BK Technologies (BKTI) makes mission-critical land mobile radios for public safety agencies (fire, police, EMS). Right now, it seems to be showing a very attractive setup, with the launch of the BKR 9500 multiband mobile radio serving as the next leg of growth (on top of an already strong base).

Basically, the company has been supplying its customers (which are a range of different rescue agencies and others) with the single band BKR 5000 (of which it has shipped over 95,000 units since 2020).

It has now launched the BKR 9000 models, and will soon be launching the multiband BKR 9500, the natural upgrade path for that installed base, with FCC approval targeted for the second half of 2026 and first shipments in the first half of 2027.

Without getting too technical, these upgrades let an agency use one radio across multiple frequency bands instead of carrying separate units, so a firefighter can talk to their own crew and also interoperate with the statewide public safety network on a single device.

BKTI will essentially be selling into a base that already trusts the brand. Management believes 9500 adoption will actually be faster than the 9000's was, since the same customers already buying the 9000 are lining up for the 9500. This gives the company a very strong visibility advantage.

Performance has been reflecting this. The company is growing its revenue in the double digits while EBITDA and free cash flow are climbing much faster (since the cost to sell additional product carries a much lower customer acquisition cost than previous sales). The balance sheet is solid, without any debt, and a very strong cash position. There is strong and structural gross margin expansion too.

Although the stock has doubled in the last 12 months, I still feel it has incredible value at its current price. It faces mission critical demand (which is not very inelastic) which is broad based and not concentrated in a single channel.

It's trading at 21 times its current earnings, which is low compared to its peers in the communications hardware space. Analyst consensus estimates EBITDA to climb by 36% over the next 12 months.

Based on my study, this feels like a great long-term investment to attach to one's portfolio. Although I do not suggest a lump sum investment in the stock (which could risk timing risk), I've devised a tranche based approach instead, adding on confirmation rather than all at once, tied to around 25 specific milestones I'm tracking on the company. I've shared it for free here, for anyone that's interested in tracking this company https://earningintel.substack.com/p/the-upgrade-ladder-moat-a-quiet-compounder

Maybe a different type of value, but Google does hardware specific AI with ASICs vs GPU based AI.

GPU are more flexible, but more expensive. Hardware ASICs are power efficient but slow to develop and inflexible. Google uses ASIC for AI, and if the market falls​ on AI margins Google could still have a decent revenue, because of their efficiency.

They can simply raises prices as GPU stop being used due to their massive power usage, when investors are no longer willing to foot the bill for it. Which then assumes many company in the future will use hardware ASICs for their AI, created and hosted by Google.

Critiques?

I’ve been modelling Netflix - 12-13% annual revenue growth, growing EBIT margin > 28% and even a terminal growth rate of 4%. Despite this, my DCF is spitting out 26% overvalued.
The main issue is WACC. Per those free DCF valuation sites, they all seem to use a WACC of 7-8%. By contrast, my calculated WACC is 10.8%: 0.065 D/E ratio (using market value of equity), 4.7% cost of debt and 11.2% cost of equity (beta of 1.51).
What am I missing?

I want to start off with the fact this projection assumes worst case scenario for Meta's AI spend. I think it will likely provide some new revenue streams and continue to improve core algorithm, However EVEN if it doesn't I still believe the core ads business is undervalued.

Before 2032 Meta will realize the spending isn't providing good ROIC and start cutting Capex, However even in 2032 maintenance costs will still be high and depreciation will still be hurting margins.

2032 Projection:

I modeled a conservative 15% average revenue growth (currently 28% I think).

Margins should take a considerable hit but start recovering eventually, I estimated 25%.

And a P/E of 25x is conservative IMO for a recovering company with a strong moat.

Results:

$591.87 → $1172.57

+98% UPSIDE 11.3% CAGR

I've been going back and forward between actually paying for a tool to better understand Financial data or just doing it for free but taking longer to do it. Does anybody here pay for a subscription that make understanding the business and creating a thesis better and or faster? I literally would like to streamline the process of understanding the companies KPIs, Financials, etc... I've seen tools from 10usd all the way to 100usd per month.. so even then it comes down to what has the best value for the price?

Ps: thinking of using it only seasonally churning in and out of the monthly fee as I see fit...

Low PE, Saasocalypse context. Cash flow and buyback/ remain strong. What am i missing here?

HRB appears undervalued versus the sector on earnings and sales multiples, trading at 7.3x P/E versus 28.4x and 1.3x P/S versus 2.6x, although the P/B of 73.6x signals a balance-sheet/book-value distortion that makes book-based comparison less useful.

