ASML

ConsistentOriginal82

plz ASML, just be normal today and do a green

Livid_Engineering_30

I have this scenario running my head all the time, and what’s the scenario is if I had a gun to my head and I had to pick a stock that would 10X in the next 10 years or die, I would choose ASML

No_Current3675

ASML

IV-Crushed

ASML?

Livid_Engineering_30

The hardware trade never really ends. The question is who can actually crank out each new generation of chips at scale without taking forever to change direction. TSMC is stubborn when it comes to new technology, and Samsung isn’t much better. If China got the newest ASML machines and a bunch of firms started competing to scale 2nm chips and advanced stacking, that could keep the AI trade from busting. I think it happens one way or another—either before a bust and prevents it, or after a bust because the industry is forced to change.

Livid_Engineering_30

The AI hardware trade never truly ends. The real question is who can rapidly ramp production and mass-produce each new generation of chips at scale. TSMC is rigid and slow to pivot to new technologies, and Samsung has the same problem. Give China access to ASML’s newest machines and let a broad field of firms master 2nm production and advanced chip stacking, and you could create enough capacity and competition to keep the AI trade from busting. Either that happens before the bust and prevents it or afterward as the industry’s inevitable response.

ConsistentOriginal82

fml i just want to break even on ASML. down 4.2% yesterday.. today it will bounce back right?

Trackback_

Oh damn, so why is Mercedes so expensive then? There must be tons of counterfeit Mercs on the streets, significantly cheaper and only slightly worse than the real thing, if "just fucking steal it" was so easy. How many companies have stolen SpaceX's reusable rockets so far? How many companies are making ASML's EUV machines or Nvidia's chips? Or maybe "stealing" is sometimes exceptionally difficult to do, which is those companies' entire moat? You know, which was the entire point of the guy you're responding to.

No_Presentation9490

memory is way too compromised by algos/hedge funds and too risky to hold overnight. if im investing in anything AI its going to be ASML and GEV

PhasedVenturer

ASML seems to get rejected any time it approaches 2000, interesting

OptionsHuduga

FCUK ASML seriously. The stock literally goes up $70 yesterday and now down the same or more a day later. this pattern has been happening everyday for weeks. it holds no gains. total manipulation. I am gonna file a complaint with the stock market company. I know they will take me seriously and will compensate me for emotional and financial duress.

Tamronloh

What do you guys think, why can’t AMD just flood the market with cheap GPUs. Oh, because TSM is the bottleneck? Okay why can’t samsung and intel flood the market with cheap wafers? Oh because ASML is the bottleneck? Okay why can’t china flood ther market with cheap EUV machines? Oh because…

Pornelius_Hubert0

ASML

OptionsHuduga

Can ASML please hurry up and get to $2200? Thanks

No_Current3675

ASML a buy under $2K. 

cforb92

Buying more GOOGL, TSM, and ASML.

New_Ad_1682

What's the largest EU company by market cap? ASML?

