Offshore
Photo
The Few Bets That Matter
RT @WealthyReadings: Remember the $NVDA “inventory bear case”? The one built on 2 digit IQ that generated millions of views?
I broke down why it was deadly wrong in my repost.
Turns out the so-called “inventory” included ~700,000 H200 units; over $15B of produced but unsold hardware due to export curbs.
Not weak demand. Not forged accounts. Not unpaid bills.
That narrative created an so much fear, pushed by people who look at numbers without context, and did slow down the market a little bit.
Fast forward weeks later, to facts, as they always take time to surface. A recent article made the situation clear.
“ $NVDA is scrambling to meet strong demand for its H200 artificial intelligence chips from Chinese technology companies and has approached contract manufacturer $TSM to ramp up production.
Chinese technology companies have placed orders for more than 2 million H200 chips for 2026, while Nvidia currently holds just 700,000 units in stock.”
$NVDA sees a path to ~$500B in sales in the West alone. With renewed access to China, where demand from players like $BABA is massive, the supply chain will be stressed once again.
You’re just not bullish enough. The AI trade isn't over.
https://t.co/mm3A4EB6ze
🚨BREAKING: The $610 Billion AI Ponzi Scheme Is Not A Ponzi Scheme
Here’s why $NVDA isn’t the disaster the algorithms - and the bears, want you to think it is. Far from it.
Shanaka’s argument claims that Nvidia’s rising inventory, receivables, and DSO suggest demand is slowing and the company is pushing more product than customers can absorb, in terms of need and payment.
In brief: no more demand nor cash to pay for their GPUs.
1. Rising Inventory ≠ Red Flag
Shanaka says rising inventory is evidence of weak demand, but ignores $NVDA pricing - and many other factors we'll talk about.
When unit prices double or triple, the same volume of hardware shows up as a larger dollar value in inventories.
You'll have more bananas for $1M that airplanes, right? Just like you'll have more H100 than GB200.
When we normalize inventory by revenue - or by units shipped, the trend is stable, suggesting this is a pricing effect, not a demand problem and rising inventory in volume.
This can also be illustrated with accounts receivable per revenue, which make the same point: when product prices increase, dollar-denominated metrics rise, so metrics taken individually may look bad but within context, the story looks normal.
That being said, many could point that even then, inventory is rising. To which we need to add context, something algorythms are incapable of.
2. Higher DSO & Supply Chain Constraints
DSO - which represents the time before being paid, rising slightly is consistent with real-world constraints.
$NVDA doesn’t just ship GPUs anymore; they ship racks, custom configurations, integrated systems… These use third-party components, which require more coordination, harder logistics, and can temporarily increase time before revenue recognition and therefore inventory.
Add to this the fact that foundries, as proven many times these quarters during $TSM & co earnings, run at full capacity, and you get even more delays.
More customization + constrained supply chains = longer installation cycles before revenue can be recognized and rising inventories until then.
This is an operational bottleneck, not a credit problem.
A move from 46 to 53 days is marginal especially considering this value has been roughly stable for three quarters.
3. Circular Economy
As for the claims about a circular economy and the same dollars being used across multiple companies, I have no counters but this: circular economies are normal, that’s how economies work.
It only becomes a problem if AI services do not generate enough cash to honor commitments.
Because that’s what those are: commitments, not booked revenues. If those commitments can be honored, then what is the problem?
4. Algorithms D[...]
RT @WealthyReadings: Remember the $NVDA “inventory bear case”? The one built on 2 digit IQ that generated millions of views?
I broke down why it was deadly wrong in my repost.
Turns out the so-called “inventory” included ~700,000 H200 units; over $15B of produced but unsold hardware due to export curbs.
Not weak demand. Not forged accounts. Not unpaid bills.
That narrative created an so much fear, pushed by people who look at numbers without context, and did slow down the market a little bit.
