FCF

lavaeyeye

It won't last that long, FCF of hyperscalers is expected to become negative in Q4 2026, unless we see massive increase in profitability in AI in the next few months, Capex will be revised downward, Oracle Credit default swaps are already trading at a premium. As big as hyperscalers are they don't even have near that amount of money to burn on unprofitable CAPEX. IMO market will correct Q4 2026/ Q1 2027

jeff8073x

Subsea equipment, some ROVs etc for oil industry basically. Tons of FCF. Just keeps having solid ERs so I never sell

booobReviewer

You're on the right track with the Buffett book. For a practical starting point, I'd focus on three things: 1) Free cash flow yield — divide FCF by enterprise value. If it's above 5-6%, you're in the right neighborhood for a fair price. Below 3% and you're paying for growth expectations that may not materialize. 2) ROIC trend — look for return on invested capital that's stable or rising over 5+ years. A company earning 20%+ ROIC consistently has a durable competitive advantage worth paying up for. 3) Check against intrinsic value range using a simple DCF in a spreadsheet — discount 10 years of projected FCF at 10%, add terminal value at 3% growth, divide by shares outstanding. If current price is below that number, you've got a margin of safety. The trick is that no single metric tells the whole story. Each one eliminates companies that don't pass the filter, and the ones that pass all three are worth a deeper look.

Special_Elk_1289

Broadcom Inc. (AVGO) | Outperform June 3, 2026 | After-Hours Flash Note Price Target: $560 ✦ (raised from $510) Current Price: ~$447 (AH) | Market Cap: ~$2.05T BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT Another beat-and-raise, but the market is punishing it. We view the after-hours selloff — driven primarily by the $100B FY27 AI guide not being raised and a thin headline revenue miss vs. whisper — as a buying opportunity. The underlying print is exceptional: AI semis at $10.8B (+143% YoY), Q3 guided to $29.4B (+84% YoY), and Q3 AI semis guided to $16.0B (+200%+ YoY). Those numbers don’t belong to a company with a valuation problem — they belong to one the market hasn’t fully repriced yet. We are raising our PT to $560 and reiterating Outperform. Q2 FY26 RESULTS vs. ESTIMATES |Metric |Actual |Consensus Est.|Beat/Miss | |---------------|--------------------|--------------|-------------------| |Revenue |$22.19B |$22.27B |Miss (~$80M, <0.4%)| |Non-GAAP EPS |$2.44 |$2.40 |+$0.04 beat | |Adj. EBITDA |$15.24B (69% margin)|~$15.1B (68%) |Beat | |AI Semi Revenue|$10.8B |~$10.7B |Beat | |FCF |$10.26B (46% of rev)|— |Record | Total revenue came in at $22.187B, up 48% YoY. GAAP net income was $9.31B (+88% YoY). Non-GAAP net income was $12.07B. Adjusted EBITDA hit a record $15.24B, representing 69% of revenue — 100bps above guidance.  The top-line “miss” is noise — the $80M gap to consensus is rounding. What matters is the EBITDA margin expansion to 69% against guidance of 68%, and FCF of $10.26B (46% of revenue). Cash from operations was $10.49B with capex of only $231M, generating $10.26B in free cash flow.  The FCF yield here is elite-tier. THE KEY NUMBER: AI SEMICONDUCTORS Q2 AI semiconductor revenue of $10.8B grew 143% year-over-year, above Broadcom’s own $10.7B forecast, driven by increasing demand for custom AI accelerators and AI networking.  For Q3, Broadcom expects AI semiconductor revenue to grow over 200% year-over-year to $16.0 billion.  That is the single most important number in this report. The street was modeling $12B for Q3 AI semis. Broadcom guided $16B. That’s a $4B upside surprise to forward AI revenue — roughly 33% above buy-side expectations — and directly extends the path toward management’s $100B FY27 AI chip target. SEGMENT BREAKDOWN Semiconductor Solutions: $15.01B, up 79% YoY (68% of total revenue, up from 56% a year ago). Infrastructure Software (VMware): $7.18B, up 9% YoY.  Two observations here: Semis accelerating, software decelerating — and that’s fine. The mix shift toward semis is expected and actually argues for margin expansion over time as AI XPU volumes scale. Software at 9% growth is softer than we’d like, but VMware’s subscription transition completing in late CY26 should re-accelerate that line. VMware is approaching $30B in annual revenue at margins above 78%, and as the transition from perpetual licenses to subscriptions completes in late 2026, analysts expect a meaningful jump in software operating income.  The market is still not pricing this correctly — VMware is being treated as a sideshow when it’s a $30B ARR business at 78%+ margins. AI networking is underappreciated. Custom XPUs get the headlines, but roughly 40% of AI semiconductor revenue is networking — Ethernet switches, scale-up/scale-out fabric — where Broadcom has a structural moat Nvidia cannot easily replicate. Q3 FY26 GUIDANCE |Metric |Guidance |Street Prior Est.|Delta | |-------------------|--------------------|-----------------|-----------------| |Total Revenue |~$29.4B (+84% YoY) |~$23B+ |**+$6.4B upside**| |AI Semi Revenue |~$16.0B (+200%+ YoY)|~$12B |**+$4B upside** | |Non-GAAP Op. Margin|~67% |68% |-1pt (immaterial)| |Adj. EBITDA Margin |~68% |68% |In-line | The Q3 revenue guide of $29.4B is extraordinary — the largest single-quarter revenue step-up in the company’s history. The implied non-AI semiconductor + software revenue for Q3 would be approximately $13.4B, meaning even stripping out AI entirely, the base business is robust. The 67% non-GAAP operating margin guide (vs. 68% EBITDA) reflects a 100bps step-down from Q2 — this is the one item bears will focus on. Our read: this is AI rack mix (lower gross margin hardware) diluting the blended rate temporarily. As XPU silicon becomes a larger proportion of AI revenue vs. racks, margins recover. Not a structural concern. HYPERSCALER CUSTOMER UPDATE Per the earnings call, Broadcom now has six confirmed XPU customers: Google, Anthropic, Meta, OpenAI, and two others. For Anthropic, Broadcom entered a new agreement in April to enable access to another 5GW of next-gen TPU-based compute beginning in 2027. For OpenAI, silicon has been delivered and production is on track for late 2026, with a contractual commitment for 1.3GW in 2027 as part of a larger 10GW agreement through 2029. For Meta, a new partnership for multiple generations of MTIA XPUs was announced in April, with 3GW to be deployed through end of 2028 and an initial 1GW order including XPUs and networking received. For the other two customers, shipments are expected to begin late 2026 and accelerate into 2027. Purchase orders received to date total $6 billion.  The $6B in committed POs is a floor, not a ceiling. The backlog across these six relationships — at $20B per GW (BofA estimate) and 9-10GW committed for 2027 — implies $180-200B of implied 2027 AI chip revenue against management’s $100B target. Hock Tan guides conservatively. He always has. WHY THE STOCK IS DOWN — AND WHY WE DISAGREE CEO Hock Tan did not raise the company’s full-year $100B AI chip revenue target, and the stock slid in extended trading.  This is the core bear case tonight: if Q3 AI semis alone are $16B, annualizing that is $64B — and with Q4 expected to step further, how does $100B become the ceiling? Tan’s silence on raising the number is being read as a sandbag. We think he’s simply being disciplined — he has never raised that target prematurely, and given the OpenAI Project Nexus financing complexity, he may be waiting for resolution before putting a new number out there. The other bear argument: a <0.4% revenue miss vs. consensus on a stock that ran 15% in five days into print. Classic positioning unwind. We’d be buying this dip. MODEL REVISIONS & PRICE TARGET We are raising our FY26E non-GAAP EPS to $9.85 (from $9.10) and FY27E to $16.20 (from $13.50) reflecting the Q3 guide step-up and implied acceleration of the AI XPU ramp into next year. At our revised FY27E EPS, the stock at $447 trades at roughly 27.6x forward earnings — cheap for a company guiding 84% revenue growth with 68%+ EBITDA margins and a $100B+ AI chip trajectory. We apply a 34.5x multiple to our FY27 estimate to arrive at our $560 PT. Risks to the downside: OpenAI financing resolution fails to materialize, Google TPU supply diversification accelerates beyond current assumptions, margin compression from AI rack mix persists into FY27. Rating: Outperform | PT: $560 | AVGO This note is for informational purposes only and reflects simulated analyst framing based on public earnings data.