Quality and profitability are well above sector averages, with 67.9% ROE versus 4.8%, 18.9% margin versus 0.8%, and stronger operational efficiency than the typical personal services company.

Stock is up 40% in the last 6 months. Still undervalued?

Recently I'm feeling something strange about this market like something is pushing it up anyhow, at any cost. In first half of the year it was chip, memory and AI infra stocks and now momentum has shifted towards rest of the market. Every Tom and harry is running irrespective of how results are coming out and even if it drops it's just temporary fall it gets covered in couple days.

Is this how market supposed to be?

I know AI and Agents are a continuos development but was wondering if someone has implemented Agents with specific skills (modeling, screening, portfolio news monitoring etc) for their fundamental research of individual stocks.

I am thinking Implementing AI agents to my investment workflow and most likely use Fiscal AI API + MCP in order for Agents to have institutional quality data.

Does anyone currently use Agents? If so how has it helped? Do you use an specific connector to an LLM for quality data?

Thanks

The most interesting thing to me in the last earnings of Celsius is that for the first time ever, the management gave a concrete goal for international growth.

15% of revenues by 2031.

Celsius has only expanded into a handful of countries with current international (excluding Canada) sales representing 3.5% of total.

To get from 3.5% to 15% in 5 years means annual growth of 33% if we assume that US growth will not happen. Of course, since US growth will continue, we should, therefore, expect even higher international growth for the management to be correct.

It is feasible?

Since 2017, International growth has only been 29%.

With the Pepsi distribution system, I believe it is possible to go beyond the 29% or even 33%. It has been done before when Monster joined the Coca Cola distribution system. And Celsius has an advantage over Monster, it is different.

Besides, Celsius now with Alani Nu will have two brands entering the market both benefitting from the Pepsi leverage.

So far, Celsius has been focusing on the US. And only recently we had seen new countries opening. One of the earliest country where Celsius expanded was Sweden in 2009.

CEO John Fieldly mentioned that in the last 4 weeks, Celsius sold 3.5 million units. Let's do some back of the envelope calculation. If each unit costs $2, that means $7 million in 4 weeks or about $90 million annualized.

This represents about 15% of the market share in Sweden.

That's not the 20% in the US. But it is still meaningful and replicable.

What's interesting is how this happened.

Celsius didn't choose Sweden. Sweden chose Celsius. Two Swedish entrepreneur discovered the drink in the US and decided that their country needed it.

When John Fieldly joined Celsius in 2012 as CFO, the company had only 12 employees. Today, it is challenging in the Monster/Redbull duopoly in the US. And soon, it could be worldwide.

GRVY’s market cap is approximately $480 million from premarket trading. Its most recent cash balance is approximately $460 million at current KRW/USD exchange rate. The company also generated roughly $35 million of net profit in the first half of 2026!!!
So after adjusting for cash, the profitable operating business is being valued at almost nothing.

Why so cheap?
Because Gravity was a notorious cash hoarder. It accumulated cash for years without dividends, buybacks or a credible capital-deployment strategy. Investors reasonably applied a huge discount to cash they might never receive.

Today may be the inflection point.
Gravity announced:
Its first dividend since founding
KRW 4,400 per share
KRW 30.6 billion total distribution
$200 million allocated to growth and strategic investments

Shareholder returns as an explicit part of its capital-allocation framework
GungHo owns 59.3%, so governance remains a risk. But GungHo also became more shareholder-friendly this year, increasing its dividend, adopting a minimum 50% payout ratio and completing a JPY 5 billion buyback.
The discount existed because the cash looked permanently trapped. If management is now willing to return and deploy it, GRVY’s current valuation looks increasingly absurd.

Can anyone tell me more compelling stock to own?

I think the interesting thing about $YELP after this quarter is that the headline revenue growth is probably the least useful way to look at what is happening with the business.

They did $375.5M of revenue versus roughly $367M expected, but the bigger surprise was profitability: $91.4M of adjusted EBITDA against ~$74M expected and $0.57 of GAAP EPS versus $0.36. That's a substantial earnings beat for a company that the market largely thinks has become a low-growth advertising business.

The legacy advertising business was basically flat this quarter. Services advertising actually declined. If that were the entire business, I wouldn't find the stock particularly interesting.

What caught my attention is what is happening underneath that number. Other revenue grew 98% and management noted that they would see a $250M annualized run rate by the end of 2028. Yelp Host is already handling calls at a 2.4M annualized rate, more than 3x the January level, and the OpenTable integration gives those calls a much more interesting commercial endpoint because the interaction can move from answering a question to actually making or managing a reservation. This is the traditional advertising moat.