GlokzDNB

No, i've built my own dashboard based on my broker's export that shows how many trades failed and how old are they. By failing I mean negative alpha against SP500 etf as a benchmark (I know beta also matters but lets not dive into it here) So my strategy has 78% win ratio, which means around 4 in 5 trades i did in the last 5 years beat the sp500 as of today. I dont have daily data to measure how it changed over time unfortunately. And what I mean is that I buy a stock, and its a lose for first 3 months and then its a winner for 6 then today its either a winner or loser. I think this should be a huge philosophical question we all should have - should our trades quantify by the today's time horizon or it's still too early? Example could be crypto, I started averaging down while it was hot, now its -50% from it's highs and the alpha is even worse with sp500 rallying. Was crypto a bad trade? Yes, if it never recovers. No, if the bounce back will generate alpha over sp500 in the next 2/3/5/10 years horizon. Am I selling and saving as much as -60/-70% alpha on my trades? No, because I do not believe crypto already peaked and it will never return and get new ATH. So that's the first thing to settle, what does it mean for strategy to be effective, before we even dive into what the strategy is. With 78% winratio im sure my 'losing' trades can become winning in longer horizon and some trades can become winners in the long run (e.g. microsoft which i bought for 250$ and it has negative alpha even though they grow as crazy for 18 quarters in a row !!) Now the strategy itself: I seek for discounted high quality business that has good debt to equity, diversified revenue source, is a very known company, has moat, has big market share/is a leader in their category AND a real risk that makes it discounted or trading under 5/10/all time average P/E Then the hard job is to decide whether the risk is real and what would need to happen for the company to go back to their avg multiple. That's all. But the companies I seek for need to be within big trends / be discussed on reddit youtube or cnbc Examples of my winning trades: ASML - has long term moat, I bought dip on chinese export control. Even though it felt risky and expensive, my best trades are now at 300% return in less than 2 years. That was good trade for two reasons - I made a lot of money on it recovering its multiple but now I'll make even more on compounding as this company will grow anywhere from 10-15% over the next decade EVERY year. And that every is key here. Do the math. I already trimmed some because it got too much % in my portfolio, but thats the only reason and it was probably a mistake in this case but that what my risk control strategy forced me to do and probably some day it will save my ass even though i will cut N winners on the way GOOG - again, big moat and diversified revenue sources - I bought the antimonopoly case risk. Here's the power of individual investor, even though everyone knew the whole thing is BS, fund managers and pension funds couldnt buy that risk. Their policy wont let them buy risk of this level even if its so easy to debunk. That was long time before gemini proven to be a real frontier model, but I've watched closely what google does and who works for them. I would say easiest money I made but I made easier in the next chapter PANW - saaspocalypse was such a great opportunity and it is my best alpha net gain so far. I had better returns but only with 1-2% of portfolio, this was >5% bet that landed 150% in just 3 months. I looked at the whole thing and there were few opportunities - atlassian/now/crm/adbe. But I couldn't tell whether the risk of AI reducing white collar jobs is real or not. I know these companies wont be replaced by vibecoded apps, but I couldnt say if the amount of seats they sell wont go down and they were all very expensive/burning money to drive the revenue. Adobe was cheapest but the risk there is biggest, its the first company that comes to my mind what is next kodak. So the only sector within saas that didnt had this risk was cybersecurity. In 2020's covid era, there was one interesting phenomenon - all investments been cut, except cybersec. This lead me to what is currently said aloud in CNBC - there will not be a single CTO or CEO saying, oh lets cut on our cybersec spending, even if AI is another layer of defense. Nobody will risk cybersec attack with cost saving. Its the last thing where you look for savings, a single mistake could turn a great business into a dead/struggling company for years. It was easiest to call BS on all these anthropic bulls. I was just buying dips and kept buying and caught the bottom of the bottom and the dips of dips of dips. MSFT - been buying it for a long time, but as I mentioned, i started buying it when chatgpt came out for 250$, then sold some for 520 before it went down to 350$. So the part where my strategy played out greatly is buying the openai proxy discount. MSFT was punished for anthropic and google catching up. But what people do not realize, openai, anthropic and google deep mind are AI factories. The model is just a product and honestly, the pace of releasing new products is crazy. Its not like a smartphone once a year, its literally once every 2-3 months. We get 4 new iphone models per year to compete with each other. Now - would apple be dead if Samsung produced 1 or 2 flagship models that are better than iphones? That's a real risk if the trend continues, but question is - are both growing? What it both apple and samsung both sold more and more devices ? Is that a risk for microsoft ? They invested 10B into something thats now worth 50 in just few years. Is anthropic getting more market share in 10 years? Maybe, maybe not. To me important fact was that MSFT is only partially exposed to that but the punishment was not proportional to their whole business. But I also discredit the risk of openai being a bad investment. IMO if private funds run out, gov will pour money because AI = cybersec = military = global dominance and cold war 2.0. People compare AI buildout to dot com bubble or railroads buildout. To me its a cold war arm's race, people just didn't realize in 1960 that this race will last for so long or how it will end. Its the same here, the ai race will last decades and people today dont even realize the stake. This is not a private investment into a technology (smartphones), this is a national security / world order of 21st century being determined through tech race. Now funded both by public and private money (China subsidizes as it can, while US still keeps it private). Just look what happened to Intel in the last year since its become a national security issue. AI pact starts with sentence *"The United States is in a race to achieve global dominance in artificial intelligence".* People do not see AI as a weapon/military technology but it's literally that. It wouldn't' be 50 years ago, but in 2026 everything is now virtual including all their money and big chunk of world's economy. 50 years ago factories could be only destroyed with missiles. Now they can be destroyed with cyber attack. And I have more and more of these just not enough time to explain. All these companies are very high quality, have moats, most have diversified revenue streams, have been trading at discounted p/e multiples, i've analyzed risks not companies, nobody ever questioned if they were good companies - markets just discounted the future which I found to be a one big BS.

Clackamas_river

ASML is up nice.

LeSegaGenesis

Chipmaking is not cyclical. It's a fast growing market more so than ever before. And over time old and damaged ones will need to be replaced, and better innovation will replace the older models. The entire floor of ASML is being raised with these 2027-2030 road maps. Maybe it slowly creeps down after the buildouts slow down, but who knows maybe robotics becomes much bigger. I just don't see any meaningful downside over the next few years for a company that is vital to the largest growing sector.

