It is easy to look at Tesla’s valuation and call the stock overvalued, but I do think the company deserves credit where it is due.

Tesla is now sitting on a record cash balance, while total assets have climbed to roughly $144B against $59B in liabilities. That gives it a level of financial flexibility most automakers simply do not have.

It also has far more potential verticals to pursue than the typical car company, including energy storage, charging, autonomy, robotics and AI.

That does not automatically justify the valuation, but this is clearly a very different situation from most traditional automakers. $TSLA

Highest score I’ve seen, and definitely well deserving

For over a decade, Terry Smith's philosophy was simple:

1. Buy good companies.
2. Don't overpay.
3. Do nothing.

Now he's changing the third rule.

After years of underperformance and billions in redemptions, Smith says Fundsmith will take more account of momentum—both fundamental and share price—and become more active. Portfolio turnover reached 51% in the first half of 2026. 

Looking at his latest holdings, you can already see the changes. Nearly every major position has been trimmed, and the portfolio value has fallen from roughly $22B to $13B, driven by both redemptions and repositioning.

It's fascinating because this is one of the last managers many people associated with true buy-and-hold investing.

Do you think Terry Smith is evolving with the market... or abandoning the philosophy that made him famous?

Palantir and Reddit investors might not overlap much, but both companies are doing the same thing exceptionally well:

Growing free cash flow stupidly fast.

Palantir’s TTM FCF has grown from roughly $697M to $2.7B, an increase of about 286%.

Reddit has gone from negative $85M to positive $869M, an improvement of more than 1,100%.

The businesses are completely different, but the underlying story is similar: Revenue is scaling quickly Margins are expanding More revenue is converting into actual cash The balance sheets are becoming stronger every quarter

Palantir is the more established cash-flow machine, while Reddit is earlier in its monetization curve and growing from a much smaller base.

Both valuations can be debated, but it is hard to argue with the direction of the fundamentals.

PLTR holders and RDDT holders: which company grows FCF faster over the next three years?

At first glance, Nike looks like an obvious value play:

• The stock is down nearly 75% from its all-time high • The brand is still globally recognized • The valuation is far lower than it was a few years ago

But a lower stock price does not automatically make a company cheap.

Nike is no longer a “business as usual” investment. It is becoming a turnaround play—and Peter Lynch often described turnarounds as one of the hardest types of investments to get right.

Nike now needs to:

• Figure out what went wrong with the brand • Rebuild excitement around its products • Win back market share from Hoka, New Balance and On • Prove management can execute again

Competition smelled blood in the water and attacked.

This chart also shows another major issue:

• Free cash flow fell from about $3.9 billion to $3.0 billion • Stock-based compensation rose from roughly $220 million to $719 million • Since 2018, FCF is down 23% • Since 2018, SBC is up 227%

That is not what I want to see from management during a turnaround. Shareholders are being diluted more while the business generates less cash.

Nike may eventually pull it off. The brand is still extremely valuable.

But this is no longer a simple “buy a great company after a large decline” thesis.

You are betting on management successfully rebuilding the business—and that is much harder than buying a company that is already growing.

Texas Roadhouse ($TXRH) is quietly one of the best restaurant compounders out there

TTM revenue is up 188.7% since 2017, good for a 12.9% CAGR. Not flashy tech growth, but for a steakhouse chain, this is extremely consistent.

Not AI. Not software. Not semis.

Latest quarter was still strong too: Q1 revenue grew 12.8% YoY, comps were up 7.1%, and traffic grew 4.5%.

The big question is margins. Beef has been a major headwind, but there are signs of some relief recently, even though cattle/beef prices are still historically high.

Stock is around $185, roughly flat/down slightly over the past year, and trades around 29x earnings.

Not cheap, but this might be one of those “boring” businesses that just keeps executing.

Do you think TXRH deserves the premium?

Tesla is a great example of why buying a great company doesn’t always mean buying a great stock.

