When the story is right but the price runs years ahead, patience is the trade.

Direct-to-cell satellite broadband is one of the genuinely interesting engineering bets in space right now. The idea is simple and ambitious: build a constellation of large, low-orbit satellites that beam standard cellular signals directly to ordinary smartphones, no special hardware required, with major carriers as customers.

AST SpaceMobile is one of the furthest-along public pure plays on that path. It has working satellites in orbit, commercial agreements with AT&T, Verizon, and Vodafone, and the engineering team has done most of the hard physics.

None of that is in question. What’s in question is the price. After a 5x run off last year’s low, ASTS sits at a valuation that prices in years of flawless execution, and it just gave back about 15% in a day on news that wasn’t company-specific but exposed how little tolerance the market has for space-execution risk at this valuation.

Key Takeaways

• Revenue is real but tiny. AST SpaceMobile booked about $85M of revenue over the past year, with a $15M March quarter that came in lumpy off a near-zero base. Gross margin is in the mid-40s, but operating losses ran near $375M over the trailing year.

• The cash burn is the central risk. Free cash flow over the past year was roughly negative $1.4B as the company funded constellation buildout. Cash sits near $3B against $3B of debt, so the runway is real but finite, perhaps 2 years at the current rate before another raise.

• Valuation has detached, but it isn’t an automatic sell. At $113 the stock trades at 518 times trailing sales and above every analyst target on the Street, including the most bullish at $108. The mean target sits near $82, the median near $80, implying around 27% downside to consensus. Momentum can still overwhelm valuation in the short run, which is why this is a patience setup, not a short.

• The technical setup just cracked. ASTS dropped about 15% on a sympathy reaction to a Blue Origin prelaunch test that ended in a pad explosion, even though ASTS uses other launchers. Daily momentum has cooled, but price is still above its 20-day average and the weekly trend remains intact.

• The honest read: this is a story stock at a story price. Consider a small starter on a deeper retrace, set a defined stop, and let the next earnings report, expected around August 10, tell you whether the burn is buying enough progress.

What AST SpaceMobile Is Actually Building

AST SpaceMobile is trying to do something nobody has at scale: provide cellular service from space directly to existing, unmodified smartphones. The satellites are large by low-orbit standards, with massive phased-array antennas that talk to ordinary mobile phones at standard cellular frequencies. The pitch to carriers is closing coverage holes, providing rural and emergency service, and competing with terrestrial towers for fringe traffic.

AST has working satellites in orbit and has signed commercial agreements with AT&T, Verizon, Vodafone, and a long list of international carriers. The strategic case is genuine; this is not a vaporware company.

What hasn’t materialized yet is meaningful recurring revenue. Quarterly revenue moves around lumpily as milestone payments and early service traffic come and go: $0.7M in early 2025, then $1.2M, $14.7M, a $54.3M spike in the December quarter, then back to $14.7M in the March quarter. Today’s investors are paying for the constellation finished tomorrow, not the income statement that exists now.

The sharper bear case is worth naming. It isn’t simply “they need more cash.” It’s this: what if the constellation works technically but the carriers’ actual commercial rollout lags AST’s capex schedule by 18 to 24 months?

In that scenario the satellites are built, the burn is locked in, and the revenue ramp lags by enough to force a dilutive raise before the cash machine truly turns.

The bull case requires both the engineering and the commercial timing to land together. The bear case is just one of them slipping.

The Fundamentals: Building a Constellation Is Expensive

Start with the cash, because at this stage that’s the story. Over the past year AST burned roughly $1.4B of free cash as it manufactured, launched, and integrated satellites.

Operating cash flow ran near negative $91M; the rest of the burn was capital spending. The balance sheet is the one stabilizer: cash near $3B against total debt of roughly $3B, with a current ratio near 18.

That cash pile came from repeated equity and convertible raises, so existing holders have already paid for the runway in dilution. At the current burn rate the company has perhaps 2 years before another raise, sooner if buildout accelerates.

On valuation, the multiples don’t translate to a regular business: 518 times trailing sales, more than 400 times enterprise value to revenue, and no meaningful P/E because earnings are deeply negative. Gross margin runs in the mid-40s, a fine starting point, but operating margin is negative many times over because revenue is still trivial relative to the engineering and launch cost base.

The mean Street target near $82 and the highest at $108 both sit well below $113, which says the market is pricing the constellation it hopes to see, not the income statement it has. Momentum can still overwhelm valuation in the short run, though, which is why the setup is a patience trade, not a setup to fight.

The Technical Picture: The First Real Crack

The setup in one read: the weekly trend is not broken. The daily trend is no longer clean. ASTS is still in an uptrend, but no longer a chase.

On the weekly view, the larger trend hasn’t yet broken. Weekly RSI, a momentum gauge that runs 0 to 100, sits at 64, comfortably bullish without being overbought, and price is still riding above its rising averages. On the daily, price at $113 sits above the 20-day near $97 and the 50-day near $90 even after the drop, but daily momentum has cooled and the last session collapsed from a $134 swing high. The 38.2% retracement of the rally sits at $106, just under spot; the 50% retrace at $98 lines up with the rising 20-day, the Ichimoku baseline, and prior structure, forming a meaningful support cluster. Below that, the 50-day near $90 and a deeper $80 to $85 zone match the analyst mean target.

Net read: the weekly is still in command, but the daily just showed the first real crack of the trend. The defined-risk entry is on the next leg of weakness, not on the first bounce.

Our Trade Plan

AST SpaceMobile (ASTS) is on its first real pullback after a parabolic run, so tier carefully and keep size small.

• Starter entry: 95 to 106, the band from the 38.2% Fib retracement down through the 50% Fib, 20-day average, and Ichimoku baseline cluster. Wait for price to enter the zone rather than chasing the bounce.

• Better-add zone: 80 to 88, near the 50-day and the analyst mean target. A deeper flush into here would set up the cleaner risk/reward.

• Invalidation: a daily close below 78 takes out the deeper support shelf and the analyst mean, which would say the larger trend is breaking, not just resetting.

• Continuation trigger: a daily close back above 134 reclaims the prior high and opens the next leg.

• Upside reference zones: 134 (the prior swing high), 150 (a round-number consolidation level above), and 175 (a measured-move extension of the recent leg).

Size from the distance between entry and stop, not from a fixed share count, and treat the position as a speculation rather than a core holding. Average true range sits near $11 on the daily, so a $20 to $25 move in either direction is normal, not exceptional.

The next earnings report is expected around August 10, the next real read on whether the buildout is converting milestones into recurring revenue at the rate the price needs.

Bottom Line

AST SpaceMobile is a genuine engineering story being priced as if the commercial story is already done. The constellation is real. The carrier deals are real. The capital intensity is also real, and the stock just gave back 15% in a session on a trigger that had nothing to do with the company itself.

For now this looks more like a routine reset of an extended trade than the start of a regime change, but the gap between price and fundamentals is wide enough that patience is the cheaper way in. The story will still be here once the satellites are billing minutes. The current risk/reward may not be.

Subscribe now

This is research and commentary, not personal investment advice. Levels and trade plans are illustrative; size positions to your own risk tolerance and time horizon. The author may hold positions in names discussed.

Alphabet is spending more on AI than anyone, and it’s still printing more cash than almost anyone. That’s the whole pitch in one sentence. The market cheered the combination right into a $404 record, then gave back about 7%, and now the conversation gets more interesting.

Is this the first real cooling of a trend that’s been straight up since the spring, or a routine test of the rising 20-day average that lets longer-term holders add at a better price? Most of the answer is in the numbers, with 2 asterisks worth knowing before you draw the trendline.

Key Takeaways

• Revenue is accelerating. Alphabet booked $109.9B of revenue in the March quarter, up 22% YoY, with operating income climbing about 30%. The reported net-income line jumped roughly 81%, but most of that came from a one-time $37B gain on equity-investment marks, so the real operating number is the 30%.

• The capex story is the story. Spending on property and equipment ran $35.7B in the March quarter and roughly $110B over the trailing year, up from about $55B 2 years ago. Alphabet also closed its $33.6B Wiz acquisition during the quarter.

• The cash machine still prints. Operating cash flow ran $174B over the past year, free cash flow stayed positive at about $64B even after record capex, and cash ($127B) exceeds total debt ($96B).

• Valuation is fair, not cheap. At $376 the stock trades near 29x trailing earnings and 26x forward, on a 60% gross margin and 39% return on equity. The desk leans heavily positive, with 58 of 65 covering analysts at buy or strong buy and a mean target near $415.

• The setup is constructive. Weekly trend intact, daily momentum cooling, intraday oversold, and a tight support cluster near $373 to $380. The first defined-risk entry since April.

  Subscribe now

What Alphabet Is Actually Doing With All That Money

Alphabet’s spending profile has no precedent in its own history. 2 years ago annual capex ran around $55B. The trailing-year figure is now near $110B, and the March quarter alone was $35.7B. Almost all of it is going into AI infrastructure: data-center capacity, custom silicon, networking, and the power deals to feed them. On top of organic spend, the company closed its $33.6B Wiz acquisition during the quarter, the biggest deal in Alphabet’s history, folding enterprise cloud security into Google Cloud at scale.

The market is willing to underwrite the spend because the underlying business is still compounding. Quarterly revenue went from $90B a year ago to $96B, $102B, $114B, and $110B in the March quarter, the highest growth rate the company has posted in over 2 years. Search remains the cash engine.

YouTube ad revenue keeps growing. Google Cloud is now contributing meaningful operating profit instead of soaking it up, with a recent multi-year EQT deal the kind of enterprise win that didn’t happen at Alphabet 5 years ago.

The sharper bear case is worth naming explicitly. It isn’t simply “capex stays high.” It’s this: what if $100B-plus of annual AI capex becomes the new permanent baseline, but incremental revenue growth doesn’t keep accelerating fast enough to justify it?

Today the spend is being matched by a 22%-growing top line and a faster operating line, so the math works. Stretch it 3 years out, and the question is whether the buildout earns its keep or compresses the cash machine for good.

The Fundamentals: A Cash Machine Spending Like One

The profit profile is almost absurd at this size. Over the past year Alphabet earned roughly $160B of reported net income on $422B of revenue. Gross margin runs above 60%, operating margin near 36%, and return on equity sits at 39%.

Even after stripping out the one-time securities gain that lifted the March quarter, this is a business that earns more on each marginal dollar than almost anything public.

The balance sheet stays a fortress through all of it. Cash near $127B against total debt of roughly $96B leaves the company net-cash by about $31B, with a current ratio near 2 and debt-to-equity of 0.20. Even with the $33B Wiz bite, Alphabet didn’t have to lever up; it paid in cash and stock. On valuation, the multiple is fair rather than cheap: 29x trailing earnings, 26x forward, 11x sales.

For a business growing revenue at 22% with these margins and this balance sheet, none of that is demanding. Price targets aren’t an argument on their own, but the mean near $415 and median near $430, stacked on top of the operating numbers, read as confirmation rather than aspiration.

The wrinkle worth naming: free cash flow is positive but heavily compressed by capex. 2 years ago Alphabet generated more than $70B of free cash without breaking a sweat. Now the same company runs at a much higher revenue base but produces less free cash, because every available dollar is being routed into AI infrastructure.

The bet is that this spend creates more durable earnings power on the other side. The risk is that the spend becomes the new baseline and the cash line doesn’t recover.

The Technical Picture: A First Pullback in a Long Uptrend

The setup in one read: weekly trend intact, daily momentum cooling, intraday oversold, support clustered between $373 and $380. That’s where the opportunity lives.

On the weekly view the uptrend hasn’t even started rolling. Weekly RSI, a momentum gauge that runs 0 to 100, sits at 66, bullish without being overbought, and the weekly MACD line, a trend-following momentum read, is still above its signal.

On the daily, price at $376 sits just under the 20-day average near $379 after a fast run from $300 in April. Daily RSI is neutral at 52, daily MACD has rolled below its signal as momentum cools, and the shorter intraday timeframes are now stretched to the downside.

The lower Bollinger band, the line marking roughly 2 standard deviations below the recent mean, sits at $374, and the 23.6% retracement of the leg-up is at $373. Add the rising 20-day, and the support cluster is unusually tight. Below that, the next real shelf is the 50-day in the mid-350s.

Net read: the larger trend is working, the short-term has cooled, and price is testing its first meaningful support since April. Not a guaranteed bounce, but the kind of place where a fresh entry has defined invalidation and the bigger trend is still on your side.

Our Trade Plan

Alphabet is a pullback-in-uptrend setup, not a chase and not an avoid. Tier the entries against support and let the stop do the rest.

Alphabet (GOOG) is pulling back into support, so buy weakness in tiers.

• Starter entry: 373 to 380, the rising 20-day and lower Bollinger band cluster. Price already sits inside this zone.

• Better-add zone: 354 to 365, near the 50-day and 38.2% Fib retracement. A deeper shake into here offers the cleaner long.

• Invalidation: a daily close below 345 breaks the structure that has guided the rally. Move stops there once both tiers are filled.

• Continuation trigger: a daily close back above 405 reclaims the prior high and opens the next leg.

• Upside reference zones: 415 (a round-number consolidation shelf just above the prior high), 430 (where analyst consensus clusters), and 460 (a measured-move extension of the April-May leg and the Street’s high target).

  Subscribe now

Size from the distance between entry and stop, not from a fixed share count. At the first reference zone, lift the stop to break-even, then trail it under each higher low.

Alphabet reports again on Thursday, July 23, which will be the next real read on whether capex is still translating into Search, YouTube, and Cloud growth at the rate the market is paying for.

Bottom Line

For now this looks more like a routine test of a strong uptrend than the start of a regime change. The 2 asterisks are worth keeping in mind: most of the splashy 81% net-income jump owes itself to a one-time gain, and free cash flow won’t return to its old run rate until capex normalizes. Neither changes the central case.

A 22%-growing business that earns above its weight, spends more on AI than anyone, and still prints more cash than almost anyone.

That combination doesn’t go on sale often. When it does, the right question isn’t whether to look. It’s where to stop out if you’re wrong.

Share

This is research and commentary, not personal investment advice. Levels and trade plans are illustrative; size positions to your own risk tolerance and time horizon. The author may hold positions in names discussed.

The shares have gone from under $5 to near $26 in a year, and the company now sells everything from satellite components and solar arrays to in-space manufacturing and, after a recent acquisition, defense drones.

The business is genuinely growing. The problem is that the stock has run so far, so fast, that it now sits above every analyst’s price target and miles above the fundamentals. So this isn’t a story about whether Redwire is a real company. It is. It’s a story about price, and why the best business in the world can still be a bad buy on the wrong day.

Key Takeaways

• Redwire is a real space-infrastructure and defense business. Quarterly revenue jumped from about $61M to near $100M after it folded in the Edge Autonomy drone acquisition, and the March quarter grew 58% YoY.

• It’s deeply unprofitable. Over the past year the company lost about $300M on $371M of revenue, a net margin near -81%, and it burned $71M of free cash. Gross margins are thin and erratic, swinging from -31% to +27% across recent quarters.