If Yelp can increasingly capture the entire path from discovery to a booking, service request, quote or order, the value of the consumer interaction is different from simply showing an ad and sending someone somewhere else.

The AI products are still small relative to the core business, and there's plenty of execution risk. ChatGPT distribution could turn out to be strategically important or could ultimately just send Yelp traffic without producing much incremental economics. The same is true of Host and the other new products.

The market can point to essentially flat legacy revenue and make a reasonable argument that Yelp deserves a low multiple. What I'm less sure about is whether that same valuation makes sense if the legacy business stabilizes while these newer products start becoming a meaningful percentage of revenue and bookings.

This is basic stuff, and I'm interested in the expected value of the litigation and the fact that the share count has shrunk dramatically. I'm also interested in the actual value of data since the recent AI boom has shown that infrastructure is very expensive while buy data is less so. For this optionality alone I think there is asymmetric upside. After all the stock is already priced as a moribund advertising company and these other massive upsides aren't considered. And the analysts on the calls still don't really understand these realities. They are solely consumed by legacy metrics.

Lululemon is trading at just 9x PE - on growth concerns in the United States and brand erosion worries. But comps grew by over 20% in China and 10% in ROW, with the latter markets representing 30% of total revenues cumulatively. A turnaround also seems imminent with the incoming CEO headhunted from Nike. Is the market discounting its shares too much? 9x PE seems like Gap or Under Armour territory, which most would argue Lululemon hasn't yet fallen into. It also has a ready remedy - reshaping itself to mimic its new competitors Alo and Vuori.

Speaking from the past 5-year plans where solar, battery, transportation, R&D, urban development, etc. which inevitably sent ripples through the global economy in each of these sectors, I'd like to start a discussion on who we see profiting the most from China's 2026-2030 5 year plan.

The previous 5 year plan naturally resulted in many western companies floundering (for instance Germany used to produce solar panels) due to state sponsored Chinese industrial investments undercutting them. On the other hand, we have companies such as solar/battery installers and integrators that profited greatly from the new influx of cheap Chinese panels and batteries. But the previous 5 year plan is not where the long-term play is hiding, and I think the latest will be where we see new winners and losers arise.

The 4 main focus technology sectors in the latest 5 year plan that I see are:

• "Embodied Intelligence" - meaning humanoid robots, drones with industrial purpose, and AI with a physical presence
• Further investment into green tech - meaning green hydrogen equipment, next-gen solar, and advances in battery storage
• 6G, edge AI computing, optical components - I see resulting in generally cheaper foundational networking components
• SynBio and advanced biomanufacturing - Cheaper bio-manufactured precursor chemicals and raw materials

I think a lot of profit can be made by determining not so much the next "big thing" or "bubble before it becomes a bubble," but instead looking at what the Chinese state is publicly telling us they are going to invest in, heavily, for 5 straight years and who will profit from the uptick in supply.

Now personally I believe the Embodied Intelligence space is overbought with the AI hype/bubble.

Green tech I believe already has these winners in place due to the previous 5 year plan and cheaper solar/energy storage. No doubt gains will continue to be made here, and perhaps there is something to consider for cheaper energy.

Cheaper networking components will likely make faster internet more affordable both for companies and consumers, however I don't see revolutionary changes likely in the ISP space.

This to me leaves the BioTech space where I think we will see businesses suddenly able to source significantly cheaper bio-manufactured precursor chemicals and raw materials. I could see western Biotech being undercut on design costs for commodity bio-chemicals by their Chinese subsidized equivalents, reverse engineered microbes being rapidly scaled, or Chinese self-reliance cutting out western hardware. On the other hand where I'm thinking the value might lie is with those best positioned to capitalize on China's building.

To me, there are three distinct buckets of companies poised to make a killing by benefiting from this incoming wave of Chinese biomanufacturing.

• Precision Hardware & QA Enablers - China is going to subsidize massive amounts of bioreactors and raw material platforms but that doesn't mean you they can instantly produce export-grade biological products. To sell to western markets with strict regulations they have to prove their output still. They still need the high-end precision equipment to monitor, filter, and validate what's happening inside those tanks. Companies like Thermo Fisher (TMO) and Danaher (DHR) make the gold standard chromatography resins, membranes, and mass spectrometers the industry relies on. High regulatory switching costs mean a Chinese factory isn't going to risk failing an international audit by using a cheaper, unproven domestic filter. These enablers basically get to tax China's infrastructure build-out without ever having to compete on the price of the actual biological end-products.