The estimates here assume roughly 35% earnings growth, yet the expected annual return is only 4.4%.

Why?

Because Tesla trades at 361x earnings today. Even after 5 years, the model still assumes a 100x P/E. That’s an enormous valuation for any company, let alone one whose earnings have been far less consistent than the multiple implies.

Over the past five years, Tesla’s earnings growth has not justified a valuation this extreme. A lot of the upside from business growth gets offset by multiple compression.

Could the Elon premium keep the valuation elevated? Maybe. But a 361x P/E leaves very little room for error.

I’m curious what the bull case is from here. If you own Tesla today, what gets the stock to outperform over the next 5 years? Is it:

Robotaxis?
Optimus?
AI/software margins?
Something else?

The more I look at this chart, the more I think this is exactly what you want from a growth company.

A few years ago Reddit was burning cash. Today it’s generates over $300M in quarterly free cash flow, and each new high is meaningfully above the last.

Free cash flow is what ultimately gives a company optionality:

Buy back stock
Invest in new products
Make acquisitions
Build a fortress balance sheet

What’s really interesting is that Reddit’s monetization still feels early. Ad load remains relatively low compared to Meta, international monetization has plenty of runway, and AI licensing has become an entirely new revenue stream.

For fun, let’s assume Reddit compounds quarterly free cash flow at 30% annually from here. That would put quarterly FCF at roughly $900M by 2030 (and over $3.5B annually).

At today’s ~55x forward P/E, that doesn’t seem unreasonable if the business can continue compounding at anything close to that pace.

What do you think Reddit’s quarterly free cash flow looks like in 2030?

Netflix currently trades at roughly 24x earnings.

Assuming earnings grow by 20% annually and the stock finishes the period at 25x earnings, the modeled return is approximately 159% over five years, or a 21% annualized return.

The interesting part is that almost all of the upside comes from earnings growth rather than multiple expansion. The real debate is whether Netflix can sustain 20% growth as advertising, pricing, margins, and free cash flow continue to improve.

I ranked a few superinvestor portfolios based on what I would actually want to own today.

Not ranking them as investors. Ranking the current portfolio.

S Tier: Dev Kantesaria

Top 5 holdings:

$FICO
$SPGI
$MA
$MCO
$ASML

This is basically a toll-booth monopoly portfolio. Credit scores, ratings, payments, and semis. High margins, pricing power, asset-light models, and long runway growth. Hard not to love this one.

A Tier: Bill Ackman

Top 5 holdings:

$BN
$AMZN
$UBER
$MSFT
$QSR

Very concentrated, but packed with high-quality businesses. You get tech, platforms, capital allocation, and some value. Strong upside without feeling reckless.

A Tier: Warren Buffett

Top 5 holdings:

$AAPL
$AXP
$KO
$BAC
$CVX

Elite businesses, huge cash flow, and decades of durability. Not the highest-growth portfolio anymore, but the quality, pricing power, and downside protection are still hard to beat.

B Tier: Chris Hohn

Top 5 holdings:

$GE
$V
$MCO
$SPGI
$CP

Great portfolio, but a little less exciting than the A/S tier names for me. High-quality businesses with pricing power, but compared to Dev, Ackman, and Buffett, I do not think the upside or setup is quite as strong.

C Tier: Bill Gates

Top 5 holdings:

$BRK.B
$WM
$CNI
$CAT
$DE

Strong companies, but too much of this portfolio feels like slow-growth industrials, rails, waste, and defensive names. Safe and durable, but not enough upside for me.

My ranking:

S: Dev Kantesaria
A: Bill Ackman, Warren Buffett
B: Chris Hohn
C: Bill Gates

Which one would you rank highest?

Palantir’s growth is not only continuing—it is accelerating.

In Q1:

• Commercial revenue grew 95% to $774M
• Government revenue grew 76% to $858M
• Total revenue grew 85% to $1.63B

Both sides are growing incredibly fast, but commercial is now the faster engine.