• The stock has gone parabolic. It’s up more than 5x off its 52-week low, RSI sits at 89 (a momentum gauge where above 70 is already overbought), and price trades above its upper volatility band.

• Valuation has detached. At $26 the shares sit above the highest analyst target of $22 and roughly 80% above the $14 mean, which implies steep downside if the enthusiasm cools.

• The honest read: this is a patience setup, not an entry. Own the story on a reset, not at the high.

Redwire: Orders Growing Faster Than Profits

Redwire builds the unglamorous hardware that space runs on: structures, solar arrays, sensors, digital engineering, and experiments in manufacturing things in zero gravity. Last year it bought Edge Autonomy and bolted a defense-drone arm onto the space business, which is why the revenue line suddenly stepped up. Quarterly revenue ran near $61M in the first half of 2025, then jumped to roughly $103M and $109M once the deal closed, and landed at $97M in the March quarter, up 58% YoY. Orders are growing, the backlog is filling, and the demand story is real.

It helps to understand why the stock specifically went vertical now. Renewed SpaceX IPO speculation has pulled a whole basket of small space names higher together, Redwire alongside peers like AST SpaceMobile, Rocket Lab, and Intuitive Machines. Call it the halo effect: when the sector catches fire, money chases anything with an orbit address, and it rarely stops to check the income statement on the way in.

Layer the genuine catalysts on top, growing defense-drone orders and a fuller backlog, and you get a crowd that’s convinced the next few years will look nothing like the last few. They might be right. But a rising sector tide lifts the overpriced as easily as the cheap.

What hasn’t shown up yet is profit. The growth is being bought, not earned, and the gap between the top line and the bottom line is wide.

The Fundamentals: Real Growth, Real Losses

Here’s the part the rally is ignoring. Over the past year Redwire booked $371M of revenue and still lost about $300M, a net margin near -81%. That isn’t a one-time charge buried below the operating line; the operating loss alone ran more than 60% of sales, so the core business is spending far more than it brings in.

Free cash flow was negative $71M, and operating cash flow was worse at negative $139M, so the company is consuming cash to grow. Gross margin tells the same messy story: it swung from -31% in one recent quarter to +27% in the March quarter, which says the cost of these contracts is lumpy and not yet under control.

The balance sheet is the one steadying hand. Debt is modest at about 0.11 times equity, cash sits near $145M, and the current ratio of 1.75 means short-term assets cover short-term bills comfortably. That gives Redwire room to keep investing without an immediate crisis. But it doesn’t fix the valuation.

At $26 the stock trades near 14x sales for a business with thin margins and deep losses, and there’s no price-to-earnings figure to cite because there are no earnings. You’re paying a software-like multiple for a hardware company that hasn’t proven it can make money.

Price targets lag and shouldn’t carry an argument on their own, but they’re a useful sanity check here. Of the 10 analysts covering it, 8 say buy, yet the mean target sits near $14 and even the most bullish target is $22, both well below today’s price.

Stacked on top of the negative cash flow, the absent earnings, and the lurching margins, that gap says the market has stopped pricing the business and started pricing the momentum. That’s worth respecting on the way up and fearing on the way down.

The Technical Picture: A Blowoff in Progress

The price action explains the gap between the company and the stock. Redwire trades around $26 against a 20-day average near 16, a 50-day near 12, and a 200-day near 11, so it’s more than double its own 2-month trend.

RSI, the momentum gauge that runs 0 to 100, reads 89 on the daily and 81 on the weekly, both deep into overbought, where readings above 70 already signal a stretched move. ADX, which measures trend strength, sits above 50, an unusually powerful trend, with buyers (+DI) crushing sellers (-DI), so the buying pressure owns this move entirely for now.

Price is also riding above its upper volatility band, the line that marks roughly 2 standard deviations above the recent mean. That combination, vertical price, extreme RSI, and a close outside the band, is the signature of a blowoff rather than a healthy trend.

None of that predicts the exact top. Overbought can get more overbought, especially when a sector theme is driving flows. But moves like this almost always give a chunk back, and the further price runs from its averages, the harder the eventual snap. The level that matters now is the prior high near 26.64; below it, the first real support is the rising 20-day in the mid-teens.

Net read: the trend is as strong as they come and momentum is firmly higher, but this is a melt-up, not an entry. Buying here means paying above every target on the Street and betting the move accelerates from already-extreme levels. The risk and reward are upside down at $26.

Our Trade Plan

Read more

Both let you bet on that demand without guessing which model wins. But if you put them side by side, you’re looking at 2 genuinely different risk profiles wearing the same growth story.

One is small, pricey, and cash-rich. The other is large, cheaper on sales, and leveraged to the hilt. Let’s see where the reward actually lines up with the risk.

Key Takeaways

• Nebius is the balance-sheet play. Revenue grew 684% YoY in the March quarter off a tiny base, and the company holds roughly as much cash as debt. You pay for that safety, though: the stock trades near 60x sales.

• CoreWeave is the scale play. It books $2.08B of revenue a quarter, up 112% YoY, and more than $6B over the past year, roughly 7x Nebius. Even so, it’s cheaper at 9x sales. The catch is about $35B of total debt, leases included, and thin liquidity.

• Watch the profit story on both. Nebius shows a reported net profit, but it comes from a one-time asset sale, not from renting compute; the operating line still loses money. CoreWeave earns positive cash flow before depreciation and interest, then heavy depreciation and a big interest bill drag it to a net loss.

• The price action diverges. Nebius is in a clean uptrend near its record high. CoreWeave is in a correction, well off its high and leaning on support.

• Ranking them today: Nebius for trend and safety, CoreWeave for value and scale, neither for the faint of heart.

The smaller, stronger-looking one first.

Nebius: Tiny Revenue, Cash-Rich Balance Sheet

Nebius came out of the old Yandex breakup with cash, a clean listing, and a plan to build compute capacity across Europe and the US. The growth has been violent off a small base. Quarterly revenue went from $100.7M to $146.1M to $227.7M, then to $399M in the March quarter, up 684% YoY. Trailing 12-month revenue now sits near $878M. Gross margin runs around 74%, which tells you the underlying rental economics are healthy once the boxes are full.

Here’s the part you can’t skip. Nebius reported a net profit of about $621M in the March quarter, but the operating line still lost $128M. The black ink came from a one-time gain of about $781M on the sale of investments, not from renting out GPUs.

So don’t read that profit as a sign the core business has turned; it hasn’t yet. What has turned is the balance sheet. The company holds roughly $9.4B in cash against $9.6B in debt, near enough to neutral, with a current ratio above 8, meaning it can cover short-term bills many times over.

Free cash flow ran deeply negative over the past year as it pours money into build-out, but with that cash pile, it can fund the expansion without begging the market.

What you don’t get is a cheap entry. At around $208 the shares trade near 60x sales, and earnings multiples are meaningless here because the profit isn’t operational. For context, the desk leans positive with a mean target near $231, but that’s supporting color, not the reason to act. The trend decides that.

On price, Nebius is in command. The stock sits above its 20-, 50-, and 200-day averages (near 192, 163, and 113) and has more than quadrupled off its 52-week low near 35. RSI, a momentum gauge that runs 0 to 100, sits at a firm 60, and ADX, a trend-strength reading where above 25 means a real trend rather than chop, is up at 36.8 with buyers (+DI) well ahead of sellers (-DI), so the pressure stays on the upside. Momentum cooled a touch this week, a normal breather inside a strong uptrend. The level overhead that matters is the record high near 234.

Net read: Nebius is the safer balance sheet and the better-behaved stock, but you’re paying a nosebleed multiple for a business that doesn’t yet make operating money. The trend says don’t fight it; the valuation says don’t chase it. A pullback toward the rising 20-day is the entry that respects both.

Now the bigger one with the heavier load.

CoreWeave: Scale, Cash Earnings, and a Mountain of Debt

CoreWeave is the giant of the pair. It rents GPU clusters to the biggest names in AI under long contracts, and its revenue dwarfs Nebius. The ramp has been steep: quarterly revenue climbed from $1.21B to $1.36B to $1.57B, then to $2.08B in the March quarter, up 112% YoY. Over the trailing 12 months the business pulled in $6.23B. Gross margin sits near 66%, a touch below Nebius but on far more volume.

The profit story splits 2 ways. EBITDA, a rough cash-earnings proxy that strips out depreciation and interest, ran positive at about $3.02B over the past year, a 49% margin. That’s the bull case the company keeps pointing to, that margins inflect higher as more power capacity comes online. The trouble sits below that line.

Depreciation of roughly $1.15B over the March period outran the $1.03B of EBITDA it earned, pushing operating income to a $144M loss, and then $536M of interest on the debt dragged the bottom line to a $740M net loss. That gap is widening as the build-out accelerates. The balance sheet is the real worry.

Total debt runs about $35B, which includes roughly $10B of finance leases on its data-center gear, more than 7x equity; net of cash it’s around $23B. With only $2.3B of cash and a current ratio of 0.31, short-term bills outweigh short-term assets, so the company is funding its land grab with borrowed money.

On valuation, CoreWeave is the cheaper name where it counts: near 9x sales and about 30x EV/EBITDA, versus 60x sales for Nebius. There’s no meaningful price-to-earnings figure since it loses money at the bottom. The 34 analysts covering it lean buy, mean target near $139, but their range runs from $36 to $295, which tells you the Street can’t agree on what this is worth.

Price action is the soft spot. At around $104 the stock sits below its 20-day average (near 109), on its 50-day (near 105), and above its rising 200-day (near 97), well off the 187 high it set earlier this year. RSI reads a weak 46 and ADX at 15 signals no real trend, just chop, with sellers (-DI) modestly ahead of buyers (+DI). Soft, but leaning on support rather than breaking it.

Net read: CoreWeave gives you 7x the revenue at a sixth of the sales multiple, and it’s already EBITDA-positive. But that debt load is real, the bottom-line losses are widening, and the trend is corrective. This is a value-and-scale bet that needs the margin inflection to show up before the interest bill swamps it.

Our Trade Plan

These are 2 different setups, so treat them differently. Nebius is a trend-pullback name; CoreWeave is a support-and-confirm name.

Read more

Meta closed at $612.34 on 2026-05-26, down about 5% over the past year. In that same stretch the S&P 500 climbed 26%. That gap is the puzzle, because the business behind the stock just had one of its best years on record. Revenue grew 33.1% YoY in the March quarter to $56.31B, the operating margin held above 40%, and the company threw off $124B of operating cash over the past 12 months. So why is one of the great compounders in the market down while almost everything else is up? In a word, spending.

Meta is pouring tens of billions into AI data centers, and the market hasn’t decided whether that’s a moat being built or a hole being dug. That single question, not the earnings, is what’s pricing the stock right now.

Key Takeaways

• Growth reaccelerated. The March quarter put up $56.31B, up 33.1% YoY, at a 40.6% operating margin. This is a $215B-revenue business still growing like a much smaller one.

• The earnings power is rare. Operating cash flow was $124B over the past year and return on equity is 33%. Few companies on earth turn revenue into cash like this.

• The AI bill is the overhang. Capital spending nearly doubled in fiscal 2025 to about $70B, pushing free cash flow far below the $124B of operating cash flow. That outlay, and its uncertain payoff, is why the stock has lagged.

• Valuation has come back to earth. Near 14.2x EV/EBITDA, Meta trades close to the broad market despite growing several times faster. A one-time tax charge muddies the trailing P/E, so EV/EBITDA is the cleaner lens here.

• One zone frames the trade. Price is resting on long-term-trend support around $600 to $605. Hold it and the multi-year uptrend is intact. Lose it and the pullback has further to run.

Here’s what the numbers actually say.

META: A Cash Machine That Decided to Spend

3 years ago Meta looked broken. Fiscal 2022 revenue actually shrank to $116.6B and operating income collapsed to $28.9B as an ad recession met heavy Reality Labs losses. Then came the cuts, the headcount reset, and a hard refocus on the core advertising engine.

The result: fiscal 2025 revenue reached $201.0B and operating income $83.3B, nearly tripling the operating line in 3 years. The March quarter did $56.31B, up 33.1% YoY, at a 40.6% operating margin and an 81.9% gross margin. Net income was $26.77B, up about 61% from a year ago, outpacing revenue because below-the-line items broke favorably, not because margins widened.

This is a business firing on its core, not a turnaround hoping to work.

The spending is the other half of the story, and it’s the half the market is fixated on. Capital spending ran near $19B in the March quarter alone, so the $124B of operating cash flow Meta produced over the past year converts into far less actual free cash.

The bull case is that this capacity powers sharper ad targeting, new AI products, and a durable lead. The bear case is the risk to margins: depreciation from all that hardware lands on the income statement for years, whether or not the revenue shows up to match it. Both can be partly right, and the next several quarters of margin data will settle the argument.

A wrinkle worth knowing here: the September quarter carried a large one-time tax charge that pushed that quarter’s net income down to $2.71B, so trailing earnings understate the real run-rate.

The balance sheet gives Meta room to make this bet, with about $81B in cash against $87B of debt even after the borrowing it added to help fund the build-out.

On valuation the stock isn’t expensive: near 14.5x EV/EBITDA (enterprise value against operating earnings before depreciation) and around 22x trailing earnings, multiples you’d expect on a slower business than this one. EV/EBITDA is probably the cleaner lens right now, since it strips out both the September tax distortion and the depreciation timing on all that new hardware.

For context, the analyst desk is overwhelmingly positive and its lowest published target sits just above today’s price, but that’s supporting color. The spending debate, not the sell-side, is what moves this stock.

The tape says the market is undecided, not bearish. On the weekly trend Meta pulled back from a high near $796 to $612, but it’s still holding above its 100-week EMA at $598.55 and far above its 200-week EMA at $482.17 (the EMA, or exponential moving average, is a trend line that weights recent prices more), so the multi-year uptrend is intact even after the slide.

Weekly RSI is 46.6, a 0-to-100 momentum gauge sitting in neutral rather than oversold, and weekly ADX is just 12.6, a trend-strength reading so low it signals chop instead of direction. Price is parked just above the 50% retracement of the entire $414-to-$796 run near $605, which is why this zone carries weight.

The daily picture is softer. Price sits below all 4 daily moving averages, stacked in the bearish order that marks a downtrend, with the nearest overhead the daily EMA20 at $616.51 and the EMA50 at $624.55.

Daily MACD, which tracks the spread between a fast and a slow trend average, is mildly negative, so sellers still hold a slight edge. But drop to the 4-hour and a bounce is underway: price has reclaimed the 4-hour EMA20 ($608.43) and EMA50 ($611.30), and 4-hour RSI has crossed back above 50.

Net of the detail, the read is simple: a healthy long-term uptrend on a medium-term pullback, defending real support, momentum neutral and starting to base. First resistance is $617 to $632, then $650. Support is the $600 to $605 shelf, then $560.

Net read: this is a high-quality business on sale over a real and unresolved question about its spending, not because the earnings cracked. Price is holding just above the line that has defined the multi-year uptrend, around $600 to $605, with momentum neutral and the 4-hour turning back up. It isn’t a clean breakout, and it doesn’t need to be chased.

The better move is to let the support zone prove itself, or wait for a reclaim of $632 to confirm the pullback is done. The next print lands Wednesday 2026-07-29, 63 days out, so there’s time to be patient.

