leader. Um, Google's likely gonna win this battle against everybody else anyway. So, if you think about the strategy, okay, what should you do? It's kind of mentioned, you know, you're damned if you do. You're damned if you own 48% of your portfolio in technology, but that's the only way to to keep pace with the overall markets.
So, we're more inclined to protect our clients money rather than try to get that last penny out of out of a move. So, it's kind of damned if you do, damn it if you don't if you're a fund manager trying to keep pace with the uh with the S&P 500. I'm more concerned about, okay, I got good returns. I don't want to give them away.
I don't want to I don't want to fall 50%. Um so like back in 200 uh8 good example our most aggressive strategy at my firm PBG was down uh on a uh gross basis somewhere around 5%. A little bit over 5%. We were down 5% in our most aggressive portfolio. Our least aggressive was up two okay close to 2%.
So that's what we're trying to do is to protect our money but still get good returns. When you look at the S&P 500 48% in technology and valuations being high. So what you want to do is you know have a portfolio that can get you out of the way of it. Protect your downside. Hedge the portfolio when necessary.
One of our strategies, we have multiple uh tactical strategies is dynamic core. Invest in the S&P 500. So, we're trying to get S&P 500 types of returns on the upside, but not having the downside to be tactical and pro protect the portfolio when the portfolio drops in terms of individual stocks and maybe some speculation, right?
So in terms of individual stocks, Palanteer, what do you do if you got big gains in it? You probably don't want to sell at this point. Um, not take the gain. You can buy PL PLTD, which is a single inverse. It's an ETF. So if the if Paluntary stock drops 50%. Right? The PLTD will go up 50%. That's how it's designed.
So you can offset your losses. You're going to probably take gains here at some point if if you use the PLTD. You you're going to take some gains. Might be just prudent just to, you know, carve back your position some. Nvidia, they uh there's an ETF that's 2x the downside of Nvidia. NVD, I don't own this right now, uh but I have owned it and it it's a great trading stock.
um Nvidia drops, you get 2x the downside of Nvidia. So hopefully this is helpful. It kind of frames this in a little bit. We're probably in the early stages of of the market identifying, yeah, we're in an AI bubble. Um but it's not willing to give up on it. You're not going to get these big mutual fund managers to sell it, at least probably not in front of the end of the year.
And you need to shake them more. So you need some more more proof that okay, we're at the end of this cycle and then when it when it corrects it's going to correct in a big way and initial correct down and it's going to bounce a little bit because no one believes it and then going to go down further.
So Michael uh Michael Bur is probably right in this thesis. Our guess he's probably too early like he was last time, but I think he's going to end up being correct at some point in time. And just remember to manage that risk of your portfolio. If you have any questions, come to my website, Patrick Adams CFA.
Just send me a message there. Sign up for a hard copy of Market in a Minute and uh and come to my uh my company site and you can see our strategies over there. Take care.
댓글 0