Leveraged_Lots

Someone else just commented that too, to which I can only say, which time they went bankrupt, it's happened like three times hahaha... They're FCF positive now tho so hopefully it shouldn't happen again.

Leveraged_Lots

"when they went bankrupt" yeah mate, which time, it's happened like three times hahaha... Hopefully not again tho, they're actually just turning FCF positive.

_hiddenscout

I usually look at PEG, P/FCF and do a DCF analysis around a bear, base, and bull case to help determine valuations.

fredditf

$AVGO Q2’26 EARNINGS HIGHLIGHTS 🔹 Revenue: $22.187B (Est. $22.13B) 🟢; +48% YoY 🔹 Adj. EPS: $2.44 (Est. $2.39) 🟢; +54% YoY 🔹 Semiconductor Solutions: $15.009B (Est. $14.65B) 🟢; +79% YoY 🔹 AI Semiconductor: $10.8B (buyside Est. $11.3B) 🟡; +143% YoY Q3 Guide: 🔹 Revenue: ~$29.4B (Est. ~$28B; buyside $30B) 🟡; +84% YoY 🔹 AI Semiconductor Revenue: ~$16B (buyside Est. ~$18B) 🟡 🔹 Non-GAAP Operating Income: ~67% of projected revenue 🔹 Adjusted EBITDA: ~68% of projected revenue Segment Performance: 🔹 Semiconductor Solutions Revenue: $15B; +79% YoY 🔹 Infrastructure Software Revenue: $7.178B; +9% YoY Financials: 🔹 FCF: $10.262B; 46% of revenue 🔹 Non-GAAP Net Income: $12.074B; +55% YoY 🔹 Adjusted EBITDA: $15.244B; +52% YoY 🔹 Operating Cash Flow: $10.493B; +60% YoY 🔹 Cash & Cash Equivalents: $19.628B Capital Return: 🔹 Dividend: $0.65/share payable June 30, 2026 🔹 Q2 Dividend Paid: $3.092B Commentary: 🔸 “Broadcom achieved record revenue, operating profit and free cash flow in Q2 driven by accelerating growth in AI semiconductor revenue and strong operating leverage.” 🔸 “Q2 semiconductor revenue from AI of $10.8 billion grew 143% year-over-year, above our forecast, driven by increasing demand for custom AI accelerators and AI networking.” 🔸 “The momentum continues and in Q3 we expect semiconductor revenue from AI to grow over 200 percent year-over-year to $16.0 billion.” 🔸 “In Q3 we expect consolidated revenue growth to increase 84% year-over-year to $29.4 billion, with non-GAAP operating margin stable at 67% reflecting our strong operating leverage.”

Personal_Repair_3579

Ran $ARLP through a stock benchmarking tool out of curiosity. Cash generation is genuinely strong - FCF yield around 10-11%, and their balance sheet is unusually clean for a commodity producer. Interest coverage is 3x the peer median. That's what's funding the dividend. The tension though: they're paying out more in dividends and buybacks than they actually generate in free cash flow. Revenue is already down 10% YoY. That works... until it doesn't. The AI power demand tailwind is real and does support coal near-term. But "near-term support for a structurally declining fuel" is a specific thesis to keep adding to. Not saying she's wrong - the yield is doing a lot of work here. Just something to watch.

origami_bluebird

7 in orbit right now (including BW3) and they only need 25 to be FCF positive and for intermittent coverage to begin, and only around 100 sats for global coverage vs Starlink who needs to launch around 25,000 for tech that still cannot currently achieve 5G speeds unlike AST which has proven it to most of the global telecom companies (like Verizon and AT&T which have already partnered with AST because they understand they will be the global leader in Direct to Cell) Is your argument that AST will never launch their sats because they can't launch themselves? Realize SpaceX is launching their next 3 sats in the coming weeks. So it would take anitcompetitive trade practice for them to not launch AST. Amazon Blue Origin is responsible for failure of last launch and we can also use ISRO (again) and ULA Vulcan to launch.

adric03

Their FCF is nowhere close the number you are saying from what I know, do you have some sources of financial analysis ?

_hiddenscout

Not sure if it’s skill or luck, but this is more 4th year of active investing and I’ve really well each year. I always go back to valuations do matter in the long term and I’m looking for growth as a responsible price. To me, screening is like when buffet would read all of mooneys to see all businesses. Peter lynch talks about good businesses staying good. So that’s where different investors take different approaches around what is a good business. That’s why when screening I look at revenue growth, eps growth, ROIC, p/fcf, and quick ratio as a few of my parameters. Like I posted about ATMU the other day. I just bought some. Boring business. They do air filters for heavy trucks. The stock plunged after their earnings, but it was because it kept guidance and didn’t raise it. Also the stock was running after the announced they bought an air filter company for data centers. They are actually a pretty assert light business and generate a ton of FCF. The war has hurt trucking but there is an EPA rule change around emissions which should help trucking sales by beginning of next year. So this gets exposure in things like data centers and mining, but valuation is responsible since the pullback. I’m a software engineer but I learned all this by being curios and reading. From my experience you need to learn to think for yourself to find interesting opportunities.