Here’s how to act on it.

Our Trade Plan

Read more

Shopify closed at $103.00 on 2026-05-22, almost exactly where it traded a year ago. Over those same 12 months the S&P 500 climbed 26%. That gap is the whole setup. Underneath it, the business did the opposite of stall: revenue grew 34.3% YoY in the March quarter to $3.17B, operating income stayed firmly positive, and operating margins have been climbing for most of the past year.

The company also reported a GAAP net loss of $581M, and that loss tells you almost nothing about how the business is doing. When a stock gives back a full year while the market runs and the underlying numbers keep improving, it’s worth understanding what the market stopped paying for, and whether the price has fallen far enough to change the math.

Key Takeaways

• Revenue is accelerating, not slowing. The March quarter put up $3.17B, up 34.3% YoY, with gross profit of $1.546B. Demand for Shopify’s merchant software isn’t the problem here.

• The loss is investment noise, not operations. Operating income was a positive $498M at a 15.7% operating margin. A markdown on Shopify’s equity stakes pushed the GAAP bottom line to a $581M loss. The same thing happened a year ago.

• The balance sheet is pristine. Roughly $5.74B of cash against $179M of debt, a current ratio above 6, and trailing operating cash flow of $2.15B. This is a company that funds itself.

• Valuation is still rich. Even after the slide, shares trade near 11x trailing sales and roughly 60x EV/EBITDA. The growth earns a premium, but not a cheap one.

• One line frames everything. Price sits right on the 200-week trend average near $103 and just above the $99.61 long-term retracement. Hold that zone and it’s a base. Lose it and the next shelf is well below.

Here’s what the numbers actually say.

SHOP: The Operating Engine Quietly Turned

Step back 3 years and Shopify looks like a different company. Fiscal 2023 revenue was $7.06B against an operating loss of $1.418B, the hangover from overbuilding through the pandemic boom.

Then management cut hard, sold off the money-losing logistics arm, and the operating line flipped: fiscal 2025 delivered $11.556B of revenue and $1.468B of operating income.

The March quarter did $3.17B, up 34.3% YoY, at a 48.8% gross margin. The margin trend is the tell. Across the past 5 quarters the operating margin ran 11.8%, 13.8%, 17.3%, 20.3%, then 15.7% into the seasonally lighter spring period.

That’s a business getting structurally more profitable as it scales.

So why the reported loss? Shopify carries equity stakes in other companies, and accounting rules force it to mark those stakes to market through the income statement every quarter.

When those holdings fall, the company books a paper loss even though nothing was sold and the core business kept humming. That’s exactly what produced the $581M GAAP net loss against $498M of real operating income.

The prior-year spring period showed the same shape: positive operating income, a large investment markdown, a headline loss. The figure to anchor on is operating income and cash generation, not the GAAP bottom line, which will swing with markets from one period to the next.

The balance sheet is why none of this is fragile. Shopify holds about $5.74B in cash against just $179M of debt and threw off $2.15B of operating cash over the past year. This is a company that funds itself and then some.

Valuation is the catch. Even after the slide the stock trades near 11x trailing sales and about 60x EV/EBITDA (enterprise value against operating earnings before depreciation), so the market is still paying a premium that growth has to keep earning. For context, the analyst desk leans positive and its lowest published target sits a touch above today’s price, but that’s supporting color, not the reason to act. The trend and the tape decide that.

The price action tells a more sober story. On the weekly trend the stock ran from below $50 in 2023 to above $180 late last year, then rolled over and gave most of it back. The last weekly close at $103.00 sits below the weekly EMA20 ($122.92) and EMA50 ($126.47), the trend lines that weight recent prices more, but right on the weekly EMA200 near $103.25, the 2-year average that has held as the floor through prior pullbacks.

Momentum confirms the fatigue: weekly RSI is 39.6, a 0-to-100 gauge where readings under 40 mark a tired tape. The 61.8% retracement of the whole $48-to-$182 run sits just beneath at $99.61, so price is wedged between its long-term trend line and that deeper support.

The daily picture is a downtrend trying to find a floor. Price sits below all 4 daily moving averages, stacked in the bearish order that defines a downtrend, with the nearest overhead at $108 and $116. Daily MACD, which tracks the spread between a fast and a slow trend average, is barely negative now with its histogram near flat, so the selling has eased even if buyers haven’t taken over.

Drop to the 4-hour and a small bounce is underway, though it’s already short-term overbought, which usually means it needs to rest before it can do more. Net of the detail, the read is simple: below the short-term averages, sitting on long-term support, momentum weak but stabilizing. First resistance is $108 to $110, then $115 to $116. Support is $99 to $100, then the lower volatility band near $91.

Net read: the business is compounding and the balance sheet is bulletproof, but the tape is still in a medium-term downtrend that has only just reached major support. Price is sitting on the 200-week trend line with the $99.61 retracement right below, and momentum is weak but no longer falling apart. This isn’t a breakout to chase. It’s a base that either forms here or breaks, and the $99 to $100 zone is where you’ll find out. Patience earns a better entry than the open does. The next print lands Wednesday 2026-08-05, 72 days out, so there’s time to let it come to you.

Here’s how to act on it.

Our Trade Plan

Read more

Here’s the catch. All 3 trade near record highs on rich valuations, yet the market is pricing 3 genuinely different stories: a monopoly compounding at a steady double-digit clip, the fastest grower riding a memory rebuild, and the laggard that’s cheaper than the other 2 for a reason. Let’s find where risk and reward line up.

Key Takeaways

• ASML is the only company on earth that makes EUV lithography, the step no leading-edge chip can skip. Revenue grew 13% YoY last quarter at a 53% gross margin, but you’re paying around 54x earnings for it. The premium is earned, not a bargain.

• Lam Research is the growth leader. Revenue rose 24% YoY and is still speeding up as NAND and high-bandwidth memory spending comes back. The one worry is that weekly momentum is stretched, with RSI at 72.

• Applied Materials is the value case. It’s the cheapest of the trio on forward earnings and carries the widest gap to its analyst target, around 18% upside, but revenue has gone flat and daily momentum has rolled over.

• All 3 sit just under prior highs. None offers a clean low-risk entry right at spot. The better setup is a pullback toward the rising 20-day average.

• Ranking them today: Lam for trend, ASML for quality, Applied for patience.

The choke point first.

What These Companies Actually Sell

Chip factories spend their capital budgets on wafer fabrication equipment, and that spending is what these 3 live on. ASML owns lithography, the printing of circuit patterns onto silicon; its extreme-ultraviolet systems are the only ones capable of the finest patterns, and a single system can cost more than a wide-body jet. Lam dominates etch and deposition, the steps that carve and layer those patterns, with heavy exposure to memory. Applied has the broadest range, the most diversified and the most tied to the overall cycle.

The demand driver is AI, which consumes more equipment per wafer than older designs and has lifted ASML’s backlog while pulling memory spending off the floor. The shared risks are China export limits and plain cyclicality: orders move in waves, and each has lived through 30%-plus drawdowns when a wave rolls over. The earnings split the trio. Lam delivered the cleanest beat, ASML kept compounding with record margins, and Applied held margins steady while revenue stayed flat.

Start with the one that has no competition.

ASML: The Monopoly You Pay Up For

ASML’s last quarter brought in revenue of €8.77B (it reports in euros), up 13% YoY, with net income near €2.76B, up about 17% from the year-ago period. Gross margin landed at 53% and operating margin at 36%, both near company records. Over the trailing 12 months the business produced roughly €33.7B in revenue and €8.9B in free cash flow. Return on equity sits at 54%, debt is almost nothing at 0.13 times equity, and a 1.36 current ratio covers short-term bills easily. Pristine balance sheet, genuine monopoly.

What you don’t get is a cheap entry. At around $1,633 the shares trade near 54x trailing earnings and close to 19x sales. Analysts stay positive, with a strong-buy lean across 15 opinions and a mean target near $1,660, a median of $1,728, and a high of $1,997. Price already sits just under the mean, so the consensus isn’t shouting upside; it’s calling the name fair for the quality. You’re buying durability and scarcity, not a discount.

On price, the trend is up. On the weekly timeframe ASML rides above every major moving average, with ADX at 31 (a trend-strength gauge where above 25 means a real trend rather than chop) and +DI well above -DI, which is a simple way of saying buyers are in control. The daily picture agrees: the MACD line above its signal with the histogram rising tells you momentum is building, not fading, and Bollinger %B near 0.92 means price is pressing toward the upper volatility band. The level that matters overhead is the prior swing high around 1,653. Support steps down to the 20-day average near 1,515, then the 50-day near 1,457.

Net read: ASML is the highest-quality name here and the trend backs that up, but at 54x earnings and pressed against resistance, this isn’t the spot to chase. A breakout above the prior high confirms continuation; a pullback to the 20-day offers better risk/reward. Either way, you own the best business in the group at a fairer entry than today.

Now the fastest grower.

Lam Research: The Growth Leader, Running Hot

Lam’s March quarter brought in revenue of $5.84B, up 24% YoY, with net income of $1.83B, up roughly 37% from a year earlier. The top line is accelerating: the last 5 quarters ran 4.72, 5.17, 5.32, 5.35, and 5.84 billion, each a fresh step higher. Gross margin held near 50%, operating margin near 35%. Trailing-12-month revenue is about $21.7B with $6B of free cash flow, and return on equity is an eye-catching 66%, helped by heavy buybacks. Debt is modest at 0.35 times equity.

The engine here is memory. As NAND and high-bandwidth memory capacity gets rebuilt for AI, Lam’s gear sees the spending early, and the accelerating revenue is the proof.

Valuation has caught up with the story, at about 57x trailing earnings and 18x sales, a touch richer than ASML despite a less defensible position. That makes Lam the purest growth story of the 3, but not the best risk/reward: the market is paying monopoly-level multiples for a business that doesn’t have ASML’s monopoly. The analyst group of 32 leans buy, mean target near $312, high of $385, against the current $305.

The price action is the firmest of the 3, both the appeal and the warning. The weekly trend is powerful, ADX above 39 with price sitting on the prior swing high near 310, but weekly RSI at 72 is overbought, which tends to precede a pause rather than a top. The daily read is calmer, RSI in the low 60s with momentum flattening, so a breather wouldn’t surprise. Support is the 20-day near 282, then the 50-day near 262.

Net read: Lam has the best fundamental momentum and the best trend, but it’s also the most stretched. It’s a buy on weakness, not strength. A pull toward the high-280s offers a far better entry than chasing the highs.

And then the contrarian read.

Applied Materials: The Cheap One, For a Reason

Applied is the value name, and the price reflects a softer growth profile. Revenue has held around $7B a quarter and was roughly flat over the past year: the January quarter came in at $7.01B, down about 2% from a year earlier, while ASML and Lam posted double-digit gains. Full-year revenue was $28.4B for the fiscal year ended October, with the trailing-12-month figure near $29B. Profitability is steady, with a 49% gross margin, a 32% operating margin, and a 29% net margin, and free cash flow over the past year was about $6.2B.

Here’s where it gets interesting. Applied trades around 41x trailing earnings but under 27x forward, the cheapest of the 3 on next year’s numbers, and it carries the widest analyst gap: a mean target near $510 against the current $432, roughly 18% of headroom. The market treats Applied as the cyclical laggard, which it is, but a broad range means it benefits most when the whole cycle turns rather than one slice of it. The bull case isn’t that Applied becomes ASML. It’s that expectations are lower, the multiple is cheaper, and a broad recovery in wafer fab spending would lift its diversified range.

The price action explains the caution. The weekly trend is still strong, ADX at 35 with price under the prior high near 448, but the daily timeframe has lost steam: the MACD line has slipped below its signal, the histogram has turned negative, and +DI and -DI are nearly level, meaning buyers and sellers are in rough balance. RSI in the high 50s is neutral. This is a stock digesting a big run, not breaking out. Support is the 20-day near 417, then the 50-day near 394.

Net read: Applied offers the most upside on paper and the least momentum in hand. It’s the patient investor’s pick. If the cycle reaccelerates, the cheap multiple and the analyst gap close fast. Until then, it needs the daily trend to firm before it earns fresh money.

How to actually play it.

Our Trade Plan

These are 3 high-quality names in an extended sector. None is a high-conviction buy at spot without accepting elevated entry risk. The framework favors pullback entries, with breakouts for anyone who needs to be in on strength.

ASML

• Preferred entry: 1,500 to 1,515

• Breakout trigger: above 1,655

• Invalidation: below 1,450

• Targets: 1,728, 1,850, 1,997

Lam Research

• Preferred entry: 276 to 282

• Breakout trigger: above 310

• Invalidation: below 260

• Targets: 315, 350, 385

Applied Materials

• Preferred entry: 410 to 417

• Breakout trigger: above 449

• Invalidation: below 390

• Targets: 470, 520, 575

Position sizing: let the distance between entry and stop define risk, not a fixed share count. A wider stop means a smaller position, so a hit costs the same on any of the 3. At the first target, raise the stop to your entry; you’re now playing with the market’s money, then lift it under each higher low as the trend confirms.

How to choose between them.

Who Should Own What

For investors who prioritize quality, ASML is the cleanest business. For those who prioritize earnings momentum, Lam has the strongest trend. For those who prioritize valuation and mean reversion, Applied is the better patience trade.

Bottom Line

3 fine businesses, 3 different jobs in a portfolio. The thread tying them together is discipline on entry: all 3 are high-quality, all 3 are extended, and none of them rewards chasing at today’s price.

The single most important line for the group is each stock’s 50-day average: 1,450 on ASML, 260 on Lam, 390 on Applied. Above those, the uptrends are intact and pullbacks are buys. Below them, the character changes and patience becomes the smarter trade. All 3 sit above today, which is why discipline on entry matters more than conviction on the story.

Subscribe now

This is research and commentary, not personal investment advice. Levels and trade plans are illustrative; size positions to your own risk tolerance and time horizon. The author may hold positions in names discussed.

That non-reaction is the part worth sitting with. Revenue came in at a record $81.6B, up 85% YoY, with data center alone at $75.2B. Management guided the next quarter to $91.0B, well above the $86.8B Wall Street was modeling. The board lifted the dividend from $0.01 to $0.25 a share and authorized another $80.0B of buybacks.

By almost any standard it was a beat with a stronger guide, and the market’s first response was a yawn. When a company this size does everything right and the tape barely flinches, it’s telling you what’s already in the price.

Key Takeaways

• The quarter was a record on every line. Revenue $81.6B (up 85% YoY), data center $75.2B (up 92% from a year ago), GAAP operating income $53.5B at a 65.6% operating margin. This wasn’t a beat-and-trim, it was a beat-and-raise.

• The guide is the real headline. Management sees $91.0B next quarter, roughly 11% above the quarter just reported and above the $86.8B consensus, and it assumes zero data center compute revenue from China. Demand isn’t the question.

• Capital returns shifted gears. The dividend went up 25-fold ($0.01 to $0.25) and the board added $80.0B to the buyback on top of $38.5B already left. Nvidia returned about $20B to holders in the quarter alone.