I-banged-elsa

ASML to the moon

znightmaree

It’s all SK Hynix, Samsung, TSMC, and ASML

Different_One_5257

**1/** I think Terafab may be the clearest example of the narrative problem inside $SPCX. SpaceX wants Terafab to eventually produce ONE TERAWATT of compute hardware every year. Incredible ambition. But now forget the presentation and read the SEC disclosures. **2/** The SEC asked SpaceX to disclose: • Terafab’s development timeline • major milestones • anticipated capex • material terms of Intel’s involvement SpaceX’s response: those timelines, milestones and capital expenditures are not yet available. **3/** SpaceX also disclosed its arrangement with Tesla is essentially a general framework. Specific Terafab projects still require separate negotiation, separate agreements and Board approval. Neither Tesla nor Intel is obligated to remain involved. **4/** SpaceX even disclosed it may never enter definitive agreements for the collaboration. So compare the headline with the underlying reality: Headline: ONE TERAWATT/YEAR. Reality: no final scope, disclosed schedule, milestones or total capital requirement. **5/** That isn’t a semiconductor manufacturing plan yet. It’s a promise looking for a plan. Now compare that with TSMC, which plans $165B of U.S. investment across advanced fabs, packaging, R&D and the supplier ecosystem needed to actually manufacture at scale. **6/** TSMC’s Arizona operation already employs 3,000+ people. Its broader expansion is expected to require 40,000 construction jobs plus tens of thousands of high-tech jobs. And this is TSMC—a company built around semiconductor manufacturing for decades. **7/** SpaceX has \~22,000+ employees across the ENTIRE company. Those people already support Falcon, Dragon, Starship, Starlink, Starshield, launch sites, satellites, ground infrastructure, xAI, Colossus, AI, data centers and telecom. Who staffs Terafab? **8/** A leading-edge fab needs process integration, lithography, etch, deposition, yield, metrology, equipment, chemical/gas, ultrapure-water, facilities, electrical, controls, packaging and maintenance talent. These aren’t generic engineers you move over from Starship. **9/** A rocket engineer does not become a leading-edge semiconductor yield engineer because management says “vertical integration.” And even Intel—with decades of fabs, patents, suppliers and process knowledge—still tells investors how brutally difficult the economics are. **10/** Intel says leading-edge nodes require enormous capital, continuous yield improvement and enough wafer volume to justify the economics. It has even warned that without a major outside customer, it could pause or stop pursuing its next-generation 14A node. **11/** Think about that. INTEL is saying semiconductor economics still matter. Yet the $SPCX narrative asks investors to jump from: “We need more AI chips” to: “Let’s vertically integrate leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing.” Those are not remotely the same thing. **12/** Buying ASML machines doesn’t create TSMC. Building a cleanroom doesn’t create TSMC. Hiring a few hundred engineers doesn’t create TSMC. The moat is institutional knowledge: thousands of process steps executed repeatedly at high yield, utilization and competitive cost. **13/** Making a chip is not the achievement. Making MILLIONS of advanced chips economically is. Yield is the product. And then you have to improve that process every generation while competitors with decades of experience are doing the exact same thing. **14/** This is my broader issue with $SPCX. Every new promise gets treated as another future monopoly instead of another claim on capital, talent and management bandwidth. Starship. Mars. Starlink. xAI. Orbital compute. Terafab. Execution risk keeps stacking. **15/** At some point, “vertical integration” stops explaining the strategy and starts disguising organizational sprawl. Different industries have different talent pools, supplier networks, learning curves, physics, economics and failure modes. Rocket excellence doesn’t erase that. **16/** Could Terafab eventually succeed? Absolutely. That isn’t the investment question. Why should investors capitalize Terafab’s future economics TODAY when SpaceX itself says the specific projects, timelines, milestones and capital requirements aren’t determined? **17/** That’s my problem with a \~$1.8T $SPCX valuation. The market keeps treating long-term ambitions as if they are already de-risked assets. Terafab isn’t TSMC. Today it isn’t even a fully disclosed fab program. It’s a one-terawatt promise on a framework agreement. **18/** Eventually someone has to: build the fabs, staff them, achieve yield, fund the capex, run them at scale, and prove the return on capital. The cult sees the destination. I want to see the execution plan. Short $SPCX.

KingStyllama

Mainly, yeah, but a lot of the picks and shovels comes from other parts of the world and those companies don't want to miss contracts and are in the race as well against other companies. Also these have their backs covered. Europe won't let companies fail like SAP, ASML, ...

Brilliant-Repeat-178

someone tell me ASML is gonna pop to $2500 this month https://preview.redd.it/0fhhpvaua8jh1.jpeg?width=588&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6ef19bbfe0e5e61117c1690bfd10ecaff782044

Terrible-Deer1398

Buddy Google was a 2x, Nvidia, ASML, rubrik, any semi company, any memory company. Check how many companies have doubled last year

CosmosMasterMan

I moved upstream of the buildout to avoid picking winners in the datacenter race. ASML, AMAT, LITE, TSM, Siemens.

CosmosMasterMan

Should I put my $1.00 Dividend from Visa into ASML or gamble more on CNTX oncology IP pipeline breaking out?