Fast forward weeks later, to facts, as they always take time to surface. A recent article made the situation clear.
“ $NVDA is scrambling to meet strong demand for its H200 artificial intelligence chips from Chinese technology companies and has approached contract manufacturer $TSM to ramp up production.
Chinese technology companies have placed orders for more than 2 million H200 chips for 2026, while Nvidia currently holds just 700,000 units in stock.”
$NVDA sees a path to ~$500B in sales in the West alone. With renewed access to China, where demand from players like $BABA is massive, the supply chain will be stressed once again.
You’re just not bullish enough. The AI trade isn't over.
https://t.co/mm3A4EB6ze
🚨BREAKING: The $610 Billion AI Ponzi Scheme Is Not A Ponzi Scheme
Here’s why $NVDA isn’t the disaster the algorithms - and the bears, want you to think it is. Far from it.
Shanaka’s argument claims that Nvidia’s rising inventory, receivables, and DSO suggest demand is slowing and the company is pushing more product than customers can absorb, in terms of need and payment.
In brief: no more demand nor cash to pay for their GPUs.
1. Rising Inventory ≠ Red Flag
Shanaka says rising inventory is evidence of weak demand, but ignores $NVDA pricing - and many other factors we'll talk about.
When unit prices double or triple, the same volume of hardware shows up as a larger dollar value in inventories.
You'll have more bananas for $1M that airplanes, right? Just like you'll have more H100 than GB200.
When we normalize inventory by revenue - or by units shipped, the trend is stable, suggesting this is a pricing effect, not a demand problem and rising inventory in volume.
This can also be illustrated with accounts receivable per revenue, which make the same point: when product prices increase, dollar-denominated metrics rise, so metrics taken individually may look bad but within context, the story looks normal.
That being said, many could point that even then, inventory is rising. To which we need to add context, something algorythms are incapable of.
2. Higher DSO & Supply Chain Constraints
DSO - which represents the time before being paid, rising slightly is consistent with real-world constraints.
$NVDA doesn’t just ship GPUs anymore; they ship racks, custom configurations, integrated systems… These use third-party components, which require more coordination, harder logistics, and can temporarily increase time before revenue recognition and therefore inventory.
Add to this the fact that foundries, as proven many times these quarters during $TSM & co earnings, run at full capacity, and you get even more delays.
More customization + constrained supply chains = longer installation cycles before revenue can be recognized and rising inventories until then.
This is an operational bottleneck, not a credit problem.
A move from 46 to 53 days is marginal especially considering this value has been roughly stable for three quarters.
3. Circular Economy
As for the claims about a circular economy and the same dollars being used across multiple companies, I have no counters but this: circular economies are normal, that’s how economies work.
It only becomes a problem if AI services do not generate enough cash to honor commitments.
Because that’s what those are: commitments, not booked revenues. If those commitments can be honored, then what is the problem?
4. Algorithms D[...]
Offshore
The Few Bets That Matter RT @WealthyReadings: Remember the $NVDA “inventory bear case”? The one built on 2 digit IQ that generated millions of views? I broke down why it was deadly wrong in my repost. Turns out the so-called “inventory” included ~700,000…
on’t Understand Context
Shanaka claims that this was thankfully found by algorithm - and I can agree with him based on the market's behaviour and violence. But he forgets that algorythm are built to find fraud in 99% of cases.
But $NVDA is the 1%.
When revenue grows 60–80% YoY, it's normal for inventories, receivables, and payables to grow at least comparably in dollar terms. Maybe even slightly higher when added real-world constraints.
What matters is whether these metrics grow disproportionately relative to revenue.
And once normalized, $NVDA ratios are stable, which is consistent with a rapid ongoing expansion, not accounting games or demand collapse.
That being said, everything isn’t necessarily perfect. But again: algorithms are configured to gauge 99% of the market, so of course the 1% will raise red flags.
Add some organic grey cells, context and reality, and the picture is very different, even if the stock continues to fall.