_hiddenscout

I use LLMs for things like doing DCFs or helping to look up any answers around things when researching a company. Always start out on a screener. I screen everything single day. I also do this on weekends. I view investing like a hobby. After finding a company, I then go read the previous two earnings call transcripts and look at e earnings presentation. Like recently been digging into AIR. They do MRO, which I’ve investing heavily in aerospace the last few years. Not really talked about, but Covid created a huge backlog of plane ordering. Planes take an awhile, which mean airlines are flying older planes for longer, which the MRO business’s have been on fire. I use LLMs to ask why their P/FCF is so high, it’s because AIR is building up inventory to meat the demands. For me, I like to buy things that actually have macro tailwinds. I still see electrification, aerospace/space/defense, defense modernization, sensors and rf components as a great place to be. I’m long a bunch of missions critical boring component companies.

Dudeman1000

Then how is Microsoft able to reduce their debt/equity while increasing FCF?

_hiddenscout

I've recommend a handful of 10xers in the daily threads here throughout the years, but I never really sought them out. My investing philosophy draws a lot from Lynch and Buffet, which really comes down to me just being a GARPy investor (Growth at responsible price). All my names come from researching via screening for stocks. I think that's one the big reasons why people underperform in the market in general, they just don't do the work and do the actual reseach. Few of the people I've become friends with on this sub over the year are the weirdos like me, that enjoy looking into and learning about companies. Even when screening, I use the PEG ratio, which is Lynch's go to for valuation. I try to keep it simple and use the Buffet idea of 'It's Better To Buy A Wonderful Company At Fair Price Than A Fair Company At A Wonderful Price'. Using a screener allows for you to pick apart fundamentals to find out what a wonderful business is. Like I look for things with a PEG under 2, ROIC above 10%, Quick Ratio above 1, P/FCF under 30, etc.

LarryStink

Mags showing some weakness with a multi week consolidation. What appears to be a distribution. Googl announcing equity sales to fund further capex and today the market isnt liking it. Aapl is up on the other hand as they were smart for not dumping every penny of FCF and leveraging up their balance sheet to buy a commoditized depreciating asset. Everyone laughed at AAPL early in the cycle but late in the game they are proving to have made the right choice.  This is not a pitch for AAPL but rather a signal to be followed and potentially capitalized on. Waiting for further confirmation on a few key indicators I watch before pulling the short trigger on a nasdaq trade.

never_sur_ender

With $1B of FCF they can literally buy themselves back in five years.

prana_fish

Exactly where all that hyperscalar FCF going. That and my portfolio pockets.

ImperceptibleFerret

Not at all. The fundamentals of this stock are solid. FCF is growing, pipeline is ever expanding. They have no debt. I genuinely think this as far from pump and dump as you can get. The share price did run on rumours of buyout, but at current prices - This is a steal.

Ok-Nose29

Google told everyone that their FCF can't pay for this capex so how can anyone else Also they were first to raid the main cash pile available Probably a calculated move by them

WolfetoneRebel

It’s nuts. They still had FCF left last year after their massive capex. Not a good idea.

Capesize230

I think PYPL will be at least a 3x from here by the end of 2027. It has to be. It’s just too cheap to ignore. Buybacks are $6B per year on a $38B company, with $1.5B more in FCF expected over the next 12 months. Good old fashioned no-brainer. I own a lot at 40 avg.

Flame1808mk

they're not funding it purely from FCF lol. they have debt capacity, they can raise capital, and the spend is over time.. not all at once. $64B FCF is still massive, that's not a company on life support.

bright_sunshine19

I kept putting good money after bad money and lost a big number. Please save yourself and do good due diligence. Invest only if you feel it’s a good stock to invest aka, that business will increase, FCF will go up and stuff. Of course anything can happen as it is an online biz, AI, Crypto or both and move the stock up. Also it could go down for a lot of reasons. I recommend that you read cover to cover of the last 5 years annual and quarterly report. Heck make use of an AI tool to draw inferences and judge for yourself.

sportingpool

actually it is worse, as the share issuance to employees isnt part of FCF. there is a lot of money and shares going out of alphabet now. still a great company, but the risk keeps growing. this is certainly not a Warren Buffett type of investment anymore

RealRobDino

Google's financing method is interesting. I'm not sure how to think about it yet for the long term. I do not understand the criticisms I'm seeing regarding previous buybacks because of this issuance. Google is cashing in a 100% profit on the shares they purchased last year. Overall, that is a win for them. You could make compelling bearish arguments regarding share dilution and the risks of future FCF but to criticize their overall financial management the past couple of years is ignorance.

fakieTreFlip

not how that works -- you can't look at trailing FCF (which already accounts for past capex) and subtract future capex from it. you'd need to look at 2026 operating cash flow and subtract it from that

the_mind_goblin1

Lmao imagine investing in a mag7 stock that has to dilute in order to pay taxes. what the fuck? Sell that shit and buy daddy NVDA, their FCF is legendary

ExerciseFickle8540

Then their real FCF is negative 100 billion?

microdosingrn

Makes sense, this will enable them to fulfill their backlog of RPOs without taking on debt or hindering FCF.  Pittance, relatively speaking.

Ok-Nose29

At this point I should just throw all my money into GOOG and Amazon and call it a day Whenever they decide to stop hiking capex their FCF will be insane

skilliard7

Their free cash flow isn't enough to fund the AI investments they need to make to stay relevant. TTM FCF is $64 Billion, 2026 capex guidance is $180 to $190 Billion.