Clackamas_river

I like ASML

Stunning-Crew5527

New here, but I felt that way this week about ASML. Every thing is coherent to go big up, INTC & COHR too. From an economics standpoint, it makes sense. We were seeing it earlier this week with ASML until an article came out suggesting otherwise. I can't believe how much that article worked. Closed that day low, with next day premarket increase at half the rate. Increase continues but slower now. With INTC & COHR gaining traction now, why not equally go back to ASML? I guess most people are just followers? I ask that genuinely. Doesn't that get exhausting? Wealth concentration with 1 article? You all just believe it?

liuqiu_rangers

I mean Korea has the landmass of Indiana and the population of Spain so the fact that it actually has multiple world-class tech companies worth so much is insane. Compare that to 700 million Europoors who managed to produce 1 ASML dependent on American tech

QuatroCisco

None of the above… …NVIDIA is becoming the central bank of the AI infrastructure layer with more and more outside financing and backstops needed because contrary to Jensens belief, lenders don‘t take GPUs as collateral. To much risk involved for me. …AVGO took/takes on loads of debt to do their deals with a lot of the recent deals directly linked to either OpenAI and Anthropic, which makes me uncertain whether they will be able to pay, since they‘ve already commited so much to other especially Hyperscalers. …MU is (in my opinion) near a cyclical peak when it comes to RAM prices, since a lot of their recent revenue growth and margin expansion is directly linked to massive price increases and not volume. Meaning once the capacity that MU, Sk hynix and Samsung are building comes online, revenues might still grow but margins will normalize, leading to lower profits. So once again, too much risk for me. …TSM and also ASML are in my opinion the least risky infrastructure stocks out there, fundamentally speaking, when it comes to their current valuation, wouldn‘t consider them a buy at the moment. …AMZN also too much uncertainty for me right now. They‘ve taken on the most debt, the bond market is skeptical with their last offering only being 1,6x oversubscribed vs. normal investment grade sales at 4x. They are the largest cloud provider with AWS, however Like the other hyperscalers, they don‘t disclose their AI-revenues or their margins. They only use run-rates which is just any month times twelve, so as transparent as a phone screen in my opinion. Also not a fan of management recently. They talk so much about the insatiable demand for their services (cloud, renting chips etc.), take in huge amounts of debt, send FCF into the negative, but then simply wire 35 billion to OpenAI for nothing. That was money contingent on IPO or AGI, OpenAI achieved neither but got the money anyway. If you have real outside demand, you don‘t issue debt to fund your own customers. So like I said, too much uncertainty and shady management, in my opinion.

ham_sandwedge

It's 20% top marginal cap gains, 3.8% NIIT (23.8% fed) + 11.3% state. Plus I don't know for sure whether earnings catch up to valuations. So having a 35% handicap definitely influences the decision, but doesn't make it. I would certainly at least trim AVGO, LRCX, AMAT, ASML and a few others without this. But for now we let it ride

I-banged-elsa

ASML to the moon

No_Current3675

ASML 1550 was an easy buy

Such-Ice1325

Why the sudden dump an the end? MU/ASML/ARM ETC.

oojacoboo

Yes, because it’s dilution. It’s down basically the same as the dilution and following the rest of the semi sector, sans ASML

Southern-Carpenter-1

ASML was bleeding money for decades as they were trying to make EUV lithography possible. They were backed a lot of big tech players as they knew EUV was the best bet to continue following Moore's law (cited from "Chip Wars" book) to allow even smaller chips. Betting on tech advancing has been the play since forever. Also most chip fabs were bleeding money on production but just kept pumping money on it because "the vision". Say what you will about AI, but there is a vision for the future.

im-buster

They can build fabs pretty fast but question is, can they get all the tools they need delivered. Can't just tell ASML or others, to get you 10 cutting edge tools ready. A lot of vendors dance cards are already filled up for 2029.

gimme_pineapple

I figured that was the case. It would’ve been very traumatic if you actually thought ASML is worth less than NVDA. Cheers mate!

znightmaree

I vastly oversimplified my logic at the time. I understand. It’s not like ASML is worth more than NVDA etc. Probably could have explained my thought process better but just shot off a response lol

Ok-Chapter8930

There is even better than ASML, it's Hermes. I would argue what they make is even harder to replicate than leading edge semi equipment and their margins are crazy.

SeriousAdult

>That's the only argument I can partially understand, that maybe companies won't be able to expand as big as they like at the pace they'd like, but one would think they have a plan for these hurdles? For the sake of argument, let's assume everything you say about the demand side is true. That's only more reason to believe nobody had a plan for these hurdles. You've seen it all the way down the supply chain from GPUs (NVDA/AMD), to DRAM (MU/SNDK/etc), to data center infrastructure (AMAT/ASML/etc), all the way to power (CAT/BE). All up dramatically because nobody had a plan for these bottlenecks, largely because all of these capacities take a ton of resources and time to raise. Even if all of these players had predicted this demand when ChatGPT first came out in late '22, much of the capacity would just be coming online now. If a lot of these companies are spending the capex now, I'd expect that capacity to start being present at all in late 2028 or 2029. Because of the complexity and cost it's hard to see any of individual companies expanding production as fast as most would like even if supply chains were no issue. Looking at the aggregate picture, with the entire supply chain feeling the same squeeze, it pushes that timeline even further out and pushes all of the costs up. This is why I'm skeptical that they can spend the money allocated and build the capacity planned on a timeline close to what the markets are pricing.

theflubberdubber

That is the approach at this time. Little while back went with a little more tech/ai build out thesis with things like AVGO, ASML, MRV, VRT, GEV and some others. Did okay with that but learned the volatility with of ups and downs was too much for me. The dividend blue chip route seems my speed. What are you holding as I am not fully set on a couple of these (mainly DE)

MitchCurry

Haven't bought actively bought since July 23 unless you count my ASML DRIP (I don't count my 401k as a buy).