The market is about emotions, not rationality. And X is great at sharing emotions, less for rationality.
Conclusion.
I might be proven wrong in time and $NVDA might be an accounting fraud. I personally continue to believe in the AI revolution, have my own concerns about the circular economy but did not find any indications that AI won't yield cash flow and that commitments can't be honored as of today.
I continue to be bullish. And shared all my moves and reasoning with subscribers yesterday.
The future is bright for those with a system. - The Few Bets That Matter tweet
Shanaka claims that this was thankfully found by algorithm - and I can agree with him based on the market's behaviour and violence. But he forgets that algorythm are built to find fraud in 99% of cases.
But $NVDA is the 1%.
When revenue grows 60–80% YoY, it's normal for inventories, receivables, and payables to grow at least comparably in dollar terms. Maybe even slightly higher when added real-world constraints.
What matters is whether these metrics grow disproportionately relative to revenue.
And once normalized, $NVDA ratios are stable, which is consistent with a rapid ongoing expansion, not accounting games or demand collapse.
That being said, everything isn’t necessarily perfect. But again: algorithms are configured to gauge 99% of the market, so of course the 1% will raise red flags.
Add some organic grey cells, context and reality, and the picture is very different, even if the stock continues to fall.
The market is about emotions, not rationality. And X is great at sharing emotions, less for rationality.
Conclusion.
I might be proven wrong in time and $NVDA might be an accounting fraud. I personally continue to believe in the AI revolution, have my own concerns about the circular economy but did not find any indications that AI won't yield cash flow and that commitments can't be honored as of today.
I continue to be bullish. And shared all my moves and reasoning with subscribers yesterday.
The future is bright for those with a system. - The Few Bets That Matter tweet
Offshore
Photo
The Few Bets That Matter
RT @WealthyReadings: $ALAB has been one of my highest-conviction names over the past few weeks. Biggest accumulation.
Up ~9% today and ~28% from the ~$140 level where I shared it as my favorite buy in the market with subscribers.
We will see how the session closes, because only closes matter. But I'm about to make my position much bigger if we hold this new high as it clearly indicates that the market wants more AI.
And why wouldn't he?
tweet
RT @WealthyReadings: $ALAB has been one of my highest-conviction names over the past few weeks. Biggest accumulation.
Up ~9% today and ~28% from the ~$140 level where I shared it as my favorite buy in the market with subscribers.
We will see how the session closes, because only closes matter. But I'm about to make my position much bigger if we hold this new high as it clearly indicates that the market wants more AI.
And why wouldn't he?
tweet
Offshore
Photo
The Few Bets That Matter
RT @WealthyReadings: You only need one stock to beat the market. One. Find the perfect setup and size correctly.
My highest-conviction setups starting 2026.
$TMDX
$BABA
$PATH
High-quality fundamentals, strong sector tailwinds, perfect price action. These three stand out.
What’s yours? https://t.co/5eFTzmcTuk
tweet
RT @WealthyReadings: You only need one stock to beat the market. One. Find the perfect setup and size correctly.
My highest-conviction setups starting 2026.
$TMDX
$BABA
$PATH
High-quality fundamentals, strong sector tailwinds, perfect price action. These three stand out.
What’s yours? https://t.co/5eFTzmcTuk
tweet
Offshore
Photo
The Few Bets That Matter
RT @WealthyReadings: You will always underperform if you judge a stock the same way you judge a company.
They are fundamentally different, and far too many investors fail to understand this.
A company’s “greatness” is defined by many factors. Longevity, cash flow, employees, compensation, importance, by the added value of its product or service... At that point, greatness is almost subjective, more opinion than fact.
But a great stock has only one criteria: that it trades higher today than yesterday.
As stock pickers, that is the only thing that matters.
Yet many investors assume that a great company must be a great stock. Nothing is further from the truth. So many incredible companies deliver mediocre returns, and often for very valid reasons. But we need to understand the market to understand this fact.