• Mind the GAAP headline. GAAP net income of $58.3B and $2.39 of GAAP EPS were inflated by a $15.9B gain on investments. The number to underwrite is non-GAAP EPS of $1.87, which still beat the $1.76 estimate. Treat the rest as a windfall, not run-rate.

• One level frames the trade. $236.54 is the swing high set into the print. A daily close above it is a fresh breakout. Failure to reclaim it and a slip back to the $214 to $202 moving-average shelf is a healthy digestion of an extended run.

Here’s what the numbers actually say.

NVDA: The Operating Line Is Still Bending Upward

Nvidia’s last 12 quarters trace one of the steepest revenue ramps in corporate history. The top line went from $13.5B in the quarter ended July 2023 to $81.6B in the quarter ended April 2026, about 6x in under 3 years, and the last 3 prints alone read $57.0B, then $68.1B, then $81.6B.

The latest quarter put up revenue of $81.6B (up 85% YoY reported), GAAP operating income of $53.5B, and GAAP diluted EPS of $2.39. The margin stack is back near the highs: GAAP gross margin 74.9%, up from 60.5% a year ago when China H20 charges dragged it down, and operating margin 65.6%.

One caveat matters here. GAAP net income of $58.3B and the $2.39 of GAAP EPS sit well above the operating line because of a $15.9B gain on equity securities, a markup on Nvidia’s investment stakes rather than anything it sold to customers.

The figure to underwrite is non-GAAP EPS of $1.87, up from $0.78 a year ago, which strips the investment noise out. Data center did $75.2B of the $81.6B, and within it networking grew 199% from a year ago as Nvidia increasingly sells whole systems instead of loose chips.

The balance sheet is why the capital-return news lands. Trailing revenue is now about $253.5B, and free cash flow was $48.6B in this quarter alone.

Nvidia holds roughly $80.5B of cash and marketable securities against about $8.5B of debt, with stockholders’ equity of $195.5B and trailing return on equity above 100%.

On valuation, the stock trades near 21x trailing sales and, on the engine’s read, about 19x forward earnings, and that forward number is the bull case in one line: a $5.4T company still growing the top line 85% while priced below the market’s slower-growing chip names.

Broadcom sits near 23x forward earnings and AMD near 35x, both expanding slower than this. The analyst desk is lopsided too, with a $278 mean target ($275 median, $400 high, $180 low) across 61 opinions, 58 of them buy or strong buy and a lone sell.

Beta is 2.24, so the shares move more than double the market on a typical day, which matters a lot for how big a position you carry.

The weekly trend is firmly up and a little hot. Last weekly close $223.47, with the weekly EMA20 at $195.40, EMA50 $179.01, EMA100 $153.95, and EMA200 $116.95 (EMA is the exponential moving average, a trend line that reacts faster than a plain average). Price sits far above all of them, which is the multi-year uptrend doing its thing. Weekly RSI is 67.1, a momentum gauge that runs 0 to 100 where above 70 reads hot, so it’s knocking on that door.

Weekly MACD line 10.23 holds above its signal at 6.13, with a +4.09 histogram that says upward momentum is still building (MACD tracks the gap between a fast and a slow trend average). The flag is the weekly Bollinger %B at 1.00, meaning price is riding the very top of its weekly volatility band, alongside weekly StochRSI near 98, an overbought reading on a faster, more sensitive cousin of RSI, and both say the run was stretched going into the print.

Weekly ADX is 22 with +DI 29 over -DI 11 (ADX measures how strong a trend is, and the DI pair compares buyers against sellers), so buyers are clearly in front without the reading being at an extreme.

The daily tells an orderly story. Close $223.47 sits above all 4 daily EMAs in textbook order (EMA20 $214.03, EMA50 $202.01, EMA100 $193.83, EMA200 $183.08), the stacking that defines an intact uptrend. Daily RSI 61.9 is firm without being overbought.

The daily MACD line 8.38 holds just above its signal at 8.05 with a small positive histogram. Daily ADX 30.4 says a genuine trend is in force, and +DI 30 over -DI 17 keeps buyers ahead. ATR is $7.56, so a normal session swings about $7.50, which is what you use to set a sane stop distance. Resistance is the $236.54 swing high, then the $240 round number, and a reclaim of those opens air above.

Support steps down through the EMA20 at $214, the $209 retracement, then the heavy shelf at $202 to $200 where the EMA50 and the round number sit together, with the lower Bollinger band and EMA100 near $192 below that. Worth noting that the April-to-May run lifted price from the low $160s to $236, so a lot of this band is recent and untested as support.

Net read: the business is accelerating and the trend is up, but the stock walked into the print extended on the weekly band and right under its swing high, which is exactly the condition that tends to mute the immediate move no matter how strong the print. $236.54 is the line that separates a fresh breakout from a digestion. A pullback into the $214 to $202 moving-average shelf would be normal, and arguably healthier, than another vertical leg. The next print is Wednesday 2026-08-26, 97 days out, so there’s room to let the setup come to you rather than chase the open.

Here’s how to act on it.

Our Trade Plan

Read more

Key Takeaways

• PLTR is the rare megacap correcting on multiple compression, not earnings. Trailing 12-month revenue $5.22B, net margin 43.7%, free cash flow $2.69B (FCF margin 51.5%), debt almost zero. The growth is still accelerating.

• The drawdown is sharp but contained. Spot $135.14 is 35% below the November $207 high but still up 104% from the April $66 low. The weekly trend has rolled over and daily price sits below all 4 major moving averages.

• Q1 2026 was the strongest print in years. Revenue $1.63B (up 84.7% YoY), net income $871M (up 307%), diluted EPS $0.34. Q1 net margin was 53.3%, gross margin 86.8%. This isn’t a slowdown story.

• Valuation is still extreme. Computed trailing P/E 136x, forward P/E 65x, price-to-sales 62x, EV/EBITDA 159x. Even after a 35% drawdown, the multiple is at a level where any miss compresses fast.

• One number decides the setup. $122 daily close. That’s the April daily low. Above it, the correction is healthy. A daily close below confirms a lower-low and the de-rating extends.

PLTR: The Operating Line Keeps Accelerating

Palantir’s last 12 quarters trace one of the cleanest revenue accelerations in software. Revenue went from $533M in Q2 2023 to $1.63B in Q1 2026, a 3.1x in 3 years, with the year-on-year growth rate climbing from the high teens to 85% over that window.

Latest reported quarter print: revenue $1.63B (up 84.7% reported), net income $871M (up 307% reported), diluted EPS $0.34. The quarterly margin stack tells the story even better: gross margin 86.8%, operating margin 46.2%, net margin 53.3%. One important caveat on that 53% net margin: it sits well above the 46.2% operating margin because of below-operating-line items (interest income on the big cash pile, tax benefits, gains on investments).

Don’t model 53% as the new run-rate. The defensible margin to underwrite is the 46% operating line, with everything below it treated as windfall rather than baseline. Each of the last 4 reported quarters has shown year-on-year growth accelerating from 48% to 63% to 70% to 85%.

The fundamentals are what make this drawdown puzzling. Trailing 12-month revenue $5.22B, net income $2.28B, operating cash flow $2.72B, free cash flow $2.69B (FCF margin a remarkable 51.5%). TTM gross margin 84.1%, net margin 43.7%, EBITDA margin 38.6%. Return on equity 32.6%. Balance sheet is debt-free in any meaningful sense (total debt $212M is just capital-lease obligations, debt-to-equity 0.025).

Cash and short-term investments $8.03B at quarter end. Current ratio 6.91 means current assets are nearly 7 times current liabilities (the balance sheet is mostly cash). Beta 1.52 (the stock moves about 50% more than the market on any given day, which matters for position sizing). Computed trailing P/E 136x, forward P/E 65x, price-to-sales 62x.

Consensus target $183.73 mean across 31 analyst opinions (1 strong buy, 18 buy, 10 hold, 1 sell, 1 strong sell). Median target $200, high $255, low $70. The bear case sits in that $70 low target, and it’s the same bear case the market is currently expressing: that 62x sales is unsustainable regardless of how strong the operating numbers look.

The Technical Setup

The weekly trend has rolled over. PLTR printed an all-time high of $207.52 on 2025-11-03 (the post-Q3 2025 earnings rip), spent November and December chopping in the high $180s to low $200s, then corrected from $200 to $122 over 4 months.

Last close $135.14. Weekly EMA20 $146.45, EMA50 $143.88, EMA200 $85.45 (EMA is exponential moving average, a trend gauge that reacts faster than a plain average).

The 200-week is far below price because the multi-year trend is still up, but the 20-week and 50-week have curled and crossed below spot, which is the visible weekly damage. Weekly RSI 43.5 is neutral-to-weak, not panic.

Weekly MACD line -6.15 below signal -4.89, with the histogram -1.26 (sellers still have momentum, but the downside push has flattened). Weekly Bollinger %B 0.30 (price sits in the lower part of its weekly volatility band, not stretched).

Weekly ADX 24.3 means a real trend exists but is losing strength. +DI 11.8 vs -DI 23.2 means sellers are still in charge on the weekly timeframe.

The daily tells a more interesting story. Daily close $135.14 sits below all 4 major EMAs (EMA20 $137.89, EMA50 $142.50, EMA100 $148.61, EMA200 $148.20).

The short and intermediate averages have rolled below the longer ones (20 < 50 < 200 < 100, with EMA100 still narrowly above EMA200), so the daily trend has weakened without the 200-day fully decaying below the 100-day.

That’s a mature pullback inside a longer up-cycle, not yet a regime change. RSI 45.0 is neutral, not yet oversold. MACD line -2.70 below signal at -2.34, histogram -0.36 (negative but very small, the down-move has flattened). Bollinger %B 0.31 puts price in the lower part of its daily volatility band, not extended.

ATR $6.01 means a normal day swings about $6, so traders can size to that. ADX 12.5 says there’s no strong directional trend on the daily right now, just chop. +DI 20.1 vs -DI 28.3 (sellers in front, but only modestly).

Williams %R -69.4 (lower-middle of its 14-day range, not yet washed out). Support clusters at $128 (lower daily Bollinger Band), $122 (the April 10 daily low), then weekly support comes in around $115. Resistance is the EMA cluster $138 to $148, then $162 (the March 24 swing high), then $183 (analyst mean), then $207 (the all-time high).

Net read: the weekly trend is broken on its short and intermediate EMAs but the long-term structure is intact. Daily $122 is the line that separates “healthy 35% correction” from “lower-low and the de-rating extends.” A weekly close above $150 reclaims the broken structure and opens the conversation about $162, then $183, then $207. The next earnings print is Monday 2026-08-03, 76 days out. That’s runway to add or wait, not a wall.

How to act on it?

Our Trade Plan

Read more

For 3 years, owning Eli Lilly or Novo Nordisk was effectively the same bet: long the GLP-1 weight-loss bull market. That trade is over. As of 2026-05-15, LLY closed at $1,004.92, 11% below its all-time high but 61% above its August 2025 panic low. NVO closed at $44.74, down 33% over the trailing 12 months and well off its 2024 highs, only now showing daily-timeframe signs of repair. The fundamentals diverged first. The price action has finally caught up.

Key Takeaways

• LLY is back at the highs with a clean EMA stack and 55.5% latest-quarter revenue growth. Daily price $1,004.92 above EMA20 $961, EMA50 $956, EMA200 $934. Trailing 12-month revenue $72.25B, net margin 35%, ROE 107%. The trend’s repaired itself.

• NVO’s weekly trend is still broken. Daily is trying to bottom. Price $44.74 sits below weekly EMA50 $54.16 and EMA200 $71.43, but daily MACD just crossed up (+1.80 line over +1.66 signal) and ADX 30 reads “strong trend” forming. Early repair, not confirmation.

• The valuation gap is the real story. LLY trades at 35.7x trailing earnings, 22.6x forward. NVO trades at 10.4x trailing, 13.3x forward. The market has priced LLY for franchise extension and NVO for share loss. Both could be right.

• NVO’s latest print was solid too, just not enough to repair the tape. Q1 2026 revenue $96.82B (DKK reporting basis, about $14.9B at current USD-equivalent), growth of 24% versus the prior-year quarter.

• One number decides each setup. $930 LLY (daily EMA200). $42.50 NVO (daily EMA50). Daily close below either, the constructive read is gone.

The biggest one first.

LLY: The Trend Has Already Repaired

Eli Lilly’s last 12 reported quarters are a clean picture of tirzepatide’s market arrival. Revenue went from $8.31B in Q2 2023 to $19.80B in Q1 2026, a 2.4x compounding step inside 3 years. Latest quarter print +55.5% YoY (reported), with net income up 168% versus the prior-year quarter, diluted EPS $8.26. Mounjaro launched in May 2022. Zepbound followed in obesity in November 2023. SURMOUNT-OSA’s positive read on obstructive sleep apnea in 2024 added a third indication. SUMMIT’s HFpEF (heart failure with preserved ejection fraction) win in late 2024 added a fourth pathway. Each indication compounds the same molecule.

The fundamentals match the tape. Trailing 12-month revenue $72.25B, net income $25.28B, operating cash flow $20.48B, free cash flow $10.37B. TTM gross margin 82.8%, operating margin 49.4%, net margin 35.0%, EBITDA margin 50.1%. ROE 107%, ROA 20.7%. Debt/equity 1.39 (the manufacturing build is debt-funded), current ratio 1.50. Trailing P/E 35.7, forward P/E 22.6 (the market’s pricing $44 of fiscal-2027 EPS against this year’s pace). Dividend yield 0.69%. Consensus target $1,210 mean across 31 analysts, with 24 buy or strong buy, 6 holds, 1 sell. Median target $1,250.

The weekly trend has rebuilt itself. August 2025 was the deeper panic, with LLY printing a $624 low. From there the stock rallied to a $1,134 all-time high in January 2026, gave back 25% into an April 2026 retest near $850, and has reclaimed $1,004.92. Spot sits 11% below the January high and 61% above the August low. Weekly EMA20 $961.89, EMA50 $922.67, EMA200 $713.74. Weekly RSI 55.2 (healthy, not stretched). Weekly MACD histogram still mildly negative at -7.97, Bollinger %B 0.557 (price sits in the middle of its weekly volatility band). ADX 18.6 means the trend’s there but not roaring.

The daily is where it gets interesting. Daily close $1,004.92 sits above all 4 moving averages (EMA20 $961.57, EMA50 $956.71, EMA100 $959.91, EMA200 $934.11). EMA50 still sits a hair below EMA100 (the residual scar from the April pullback, not yet fully repaired), but price above all of them is the read that matters. RSI 60.84 (room to run before “overbought”). MACD line +19.42 well above its signal at +10.28, with the histogram at +9.14 and rising (the up-move is accelerating). +DI 29.5 vs -DI 19.0 (buyers clearly in control). ATR $29.93 means a normal day swings around $30, so traders can size to that. Bollinger %B 0.802 puts price near the top of its volatility band, which often precedes a 1-2 day pause, not a reversal. Williams %R at -10.4 is the only short-term caution, the move is overbought on a 14-day lookback. Support clusters at $961 (EMA20), $934 (EMA200), then $890.