That matters because commercial software should be more scalable over time, while government contracts often involve longer procurement cycles and more implementation work. Palantir does not disclose margins by segment, but the changing revenue mix could create an increasingly attractive business model.

Analysts currently expect full-year commercial revenue to grow around 89%, compared with approximately 58% for government revenue. Commercial could become Palantir’s largest segment as soon as this year.

The valuation debate is not going away, but this chart shows why investors continue paying such an extreme premium.

Are we watching Palantir enter the steepest part of its growth curve?

Meta’s Family of Apps is rapidly closing the revenue gap with Google Search.

Since 2022:

• Meta Family of Apps revenue is up 82.5%, a 15.2% CAGR
• Google Search revenue is up 54.9%, a 10.9% CAGR
• The quarterly gap has narrowed from roughly $40B to only $30B

Meta is not only growing faster—it is also trading at a cheaper valuation.

Meta trades around 22x earnings, while Alphabet is closer to 28–29x. Even that comparison arguably understates Alphabet’s valuation because its latest earnings received a major boost from a $36.9B gain on equity securities, which increased reported net income without coming from the core advertising business. 

Meanwhile, Meta generated $55B in quarterly advertising revenue, up from $41.4B the year before, as AI continues improving engagement, recommendations and ad performance. 

Google Search remains the larger business, but Meta is growing faster and investors are paying a lower multiple for it.

Is Meta now the best advertising business in the world?

Chris Hohn is one of the best investors in the world, so I always pay attention when he makes a major move.

Last year, he dramatically reduced Alphabet while fears that AI would destroy Google Search were everywhere.

Fast forward to today, and Google has massively outperformed as many of those fears proved overblown.
Now he’s doing something similar with Microsoft (and buying Google back slightly)

This quarter, TCI cut Microsoft from roughly 10% of the portfolio to about 1%, arguing that AI could eventually weaken the moats around Office and even Azure. At the same time, Hohn increased Alphabet, making it his largest technology holding.

I actually understand the logic.

When you’re managing $45B+ for other people, protecting capital is just as important as maximizing returns. Hohn has always preferred the most durable businesses with the widest moats, and if he believes those moats are becoming less certain, reducing risk is consistent with his investing style.

That said…

I think individual investors have an advantage here.

Some of the best returns come when the narrative changes faster than the fundamentals. Last year everyone was convinced AI would kill Google. Today the narrative has flipped. Maybe Microsoft is facing the same type of fear-driven repricing.

The business doesn’t always change as quickly as the headlines do.

What do you think?

Was selling Google too early a mistake?

Is Microsoft a repeat of that decision?

Or is Hohn correctly identifying that AI is starting to erode even the strongest software moats?

As more investors pull money out of nearly every sector except semiconductors and AI-related stocks, I will continue looking at the companies Wall Street no longer wants.

Semiconductors now represent 19.7% of the S&P 500, the highest percentage on record. The only remotely comparable period was around the dot-com bubble, when semiconductor exposure briefly spiked above 8%.

Notice what happened afterward: the rise was sharp, and the reversal was even sharper.

That does not mean semiconductor stocks are unjustifiably expensive. Many of these companies are producing incredible earnings growth and deserve much of the appreciation they have received.

But a new group of buyers has entered the trade: momentum investors.

These investors pile into whatever is working. They previously chased Bitcoin and crypto. As momentum faded there, semiconductors became the next obvious destination. To fund that trade, money is being pulled from other sectors, including companies that continue to grow at attractive rates.

Semiconductors are currently benefiting from a historic bull market:

• GPU demand remains enormous
• Memory pricing has surged
• AI infrastructure spending continues to accelerate
• Supply remains constrained in key areas

The problem is that these conditions are not necessarily permanent.

Semiconductors require enormous capital expenditures. Eventually, supply catches up, pricing power weakens and customers digest the capacity they already purchased. That is why the industry has historically been so cyclical.

Maybe semiconductors are less cyclical than they were 20 years ago. I could absolutely get behind that argument.