The market cares about one thing only: safe and growing future cash generation.
Everything else is noise.
That is why so many outstanding companies underperform; not because they are bad businesses, but because they are not accelerating, not expanding margins, not safely compounding cash.
The market rewards companies whose future cash flows are secure and/or growing rapidly. Those are great stocks.
For all the $PYPL, $NVO, $HIMS & so many others, please understand: the market will rewards growth acceleration, safe compounding and expanding margins.
If your stock has none of those with no data pointing to it happening... It isn't a great stock.
But it can be a great company.
tweet
RT @WealthyReadings: You will always underperform if you judge a stock the same way you judge a company.
They are fundamentally different, and far too many investors fail to understand this.
A company’s “greatness” is defined by many factors. Longevity, cash flow, employees, compensation, importance, by the added value of its product or service... At that point, greatness is almost subjective, more opinion than fact.
But a great stock has only one criteria: that it trades higher today than yesterday.
As stock pickers, that is the only thing that matters.
Yet many investors assume that a great company must be a great stock. Nothing is further from the truth. So many incredible companies deliver mediocre returns, and often for very valid reasons. But we need to understand the market to understand this fact.
The market cares about one thing only: safe and growing future cash generation.
Everything else is noise.
That is why so many outstanding companies underperform; not because they are bad businesses, but because they are not accelerating, not expanding margins, not safely compounding cash.
The market rewards companies whose future cash flows are secure and/or growing rapidly. Those are great stocks.
For all the $PYPL, $NVO, $HIMS & so many others, please understand: the market will rewards growth acceleration, safe compounding and expanding margins.
If your stock has none of those with no data pointing to it happening... It isn't a great stock.
But it can be a great company.
tweet
Offshore
Photo
The Few Bets That Matter
RT @WealthyReadings: A few ideas starting 2026.
The AI trade will continue but it'll evolve. I'd expect two important verticals.
Compute/efficiency (hardware & infra), with companies like $ALAB & $NBIS pushing it further, allowing companies to generate more compute with less infra.
AI services finally surfacing after years of development: started with $PLTR, now $PATH and its S+ setup, and legacy names like $ADBE & more as the “AI disruption” narrative cools down.
Researching another AI name with a $PATH-like setup. More about it later.
China has been one of the best performers this year and I think that'll continue. Gov is pushing consumption and innovation, very bullish for $BABA which remains one of my top pick for 2026 at these levels.
Retail still matters. Surprisingly, we’ve seen monster moves H2-25 like $ULTA, and that could continue into 2026 despites clear consumption weakness. But as long as those with the money consume more, it doesn't matter. My favorite remains $ONON, and I’m watching $LULU closely, with reasons to be optimistic.
Energy and “safer” names also catching a bid lately - $HAL $SLB $DG $DLTR... This shows rotation is starting. Less risk-on, healthier names and valuation. Wouldn’t be surprised to see more of this in 2026.
Precious metals is now a crowded trade. Needs a breather. But I wouldn't be so sure it is over and I wouldn't be surprised for more in 2026. It isn't the healthiest trade as it reflects distrust in the system.
Healthcare waking up. $LLY still leads, but $JNJ, $MRK caught a large bid. Watching laggards like $PFE and $NVO but those need a catalyst.
After massive FY25 performances, I see 2026 as a rotation year. Last two years’ winners will likely underperform as the market either turns to less risks, or focuses on other verticals.
My personal view is that 2026 will see the AI bubble. The real one. Which is why I still own AI names today, but I am clearly not certain I still will by H2-26.
Bullish AI software/services short term, very bullish China, and closely watching healthcare and other "safer" names.
I don’t think 2026 will be bad. Quite the opposite. But I think those who don't take the turn will get burnt. Rotation is coming.
tweet
RT @WealthyReadings: A few ideas starting 2026.