Net read: the business is firing on every cylinder and the price structure just confirmed the recovery. Weekly close above $1,025 opens fresh-high territory. Daily close below $930 (EMA200) breaks the structure that’s been built for 12 months. The next earnings print is Wednesday 2026-08-05, 79 days out. That’s runway, not a wall.

Different beast, same drug class.

NVO: The Repair Has Just Started

Novo Nordisk’s last 5 reported quarters are not the disaster the tape implies. Q1 2026 revenue $96.82B on a DKK reporting basis (around $14.9B in USD-equivalent terms), growth of 24% versus the prior-year quarter. Net income DKK 48.56B (around $7.5B USD), a 67% jump versus the prior-year quarter. Diluted EPS 10.91 DKK. The business is still growing fast. The 60%-plus drawdown from September 2024 is about everything else: the CagriSema disappointment of December 2024 (22.7% mean weight loss in REDEFINE-1 vs the high-20s management had signaled), the SURMOUNT-5 head-to-head data showing tirzepatide ahead of semaglutide (20.2% vs 13.7% at 72 weeks, May 2025), and the $11B Catalent acquisition that was necessary, expensive, and arguably late.

The fundamentals tell a story the price doesn’t. Yahoo’s USD-converted ratios: trailing P/E 10.4, forward P/E 13.3. TTM gross margin 83.2%, operating margin 61.6%, net margin 37.2%, EBITDA margin 53.0%. ROE 71.4%, debt/equity 0.72. Dividend yield 4.03%. Beta 0.35 (the stock moves at one-third the market’s daily noise). Operating-margin call-out: NVO converts every dollar of revenue at over 60 cents into operating income. That’s a structural margin profile that doesn’t typically belong to a stock trading at single-digit forward earnings. Consensus target $46.82 mean across 14 analysts, with only 5 of them buy or strong buy and 9 hold. Median target $44.63 is basically flat to spot. Analysts have already capitulated.

The weekly trend is still broken. NVO’s weekly EMAs are stacked in proper downtrend order: price $44.74, EMA20 $44.72 (just barely back above the 20-week), EMA50 $54.16 (a long way up), EMA200 $71.43 (memory of the highs). Weekly RSI 47.1 is neutral. Weekly MACD histogram just flipped positive at +0.97 after months of negative readings, an early-cycle bottoming tell. ADX 26.4 says the still-existing trend (down) has weakened. Bollinger %B 0.469 puts price mid-band. The weekly setup is not yet bullish. It’s “less bearish than it was.”

The daily tells a sharper story. Price $44.74 sits above the daily EMA20 ($43.77), EMA50 ($42.59), and right at the EMA100 ($44.71). Only the EMA200 at $51.35 still towers overhead, the structural ceiling. Daily RSI 59.2 (firm). MACD line +1.80 above signal +1.66, histogram +0.14 (positive but thin, the cross is recent). +DI 38.3 vs -DI 25.8 means short-term buyers in control. ADX 30.0 means the new daily trend is already strong (more reliable than the weekly +DI reading). ATR $1.33 sets the daily noise around 3% of price. Bollinger %B 0.628 is mid-band. The setup is “early bottoming” not “trend turn.” A weekly close above $48 plus a reclaim of the daily EMA100 at $44.70 would meaningfully change the read.

Net read: the latest reported quarter says the business is fine. The tape says the market is still pricing share loss and pipeline doubt. Daily $42.50 (EMA50) is the line that separates “real repair” from “another false bottom.” A daily close below it sends spot back toward $40 and the prior swing low. A weekly close above $48 starts the conversation about $54 (weekly EMA50) and eventually $60.

How to act on it.

Our Trade Plan

LLY (earnings Wednesday 2026-08-05)

• Pullback: $975 to $945 (daily EMA20 down to EMA200 cluster)

• Breakout: weekly close above $1,025 (prior swing high)

• Invalidation: daily close below $930 (loss of EMA200, structure broken)

• Targets: $1,065, $1,210 (consensus mean), $1,300+

• Rolling stop: at $1,065 to $975, at $1,150 to $1,030, at $1,210 to $1,080

• Earnings 79 days out, so there’s no print risk for at least 10 weeks. Add on weakness rather than chase. Daily Williams %R at -10 says the very-short-term is overbought, a 1-3 day pause to $980 is typical.

NVO

• Pullback: $43.50 to $42.50 (daily EMA20 to EMA50)

• Breakout: weekly close above $48 (recovers daily EMA200 zone)

• Invalidation: daily close below $42.50 (loss of EMA50, daily repair fails)

• Targets: $48, $54 (weekly EMA50, then consensus high $64)

• Rolling stop: at $48 to $43, at $54 to $47, at $60 to $50

• This is the contrarian leg. Position smaller than LLY because the weekly trend is still down. 4.03% dividend yield is real carry while you wait. If $42.50 breaks, the trade idea breaks with it.

Position sizing. Risk per trade, not capital per trade. Decide what percentage of the portfolio you’ll lose if invalidation hits, divide by the distance between entry and stop, that’s your exposure. LLY’s stop sits about 7.5% below spot. NVO’s stop about 5%. Same dollar risk means roughly 1.5x more NVO shares than LLY shares.

Bottom Line

Lilly’s the cleaner setup. Revenue from $8.31B to $19.80B per quarter in 3 years is the demand picture. Daily price sits above every meaningful moving average in proper trend order, latest quarter delivered 55.5% revenue growth, and the next earnings print is 79 days out. The decision is whether you’re chasing a recovery that’s already rallied 61% from the August 2025 low, or whether the trend extends to $1,210 and beyond. The line that decides it is $930.

Novo’s the contrarian setup. The weekly trend still says “broken.” The daily says “early bottoming.” The fundamentals say “still growing 24% YoY at 62% operating margins.” The valuation says “the market is pricing decline that hasn’t started yet.” Daily $42.50 is the binary. Above it, the repair gets a chance. Below, the next leg of the move is lower and the trade plan needs to wait for the next setup.

The duopoly framing made sense when supply was the binding constraint and both stocks were one trade. By spring 2026 they’re 2 distinct setups. Lilly rewards trend-following. Novo rewards patience on entry and discipline on the stop.

One number per name decides everything. $930 LLY, $42.50 NVO. Above, the constructive read holds. Below, the plan needs revisiting.

This is research and commentary, not personal investment advice. Levels and trade plans are illustrative; size positions to your own risk tolerance and time horizon. The author may hold positions in names discussed.

What it does have is a 20-satellite constellation delivering 50cm high-resolution Earth observation imagery at what management claims is one-tenth the cost of small satellite peers, a technology roadmap that is fully funded by customer contracts rather than dilutive equity raises, and a growing list of sovereign defense customers across the US, Europe, Asia Pacific, and the Middle East who are actively writing checks.

This is still an early-stage, pre-profitability business with real execution risk. But the underlying operating business is improving steadily. The question for investors is whether the commercial momentum that started building in 2025 is durable, and whether the Merlin constellation, launching in October 2026, creates a big change in addressable market and recurring revenue potential.

The stock has moved. Up roughly 30% on the week of writing, pressing near its highest levels since 2022. The setup requires patience rather than chasing.

Key Takeaways

• Q1 2026 revenue up 80% year over year, continuing a multi-quarter acceleration

• Q1 2026 operating cash flow turned positive at +$0.2M, the first positive operating cash flow quarter in the company’s recent history

• Headline net loss of $(118.3M) driven almost entirely by a $(113M) non-cash change in fair value of financial instruments; not reflective of operating performance

• Asia and Asia Pacific revenue grew more than 700% year over year to $3.0M in Q1 2026, driven by Australia and Malaysia

• $64.8M in non-cancellable remaining performance obligations (RPO) as of March 31, 2026

• Merlin AI-first constellation on track for October 2026 launch; H1 2027 initial operational capability

Subscribe now

What Satellogic Does

builds, launches, and operates a constellation of Earth observation (EO) satellites that capture high-resolution imagery and deliver it to defense, intelligence, and commercial customers. Its 20-satellite NewSat constellation provides 50cm resolution imagery at what the company describes as the lowest unit cost in the sub-meter commercial EO market, backed by a patent-protected pushframe camera design that gives each satellite roughly 10x the capture capacity of small satellite peers.

The business operates across three lines.

• Asset Monitoring is the core product, providing high-resolution imagery and analytics via the Aleph platform to defense and intelligence customers including NGA, NASA’s Commercial Satellite Data Acquisition program, US Space Force, Palantir, and Vantor (formerly Maxar Intelligence).

• Advanced Space Systems is the sovereign business, where governments pay Satellogic to build and transfer satellite ownership to them, including in-country technology transfer and manufacturing. This segment generated the $18M Portugal contract (CEiiA), the $12M sovereign defense satellite sale in April 2026, and agreements in Malaysia and India.

• Searchable Earth is the emerging AI-first product layer, anchored by the $30M multi-year contract for near-daily ultra-low latency analytics from the Merlin constellation.

What makes Satellogic structurally interesting right now is the convergence of three forces that did not exist twelve to eighteen months ago.

1. The company finalized its US domicile in March 2025, which opens direct access to US government defense and intelligence contracting in a way that was previously unavailable. This is not a small unlock. The appointment of VADM Frank D. Whitworth, former Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, as strategic advisor in Q1 2026 signals that Satellogic is actively pursuing that market.

2. The Aleph Observer product, launched in February 2026, shifts the commercial model from transactional per-image sales toward recurring subscription-based monitoring. This is a meaningful model transition. Persistent monitoring contracts generate predictable, multi-year revenue rather than lumpy project-based income, and the company already has a strategic D&I customer under a $30M multi-year contract as the anchor.

3. The Merlin constellation, launching October 2026, is the first Earth observation system designed for daily 1-meter global coverage with real-time AI alerts. It is fully funded by existing customer contracts. Management is not asking investors to fund this. That is a material distinction from most pre-revenue space companies.

Subscribe now

Fundamental Analysis

Revenue and Earnings

’s quarterly revenue trend is the clearest signal of what is changing in the business.

Quarterly revenue (in $M):

• Q4 2024: $3.2M

• Q1 2025: $3.4M

• Q2 2025: $4.4M

• Q3 2025: $3.6M

• Q4 2025: $6.2M (+94% YoY)

• Q1 2026: $6.1M (+80% YoY)

Annual revenue:

• FY2023: ~$9.7M (annualized from quarterly data)

• FY2024: $12.8M

• FY2025: $17.7M (+38% YoY)

The acceleration is real. Q4 2025 and Q1 2026 represent a significant change from the $3-4M quarterly run rate that characterized most of 2024 and early 2025. The company is not yet at a revenue scale that makes traditional earnings multiples meaningful, but the direction of travel is unambiguous.

FY2025 net loss available to stockholders was $(4.8M) on a GAAP basis, but that figure included a large positive swing from fair value changes. The noise in these GAAP numbers is significant and requires stripping back to Adj. EBITDA and operating cash flow to understand the actual trajectory.

Share

Margins and Profitability

Gross margin trend:

• Q1 2025: 63.5%

• Q2 2025: 73.2%

• Q3 2025: 67.8%

• Q4 2025: 79.5%

• Q1 2026: 76.2%

Gross margins are expanding meaningfully and are now consistently above 70%. For a hardware-intensive satellite business, these are exceptional margins. They reflect the low marginal cost of incremental imagery delivery on an already-deployed constellation combined with the high-value defense and sovereign contracts dominating the revenue mix.

Cash Flow and Balance Sheet

The operating cash flow inflection in Q1 2026 is the most important fundamental development in recent quarters.

The company generated +$0.2M in cash from operations, compared to $(4.7M) in Q1 2025. This is the first quarter of positive operating cash flow in the company’s recent history and is a signal, not yet a trend, but a signal that the revenue scale is beginning to cover operating costs.

Cash position:

• FY2023: $23.5M

• FY2024: $22.5M

• FY2025: $94.4M

• Q1 2026: $121.9M (following capital raises)

The $121.9M cash balance is the strongest in company history and provides a meaningful operational runway. Capital expenditures were $5.5M in Q1 2026, higher than prior quarters, reflecting investment in the Merlin constellation build-out.

The balance sheet has a complexity worth flagging: total debt stood at $149.7M as of March 31, 2026, up from $63.4M at year-end 2025. The increase is primarily driven by the convertible notes whose fair value swings are responsible for the GAAP net loss volatility. Common equity is negative at $(25.5M) due to the accumulated deficit. This is not a traditional balance sheet analysis situation; the company is pre-profitability and the debt structure requires monitoring.

Total assets grew to $188.1M from $151.3M at year-end 2025, supported by the cash build and growing receivables.

Non-cancellable backlog of $64.8M breaks down as follows:

• Under 1 year: $29.2M

• Years 1-2: $7.9M

• Years 2-3: $7.5M

• Thereafter: $20.2M

For a company generating $6M per quarter, $29.2M in near-term backlog is substantial forward visibility.

The honest framing: at current price is a momentum and catalyst trade, not a value trade. The intrinsic value case builds materially as revenue scales and the Adj. EBITDA loss narrows toward breakeven.

Subscribe now

Technical Analysis

The Big Picture: Weekly Chart

The weekly chart tells the story of a long, brutal decline followed by a base and an explosive recovery that is only now beginning to show up at the weekly level. From its 2022 highs near $12-13, SATL spent roughly two and a half years grinding lower through a complete five-wave corrective structure, bottoming near $1.50 in early 2026.

The recovery from that bottom has been extraordinary. Price has now cleared all four weekly EMAs, with the 20 EMA at $5.49 and the 50 EMA at $4.18 both turning sharply upward. The weekly RSI is at 75.98, entering overbought territory at this timeframe, and the MACD has completed a strong bullish crossover with histogram bars expanding positively.

The weekly chart points toward $9.90 as the immediate target for the current leg which price has essentially reached last week. This is a natural pause zone. The structure above $9.90 needs to consolidate and form a new base before the next impulsive advance becomes probable.

Daily Chart

The daily chart shows a stock that launched aggressively from its April lows around $3.50-4.00 and has not looked back. Two significant gap-and-go sessions drove the bulk of the advance: the initial breakout in mid-April and the earnings week surge in May. Volume on both moves was exceptional relative to the prior three months of quiet accumulation.

Price is now well above all four daily EMAs, with the 20 EMA at $7.48 sitting roughly 25% below the current price. The daily RSI reached 69.53 and the MACD remains deeply positive. This is a healthy daily trend with the characteristic of a momentum-driven move where pullbacks have been shallow and brief.

The risk for new entrants is buying into the vertical phase of a move that has already covered most of its near-term distance.

The daily chart does not yet show signs of exhaustion at current levels. But it does not need to show exhaustion to offer a better entry 10-15% lower than current prices.

Momentum Across Timeframes

Weekly: RSI 75.98, MACD strong bullish crossover, EMA stack aligned bullish. Entering overbought but not extreme at weekly level.

Daily: RSI 69.53, MACD deeply positive, price well above all EMAs. Constructive trend, not extended enough to panic but not offering good risk-reward for new entries right now.

2-hour: RSI 75.64, MACD positive with histogram beginning to flatten. Short-term momentum peaking.