Tentman66

I’m 52% VOO, 6% ASML and 5% SMH. I wanted the huge ASML overlap. 

2020isgreat

it's funny the only thing Europe has left is ASML a single company lmfao

hftrader09

Look at ASML 5m candle lol...

youstillhavehope

I think it may be too early for reusable heavy lift. Guessing here, but the math seems to depend on multi-decade trips to build a lunar habitat, mine the moon, carry on from there, etc. It is a great idea IMO but the US gov would have to fun it and at its current debt load, and anti-tax stance, that funding will not happen. I am speaking broadly here but the alt idea, manufacturing in space is also worth exploring but that economic surface will be subject to intense, undgodly intense, demands to lower lift costs by reducing payload weight, meaning those operations will be light, fast, deployable by all the current med-weight operators. It is the corollary to the insane demand for nanoscale processors TSMC / ASML face. So, RN, no, not a game changer.

No-Competition-6694

Where is ASML in this list?

gmennert

ASML begs to differ

PhotonicsIsFried

Why are we talking about a europoor company? I thought they only had ASML

Beginning-Fig-9089

ASML

blorg

I would never recommend going all-in on ex-US and dumping all US holdings. That's a strawman. The core argument for diversification is holding both. Even at global market-cap weights, you're still ~60% US, even the base case here you're more in US equities than not. I prefer VT for simplicity, but it's completely fine to choose an intentional home-bias (like 70/30 or 80/20 US). What doesn't hold up is using macro narratives to justify a 100% US allocation. This is all **Priced In**. >There aren't any tailwinds in a huge # of Ex-US countries. Market returns aren't driven by absolute economic growth or good headlines; they are driven by performance relative to expectations. Everything you listed, China's political risk, Japan's demographics, European stagnation, or the UK's GDP per capita, is common knowledge. Because it's common knowledge, it's already priced in. That's why ex-US equities trade at a massive valuation discount compared to the US. For US stocks to continue outperforming, US corporate earnings don't just need to be good, they need to consistently exceed the extremely aggressive growth expectations already baked into today's sky-high valuations. For cheap international stocks to outperform, they just need to turn out *slightly less terrible* than the dismal scenario the market has already priced in. Research has actually shown there is a [zero or slightly negative correlation between per-capita GDP growth and real stock returns.](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927538X05000338) [[2]](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oddly-stock-market-returns-gdp-203439790.html) You're simply looking at the wrong thing here. *It's not what you buy, it's what you pay that counts. Good investing doesn't come from buying good things, but from buying things well.* - Howard Marks >I'll start buying as soon as Ex-US companies become household recognizable names. Waiting for companies to become household names before buying is literally a strategy for buying at the top. The entire point of value/international diversification is buying productive assets before the market prices them higher. Beyond that, ex-US companies are already household names: Nestle, Toyota, Samsung, Novo Nordisk, LVMH, Sony, Unilever, Shell, and ASML and TSMC (who are responsible for producing the chips inside the American tech everyone is bullish on). The US is the strongest market in the world today, but betting 100% of your portfolio on the assumption that current US valuation multiples will expand indefinitely, and that no other market will ever experience a multi-decade cycle again, seems wrong to me. It can't do this forever: indefinite relative outperformance is mathematically impossible unless you believe US equities will eventually account for 100% of global market cap and total global GDP. You are right though that we don't know when it might change. Hence why I just buy both and don't try to time it.