The AI trade will continue but it'll evolve. I'd expect two important verticals.
Compute/efficiency (hardware & infra), with companies like $ALAB & $NBIS pushing it further, allowing companies to generate more compute with less infra.
AI services finally surfacing after years of development: started with $PLTR, now $PATH and its S+ setup, and legacy names like $ADBE & more as the “AI disruption” narrative cools down.
Researching another AI name with a $PATH-like setup. More about it later.
China has been one of the best performers this year and I think that'll continue. Gov is pushing consumption and innovation, very bullish for $BABA which remains one of my top pick for 2026 at these levels.
Retail still matters. Surprisingly, we’ve seen monster moves H2-25 like $ULTA, and that could continue into 2026 despites clear consumption weakness. But as long as those with the money consume more, it doesn't matter. My favorite remains $ONON, and I’m watching $LULU closely, with reasons to be optimistic.
Energy and “safer” names also catching a bid lately - $HAL $SLB $DG $DLTR... This shows rotation is starting. Less risk-on, healthier names and valuation. Wouldn’t be surprised to see more of this in 2026.
Precious metals is now a crowded trade. Needs a breather. But I wouldn't be so sure it is over and I wouldn't be surprised for more in 2026. It isn't the healthiest trade as it reflects distrust in the system.
Healthcare waking up. $LLY still leads, but $JNJ, $MRK caught a large bid. Watching laggards like $PFE and $NVO but those need a catalyst.
After massive FY25 performances, I see 2026 as a rotation year. Last two years’ winners will likely underperform as the market either turns to less risks, or focuses on other verticals.
My personal view is that 2026 will see the AI bubble. The real one. Which is why I still own AI names today, but I am clearly not certain I still will by H2-26.
Bullish AI software/services short term, very bullish China, and closely watching healthcare and other "safer" names.
I don’t think 2026 will be bad. Quite the opposite. But I think those who don't take the turn will get burnt. Rotation is coming.
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Fiscal.ai
Analyst: "Even with a limited opportunity from China, you are still confident that a 40% CAGR or even higher can be achieved in the coming years?"
Taiwan Semiconductor CEO: "You are right."
$TSM https://t.co/b8RxgTdPRM
tweet
Analyst: "Even with a limited opportunity from China, you are still confident that a 40% CAGR or even higher can be achieved in the coming years?"
Taiwan Semiconductor CEO: "You are right."
$TSM https://t.co/b8RxgTdPRM
tweet
Offshore
Photo
God of Prompt
Use code SUCCESS26 for 20% off
Grab the bundle 👇
https://t.co/C8Zzw2Jkpc https://t.co/dMz73ZadPI
tweet
Use code SUCCESS26 for 20% off
Grab the bundle 👇
https://t.co/C8Zzw2Jkpc https://t.co/dMz73ZadPI
the n8n automations alone are worth the price of admission.
prompts are cool, but automated workflows are what actually scale a business. "pay once, own forever" is a dying business model in the SaaS era. grab this before they switch to subscription💎 tweet
Offshore
Photo
Fiscal.ai
Palantir's valuation is in a league of its own.
Of all the companies in the world with >$500 million in revenue, Palantir is the most expensive... by a long shot.
$PLTR https://t.co/2KVKROvEma
tweet
Palantir's valuation is in a league of its own.
Of all the companies in the world with >$500 million in revenue, Palantir is the most expensive... by a long shot.
$PLTR https://t.co/2KVKROvEma
tweet
Offshore
Photo
The Few Bets That Matter
$ETH is ready to burst.
Broke its trendline, reclaimed its moving average, higher highs on dying volume.
One last shakeout before we go👀? https://t.co/foQihXygj2
tweet
$ETH is ready to burst.
Broke its trendline, reclaimed its moving average, higher highs on dying volume.
One last shakeout before we go👀? https://t.co/foQihXygj2
tweet