1-hour: RSI 73.64, MACD constructive, EMA stack bullish. Elevated but not extreme.

30-min: RSI 72.20, MACD positive, Kalman bands rising steeply. Extended intraday.

5-min: RSI 65.26, MACD flat to slightly positive. Near-term cooling from the hot readings seen earlier this week.

The dominant read: the weekly and daily structures are genuinely bullish and the trend is intact. Short-term timeframes are extended from the week’s move and suggest patience rather than immediate entries.

Key Levels

Support:

• $8.80-9.00: 20 EMA on the 1-hour and recent intraday consolidation base; first pullback zone

• $8.00-8.20: Kalman band support and prior breakout area from the May surge; primary dip-buy zone

• $7.10-7.50: Daily 20 EMA and intermediate support shelf; deeper reset zone with better risk-reward

• $6.00-6.30: Pre-May consolidation base; structural support for any larger pullback

Resistance:

• $9.84-10.00: Current zone; psychological round number and wave projection target

• $10.50-11.00: Next extension zone above the current consolidation

• $12.00-13.00: Prior 2022 highs and long-term structural resistance

Subscribe now

Trade Plan

Position bias: Long, trend-following. The trend is real and the catalysts are real. Do not chase the current vertical move. Wait for consolidation or a pullback to defined entry zones.

Time horizon: 2-4 months (swing), with the Merlin October 2026 launch as the next major catalyst to frame around. Q2 2026 earnings in August is the intermediate checkpoint.

Entry zones:

• Primary entry: $8.00-8.50 The ideal pullback zone where the support, prior breakout shelf, and the beginning of the daily moving average cluster converge. Look for a stabilization candle and reclaim of $8.50 on a closing basis before entering. This is the highest-quality entry if the trend remains intact.

• Secondary entry: $7.10-7.50 Deeper pullback and daily 20 EMA zone. If price reaches this area and shows clear buying absorption, the risk-reward improves meaningfully. Confirmation preferred over anticipation.

• Breakout entry: Above $10.30 on a daily close with volume. If price consolidates in the $9.50-10.00 range for several sessions and breaks cleanly higher, that continuation is tradeable with a stop just below the consolidation base.

Stops / invalidation:

• Tactical stop: Below $7.00 A close below this level after entering in the primary zone weakens the near-term structure. Reduce or exit.

• Structural stop: Below $6.00 Below the pre-May base and structural demand shelf. This level being lost means the post-earnings thesis is broken. Step aside entirely and wait for a new base.

Targets:

• T1: $10.50-11.00 First extension and logical pause zone. Book partial profits here.

• T2: $12.00-13.00 Prior 2022 structural highs. Consider full or near-full exit at this level.

• T3 (stretch): $15.00+ Only viable in a strong momentum environment with Merlin launch confirmation, major defense contract wins, and volume expansion. Do not plan around this; let it come if it comes.

Subscribe now

The Bottom Line

is not a polished, proven compounder. It is a capital-light, technically differentiated Earth observation platform that is finally generating the commercial momentum its technology always promised, at a moment when sovereign defense demand for non-ITAR satellite intelligence has never been stronger.

The bull case: Revenue accelerating at 80% year over year. Operating cash flow positive for the first time. Gross margins above 75% and expanding. $64.8M in non-cancellable backlog. $121.9M in cash. A fully funded next-generation constellation launching in four months. Board members including a former US Treasury Secretary and a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. A strategic advisor who ran the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. US domicile completed and direct government contracting now accessible.

The bear case: Still loss-making on an operating basis. Revenue of $6M per quarter is tiny relative to the $1.5B market cap. The backlog is promising but contract-to-revenue conversion in sovereign defense is slow and lumpy. The balance sheet carries $149.7M in convertible debt that creates GAAP noise and dilution risk. The stock has already moved 200%+ from its lows. The fair value model implies the current price reflects an optimistic scenario that is not yet in the numbers.

The institutional view here is selective and patient. SATL has the technology, the customers, and the catalysts to justify a position at the right price. The right price is not today’s price after a 30% week. It is the pullback into the $8.00-8.50 zone, where the risk-reward lines up against a thesis that is now supported by the best financial quarter this company has ever reported and a product roadmap that is, for the first time, fully funded.

SATL doesn’t need to become Maxar to work from here. It just needs to keep executing.

This content is for informational and educational purposes only and reflects our views at the time of writing. It is not investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Markets involve risk, prices can move against you, and outcomes are never guaranteed. Always do your own research and consider your risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Too small. Too tech-forward for a business where margins are measured in basis points. Too dependent on a regulatory environment that could shift under its feet.

The ACA exchange market is volatile, the argument went, and Oscar was too concentrated in it to build a durable business.

Q1 2026 kind of proved those critics wrong.

Oscar is not a speculative bet on an ACA enrollment story anymore. It is a rapidly scaling health insurance business with a technology platform, a proven MLR improvement trajectory, and an increasingly clear path to sustained profitability. The valuation still carries a premium and the regulatory backdrop is a genuine variable. But the business underneath the uncertainty is materially stronger than it was twelve months ago.

The stock is up over 60% from its February lows. The question for investors now is whether this is a momentum trade that has already run, or the early stages of a re-rating toward what this business is actually worth at scale.

Subscribe now

Key Takeaways

• Q1 2026 total revenue of $4.65B, up 53% year over year, driven by membership growth and disciplined rate increases

• Medical loss ratio of 70.5%, down from 75.4% in Q1 2025, a 5% structural improvement

• Total membership of 3.17M, up 56% year over year from 2.04M in Q1 2025

• Net income of $679M, or $2.07 diluted EPS, versus $275M and $0.92 in Q1 2025

• Adjusted EBITDA of $727M in Q1 2026, up from $329M in Q1 2025

• Q1 2026 free cash flow of $2.61B; TTM free cash flow of $2.80B

• Cash and equivalents of $4.81B as of March 31, 2026; total debt just $431M

Share

What Oscar Does, and Why It Matters More Now

Oscar is a health insurance company built around the individual and family plan market under the Affordable Care Act. It sells directly to consumers, competes on plan design, pricing, and digital experience, and collects premiums while managing the medical cost ratio that determines whether those premiums generate a profit.

What differentiates Oscar from legacy managed care operators is the technology layer. Oscar built its own full-stack platform covering member onboarding, care navigation, utilization management, and claims processing. That platform is not just an operational efficiency tool. It is the basis for Oscar’s +Oscar business, which licenses the technology to other health plans and providers, and for Lucie Health Marketplace, which extends Oscar’s consumer distribution capability beyond its own insurance book.

Three structural forces are working in Oscar’s favor right now. First, the individual market has proven larger and more resilient than most expected. Oscar has demonstrated it can grow its member base aggressively while simultaneously improving unit economics. Second, the workforce is continuing to shift away from employer-sponsored coverage toward gig, freelance, and contract arrangements, expanding the addressable pool year after year. Third, consumers increasingly behave like shoppers when choosing health coverage, comparing plans on price and value rather than defaulting to an employer’s offering. Oscar’s digital-native model was built for exactly that dynamic.

The Q1 2026 results confirm that the combination of membership scale and pricing discipline is producing the operating leverage the bull case always assumed would eventually arrive. It has arrived.

Subscribe now

Fundamental Analysis

Revenue and Earnings

Oscar’s revenue growth over the past four years tells the story of a business that kept scaling through profitability struggles and came out the other side with real momentum.

• FY2022: $4.13B

• FY2023: $5.86B (+42%)

• FY2024: $9.18B (+57%)

• FY2025: $11.70B (+27%)

• TTM: $13.30B

• Q1 2026 alone: $4.65B (+53% vs. Q1 2025)

That is a business that has more than tripled revenue in three years. The acceleration in Q1 2026 on top of an already large base is what makes this quarter notable.

Profitability history:

• FY2022: Net loss of $606M

• FY2023: Net loss of $271M

• FY2024: Net income of $25M (first profitable full year)

• FY2025: Net loss of $443M (driven by unusual items and adverse development)

• Q1 2026: Net income of $679M

The FY2025 loss looks jarring against the Q1 2026 result, but it reflects the timing of adverse reserve development and unusual items rather than a reversal of the underlying improvement trajectory. The Q1 2026 number is the cleaner signal of where the operating business actually stands.

Margins and Profitability

The medical loss ratio is the single most important metric for an insurance business. It measures medical claims as a percentage of net premiums. Lower is better.

MLR progression:

• Q1 2025: 75.4%

• Q1 2026: 70.5% (-490bps year over year)

The improvement reflects disciplined 2026 plan year pricing, favorable claims seasonality from metal and new member mix, and $68 million of favorable prior period reserve development. For context, the same line showed $31 million of unfavorable development in Q1 2025, so the swing was roughly $99 million, meaningful but not the entire story. The underlying pricing discipline is real.

The SG&A expense ratio declining from 15.8% to 15.2% confirms fixed cost leverage is building. Each incremental member adds premium revenue with a disproportionately smaller increase in administrative overhead. This is the operating model working as intended.

Cash Flow and Capital Returns

• FY2022: $351M

• FY2023: -$298M

• FY2024: $950M

• FY2025: $1.06B

• Q1 2026: $2.61B (single quarter)

• TTM: $2.80B

The Q1 2026 free cash flow of $2.61 billion in a single quarter is the headline number. It reflects strong operating performance alongside the working capital dynamics of a growing insurance business, primarily the buildup of risk adjustment payables to CMS which grew from $2.73B to $4.72B during the quarter. This is a mechanical feature of the ACA risk adjustment program, not a cash flow concern in the traditional sense.

Operating cash flow for FY2025 was $1.09B, up from $978M in FY2024, continuing a multi-year improvement from the -$272M in FY2023.

Oscar does not pay a dividend and has not conducted share repurchases. Capital is being retained to fund growth and strengthen the balance sheet.

Balance Sheet

As at March 31, 2026:

• Cash and equivalents: $4.81B (up from $2.77B at year-end 2025)

• Total investments: $3.26B

• Total assets: $9.29B

• Total debt: $431M

• Common equity: $1.66B (up from $978M at year-end 2025)

The balance sheet is in the strongest shape in Oscar’s public history. Debt-to-total capital sits at approximately 20%, and with $4.81B in cash against $431M in debt, Oscar is effectively net cash positive by over $4 billion. Equity has nearly doubled in a single quarter due to the profitability of Q1 2026.

The accumulated deficit of $2.62B is the legacy of the years spent building the platform and scaling membership. It is now shrinking at a meaningful pace.

Guidance

Management reaffirmed full year 2026 guidance across all metrics including total revenue, MLR, SG&A expense ratio, and earnings from operations. No numbers were revised from the February 10, 2026 guidance issuance. Holding guidance after a very strong Q1 is notable because insurance businesses are seasonal and Q1 is typically the strongest quarter for MLR due to deductible resets. The reaffirmation implies management sees the full-year trajectory, including expected seasonal MLR deterioration in later quarters, as tracking within the original plan.

Valuation

• Current price: ~$21

• Market cap: ~$6.4B

• Enterprise value: ~$2.09B (reflecting the large net cash position)

• TTM P/E: Negative (TTM net income still slightly negative due to FY2025 drag)

• Forward P/E: ~23x

• Price / LTM sales: ~0.48x

• EV / EBITDA: ~52x trailing; annualizing Q1 2026 EBITDA implies closer to 10-12x on a run-rate basis

• Price / book: ~3.85x

The valuation picture requires context. At 0.48x revenue for a business growing at 50%+ with rapidly improving margins, the revenue multiple is not demanding by any growth-adjusted standard. The EV/EBITDA of 52x on a trailing basis looks stretched, but it compresses rapidly when you annualize the Q1 2026 run rate. The forward P/E of 23x is the most relevant anchor for swing traders and medium-term investors.

Peers for context: Centene trades at a forward P/E of ~16x, Molina at ~39x, UnitedHealth at ~20x. Oscar’s 23x forward multiple sits in a reasonable range given the growth differential.

Subscribe now

Technical Analysis

The Big Picture: Weekly Chart

The weekly chart tells a complete story of a stock that bottomed, rebuilt, and launched with conviction. declined from its 2024 highs through a multi-quarter corrective structure that carried price all the way down to approximately $11 in early 2026. From that low, the recovery has been sharp and impulsive.

Price has now reclaimed all four key EMAs on the weekly chart. The 20 EMA at $15.55 and the 50 EMA at $15.58 have both turned upward. Weekly RSI is at 66.63, constructive but not overbought at this timeframe, with meaningful room to run. The weekly MACD is in the early stages of a bullish crossover with the histogram turning positive.

This is the profile of a new uptrend beginning, not a dead-cat bounce. The key structural question the weekly chart poses is whether the current advance is the start of a fresh impulsive leg or a corrective bounce within a larger incomplete structure. The weight of evidence currently favors the former, but this gets resolved definitively only with sustained closes above the $22-24 zone.

Daily Chart

The daily picture is more extended but remains bullish. Price cleared the 200 EMA decisively on the Q1 earnings catalyst on May 6, gapping from the $15-16 range up through $18-19 on enormous volume, and has continued pushing higher in the sessions since. The 20 EMA on the daily is now at $17.65 and rising steeply, well below current price, reflecting the ferocity of the post-earnings move.

The daily RSI reached 82.71 with the signal line at 76.04. This is overbought territory by any conventional measure and is a clear caution flag for anyone considering immediate entry. The MACD on the daily is deeply positive, confirming the trend is intact but equally confirming momentum is stretched short-term.

A healthy pattern from here would involve consolidation or a modest pullback toward the $18.50-19.50 zone, allowing momentum to reset before any continuation.

Momentum Across Timeframes

• Weekly: RSI 66.63, MACD early bullish crossover, EMA stack aligned bullish. Constructive, room to run.

• Daily: RSI 82.71, MACD deeply positive, price well above all EMAs. Extended, caution on new entries.

• 2-hour: RSI 81.40, MACD positive with histogram fading slightly. Overbought short-term.

• 1-hour: RSI 74.08, MACD positive with signal line close. Elevated, watch for pullback trigger.

• 30-min: RSI 67.47, slight negative histogram developing. Cooling from hot, early normalization.

• 5-min: RSI 69.92, flat to slightly negative histogram. Near-term consolidation pattern.

The dominant read across timeframes: strong trend, short-term extended. The weekly structure is genuinely bullish and not overbought at that level, which is the more important signal for swing investors. The daily and intraday readings warn against chasing current price. The optimal entry window for this leg has passed. The next one requires patience.

Key Levels

Support:

• $19.80-20.20: Post-earnings consolidation base; first pullback zone

• $18.50-19.00: Daily 20 EMA converging with prior breakout area; primary dip-buy zone

• $17.50-17.80: Intermediate support shelf and partial gap fill from earnings day

• $15.50-16.00: Pre-earnings consolidation base; structural stop territory

Resistance:

• $21.50-22.00: Immediate resistance; current test zone

• $23.00-23.50: Prior supply cluster and wave projection zone

• $24.50-25.00: Fair value estimate region and 2024-2025 prior highs

• $27.00+: Stretch target if new institutional accumulation accelerates

Share

Trade Plan

Position bias: Long, trend-following. Do not chase at current levels. Wait for the setup to come to you.