blorg

I would never recommend going all-in on ex-US and dumping all US holdings. That's a strawman. The core argument for diversification is holding both. Even at global market-cap weights, you're still ~60% US, even the base case here you're more in US equities than not. I prefer VT for simplicity, but it's completely fine to choose an intentional home-bias (like 70/30 or 80/20 US). What doesn't hold up is using macro narratives to justify a 100% US allocation. >There aren't any tailwinds in a huge # of Ex-US countries. Market returns aren't driven by absolute economic growth or good headlines; they are driven by performance relative to expectations. Everything you listed, China's political risk, Japan's demographics, European stagnation, or the UK's GDP per capita, is common knowledge. Because it's common knowledge, it's already priced in. That's why ex-US equities trade at a massive valuation discount compared to the US. For US stocks to continue outperforming, US corporate earnings don't just need to be good, they need to constantly exceed the extremely aggressive growth expectations already baked into today's sky-high valuations. For cheap international stocks to outperform, they just need to turn out *slightly less terrible* than the dismal scenario the market has already priced in. Research has actually shown there is a [zero or slightly negative correlation between per-capita GDP growth and real stock returns.](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927538X05000338) [[2]](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oddly-stock-market-returns-gdp-203439790.html) >I'll start buying as soon as Ex-US companies become household recognizable names. Waiting for companies to become household names before buying is literally a strategy for buying at the top. The entire point of value/international diversification is buying productive assets before the market prices them higher. Beyond that, ex-US companies are already household names: Nestle, Toyota, Samsung, Novo Nordisk, LVMH, Sony, Unilever, Shell, and ASML and TSMC (who are responsible for producing the chips inside the American tech everyone is bullish on). The US is the strongest market in the world today, but betting 100% of your portfolio on the assumption that current US valuation multiples will expand indefinitely, and that no other market will ever experience a multi-decade cycle again, seems wrong to me. It can't do this forever: indefinite relative outperformance is mathematically impossible unless you believe US equities will eventually account for 100% of global market cap and total global GDP. You are right though that we don't know when it might change. Hence why I just buy both and don't try to time it.

Rand-Seagull96734

You have to *buy and hold* at least two out of the big hyperscalers - GOOG, AMZN, MSFT - because you don't know which one is going to get leadership and materially grow their Operating Cash Flow. I own GOOG and AMZN. Then you have to have the equipment and fabs behind all the (AI) chips. I have ASML (cutting edge equipment) and TSMC (cutting edge fab). They win regardless of which chip companies win. Then you gotta own NVDA (incumbent chip). I also have QCOM because they will benefit from all Android smartphones getting AI enabled with on-device inference. Finally, you have to own whoever owns the smartphone consumer channel because of the upgrade AI will cause. AAPL is the obvious choice. AI models are going to get conmoditized because of the Chinese open source options, but I already have GOOG/Gemini and will buy Anthropic when it IPOs. Everybody else including OpenAI, Grok, Meta, etc are not likely to make it commercially because they don't control the smartphone channel. You have to watch for how (cyber)security software layers evolve as AI agents do most of the work, including bad actors threatening enterprises with agent swarms (kinda like drone swarms). I have tip toed into RBRK and S because they are doing AI informed cyber security from the ground up while the incumbents are either consolidating and/or grafting AI capability into legacy platforms. I don't have a strong conviction here, but this is an area to learn and invest. All this is just a thesis so we shall see, but it is not momentum trading like OP is doing.

Zef-Daytrade

no, cost savings in training is NOT the same as cost savings in operation. The training with frontier models does not save in the operation side... no amount of using of frontier models will save in compute requirements. Give credit to the programmers man. SMCI don't blame china for that. Thats purely the excs fault for doing something illegal. China has an order out on the market, waiting to be filled, its the trade specialists that know what to fill or not. The execs KNEW they are doing it illegally, . This is a trade specialists (ie import/export/sourcing/trade manager) job to know the rules and they get paid handsomely for it 100k-200k is common and 300k and above is not unhead of. ASML China stealing IP because hiring the employee they fired? Really? It is also the same for virtually all the employees fired in the lasts 4 years with the China/Chinese crackdown in the USA.... across the board yet no one is claiming IP theft in those fields due to hiring but only tech.

Samjabr

True. I was in and out of ASTS back in the $20s. I am not smart enough to know how far ahead their phased array tech is versus competing tech. If it is as amazing as promised, they will definitely be successful. But tech these days is so easy to copy - Just look at the Chinese AI companies. Moats will become more relevant, so companies like ASML, TSMC, etc. are the ones that will be hard to knock off their perch. And it's hard to think of anything harder than just starting up your own satellite launch company.

Glad_Block_7220

The US companies monetarely incentivate the best stundents to migrate to West Coast tech companies, that's a fact. In reality, China is slightly behind because chinese hardware (advanced chips) is inferior to what is produced in TSMC (Nvidia, AMD, Grok, etc.) and that's because advanced EUV litography is among the few core technologies that the west is still far ahead. The chinese cannot buy the most advanced chips (made with EUV) because the US forbade Nvidia to sell them, they cannot buy the machines necessary to make the chips because the US forbade the Netherlands (ASML) to sell them, therefore they make inferior chips with what technology they currently have (DUV) while they create their own EUV machines. The result is that chinese researchers had to invent more "eficient" models in order to achieve parity with US ones, whom have access to more raw computing power for both training and running. The fact they are anywhere close (sometimes even surpassing in some metrics) to these frontier models is quite a clear meassure of their proficieny in this field and that they have some serious talent pool.