Dadraik

ok, I'm following you - I bought 4 contracts, only becuase I'm limited in available capital - here's what I see, my position, and my exit strat # THE PLAY AT A GLANCE [](https://github.com/padraik/island-fund/blob/main/week-02/research/research_HITI.md#the-play-at-a-glance) ||| |:-|:-| |**Ticker**|HITI| |**Option**|$2.50C Jul17 (call, strike $2.50, expires July 17, 2026)| |**Cost per contract**|$0.25 (bid $0.20 / ask $0.25, verified live June 1)| |**Contracts**|4| |**Total at risk**|$100.16 (including $0.04 regulatory fee)| |**Break-even**|$2.75 (requires +13.2% from $2.43)| |**Expected value**|\+EV -- see model below| |**Probability of profit**|\~42% (model base case)| |**Catalyst date**|June 15, 2026 -- Q2 FY2026 earnings| |**Conviction**|3.5/5| |**Verdict**|ENTERING -- limit order placed after-hours June 1, fills at open June 2| # THE NUMBERS [](https://github.com/padraik/island-fund/blob/main/week-02/research/research_HITI.md#the-numbers) Note: Revenue and income figures are in Canadian dollars (CAD). Divide by \~1.37 for approximate USD. |Metric|Value| |:-|:-| |Current price|$2.43 USD| |52-week range|$2.10 -- $4.055| |Position in range|20% -- near lows| |Market cap|$216.79M USD| |Revenue TTM|$629.85M CAD (+17.4% YoY)| |Operating income TTM|\+$17.33M CAD (positive)| |Free cash flow TTM|\+$18.28M CAD (positive)| |EBITDA TTM|\+$43.82M CAD (6.96% margin)| |Net income TTM|\-$34.45M CAD (non-cash driven)| |Forward PE|41.04 (implies \~$0.06 EPS inflection)| |Beta|1.07| |Shares outstanding|87.9M (+7.4% YoY -- slow dilution)| |Analyst rating|Strong Buy| |Analyst coverage|6 analysts| |Analyst consensus target|$5.67 (+131% from $2.43)| |Earnings date|June 15, 2026 (Q2 FY2026)| |Fiscal year end|October 31| Why the GAAP losses are misleading: The company is a roll-up -- they have grown by acquiring cannabis retail licenses, e-commerce brands, and distribution platforms. Each acquisition creates amortizable intangible assets (brand value, customer lists, licenses). That amortization hits the income statement as a non-cash expense each year. The cash the business actually generates -- as measured by FCF -- has been positive for three consecutive years. # THE CHAIN [](https://github.com/padraik/island-fund/blob/main/week-02/research/research_HITI.md#the-chain) Three strikes available on Robinhood: |Strike|Ask|Bid|Spread|At Risk (1 contract)|Break-even|Needs| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |$7.50C|$0.05|\~$0|Dead|$5|$7.55|\+211%| |$5.00C|$0.10|\~$0|Dead|$10|$5.10|\+110%| |$2.50C|$0.25|$0.20|$0.05 (20%)|$25|$2.75|\+13.2%| The $5C and $7.50C have no real market -- ask prices of $0.05-$0.10 with zero bid. Not usable. The $2.50C is the only viable instrument. The 20% spread ($0.05) is wide but acceptable at this price level -- maximum friction of $5/contract on entry vs. exit. **Position: 4 contracts at $0.25 = $100.16 at risk.** # UPSIDE SCENARIOS [](https://github.com/padraik/island-fund/blob/main/week-02/research/research_HITI.md#upside-scenarios) 4 contracts at $0.25 = $100 total at risk. |HITI price at Jul 17|Option value per contract|4-contract return|Return %| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |$2.75 (break-even)|$0.25|$0|0%| |$3.50|$1.00|\+$300|\+300%| |$4.00|$1.50|\+$500|\+500%| |$5.00|$2.50|\+$900|\+900%| |$5.67 (consensus)|$3.17|\+$1,168|\+1,168%| Expected value model: |Scenario|Prob|HITI price|Option value|EV contribution (4 contracts)| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |Strong Q2 beat, FCF acceleration|15%|$4.50-5.67|$2.00-3.17 avg|\+$3.15| |Solid beat, guidance maintained|25%|$3.00-4.50|$0.50-2.00 avg|\+$1.25| |In-line quarter, no catalyst|30%|$2.43-3.00|$0-0.50 avg|\-$0.75| |Miss or guidance cut|20%|$2.10-2.43|$0|\-$1.00| |Significant deterioration|10%|Below $2.10|$0|\-$1.00| EV per contract = +$0.47 on $0.25 invested = approximately +188% expected return Note: This EV model assumes the thesis is correct that GAAP losses are non-cash and the business is genuinely improving. If operating leverage does not show on June 15, the in-line and miss scenarios become more likely. # BEAR CASE [](https://github.com/padraik/island-fund/blob/main/week-02/research/research_HITI.md#bear-case) What kills this trade: 1. Revenue growth decelerates. The 17% TTM growth slows materially -- new store openings flatten, same-store sales disappoint. Cannabis retail is still commoditizing in Canada. 2. FCF turns negative. If operating expenses increase faster than gross profit, the cash story that justifies the position breaks. 3. Sector news. Any negative regulatory development in Canadian cannabis -- pricing pressure, taxation changes, license freezes -- would hit the whole sector including HITI. 4. No catalyst. Management reports an in-line quarter with no evidence of the earnings inflection analysts are projecting. Stock stays flat or dips. Option expires worthless. If things go wrong: stock falls toward $2.10. Option expires worthless. # EXIT RULES [](https://github.com/padraik/island-fund/blob/main/week-02/research/research_HITI.md#exit-rules) * If HITI stock hits $4.50 before June 15: Sell 3 contracts (recover \~$600+), let 1 ride through earnings as a free carry. * On June 15 earnings (before open June 16): Sell all remaining contracts at open June 16 regardless of outcome.

baudinl

This is.... bad right? I mean holy hell. Alphabet needs to raise cash by dilution instead of FCF?

Leveraged_Lots

Definitely, demand destruction is unavoidable but oil companies still made absurd FCF yields at $120-110-100-90/bbl. The only thing I have to avoid is an explosion in crude oil prices, that would immediately cause demand destruction even in the richest nations. The current rolling crisis and crude around $100/bbl is goldilocks for my portfolio.

NotGucci

$HPE Q2’26 EARNINGS HIGHLIGHTS * Revenue: $10.68B (Est. $9.76B); +40% YoY * Adj. EPS: $0.79 (Est. $0.53) FY Guide: * Adj. EPS: $3.35-$3.45 (Est. $2.42) , up from $2.30-$2.50 * Revenue Growth: +29% to +33% * Networking Revenue Growth: +72% to +75% * Non-GAAP Operating Profit Growth: +80% to +85% * FCF: At least $3.5B Q3 Guide: * Revenue: $11.5B-$12.1B (Est. $10.9B) * Adj. EPS: $0.88-$0.93 (Est. $0.58) +25% AH I forget they has ER today didn't load up.

_hiddenscout

Kind of an interesting name, but ATMU is looking interesting to me here. The company basically sold off since the thing was running hot and in the earnings report, they only said they are planning on hitting guidance, but not raising it. Also some slowness in the heavy trucking segment, which the management said was due to the war. At these levels, valuation is starting look decent. [https://finviz.com/stock?t=ATMU&p=d](https://finviz.com/stock?t=ATMU&p=d) PEG is 1.6, P/FCF is at 23, and Foward PE of 14. Also asset light company so the ROIC/ROE is pretty solid. Description of the business: >Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. designs, manufactures, and sells filtration products under the Fleetguard brand in the United States and internationally. >It offers fuel filters, lube filters, air filters, crankcase ventilation, hydraulic filters and coolants and other chemicals for on-highway commercial vehicles and off-highway agriculture, construction, mining, and power generation vehicles and equipment. >The company also develops filtration technologies, including filtration media, filter element formation, filtration systems integration; and service-related solutions, such as remote digital diagnostic and prognostic platforms, and analytics. They spun off from cummings and recently bought Koch, which does the HVAC filters for data centers, which should be a good growth component of the company. Also some EPA rule changes around emissions is changing next year, so could see a lot more orders coming in early next year. Earnings Presentation: [https://s201.q4cdn.com/431306011/files/doc\_presentations/2026/May/v2/Atmus-First-Quarter-2026-Earnings-Presentation-vFinal\_1.pdf](https://s201.q4cdn.com/431306011/files/doc_presentations/2026/May/v2/Atmus-First-Quarter-2026-Earnings-Presentation-vFinal_1.pdf)

RegardedWhale

they had a double beat, literally sold off because FCF margin was projected like 3% lower. IMO oversold, but we shall see

Longjumping-Dig8498

Old man SAP is like that boring dividend uncle who secretly owns half the block. Not gonna 10x in a month but if they actually execute on cloud / AI and keep printing fat FCF this is the kind of boomer rock you park money in while you nuke your account on weekly SPY calls. Only thing I wanna see is if they stop being cowards and start returning more to shareholders or if it is just vibes and PowerPoints.