Time horizon: 1-3 months (swing), with Q2 earnings as the next major catalyst to frame around.

Entry zones:

• Primary entry: $18.50-19.50

  • The ideal pullback zone where the daily 20 EMA, prior breakout area, and first meaningful demand shelf converge. The trigger is stabilization and a reclaim of $19.50 on a closing basis after a dip into this zone. This is the highest-quality entry available if the trend remains intact.

• Secondary entry: $17.50-18.00

  • Deeper pullback zone and partial gap fill. If price reaches this area and shows clear buying absorption, it offers better risk-reward with a tighter invalidation point. Confirmation preferred over anticipation.

• Breakout entry: Above $22.00 on a daily close with meaningful volume.

  • If price consolidates in the $20.50-21.50 range for several sessions and then breaks cleanly higher, that continuation is tradeable with a stop just below the consolidation base.

Stops / invalidation:

• Tactical stop: Below $17.00

  • A clean break under this level after entering in the primary zone damages the near-term structure. Reduce or exit and reassess.

• Structural stop: Below $15.00

  • Below the pre-earnings base and structural demand shelf. This level being lost means the post-earnings thesis is broken. Step aside entirely.

Targets:

• T1: $23.00-23.50 First extension zone. Book partial profits; allow the remainder to run if momentum holds.

• T2: $24.50-25.00 Fair value estimate zone and prior structural highs. At this level, consider full or near-full exit and wait for the next base to form.

• T3 (stretch): $27.00+ Only viable in a strong momentum environment with volume confirmation and a clean hold above $25. Do not plan around this; let it come if it comes.

Subscribe now

The Bottom Line

is no longer a bet on a concept. It is a business that has more than tripled revenue in three years, crossed into genuine profitability, and generated $2.6 billion in free cash flow in a single quarter. The market is beginning to price that in.

The bull case: 53% revenue growth. 490bps MLR improvement. $679M net income in a single quarter. Membership at 3.17M and still growing. $4.8B in cash against $431M in debt. Fixed cost leverage accelerating. A technology platform with real optionality beyond the insurance book. Fair value of $24.78 implies meaningful upside from current price.

The bear case: The Q1 MLR of 70.5% is seasonally favorable and unlikely to hold through the year. Risk adjustment liabilities are large and growing. ACA policy uncertainty is a permanent overhang. The stock has already moved 60%+ from its lows and short-term overbought conditions are real. The FY2025 loss is a reminder that this business can still surprise to the downside when development goes against it.

The trade here is not to chase. It is to let the momentum cool, wait for the structure to offer a cleaner entry in the $18.50-19.50 zone, and position with defined risk against a thesis that is now backed by one of the strongest quarters this company has ever reported.

does not need to be perfect to work from here. It just needs to keep delivering.

This content is for informational and educational purposes only and reflects our views at the time of writing. It is not investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Markets involve risk, prices can move against you, and outcomes are never guaranteed. Always do your own research and consider your risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

It is three separate stories, unfolding at different speeds, under different rules, inside fundamentally different economic realities.

Amazon is not competing with Alibaba. Alibaba is not competing with MercadoLibre. These companies operate on different continents, serve different consumers, face different regulators, and are at completely different stages of their investment cycles.

Understanding e-commerce investing today means understanding how these three models differ. Supply chains, payment ecosystems, cloud infrastructure, and the compounding flywheel of logistics are what separate durable winners from expensive disappointments.

Each one deserves a place in a portfolio.

Key Takeaways

• These are three different businesses, not three versions of the same trade. is a diversified technology empire with AI infrastructure at its core. is a consumer internet platform navigating regulatory and macro recovery. is a high-growth emerging market compounder in the early innings of a multi-year investment supercycle. The risk profiles, growth vectors, and time horizons are not interchangeable.

• Amazon just delivered the strongest quarter of the AI era. Q1 2026: $181.5B revenue (+17% YoY), $23.9B operating income, record 13.1% operating margin. AWS grew 28%, the fastest rate in 15 quarters, with a $150B annualized run rate and $364B in backlog. The earnings trajectory is accelerating, not plateauing.

• Alibaba is the deep value case in global internet. FY2025 revenue of $137.2B USD, operating income of $20.7B, and $59B in combined cash and short-term investments. EV/EBITDA near 10x. Trading at a 20% discount to fair value estimates. The discount is real but so is the risk.

• MercadoLibre is the highest-growth compounder of the three, currently on sale. TTM revenue $28.9B, up 39% YoY. Gross margin 50.7%. The stock is down 24% over the past year due to margin compression from deliberate reinvestment.

• All three have technically actionable setups. Amazon is in a post-earnings corrective pullback into a defined demand zone. Alibaba is attempting a bottoming structure off a multi-year base. MercadoLibre is recovering sharply from its March 2026 52-week lows.

Subscribe now

Company Overviews

Amazon

• The world’s largest e-commerce and cloud company, operating across North America and internationally through its retail marketplace, third-party seller network, advertising business, and Amazon Web Services.

• AWS is now the dominant driver of profitability, generating more operating income than the entire retail segment, and is accelerating as enterprise AI adoption drives cloud spend higher.

• The retail business is not standing still: same-day delivery expansion, a grocery operation doing $150B in gross annual sales, and unit growth that hit its highest level since the COVID lockdowns in Q1 2026.

• The defining narrative for Amazon in 2026 is the $200B capital expenditure plan (the largest in the company’s history) directed primarily at AI infrastructure and AWS data center capacity.

• Custom silicon (Trainium, Graviton) has reached a $20B annual run rate, and Amazon’s AI revenue is growing triple digits with a $15B+ run rate. This is no longer a cloud story. It is a vertically integrated AI infrastructure story.

Alibaba

• China’s largest commerce and cloud company, operating through Taobao (consumer), Tmall (brand), Alibaba Cloud (enterprise), Cainiao (logistics), and a growing international commerce segment including AliExpress and Lazada.

• After a multi-year period of regulatory pressure, management instability, and macro contraction, the business has stabilized. Revenue growth has normalized to low-to-mid single digits. Modest, but consistent and improving.

• The balance sheet is the most underappreciated feature: $59B in combined cash and short-term investments at FY2025, with the company executing one of the most aggressive buyback programs in its history ($13.5B in repurchases over the last twelve months).

• The investment case rests on valuation compression: a business doing $137B+ in annual revenue, with substantial free cash flow, trading at roughly 10x EV/EBITDA, a fraction of global internet peers.

• The risks (geopolitical exposure, regulatory uncertainty, and a domestic consumer environment that has not fully recovered) are real and cannot be dismissed. This is a position that requires a risk-adjusted view, not a blind value play.

MercadoLibre

• Latin America’s dominant e-commerce and fintech ecosystem, operating across 18 countries with particular depth in Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina.

• The platform integrates marketplace, Mercado Pago (payments and digital banking), Mercado Envios (logistics), credit, and advertising into a flywheel that would cost billions of dollars and years of time to replicate.

• Mercado Pago is increasingly the core of the story. The company is expanding its credit portfolio aggressively, building out digital banking for populations that traditional financial institutions have historically underserved.

• The 2026 investment cycle is the most aggressive in the company’s history: $10.9B committed to Brazil alone (up 50% from 2025) and $3.4B in Argentina, with 14 new fulfillment centers planned in Brazil targeting a total of 42 distribution centers.

• Near-term margin compression is intentional and structural, not a sign of deterioration. Operating margins are expected to hit approximately 9% in 2026 before recovering from 2027 onward as the investment cycle matures and operational leverage kicks in.

Subscribe now

Fundamental Analysis

Amazon

• Revenue: TTM $716.9B, up 12.4% YoY.

  • Q1 2026 revenue was $181.5B, up 17% YoY acceleration, not deceleration.

  • North America segment: $104.1B in Q1, up 12% YoY.

  • AWS: $37.6B in Q1, up 28% YoY.

• Operating leverage expanding: TTM operating income $80.0B (11.2% margin).

  • Q1 2026 hit a record 13.1% operating margin.

  • TTM EBITDA $145.7B.

  • North America operating income up 42% YoY in Q1.

  • AWS operating income up 23% YoY.

• AWS is the engine: $150B annualized run rate. $364B backlog (excluding the $100B+ Anthropic commitment). AI revenue growing triple digits at a $15B+ run rate. Custom chips (Trainium, Graviton) at a $20B annual run rate with triple-digit growth.

• Free cash flow is temporarily compressed by design: TTM FCF $1.2B, down from $26B a year ago, entirely driven by $147B in TTM capital expenditures.

  • TTM operating cash flow was $148.5B. The underlying cash engine is elite and growing 30% YoY.

• Balance sheet: Total equity $411B, total debt $178.5B.

  • The CapEx build is funded. Management has committed approximately $200B in 2026 CapEx, substantially backed by customer commitments already on the books.

• Valuation: 36.4x LTM P/E, 33.2x forward P/E, 19.7x EV/EBITDA. Trading near 52-week highs. The premium is justified by earnings velocity, but near-term pullback risk is real following a parabolic post-earnings move.

Alibaba

• Revenue: FY2023 $126.5B, FY2024 $130.3B, FY2025 $137.2B → a 5.9% YoY growth rate in the most recent fiscal year.

  • Low single-digit growth, but improving and consistent across the cycle.

• Profitability improving meaningfully: FY2025 gross profit $54.8B (40.0% margin, up from 36.9% in FY2023).

  • FY2025 operating income $20.7B, a significant step up from $14.1B in FY2024 and $12.7B in FY2023, driven by cost discipline and mix improvement.

• Net income accelerating: FY2025 net income $17.9B, up from $11.1B in FY2024. The earnings recovery is real and the trajectory is positive.

• Cash flow under pressure from CapEx ramp: FY2025 operating cash flow $22.5B, CapEx $11.8B, FCF $10.7B.

  • LTM (December 2025) FCF has compressed to approximately $1.2B as CapEx surged to $12.3B TTM

  • Alibaba’s own AI cloud buildout mirrors Amazon’s infrastructure investment theme.

• Balance sheet: $59B in combined cash and short-term investments at FY2025.

  • Total assets $248.5B.

  • Total current liabilities $60B.

  • Buybacks of $13.5B TTM reflect management’s confidence in the valuation.

• Valuation: Market cap approximately $295B. EV/EBITDA approximately 10x. Forward P/E approximately 25.6x. Trading at $131.50 against a fair value estimate of $158.58 → a 20.6% discount by the Market View model. For context, AMZN trades at approximately 19x EV/EBITDA and MELI at approximately 24x.

MercadoLibre

• Revenue: $28.9B TTM, up 39% YoY.

  • Quarterly progression: $5.9B (Q1 2025), $6.8B (Q2), $7.4B (Q3), $8.8B (Q4).

  • The Q4 acceleration is notable and supports continued double-digit growth into 2026.

• Profitability: Gross profit margin 50.7%, the highest in the group by a wide margin.

  • TTM EBITDA $4.0B.

  • TTM operating income $3.2B.

  • TTM net income $2.0B.

  • Margins are intentionally compressed by the investment cycle; the underlying unit economics remain strong.

• Cash generation: TTM operating cash flow $12.1B. The levered FCF picture turns negative in heavy investment quarters but the operating cash engine is robust and growing.

• Balance sheet: Total assets $42.7B. Total equity $6.75B. Total debt $11.4B

  • The debt load has grown with the credit portfolio expansion, but interest coverage ratios remain comfortable and cash flows cover obligations.

• Valuation: Market cap $93.8B. 44.9x LTM P/E, 37x forward 2026 P/E, 23.1x EV/EBITDA. Stock is down 24% over the past year. Analyst consensus (17 analysts) averages $2,430 target price, over 35% upside from current levels near $1,850. Q1 2026 earnings are due May 7, 2026.

Subscribe now

Read more

In Part 1, published April 4, we covered F5’s fundamentals, AI positioning, the BIG-IP vulnerability, and a complete trade plan.

Every single target in that plan has now been hit.

This is the follow-up.

Our paid subscribers will know that the April 4 trade plan called for a pullback entry in the $287–291 zone.

Price touched it on April 10, held, and never looked back.

T1 ($309–312) and T2 ($316), were all hit in sequence. Then on April 28, F5 reported Q2 earnings and the stock blast past T3 to $333–334 before settling around $320, where it’s at today.

So the question is not whether the trade worked. It did.

The question is where do we go from here? Well, here is where things get interesting for .

Key Takeaways

• Q2 FY2026 revenue of $812M, up 11% year over year and ahead of the $770–790M guidance midpoint

• Seven consecutive quarters of double-digit product revenue growth. Product up 22%, systems up 26%, software up 17%

• Non-GAAP EPS of $3.90, up 14% year over year and above the $3.34–3.46 guidance range

• Subscriptions now represent 90% of total software revenue, up from 86% last quarter

• Non-GAAP gross margin 83.7%, non-GAAP operating margin 33.8%

• Record quarterly free cash flow of $348M; cash and investments back up to $1.46B

• Full-year FY26 guidance raised again. Revenue growth now 7–8% (from 5–6%), non-GAAP EPS $16.25–$16.55 (from $15.65–$16.05)

• BIG-IP cyber overhang is fading. Q2 incident costs dropped to $6M from $17.5M in Q1; demand disruption remains minimal

• EMEA grew 22% Y/Y, APAC grew 19%. International acceleration is an underappreciated part of this story

Share

What F5 Does, and Why It Still Matters

sits in the application delivery and security layer. The control plane that manages traffic, secures APIs, optimizes performance, and keeps applications fast and available.

Enterprise workloads are no longer centralized. They are fragmented by design. AI is adding another layer of complexity: more data movement, higher throughput requirements, new categories of runtime security exposure. F5’s platform was built exactly for this environment.

The same three structural demand drivers are now backed by another quarter of concrete customer proof:

• Hybrid multicloud adoption: A Fortune 100 energy company was displaced from a long-standing incumbent. A large healthcare services organization refreshed hundreds of legacy systems and expanded to support an AI-driven consumer engagement platform. European regulatory pressure (NIS2, GDPR, DORA) is directly accelerating pipeline in EMEA.

• AI inference inflection: A global payments company displaced both an in-house solution and a competitor to put F5 at the center of its AI data delivery infrastructure. A major manufacturer deployed BIG-IP as the production traffic layer across a GPU server environment for a digital twin of their manufacturing operations. 78% of enterprises now run inference themselves, using more than 7 models on average.

• Threat landscape expansion: A software and managed service provider deployed F5 as a single security and policy layer across a hybrid multicloud estate, supporting strict healthcare privacy and audit requirements. Attacks are increasingly AI- and agentic-powered. Higher volumes, greater variation, and the era of checkbox security is over.

New product launches this quarter: AI-powered Distributed Cloud WAF, Agentic BOT Defense, F5 AI Remediate, and F5 Insights for ADSP. The product innovation cycle is healthy and accelerating.

Subscribe now

Fundamental Analysis

F5 has now beaten EPS expectations for over 20 consecutive quarters. The business is not just growing, it is compounding heavily.