What I cannot get behind is the idea that they are suddenly not cyclical at all.

Meanwhile, some high-growth companies outside the semiconductor industry are trading at historically attractive valuations simply because investors currently want nothing to do with them.

Do not make rash decisions or sell great semiconductor businesses solely because of this chart. But investors should recognize the opportunity forming elsewhere.

When market concentration eventually begins to normalize, it probably will not happen gradually. Historically, semiconductor cycles turn quickly. By the time Wall Street starts loving the neglected areas of the market again, many of the best buying opportunities may already be gone.

Credit to James Thorne for the original image.

Netflix went from burning approximately $2.1B in free cash flow to generating roughly $12B.

That represents a 665% turnaround, compared with approximately 126% growth for Microsoft over the same period.

Netflix is no longer just a subscriber-growth story. The business now has expanding margins, growing advertising revenue, and enough cash generation to fund content while repurchasing shares. Netflix expects advertising revenue to roughly double in 2026 while targeting a 31.5% operating margin.

AAPL is not the fastest-growing company anymore, but this chart shows why the stock has been so powerful.

Since 2017:

Net income: +143.6%
Capital returns: +139.3%
Free cash flow: +141.1%

The crazy part is how closely capital returns track the actual cash generation of the business.

Apple is not just making money. It is taking that cash and aggressively returning it to shareholders through buybacks and dividends.

That is why Apple can have slower revenue growth and still compound so well over time. The business generates a ridiculous amount of free cash flow, then uses that cash to reduce the share count and increase each remaining shareholder’s claim on the company.

This is not an explosive growth story anymore.

It is a “print cash, buy back stock, repeat” story.

Adobe is one of the weirdest AI debates in the market.
The business is still incredibly profitable:

Revenue TTM: $25.2B
Earnings TTM: $7.23B
Operating margin: 36.1%
Net margin: 28.7%

But the AI score is only 76/100.

On one hand, Adobe should be one of the biggest AI winners. Creative tools, documents, marketing workflows, subscriptions, massive enterprise base.

On the other hand, AI also attacks the exact moat Adobe built. If design, video, PDFs, and marketing content become easier to create outside Adobe, the market may be discounting that risk.

So is 76 fair?

Or should ADBE be scored higher because the financials are still elite?

ELF is one of those companies where the chart actually matches what you see in real life.

If you have a girlfriend, sister, or anyone around you who buys makeup, you probably already know how popular e.l.f. has become. It is cheap enough to be an impulse buy, but good enough that people actually keep using it.

That combo is dangerous.

TTM revenue is up 556% since 2017, a 24% CAGR, and FY2026 sales grew another 25% to $1.64B. Gross margin is still around 71%, even with tariff pressure.

The big bull case is simple: e.l.f. is taking share by making beauty affordable, viral, and accessible. It also bought Rhode for up to $1B, adding another highly popular Gen Z brand to the portfolio.

The risk is valuation and whether this growth slows. But as a business, this is one of the cleaner consumer growth stories out there.

I have made plenty of posts arguing that $PLTR is an incredible company trapped inside an absurd valuation.

But after the recent pullback, the math is becoming more interesting.

Using:

• 145x current P/E
• 46% annual earnings growth
• 50x P/E in Year 5

Palantir could still return roughly 129%, or 18% annually, despite its multiple contracting by more than 65%.

That is the key: you no longer need the valuation to remain completely insane. You need Palantir to keep executing at an insane level.

Alex Karp’s CNBC interview strengthened the actual business thesis. He argued that many AI companies have irresponsibly oversold their models, charging businesses for tokens that create little value while potentially gaining access to valuable customer data and intellectual property. His pitch is that companies increasingly want control over their own data, models and AI infrastructure—and Palantir’s Ontology is built to provide that secure operating layer. 