DontForgetTheDivy

I don't understand how there can be posts about a company being cheap or a value and never even mention FCF. See it often.

Black-Chicken447

Their FCF is terrible.

ToddlerPeePee

Here is my investment analysis of Reddit. Since its IPO, the company has good growth in Daily Active Users (DAU) and robust monetization of its ad inventory. This growth has turned Reddit from structural unprofitability to consistent net profit generation. Its gross margins are spectacularly high, hovering in the mid-to-high 80% range. This eclipses standard tech firms and rivals Meta. While gross margins are impressive, net margins have historically been dragged down by heavy spending on Research & Development (R&D) and Sales & Marketing (S&M). The company holds virtually zero long term debt. I like this. Because the platform does not require heavy physical infrastructure or massive capital expenditures to scale (unlike hardware tech or heavy logistics companies), the surge in advertising revenue drops straight to the bottom line. The company is now structurally FCF positive. My only concern is that Reddit frequently trades at a trailing P/S multiple well into the double digits. To put that in perspective, a P/S ratio over 10x is exceptionally premium for a social media firm. When evaluating its Price/Earnings-to-Growth (PEG) ratio, the metric sits well above the traditional "fair value" baseline of 1. Investors are paying a massive premium today for growth that must materialize over the next 3 to 5 years. My personal opinion is that the company is fairly valued. Of course, I might be wrong. It can go either way. Further discussion: [https://tewtew.com/index.asp?action=showPostCommentsFrame&postID=96](https://tewtew.com/index.asp?action=showPostCommentsFrame&postID=96)[&invitationCode=TYBQINHEQR](https://tewtew.com/?action=showRegisterFrame&invitationCode=TYBQINHEQR)

iloveaccounting64

ChatGPT rates ur dd shit: As a WSB post, it’s entertaining. As an investment thesis, it’s pretty weak. I’d break it down into what is **signal** vs **hype**. **The Good Parts (Actual Bull Case)** **1. Figma genuinely has a moat** This is probably the strongest argument in the entire post. Figma won because it wasn’t just a design tool. It became the workflow and collaboration layer between: Designers Engineers PMs Stakeholders Once an enterprise standardizes around Figma, switching costs become real. This is similar to: Atlassian with Jira Microsoft with Office ServiceNow with workflows The moat isn’t “drawing rectangles.” The moat is that everyone works there. **2. AI probably helps Figma more than hurts it** This part is actually interesting. Most bears assume: AI builds apps → nobody needs designers → Figma dies. But reality may be: AI builds apps → more software gets created → more design decisions → more collaboration → more need for Figma. You saw this happen with coding. People thought AI would kill coding. Instead: More code is being written More software projects exist Developers use more tools than ever Figma could benefit similarly. **3. Management is ambitious** Dylan Field deserves credit. The company beat Adobe’s attempt to dominate the market. That’s not easy. The failed acquisition by Adobe itself validates how valuable Figma became. The post is right that Dylan thinks bigger than “design software.” He wants Figma to become the software creation layer. Whether he succeeds is another question. **The Weak Parts** **1. “Dylan is a genius therefore stock goes up”** This is where the DD starts turning into a cult. A huge portion of the post is basically: Dylan good. Dylan smart. Dylan dropped out. Dylan visionary. Buy stock. That’s not analysis. The market already knows Dylan is talented. You don’t get alpha from knowing the CEO is smart. You get alpha from knowing something the market is missing. **2. No valuation discussion** This is the biggest problem. The author never discusses: Revenue multiple FCF multiple Enterprise value Margins Future dilution SBC Nothing. You could have the greatest company on Earth and still be a terrible investment if you pay too much. This is the exact mistake people made with: Snowflake Datadog Cloudflare Great businesses. Terrible entries at certain prices. **3. The “epicenter of software creation” claim is unproven** This is the core leap of faith. The author assumes: Figma → Design Tool then Figma → Design + Code then Figma → Entire Software Operating System then Figma → Massive valuation expansion That’s a lot of assumptions. Today, the coding layer is still controlled by: Microsoft (VS Code/GitHub) Anthropic OpenAI Google Figma hasn’t proven it can dominate that layer. **4. 50-100% by end of summer is basically pulled from thin air** This is classic WSB. No model. No numbers. No valuation framework. Just vibes. A stock can absolutely double. But the DD never explains why the market cap should be 50% or 100% higher. **What I Think The Real Bull Thesis Is** If I were writing the institutional version of this DD, it’d be: Figma owns the collaboration layer of software design. AI increases software creation volume. Design becomes more important, not less. Figma expands from design into adjacent workflows. Revenue growth stays elevated for years. Margins expand significantly. Market awards premium software multiple. That’s a legitimate thesis. The problem is the post spends 80% of its words talking about Dylan Field’s giant brain and 20% talking about the business.

Investily

The debt jump looks scarier in isolation than it is once you put it next to their cash generation. Salesforce throws off roughly $14B a year in free cash flow and it's been growing \~17% annually, so $39B of long-term debt is a bit under three years of FCF. Very serviceable, especially for a company that ran almost no leverage for years (debt/equity sat around 0.18-0.24 before this raise). [u/Fuzzy\_Louise\_2405](https://www.reddit.com/user/Fuzzy_Louise_2405/) the actual motivation: their return on capital is comfortably higher than what investment-grade debt costs them. When you can borrow around 5% and your free-cash-flow return on capital is running mid-teens, buying back stock with debt is just arbitrage. You're retiring equitythat "yields" more than the interest you pay on the debt. Pretty standard when a company is cash-rich and wants to lever up a little. The part nobody's mentioned: this is happening while the multiple has compressed a lot. CRM has gone from silly valuations (P/E was 40+ not long ago, way higher before that) down to \~24x earnings and about 12x free cash flow today. So the buyback isn't them blasting cash at an expensive stock, it's at the cheapest the stock's been in years on a cash-flow basis. That's what makes the "Benioff thinks it's near a bottom" read at least defensible, even with his acquisition track record. On sustainability: no, you can't run a $27B levered buyback every quarter and they won't. But they don't need to. The recurring buybacks come out of operating cash flow; this looks like a one-off opportunistic top-up funded by cheap debt. The thing I'd actually watch isn't the leverage, it's that revenue and income growth are both decelerating (revenue's down into the high-single/low-double digits now). The buyback math works great as long as the cash flow keeps compounding. That's the real question here, not the debt.

koyo4

Valuation isn't only tied to revenue. Everytime people throw out the revenue tied to valuation number I roll my eyes. Shows massive ignorance. Here's some examples of what analysts consider for stock valuation: P/E Ratio, Forward P/E, P/S Ratio, P/B Ratio, EV/EBITDA, PEG Ratio, EV/Sales, Dividend Yield, Price to Free Cash Flow (P/FCF), Return on Equity (ROE), Return on Assets (ROA), Debt-to-Equity, Current Ratio, Quick Ratio, Profit Margin, Operating Margin, Gross Margin, Earnings Per Share (EPS) Current revenue alone is never considered. People invest, they don't buy present value in a company not expecting it to grow. That would be retarded.