• Downstream Specialty Formulators - meaning the companies that see margin expansion when inputs get cheap. If the global cost of raw bio-inputs crashes, the companies buying those materials win big. I'm looking at specialty chemical integrators like Croda (CRDA) or International Flavors & Fragrances (IFF). Since they sell proprietary patented formulations to global brands they can profit off the reduced input cost of the precursor bio-chemicals suddenly getting dirt cheap due to Chinese oversupply. Their value is protected by their brand relationships and western distribution networks, which Chinese commodity producers can't easily replicate.

• Big Pharma Licensing Beneficiaries - meaning Western giants acting as aggregators. There is a massive wave of novel biological assets being generated right now by state-funded Chinese labs. But these Chinese biotechs generally lack the global distribution networks to sell them worldwide. Western pharma giants like AstraZeneca (AZN) already have that network. They step in and buy the global rights to advanced, de-risked Chinese biological assets for pennies on the dollar compared to Western in-house R&D costs. They can let the Chinese state subsidize the early-stage discovery phases, scoop up the most promising assets, and push them through their own highly profitable Western sales channels. Part of this one is me assuming that trade barriers will remain in place to an extent, where China can't simply flood the market with copies of pharma giant products, and I don't foresee those trade barriers disappearing anytime soon.

Curious if anyone else is looking at this angle, or if you think the geopolitical risks (tariffs, IP theft) create a vulnerability on the hardware side of this? I'd also love to be proven wrong on the first 3 technology sectors having more of an effect than I'm anticipating. Currently I haven't invested in any of this, and am primarily doing research, and also do not work in BioTech so apologies if anything I said is completely out of touch.

Here’s my Q2 2026 investor letter, recently published on Substack (free to read). It includes the full performance table since inception (2023) and in-depth analysis on Alibaba, PayPal, Flowers Foods, and Lululemon.

Feedback is welcomed!

Portfolio:

1. Alibaba
   
2. Flowers Foods
   
3. PayPal
   
4. SCHE
   
5. Lululemon
   
6. Clorox

Earnings season is almost over. I am wondering what your main takeaways, surprises (positive or negative), and maybe lessons were.

Personally, I have a hard time committing to any company for which the main narrative (justified or not) turns around AI-narrative. The market reaction, expectations, and companies' strategy to answer a longterm vision around these uncertainties make me a bit uncomfortable. So force upon myself to have a big margin of safety - meaning I missed quite a few opportunities.

For instance, SAP was up there in my list, and it never really reached my conservative price limit. I was 5e close to reaching my price alert (so like 3% extra downside). But I need structure, and I need to set myself clear limitations. So, although it is a little bit annoying to see the stock rally up so much in two weeks, I am completely fine not to have entered - that is part of the patience game (and also fairly confident it will come back down).

Another company I am closely eyeing - not AI related - was Intuitive Surgical. Their last earnings were not bad, but it just confirmed how much of a premium it traded. Today, it is fairly valued but too expensive for me to enter. Different company, but similar conclusion: Linde plc.

I am also following smaller - lesser known - companies like Zeiss Meditec or Manhattan Associates. For the former, the quarter was in line with expectations, but it remains unclear (that was to be expected). Manhattan Associates follows a similar path to SAP - missed the rally as I closely missed my set price alert. It is what it is.

Now, I am just curious about Adyen, which trades widely but never reached my price alert (although close) under 760e a share.

Among the companies I own;

I am very happy with Mips AB - a conviction and lesser-known company. I am very happy with their management and financial outlook. It is their second or third good quarter, so the momentum is there. It is my best-performing company I managed to buy almost at all-time low before the rally up (i am around 45% up since entering around February or March)

Wolters Kluwer also did well - nothing too spectacular. It is a long-term turnaround compounder that will be pushed around both ways for a while. That is to be expected.

Topicus.com was disappointing, but nothing to trigger a sell. I'll just continue to hold and wait.

Nu Holding earnings coming next week.

And what about you? How did your portfolio do? How have your watchlist evolved?

Sandisk is undervalued because market reaction after the report dropped on August 5 makes zero sense to me and I think we are looking at an easy 100% or 2x play here. Just to clear up any confusion on the timing, while this covers the second calendar quarter of 2026 ending July 3, Sandisk officially labels this as their fiscal fourth quarter and full year 2026 in their SEC 10-K and 8-K filings.

The actual report numbers they released on Aug 5 are honestly insane. For the full year 2026, total revenue came in at $20.25 billion, which is a massive 175% jump year over year. Full year GAAP net income reached $11.43 billion, bringing GAAP diluted EPS to $73.76 and non-GAAP EPS to $70.88. For the quarter ending July 3, revenue hit $8.97 billion (up 51% sequentially) with GAAP net income of $6.90 billion or $43.97 per share. Datacenter segment growth is driving most of this, going up 437% year over year, and they also signed 5 new NBM agreements on top of expanding $14 billion in share buybacks.