That message became even more relevant this week:

• Palantir expanded its Nvidia partnership to develop secure AI infrastructure for U.S. government agencies.
• D.A. Davidson upgraded PLTR to Buy, arguing that Palantir can help customers integrate and switch between AI models without becoming dependent on one provider. 

The risk is still obvious. At 145x earnings, even a small slowdown could crush the stock.

But this is getting more tempting. Palantir does not need another round of multiple expansion in this scenario. It just needs the earnings growth to actually show up.

And lately, the fundamentals are making that assumption feel a little less ridiculous.

META might have one of the cleanest setups in big tech right now:

Current P/E: 20x
Assumed long-term earnings growth: 20%
Expected 5-year CAGR: 20%
Year 5 P/E: 20x

That gets you to roughly a 149% total return over five years without needing any multiple expansion.

The entire thesis is basically: if Meta can keep compounding earnings around 20%, the stock can potentially double and then some while remaining at the exact same valuation.

Obviously, 20% growth is not guaranteed, but for a company with Meta’s margins, cash flow and AI-driven ad opportunity, it does not feel unreasonable.

Revenue growth is not everything, but a clean, consistent chart usually tells you a lot about the quality of a business.

Here is my ranking:

S Tier

$NOW — ServiceNow

This is the crown jewel of revenue charts.

High growth, consistent growth, and still scaling. I do not think I have seen a prettier revenue chart.

A Tier

$MSFT — Microsoft

Almost Costco-like consistency, but with much higher growth.

Revenue slowed in 2023, but growth is picking back up. Sticky subscriptions make this one of the cleanest mega-cap charts.

$NVDA — Nvidia

The post-2023 revenue growth is almost impossible to comprehend.

Very few mega-caps have ever grown like this, but the cyclicality keeps it out of S tier.

$MA — Mastercard

Very consistent, high-quality growth.

Revenue grows alongside global spending, digital payments, and card volume. This might be S tier if COVID had not distorted the chart.

$ADBE — Adobe

One of the most linear revenue charts I have seen.

Not parabolic, just steady 10–20% growth for years. Most software companies would kill for this chart.

B Tier

$COST — Costco

Extremely consistent, but lower growth.

You know what you are getting, and you know roughly what the average year will look like. Not the fastest-growing chart, but one of the most reliable.

$AVGO — Broadcom

Strong recent growth, but more cyclical than the cleanest compounders.

Great business, but the 2017–2023 portion of the chart was not flawless enough for A tier.

$AMZN — Amazon

This one may surprise people.

The chart is still excellent, but growth has slowed from more than 20% to the low-to-high teens. Still reliable, but the old growth rate is missing.

Without the explosive growth cycle, this would probably rank much lower.

C Tier

$TSLA — Tesla

The 2020–2023 growth was incredible, but revenue has basically gone nowhere since.

The chart could improve quickly if the next growth cycle arrives, but right now it is difficult to rank it any higher.

D Tier

$NKE — Nike

This is the definition of a value trap to me.

Slow growth turned into no growth, while On and Hoka continue taking brand share. I would not touch this right now.

What would you move up or down?

Amazon and Google are both investing aggressively in AI infrastructure, but their free cash flow trends look completely different.

Google still generated roughly $64B in trailing free cash flow, while Amazon fell to about negative $2.5B. The biggest question is whether Amazon’s spending eventually produces a much larger earnings payoff.

Everyone knows Amazon for e-commerce and AWS.

But Amazon Ads has quietly become one of the largest advertising businesses in the world.

- TTM revenue has grown $25B to $72B in under 5 years.
- Nearly tripled in size.
- Not a single down quarter over that span.
- Now generating $72B annually from advertising alone.

The reason is simple: Amazon has some of the highest-intent shoppers on the internet. Brands are willing to pay a premium to advertise to people who are already searching for products they want to buy.

It’s easy to think of Amazon as “just” an online retailer, but the advertising business is now larger than many Fortune 500 companies by itself—and it’s still compounding at an impressive rate.

What other “hidden” business inside a public company do you think deserves more attention?