Outrageous_Solid9668

Yeah, trending in the right direction compared to FCF tho

Working-Active

Free Cash Flow ratio is more interesting. Look at the FCF Yield (Free Cash Flow divided by Market Cap). Even though Broadcom’s market cap is double Walmart’s (~$2.1T vs ~$1.05T), their FCF Yields are practically identical at around 1.3% to 1.4%. This tells us that the stock market isn't just pricing Broadcom blindly on AI hype. The market looks at the raw, cold cash being generated. Because Broadcom generates nearly $27 billion in free cash compared to Walmart’s $15 billion, investors are perfectly willing to value Broadcom at twice the size of Walmart—even though Walmart's top-line revenue is vastly larger.

jrader

That's a good start and worked well for you. Now you probably want to learn a little more about what you own - have a thesis for each stock, check some fundamentals like P/E, PEG, FCF, and think about how you want them weighted across your portfolio

Federal_Radish_1421

What you do with winners and losers depends on your financial situation and philosophy. My dad uses his FCF to double down on winners when they’re weak, like mega caps during bear markets, and buy new potential winners. But he never sold anything and it worked amazingly because he has a knack for stock picking. His most recent win is MU, which he bought during the GFC for low double digits and held through every cycle. His winners have far outperformed his losers. But you have to be comfortable letting a single position run thousands of percent and become a significant part of your portfolio, or go to zero. He can do that. Most people can’t handle it psychologically. If you have a really good year, I don’t see anything wrong with taking some gains for quality of life. Money is meant to be a tool. My father made a lot of money but he never learned that lesson.

ten_million

Combination of FOMO, easiest access to investing ever for retail, and hyperscalers dropping a trillion dollars through destroying their FCF and financing. Economy very different story from the market though

zurijer

META going to $400 EOY. Why? Hundreds of billions invested into AI. What do they have to show for? Ads a little more sticky like 5-7% Does it warrant spending 135bn? Hell no. Now they gotta cover their asses with these subscriptions to unlock features that aren’t even remotely dependent on AI. LMAO. Yeah Zuck is cooked once that FCF is negative and ad spendings slow down.

Relative-Snow8735

This one makes a ton of sense. I am not saying it is going to happen, but if you look at the numbers it really starts to hit home just how big this could be (and I say this as someone that is not a fan of Elon). \- If Elon offered $90/share (double the current price), that would be just \~5% of SpaceX's target valuation of $1.5T. \- For that 5% dilution, they will almost triple their revenue post-merger. $18B -> $51B. \- The combined company will be FCF positive by $1-3B, and will be right around GAAP breakeven (compared to SpaceX currently at -$4-5B GAAP) \- Elon has the perfect cover story for this move. The market won't see this is as a desperate cash grab (which it is), but rather as Elon taking the reins back of his first company and pushing the "everything app" narrative. \- The regulatory environment will likely never be this friendly again. He has a 1-2 year window to do deals like this before he might be locked out for almost a decade. There are some downsides of course. Paypal's multiple is so low any spill over into SpaceX could seriously bring down the stock price. Elon will need to hope that his magic touch translates over to Paypal. And another issue is that the first few months after IPO the stock can be pretty fragile due to all of the insiders rotating out. With the fast track stuff going on, maybe this won't matter, but usually you would want to avoid any major actions that can put stress on the stock, with acquisitions being one of the major ones. Fun to think about. And if one is inclined to make a play on the SpaceX IPO, I actually think Paypal is a sleeper play in that regard. SpaceX could end up down 50% or up 100%. But PYPL is already in deep value territory. Probably not going to go much lower. But an acquisition is probably going to be at a 50-100% premium. So the downside feels much safer, but the upside is in the same ballpark. Plus IV is a lot lower right now.

MountainOpposite3199

I get the GME comparison but the numbers are brutal here. Trademates shows -$438M annual FCF burn vs only $144M cash on hand - that's a $293M gap. Revenue estimates are $16M for 2026 with EPS at -$2.49. 71% above analyst target already. It is right that this isn't a 'confuse the boomers' play - it's a fundamental dumpster fire in a space suit. tbh I'd rather hold cash than chase this momentum.

_hiddenscout

Here's their last 5 years of FCF growth * **2026:** $1.060 billion * **2025:** $1.082 billion * **2024:** $0.821 billion * **2023:** $0.335 billion * **2022:** $0.592 billion *(approx.)* **Operating Margin:** Currently hovers around **6.5%**. compare to 2.5%–3.9% from 5 years ago. So even when sales go down or stay flat, the company is making double the FCF they did like 5 years ago.

Sufficient_Habit5091

How much of FCF growth is cyclicality past 5 years. How does FCF growth compare peak to peak?

_hiddenscout

Part of the reason has been the onshoring/reshoring theme, but I agree it's a point where it's gotten out of hand in terms of valuation. However, look at the margin and the FCF growth over the past 5 years and you get a different story. The margins continue to improve and the company had negative FCF about 5 years ago, but now have about 1B in FCF, growing about 950%. You need to dig more into just revenue and PE when looking at company. I like following margins and FCF growth more than anything else, tells you more about the business.

Next_Palpitation8401

Sure because the market hopped on memory stocks but what’s the room to run and beta today? These 20%+ candles on AI buzz feel bad if you’re not on them but MSFT has a load of sustainable FCF engines and people are rotating back to reality now.

ryzetard

not enough. just some additional ones from the top of my head: growth, forward ratios, cagr, peg, liquidity risks (FCF statement), any risks to company's moat in the future?

CryptoBoy-007

How is FCF will be impacted, and forward multiples?!

WilliamBlack97AI

🤦‍♂️ Ok.... Do you know how long it took Amazon or Costco, just to name two, to reach profitability? 16 years! In the meantime, they've expanded their customer base, strengthened loyalty, increased repeat revenue by launching new ideas, new models, and gaining market share. Companies that focused on profit here and now no longer exist...and yet many still don't understand it... Look at other sectors, space for example. Every company burns hundreds of millions of FCF a year and is worth tens of billions. Data centers burn tens of billions and are worth trillions with tens of billions in debt. Hoti finances its operations with its own internal cash flow, a rare feat in the industry.

MountainOpposite3199

Gotta disagree man. Trademates scores SPCE at AVOID with a 71% premium above analyst target. They're burning $438M FCF against only $144M cash - that's a liquidity gap screaming for a dilution event. That 83% rally is pure hype, fundamentals are in the toilet.