Etherius

We’re past the point of “will this be profitable?” We’re currently at the point of “who is going to be able to profit the most?” The answer seems to be “Amazon, Google, and ASML”

1098duc_w_the_termi

ASML is an equipment manufacturer and the only one of actual importance in any of the ones listed

DipSniper69

Ever heard of ASML and BE semiconductors. LMFAO

ViggVarse

ASML made me lot of money, but they are china sensitive

ViggVarse

ASML is european too

Etherius

ASML is ramping up capex like fuckin insane-o-style Who knows whether they can do it fast enough to help MU et al

jonsnowick

Actually USA controls ASML, esp which clients to serve. Coz they control a critical component of the ASML machines. Unless ASML becomes totally independent , its riskier than Mu, Samsung

BriackYOLO

MU and Samsung own the actual memory monopoly, ASML owns the machines to make them. Pick your poison, or just buy calls and join the casino

No_Current3675

loaded the truck wit ASML KLAC LRCX during last week's dip. Added a bit of sandick too.

liuqiu_rangers

Chipmaking cannot be solved by money. Solving things like raising yields takes an enormous amount of time and collaboration with equipment makers. I'm sure China will *eventually* figure it out but it'll be a decadeslong effort. China originally had this plan in 2015 called Made in China 2025 that was supposed to have 70% of the chips China consumers domestically produced by 2025 but it miserably failed because they realized this shit is a million times harder than EVs or batteries especially when your access to the finest chipmaking equipment is blocked. The EUV machines that ASML developed? It's the most complex thing ever built by humans and took decades of research and collaboration. Even today it's not purely a Dutch produce because key components have to be produced in Germany and the US.

jonneh

Who knows for certain but there was a story a month ago about Lutnick telling ASML he thinks China have components of EUV

RCT_Crazy

As a Eurocuck I want to yell at you but you're right, whole market is basically always keeping their eyes peeled on ASML

Remote-Ranger-7721

ASML is genuinely our only bargaining chip in staying close with the US during the AI race :(

1098duc_w_the_termi

EuroPEONS need to be cut off from our markets. Their single AI play is ASML, they don’t deserve to influence our bubble

CivilizedSteve

I agree with that. I did trim and move a bit to the spenders but I'm pretty locked in on the capex spending theme... on the supply side, TSM, ASML, AVGO, memory... Leos's fund thing is a crazy story and there was also a lot of volatility trading. So yah the semi trade is far from being done. Spending is still increasing!!

CivilizedSteve

Ok so still the supplier side. I'm in semis too. TSM, ASML, AVGO, etc. Volatile. Crowded. Was just thinking about what is AI actually good at. There's a lot of magic thinking about AI but it's very good at processing information. That got me thinking about businesses where that could lead to strong upside.

No_Current3675

Went balls deep ASML KLAC LRCX last Tue & Wed. And bought more sanddick. Sold RDDT 180 bought back under 140. 

CoconutAmbitious2580

That seems solid to me but I am an optimistic bull in this bearish market. Thanks for sharing. I'm selling puts on many of the downtrodden tech and memory stocks this week... Fat premium on most. It could blow up in my face though with those damn Chinese pilfering the tech from ASML recently.

icydragon_12

Micron is my favorite name at the moment, but it's not for the faint of heart. high vol, high risk. Currently, the stock is pricing in a >70% crash to memory prices. That could happen, and historically has happened. But after I looked into the capex plans of memory makers, the schedule of wafer additions, I bet it doesn't happen for at least another year if not 2-3. Moreover, HBM prices/volume is being locked. My base case is that memory prices fall by 40-50% sometime after 2027 and even then MU is worth 1500-2k. TSM looks attractive to me as well and I recently bought, but obv if ASML increases their prices that will be at least marginally negative to all the companies buying their equipment.

Kooky-Address-4598

2. how exactly? the hyperscalers guided higher capex for 2027 also why would your thesis play out just for the memory stocks and not other semis (TSM/ASML/AMAT/AVGO/etc.) ?

ThanklessWaterHeater

Every chip maker is frantically building out new capacity. Seems fairly obvious to me that the companies making the lithography equipment they will need to do that are going to be busier than ever, their products perhaps even constrained, for the next few years. ASML, LRCX, AMAT, KLAC.

GoldParticular3093

Do you think it's gonna infinitely go up in a straight line? ASML is very clearly cyclical you can see that in their graph. Besides, are you gonna DCA or lump sum, because if you're gonna DCA you can start now it wont matter, but if you're gonna throw all your money at once, you need a very good price, that's just the way it is I'd wait for the current macro events to unfold. Remember, being patient and "missing out" on gains is still better than losing money on FOMO

Pure_Evidence638

O have heard the same on Reddit when ASML was at $600 LOL

cageslutjoanna

I bought UNH after the drop not because i liked the stock but because I really like how they treat their customers. (I'm not american) Jokes aside, whenever these systemically-important, cash-rich dividend-monster quasi-monopolies have a huge drop, like COST / UNH / ASML recently did, it's a signal to buy the dip. They will always bounce back long term - if they don't, it's because something has fundamentally changed about how the economy they operate in. V and MA have nowhere else to go, they have no organic growth left - credit is becoming more expensive as we are in a cycle of rate increases. Fundamentally - any lending company will have decreased profits when rates increase. When rates increase, consumers spend less because they have to spend more on their mortgage. It costs the lender more to borrow money, and people watch out more for fees. Payments companies thrive in rate cutting environments because people can see that their money is better spent now than later. So if you're buying them you are expecting them to either find a way to nickle and dime customers more, or you are betting on them finding a way to increase their offerings via integration with stablecoins. Some of the smaller payments companies have a long way to grow. If you're in V/MA it's because youve been in them a long time and like your tasty dividends.