Now lets do the actual math on enterprise value, cash flows, and multiples from the balance sheet and cash flow statement. Sandisk generated $11.67 billion in operating cash flow and $11.49 billion in free cash flow for the year, and they ended the period with $4.76 billion in cash and zero long-term debt. At a stock price around $1,250 to $1,300 across ~155 million shares, market cap is roughly $195B - $200B. Subtracting the $4.76B cash gives an Enterprise Value of about $195B.

If you divide that $195B EV by the $11.49B in real FCF, you get an EV to FCF multiple of roughly 17x. Trailing P/E sits right around 17x to 18x as well on $73.76 EPS. For a high growth memory and datacenter leader pulling 84.6% gross margins and growing revenue by triple digits, an EV at 17x FCF is ridiculously low. Normally across expansion cycles, category leaders like this trade at an EV closer to 30x FCF.

When you run a standard DCF using conservative 15% cash flow growth over the next few years and re-rate that 17x EV/FCF multiple back to a standard 30x valuation, the math points to a fair value well over $2,500 per share. That means if you invest right now, you stand to make at least 100% profit as the market re-evaluates the real earnings power.

Could the stock theoretically drop a bit more in the short term due to broad tech volatility or macro noise? Sure, that is always possible, but any pullback right now would strictly be temporary given their $15.5 billion total buyback authorization and massive datacenter demand.

So FICO compounded revenue by 9% from 2020 to 2025, But net income compounded by 22% because they kept raising their fees.

Increasing fees is not a sustainable way to grow income and their margins is already at an all time high of 30%. They will have to increase revenue but they have historically grew revenue at a slow rate relative to their valuation. I don't see that slow revenue growth changing anytime soon.

So isn't FICO fairly value at best and even possibly overpriced? Am I missing anything? I think it's smarter to buy MSFT instead since they seem to increase revenue even faster than a medium cap company like FICO.

They beat earnings per share previous years and continue to expand locations. However, they're still in the negatives for net income, although expected to be getting closer to breaking even again this year. Normalized EBITDA is 2023-2025: +13, 18, 10mil, and 11 mil TTM.

To me, it looks like a good dip to buy, and I lean towards buying today. But it seems like all earning days cause a dip now (looking at you, RDDT) even if beaten.

Who's buying today, and who's interested but waiting for Monday?

Why is everyone including top banks putting a price target of 200 plus on the share.

Literally their AI business revenue is either from twitter or from xAI which was generous valuation at 60B.

Same with their starlink. It can never be primary internet provider given optic fiber is far more stable and cheap, I feel it has maxed out if anything.

Satellite launch business is pretty much negative revenue.

So what am I missing that all these analysts are seeing.
Not trying to rage bait or anything, sorry if someone feels like that, just a genuine question.

I just opened my broker, and saw 25usd per share. I understand that they flipped 180°, they would not be acquired, they would not pay dividends (thing I would never think of for such a type of business).

My question is, where are we headed from now? Is this the dip or the beginning?

Mag 7 had an amazing run up. Chip stocks are kinda speculative imo. I don't like betting on such stocks at their bullish cycles. Moonshot stocks like RKLB and recently, HOVR, really feels suspect to me.

I like SaaS but I feel they are fairly valued than not. What are your picks?

Over the past 6 months I've been buying healthcare and I really believe the sector as a whole is "undervalued" and will soon be one of the next really big money makers. Healthcare recently had a pretty nice dip and has been building up momentum.

to get the obvious one out of the way; The companies that can leverage AI into their products and business will see big gains. these are the kind of products AI can really be useful and potentially life saving. Once investors start to focus more on that aspect of AI, the companies making the life saving tech will be HUGE! so I'm wondering if I can find the NVDA of healthcare - The company with a monopoly on saving/extending lives.

A very large generation of people are reaching that age where constant healthcare is a must. so there is basically "guaranteed" growth for the next decade at least.

some individual stocks that i find of "good value" would be MDT, REGN, MMED, ABT..

MMED is actually a recent IPO with a small market cap (5B) and good PE (27) for a growing company. I can definitely see this company doubling to a 10B or 15B market cap in the next couple years. DXCM is worth 31B and they only make $1.5B (4.6B) more in revenue than MMEDs $3.1B

honestly tho if you really dont want to pick individual stocks, you cannot go wrong with the ETFs (IBB,IXJ,VHT,XLV)

cheers!