AdohamHicoln

Previous ATMs are fine, but one this size? It can't be overlooked Their story as Bitcoin miners has been heavily misrepresented by Iren bulls One look at their financial statements and you will see they have never been profitable or returned positive FCF in all their years of Bitcoin mining I'm not an electrical engineer so you definitely know more than me about power But what I'm saying is that Nebius and CoreWeave are flexible enough to take on these power problems whilst servicing contracts, meanwhile Iren is still far behind even turning meaningful revenue So the most is shrinking because Nebius and CoreWeave are able to cross it while making money

charg3

PEG is useful, but also price/GMV is useful to think about on comp if you think take rate is flexible based on new tools and lock-in. I like the price and it’s relatively cheap compared to historical valuations while being more mature and FCF positive. It could get cheaper of course, but I’m betting strong continued growth based on my view of e-commerce. This price because very reasonable with a few years of compounding.

WilliamBlack97AI

HI, The dilution was necessary to become the No. 1 in the domestic market. The company now finances its operations through FCF+. You can see for yourself that in Q1 the company didn't issue shares; insiders bought. If you wait for a positive EPS, you could miss out on a huge upside. I mean, many companies in every sector have had a rerating before earnings. Being FCF+ while scaling is uncommon.

Sir_Fragles

$10 would require a bit of a "wow" factor – like Hertz or Enterprise renewing early or a massive cost cut beat. Without any extra fireworks, just based on the post-Avis guidance and a normal multiple (6-7x EPS / 12-15% FCF yield), the stock should settle in the $7-9 range. That’s the fair value for a still-profitable, cash-generating business that lost one major client but didn't fall apart. So $7-9 is the base case. $10+ would need a positive surprise.

Downtown_Extension_6

Hey, sounds like you're in a great spot — $14k in profit on a diversified portfolio is solid. The "cash on the sidelines" anxiety is real and very common. I built **ProspectAI** (https://prospect-ai.moisesprat.dev) specifically for situations like yours. It's a multi-agent AI pipeline that does in \~2 minutes what would take hours manually:   1. **Scans Reddit + financial forums** to find the stocks retail investors are actually talking about (not just what Wall Street pushes)   2. **Runs 13+ technical indicators** (RSI, MACD, Bollinger Bands, ATR, etc.) to assess momentum and entry timing   3. **Grades fundamentals** — P/E, margins, FCF, revenue growth — so you're not buying hype   4. **Generates a composite score** (0–100) weighing sentiment, momentum, and fundamentals   5. **Produces a portfolio allocation** with specific entry zones, stop-losses, and take-profit targets   For your situation — $25k in cash, already holding VTI/QQQ/VXUS as your core — ProspectAI would identify *which sectors or individual stocks* are showing strong momentum right now with favorable risk/reward setups, and give you concrete entry prices rather than "just do it" or "wait." It's sector-specific: Technology, Semiconductors, Healthcare, Finance, Energy, Consumer, Industrials, Real Estate, Utilities. You tell it the sector, it does the research, and an adversarial critic agent challenges the recommendations before you see them.     The pipeline runs end-to-end in under 2 minutes and gives you actionable positions with entry/stop/target — not just vibes.

Sir_Fragles

The funniest part is this DD might actually be too conservative. Management already baked the Avis hit into revised guidance and they’re still guiding almost $1B revenue, $380M+ EBITDA and $140M–$150M FCF. At \~$4, the market isn’t pricing in a haircut — it’s pricing in a funeral. If Hertz/Enterprise contagion doesn’t show up, this is not a dead cat bounce, it’s a panic multiple getting re-rated.

jrex035

The market is fully delusional. We're on track to lose more than 1 billion barrels of oil production this year, probably closer to 2 with how poorly everything is going with the negotiations. Global stockpiles are being depleted at a record pace and will need to be replenished and probably grown after this crisis, increasing demand over the short to medium term. Anyone talking about a return to $60 oil is smoking crack. >I think those prices are being held in check by the combo of SPR releases and TACO memories. Too many people got burned in March. That's all part of it for sure. As is the constant stream of fake news headlines and rumors about an imminent deal which are being coordinated with deep pocketed players dropping huge shorts (whether that be the BOJ, Treasury Dept, or just Trump allies getting insider trader info is irrelevant). The result is a cap on prices that has dropped trading volume on oil to *below average* in the midst of the worst energy crisis in history. >Oil names are ludicrously mispriced if oil stays above $80. Even at that price we could see some of the smaller names double. Yep, FCF is going to be absolutely insane on most oil equities for the foreseeable future, which they'll use for stock buybacks and juicing their dividends. It's an incredibly easy trade, just annoying as these equities sell off with every "peace deal near" headline too

_hiddenscout

Of course! I've been investing in a lot of aerospace and defense names, which will get you some space exposure. I think it's a better way to play the sector right now, since some names are speculation while other names are actually generating FCF and profits. I post something about some under the radar names a few months back: [https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1shs8li/some\_under\_the\_radar\_space\_names/](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1shs8li/some_under_the_radar_space_names/) Like everything in there is companies that will get you space exposure but actually are profitable. I've been long RLKB since it was like the 3s and posted about it a bunch here and in the daily threads. I'm never going to sale, but it does seem like a lot more speculation at these levels and something where if I wanted to play the theme, I would go that route.

_hiddenscout

Some names always will just trade with a premium, especially stuff like ISRG which probably has a solid moat with what they do. I don't think surgeons that train will want to switch to different robots. Especially if you are going long, I don't think you'll sweat the difference too much if you believe in the company long term. Like I'm seeing the PEG at 2.48 and P/FCF at 32. It's high, but not really the worst and like you said, cheap compared to how it has traded in the past. Like I've watched like BMI for years at this point and it's never hit a PEG sub 2 lol.

_hiddenscout

Market is questioning the long term impact on SaaS companies in general. Been going on for months. Gist is that software historically had higher margins and traded at higher valuations and market is questioning if these names deserve the same valuations as they had before. Even at these current levels, FIG is by no means cheap when looking at the valuation of the company. You are going to be paying for 77 forward PE, PS at like 10, P/FCF at 46 and PEG at almost 4. [https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/fig/statistics/](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/fig/statistics/) Just my personal belief, but it's going to take more time for the market do decide if it wants to get back into software. Also not all software is the same. I would be careful around names that revolve around headcount as well as names that don't have things like regulatory approval. No one is going to vibe code software that requires that. Also to add, the market doesn't do nuance, so a lot of the time it throws the baby out with the bathwater, so there are some solid SaaS names out there, but I still think the AI narrative is going to be a overhang on the sector for a while.

_hiddenscout

What do you think happens to both companies when they say they want to cut capex and use to the FCF to buyback stock?

Ehh_littlecomment

They’re already dumping 100%+ of their FCF into AI. It’s not going to get bigger than this unless they start printing within the next 18 months.