HystericalSail

CXMT ranks fourth in global market share, in Q4 2025 already had 7.67% of the market. 31% of Micron's revenue. And that's just the tail end of the DRAM shortage. I wouldn't bet that the Chinese won't have EUV and DUV machines 90% as good as ASML for 10% the price in the next few years. They don't give much of a crap about patents, and have the best manufacturing logistics and infrastructure in the world.

steady_compounder

I would be careful selling a broad index fund to swap into two individual semiconductor names unless this is a small high-conviction satellite bet. ASML and TSM are both great businesses, but that move is still a big jump in concentration and cycle risk. Usually the better question is whether you want core exposure or a deliberate tilt, not whether two stocks can replace the index.

icydragon_12

I'm a professional analyst and just built out models on these for my PA. TSM legitimately seems undervalued to me after this exercise. I modelled out their their production and costs by node. I put in fairly conservative assumptions, and expect about 40% upside in one year. ASML appears to be trading almost exactly at fair value at the moment. I'd expect them to move sideways unless they raise their prices. Which... honestly I don't understand why they don't do this. They're a damn monopoly.

CivilizedSteve

Nice. TSM and ASML IMO are two of the more durable supply AI-related buildout stocks. I own them both.

Ok-Chapter8930

I can tell you how i did 600%. 3 years aga I had a conviction that an irrational AI bubble would happen because the fundamentals were strong enough. I only invest in European stocks, so I look for bottlenecks in the semiconductor supply chain. After doubling my money on ASML, I wanted more. I found this small cap french company called Soitec, great company and product, beaten down stock. It was at a 10 year low, I figured whatever happens it could not get lower anyway. Bought at almost the bottom and waited for the AI craze to catch on... It did. this method only works every 20 years in tech, you just have to be early and have conviction when others don't. When I tried ChatGPT 3.5 and had my mind blown, I just new the bubble was coming. I will probably never be able to repeat  This in my life.

CoachDennisGreen

I was so proud of myself that I was able to keep holding my AI names (AMAT, SMH, ASML, BE). I fought the urge to sell every day of the pullback. But we may not be out of trouble just yet. We’ll see.

No_Current3675

ASML still a value IMO

No_Current3675

KLAC ASML LRCX AVGO NVDA still good buys.

KnownButton8327

I disagree because even if we believe your sentiment that it’s hard to make AI profitable for a lot of smaller companies, there is no stopping the AI arms race between China and the USA. It’s geopolitical now and the genie can’t be put back in the bottle. Not to mention other countries who are in line for sovereign AI build outs. So I guess it depends what end you’re betting on, but the core of NVDA, TSM, ASML, American energy companies, data center cooling, and high speed networking, etc is going to make bank by real TAM expansion

No_Current3675

pretty sane IMO to have bought this semis dip. I went balls deep in KLAC ASML LRCX on Tue & Wed. Bought more SNDK too, some GLW after earnings, can't even remember what else. Been buying MSFT under 400 because you gotta be fucken insane not to.

fo8oo

I still remember how in 2024 ASML ceo said that China is 15 years behind. I guess 15 years went by in 2 years?

No_Current3675

fuk it bruh might pick up more ASML on open. Still on discount.

Icy_Pay7280

Here's the thing, when China comes out with a fully functional EUV machine in 5 years the media will say, oh EUV is already known technology, the west did all the hard work to pave the path and the parts and principles of how they work were all publically available knowledge (which is true). Then people who just watched a few veritasium videos and think they understand the semiconductor industry will realize it's overblown how difficult EUV is to achieve once the supply chains and institutional knowledge is built up. What China has proved with this domestic DUV mass production (if the news is actually real, still a chance it's fake news btw), is they have matured a domestic supply chain and strong institutions with a vast talent pipeline. No one who seriously works in the industry thinks china can't achieve EUV given the pressure put on them, that's why I'm not touching ASML stock with a 10 foot pole.

coolkavo

Yes. Overreaction indeed. People and institutions can’t get it out of their head that DUV does not equal to EUV. Social media makes it out that China is leapfrogging ASML…

No_Current3675

KLAC ASML LRCX amazing values

IBUYVOTES

Tomorrow? Going bargain hunting in semiconductors. There is value there if you look for it. AVGO is hanging out at 23x NTM, NVDA is 19x, ASML is \~28x, TSM is \~17x. Very attractive entry for some very strong moats.

CUbuffGuy

Lots of tech names in the portfolio getting hammered. AMAT, ASML, SOXX is a big holding. Then there were some high beta names I sold earlier the month but still took a hit on, APLD, RCAT, OUST to name a few