SpongEWorTHiebOb

You are living in a dream. FCF was only $10 Billion last quarter and they issued $35Billion in long term debt to fund almost $36 Billion in capex. FCF is rapidly declining for all the AI hyper scalers.

xxxlefmxxx

A 15 to 20 percent ROIC is necessary to justify heavy hardware CAPEX… applying this logic to current AI investments - if the Mag 7 are commiting $2tn in CAPEX they would need to generate approximately $400bn in FCF/year… at a 20x valuation multiple, this would require an $8tn expansion in market cap just to keep current valuations flat

BeepBoopDep

Fully priced. I mean it's over 5T while having almost the same FCF as MU at 1T.

Porcupinesolos

Zuckerberg has no strategy but to waste their FCF to the next FAD. AI is an expensive technology with no ROI for most businesses as Uber COO pointed out today. MAG7 NEED TO CUT CAPEX NOW and put these parasitic memory companies in their place that steal their FCF. Fuck ZUCK

OddlyShapedGinger

To nitpick: Samsung did not "just" commit to paying out 50% of FCF as dividends. They announce their dividend strategy every 3 years. The current 50% strategy was announced in January of 2024 (and is the same strategy they used in 2021-2023.) They will announce their new strategy next January. I would ***expect*** it to still be 50% FCF. However, that's not guaranteed past the end of this year.

WickedSensitiveCrew

I bought some UBER. It seems down on the Delivery Hero acquisitions. I think it is great to use their FCF to buy or invest in other companies.

FatFluffyFish

The sooner you stop asking stupid questions like what is the DCF/FCF/some-stupid-financial-ratio and start asking what are people vibing to today, the sooner you make baggers in this market

dominic_l

valid concern. sbc really does inflate the FCF a bit. i just read that management explicitly said they're reducing sbc as a portion of revenue this year. if they keep their word could be really good. aside from that the business is pretty stable

PunchTornado

hmm. another thing that is on my mind is SBC-Adjusted FCF (TTM): (approx -$231) million. seems like they give a lot of shares to employees.

Porcupinesolos

Absolutely dissapointed in $Metas performance. AI is stealing all their FCF and they have no ROI.

dominic_l

$25B in positive FCF bro. up $5B this year. definitely not drying out. and the shareholder selloffs were due to portfolio rebalancing not structural issues. insider selling isnt always a bearish signal.

Aardige

Yes. Just not in FCF.

Antifragile_Glass

Too bad they went from Capital light to Capital heavy. Look at the change in FCF. They’re just capitalizing a hundred billion dollars in expense to be amortized over the next X years.

Personal_Repair_3579

Ran BB through a benchmarking tool out of curiosity. Mixed picture honestly. The bull case has legs: 73.8% gross margin (71st percentile vs 176 software peers), and OCF is up 500%+ YoY with FCF finally turning positive. Balance sheet is cleaner than people think - debt coverage ranks 82nd percentile. But revenue is down 29.5% YoY, bottom 8th percentile. 3Y CAGR is -9.4%. Rule of 40 is -28. Moat score is 42/100 -"developing," not strong. And SBC is 155% of operating cash flow, so the "cashflow machine" framing needs some asterisks. QNX moat narrative isn't wrong - it's just that the financials are still catching up to it. Optionality bet, not a fundamentals play. Size accordingly.

option-trader

Yep, it's the FCF that should be looked at closely. So far, I've only seen META and GOOG add ltd, but their cash and short term investments (usually t-bills, bonds, etc) are still much higher than their ltd. If that ratio gets under 1, then I can see that might lead to a bubble years away.

That-Requirement-233

There are literally millions of people in developing nations learning to code/do IT who would gladly work for our minimum wage because the minimum wage in their country is $250 a month. And the things they are coding/maintaining are like.... advertising and social media widgets.... 2 trillion dollars "committed" to AI infrastructure that must produce $400 billion in FCF by 2030. The jury rests.

Internal-Science2137

META ran $38B capex in 2024 and still printed $52B FCF. railroads burned cash during buildout. if the return structure holds, this isnt 1880s rails — its 2015 AWS

mdatwood

Every single company wants so much FCF like FB that they can pile it into their owners fever dreams without a care. Now that Zuck got some sense you see most of the cash immediately fall to the bottom line. So yeah, FB has nowhere to go except continue to stoke the cash volcano they are sitting on.

Dramatic_Agency_8721

My bad their FCF is positive since mid 2025, weird way yahoo finance numbers show up on my phone confused me. Looks like pretty healthy market cap:FCF ratio and their forward PE looks ok as you say. What's their moat re their robotics software?

Dramatic_Agency_8721

They seem to have a PE of 89 and negative FCF for most recent quarter. If it's primarily a software provider I'd expected better profitability and lower capex than I am seeing. Is that expected to improve?

Doodl3s

First off. Love the analysis. You put work into this (Even if AI helped, its not slop, so thank you) However... i do feel like while buybacks reducing share count is a good point to help when thinking about buybacks... your latter points regarding FCF and strong balance sheets is somewhat independent of buybacks. In other words, you proved that most companies (doing buybacks or not) with strong FCF and balance sheet will do well, which is kind of self-evident (ie. These parameters naturally identify strong companies.

liftingshitposts

Bought some last week, FCF machine

Weak-Pomegranate-435

I agree with the second point. But it was never Apple vs Google. Both Apple and Google Shareholders and management wanted the exact same outcome. On the contrary, some of the Google Shareholders were actually wanted Google to Loose that part of the court case and not pay apple 1/5th of its net income to Apple just be the default at this point. But every Apple shareholder, was willing for apple apple to loose 1/4th of the FCF of the apple which they were receiving from Google just as a rent for google to he as a default.

the_Q_spice

Point is that Amazon is only operating on around $1.6B FCF right now due to astronomical capital spending. There are a lot of F500 companies that are operating on significantly more FCF specifically. That being said, Amazon absolutely has higher revenue. The issue is they are extending (and IMO, likely overextending) into too many cash-intensive industries simultaneously.

InevitableAd2436

It’s a compounding machine and an easy buy They print FCF with our little fingers tapping away on a phone

EveryMethod1442

The app shows $207K cash and -$5.28M FCF. The most current data shows IGC has $1.13M in cash and $146K in debt, with a net cash position of $984K, and free cash flow of -$5.63M over the past 12 months. So cash has actually improved slightly from that screenshot's figures, but the burn rate is real. IGC entered a loan agreement with One Deck Capital for about $219K in financing, They also entered a Securities Purchase Agreement with Vanquish Funding Group. So they are using debt financing as an alternative to pure dilution. $219K barely covers a month of burn at their rate. Tbh at -$5.6M/year in FCF with only $1.1M cash, they have roughly 2–3 months of runway without additional financing of some sort, I'm personally looking forward to seeing some updates as they seem to be managing cash fairly well for a small cap biotech company with minimal dilution (right now)

WickedSensitiveCrew

> Technically we’re an Amazon competitor (in the logistics sector), but generate over double their FCF now and are targeting double that in just 3 years. How do you just throw that in your anecdote. If it has more FCF than Amazon you can name the company. No need to be vague lol.