Revenue and Earnings

• Q2 FY26 revenue: $812M, up 11% Y/Y

• Product revenue: $411M, up 22% Y/Y

• Systems revenue: up 26% Y/Y

• Software revenue: up 17% Y/Y, with 90% from subscriptions

• Seven consecutive quarters of double-digit product revenue growth

• Non-GAAP EPS Q2 FY26: $3.90, up 14% Y/Y

• H1 FY26 non-GAAP EPS: $8.35, on pace to comfortably exceed full-year guidance midpoint

Margins and Profitability

• Non-GAAP gross margin: 83.7%. Exceptional for an infrastructure business and essentially stable

• Non-GAAP operating margin: 33.8%, up ~190bps Y/Y

• GAAP operating margin: 22.1%. Weighed down by stock-based compensation ($68M), amortization ($11M), and cyber incident costs ($6M, down from $17.5M in Q1)

• The gap between GAAP and non-GAAP EPS ($2.58 vs $3.90) is real dilution that should not be ignored

Cash Flow and Capital Returns

• Q2 operating cash flow: $366M. Strongest quarterly print in recent history

• Q2 free cash flow: $348M

• FY26 YTD free cash flow: $497M, with 80% directed to share repurchases

• Q2 buybacks: $100M; $400M total YTD

• Commitment: at least 50% of annual FCF to buybacks

• $522M remaining on authorized repurchase program as of March 31, 2026

Balance Sheet

• Cash and investments: $1.46B (up from $1.22B at end of Q1, despite ongoing buybacks)

• Total debt: minimal, primarily capital lease obligations

• Deferred revenue: $2.12B, up 10% Y/Y, strong forward revenue visibility

• Recurring revenue: $564M, representing 70% of Q2 total revenue

Guidance

• Q3 FY26 outlook: revenue $820–840M, non-GAAP EPS $3.91–$4.03

• FY26 revenue growth: raised to 7–8% (from 5–6% after Q1, from 0–4% originally)

• FY26 non-GAAP EPS: raised to $16.25–$16.55 (from $15.65–$16.05 after Q1)

• FY26 non-GAAP operating margin: 34–35%

Valuation

Compared to infrastructure and security peers, screens as the most fairly priced quality name in the group. Not cheap, but not stretched:

• Forward non-GAAP P/E: ~17.8x below Fortinet (28.6x), Cisco (21.4x), Amazon (29.9x), and A10 Networks (25.3x)

• EV/EBITDA: ~17.3x at or below all comparable names shown

• Price/Book: 4.6x reasonable for a business with $1.46B in cash and growing equity

• Price/LTM Sales: 5.2x in line with the quality infrastructure peer group

• Total Debt/Total Capital: 1.3% effectively zero financial leverage

These are fair multiples for a business with 83%+ gross margins, 70% recurring revenue, and accelerating free cash flow. Upside from here depends on continued execution, not multiple expansion.

Subscribe now

The Cyber Overhang: An Update

Part 1 gave this significant attention. It deserves an honest update.

The Q2 results effectively confirmed that demand disruption was minimal and contained. Cyber incident costs fell from $17.5M in Q1 to $6M in Q2. Management described customer feedback on the response as positive, and CISO engagement deepened in several accounts rather than weakening.

This is not fully resolved. The reputational exposure in procurement conversations and renewal cycles takes longer to fully clear. But it is no longer the dominant investment narrative. Two more clean quarters of unaffected demand would effectively close this chapter.

Share

Technical Analysis

Weekly chart:

• The moving average stack across all major timeframes is fully bullish and fanning out. Trend structure is intact

• Momentum indicators are turning up from relatively low levels, not from an extended peak

• RSI in the mid-60s. Healthy, not overheated, room to continue

• That said, the longer-term chart carries a structural warning that cannot be dismissed: the current advance is pressing into a significant supply zone near $330–332 that has been visible as a key target level for months. If price stalls and fails to break through this area with conviction, the setup for a more meaningful multi-month pullback becomes the dominant risk scenario. This is not the base case, but it must remain in the mental model for anyone holding a full position

Daily chart:

• Price gapped from ~$293–295 to a high of ~$333–334 before settling around $322–323

• All moving averages stacked bullishly beneath price: 20-day ~$307, 50-day ~$296, 100-day ~$288, 200-day ~$283

• Price has completed what looks like a full advance from the late 2025 lows. A short-term corrective pullback toward $302–313 would be entirely normal from this position before any continuation higher

Short-term chart:

• The earnings event is clearly visible: price compressed into $292–299 pre-announcement, exploded to $330+, now digesting in the $320–325 zone

• Near-term trend indicators are pointing steeply upward, with short-term moving averages at $321 and $315 acting as immediate support

• RSI has cooled from the post-earnings spike and is normalizing in the low 60s, going for a healthy reset

Across all timeframes: moving average stacks are aligned bullishly and momentum is digesting post-earnings in a healthy, orderly fashion.

Key Levels

Support:

• $319–322: Short-term moving average support and current consolidation base. First line of defense on any dip

• $305–313: Primary pullback target zone. In range of the rising 20-day moving average, and the normal corrective range from the current peak. The quality entry zone for new positions

• $295–302: Deeper support shelf. Pre-earnings consolidation base and rising 50-day moving average. Better risk-reward, but requires more patience

• $282–285: Long-term structural support, still the line in the sand for the larger thesis

Resistance:

• $326–332: Immediate overhead zone and earnings day high area. The current test

• $340–341: Next measured extension target if $332 breaks cleanly

• $375: Longer-term stretch target. Only relevant in a strong continuation scenario with momentum confirmation

Critical structural level: $282–285. A decisive close below this zone would shift the dominant interpretation from bullish continuation to a more serious corrective reset. Below it, reassess the thesis entirely.

Subscribe now

Trade Plans

If You’re Already Holding

Position bias: Long. Protect gains, let the structure work, but manage the position actively. Price is pressing into known overhead resistance.

Stop / protection:

• Trailing stop: daily close below $309–312

  • Locking in gains above the T3 level from the original plan. A close below this level signals the post-earnings momentum has broken down and the corrective move is extending beyond normal digestion. Exit remaining position.

Management guidance:

• Consider trimming 25–33% in the $325–332 zone if not already done. Price is pressing directly into a well-defined resistance area and locking in partial gains into strength is disciplined risk management at any conviction level

• Do not add to the position at current prices. Adding above $320 after a gap of this magnitude skews risk-reward unfavorably

Targets (for remaining position):

1. T1: $331–334 → key overhead resistance and earnings day high. Logical trim zone

2. T2: $341 → next measured extension target above the breakout

3. T3 (stretch): $375+ → only valid with momentum confirmation and a clean hold above $341

If You’re Considering a New Position

Position bias: Selectively long, tactically patient. The trend is intact and the fundamentals improved materially. Entry price matters.

Time horizon: 1–3 months (swing), with Q3 earnings as the next major catalyst.

Entry zones:

• Primary entry: $305–313. The ideal reset zone. Sitting at the intersection of the rising 20-day and 50-day moving averages. Wait for a confirmed stabilization candle before entering.

• Secondary entry: $295–302. If the pullback extends further, this zone offers the pre-earnings consolidation base and rising 100-day moving average as meaningful support. Better risk-reward, but requires patience.

• Breakout entry: above $332–334 on a daily close with volume. Valid if price consolidates tightly and clears the earnings day high. Lower-probability near-term but not to be ignored if the structure sets up cleanly.

Stops / invalidation:

• Stop for primary and secondary entries: below $296. A daily close below the 100-day moving average and the pre-earnings base removes the structural argument. Exit without hesitation.

• Stop for breakout entry: below $319–322. A failed breakout that pulls back below the current consolidation base invalidates the breakout setup. Tight stop, disciplined exit.

• Structural stop: below $282–285. Applies across all entry scenarios. Below this level the larger corrective picture becomes dominant. Step aside entirely.

Targets:

1. T1: $331–334 → key overhead resistance and earnings day high.

2. T2: $341 → next measured extension target above the breakout

3. T3 (stretch): $375+ → only valid with momentum confirmation and a clean hold above $341

Subscribe now

The Bottom Line

F5 delivered one of the cleanest fundamental quarters in its recent history. Revenue growth accelerating, margins holding, free cash flow at record levels, guidance raised for the second consecutive quarter, and AI wins that are concrete rather than theoretical. The business is executing.

The chart reflects it. The April trade played out exactly as mapped. All three targets hit. The earnings gap added another leg. Anyone who followed the plan and managed the position has little to complain about.

What comes next is a different kind of discipline. Price is sitting at well-defined resistance after a sharp move. The risk-reward of chasing is poor. The opportunity for new positions lies in the pullback. Defined, patient, and confirmed. For those already holding, the job is to protect what the trade earned while giving the remaining position room to work.

The structural risk on the longer-term chart. A potential more significant decline if this resistance zone rejects price has not disappeared. It remains the scenario that demands respect and separates disciplined positioning from complacency. Keep it in the plan.

F5 is a quality business in the right place at the right time. The next quarter will tell us whether the momentum continues to build or whether the chart needs time to consolidate before the next leg. Either way, the framework is clear.

Stay disciplined. Manage the levels. Let the trade come to you.

This content is for informational and educational purposes only and reflects our views at the time of writing. It is not investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Markets involve risk, prices can move against you, and outcomes are never guaranteed. Always do your own research and consider your risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Since then, has moved to 422. That is a 36% return in under 2 months. Short- and medium-term targets from the original plan (350, 380, and 400) were hit in sequence. The business delivered, the structure resolved, and the trade worked exactly as framed.

But the conversation has changed. The base is behind us. The breakout has run. This is no longer about identifying an opportunity. It is about managing one that has already played out, and positioning correctly for what comes next.

Key Takeaways

• delivered roughly 36% from the base entry near 310 to current levels near 422, with original targets hit

• Q1 FY2026 revenue came in at $19.3B, up 29% YoY, with AI revenue of $8.4B growing 106% YoY

• Q2 guidance of $22B implies 47% YoY growth, meaning momentum is accelerating, not plateauing

• Adjusted EBITDA margins held at 68% and free cash flow reached $8B for the quarter, a 41% FCF margin

• The stock has completed a full base-to-breakout-to-extension cycle and is now in a short-term consolidation phase

• Short-term technical structure suggests a potential corrective pullback toward 390 before the next leg

• 400 is the critical structural pivot. Above it, the trend is intact. Below it, patience becomes the strategy.

• The next high-quality entry for new positions is not at 422. It is on a controlled pullback into defined support.

Subscribe now

Pipeline, Business, and Latest Earnings

Broadcom’s Q1 FY2026 results were not just strong. They were the kind of print that forces a re-rating.

Revenue and growth:

• Total revenue: $19.3B, +29% YoY

• Semiconductor solutions: $12.5B, +52% YoY

• Infrastructure software: $6.8B, stable and high margin

• AI semiconductor revenue: $8.4B, +106% YoY, above Broadcom’s own forecast

• Q2 guidance: $22B revenue, +47% YoY

• AI revenue guidance for Q2: $10.7B

The strategic picture matters as much as the numbers. Hyperscalers are not testing Broadcom products. They are deploying them into multi-year infrastructure buildouts. Custom AI chip design cycles run 18 to 24 months. Deployment lifecycles run 3 to 5 years. That creates revenue visibility almost unheard of in semiconductors.

Two recent partnerships reinforce exactly this:

• Expanded collaboration with Google Cloud on next generation cloud networking

• Extended infrastructure deployment partnership with Meta

These are long-cycle commitments from 2 of the largest AI spenders in the world. Broadcom is not a beneficiary of the AI buildout. It is becoming load-bearing infrastructure within it.

On the software side, VMware continues to do its job. High margins, recurring revenue, sticky enterprise customers. It is not the growth engine. It is the stabilizer that keeps cash flowing regardless of what any semiconductor cycle does.

Share

Fundamental Analysis

Broadcom is operating at a financial profile that no longer belongs in the same conversation as traditional chip companies.

Profitability:

• Adjusted EBITDA: $13.1B, 68% margin

• Free cash flow: $8B, 41% of revenue

• Non-GAAP net income: $10.2B, +30% YoY

• Non-GAAP EPS: $2.05, +28% YoY

Capital returns:

• $10.9B returned to shareholders in a single quarter

• $3.1B in dividends, $7.8B in buybacks

• New $10B share repurchase program authorized

Balance sheet:

• Cash: $14.2B

• Long-term debt: $63.8B, legacy of the VMware acquisition

• At $8B quarterly FCF, leverage is manageable and declining

What the numbers mean: a company generating 41% free cash flow margins while growing revenue at 29% is not a semiconductor company anymore. It is a hybrid infrastructure platform being repriced accordingly. The fundamentals justified the move from 310 to 422. They also justify patience about where the next entry sits.

Subscribe now

Technical Analysis

Long-Term Structure

The long-term picture is clean and intact.

• Price is above all major EMAs: 20, 50, 100, and 200 on the daily chart, all rising

• Each prior resistance level, 335, 350, 380, 400, has been reclaimed and retested as support

• Weekly RSI is elevated but not diverging, consistent with a strong trend in a mature phase

• Weekly MACD histogram is in expansion, no signs of distribution

The key read here is that this is not a broken stock consolidating after damage. It is a strong trend taking a breath after a near-vertical move. Those are very different things, and they require different responses.

Short-Term Structure

Short-term is where things get more nuanced.

• Price ran from 350 to above 425 quickly, creating extension that typically needs to resolve before continuation

• Daily RSI has pulled back from overbought levels toward the mid-60s, a healthy reset

• Daily MACD is flattening, histogram narrowing, not yet negative but losing momentum

• The 400 level has been tested once and held, establishing it as the first meaningful support

• EMA20 on the daily is currently near 378, the next structural reference below 400

• EMA50 sits near 354, the broader trend base

What this means practically: the stock is cooling off after a strong impulse. Momentum has normalized without breaking down. That is the setup that tends to precede either a base-and-continuation pattern above 400, or a controlled reset toward the EMA cluster before the next leg higher. Either way, chasing at 422 without a new base forming is the lower-quality trade.

The 430 level is the immediate continuation trigger on the upside. A clean break above it with momentum recovering would signal the consolidation has resolved and the next expansion leg is beginning.

Subscribe now

Trade Plan

If You Are Already Holding AVGO

• Trend is intact. No reason to exit as long as structure holds.

• First trailing reference: 400. Daily close below this level is the initial warning.

• Secondary protection: 378 to 380 (rising EMA20). A break here signals a deeper reset.

• Do not trim purely because the stock feels extended. Trim only if structure weakens or allocation has grown uncomfortably large.

• For those in since around 310, a 36% gain is meaningful. Trimming a portion into strength and reloading on a pullback is a disciplined approach, not capitulation.

If You Are Entering a New Position

Pullback entries:

Read more

They often get lumped together in the same thesis, and in some ways they deserve to be. But if you look closely, they’re running very different playbooks right now. The setups are not identical, the risks are not symmetric, and the entries you want in each are in very different places.

This is a walkthrough of both, done the way a disciplined medium to long term investor would approach them. Fundamentals, multi-timeframe structure, honest risk flags, and a clear plan for both pullback and breakout entries. No hype, no hand-waving.

Key Takeaways

• TSMC (TSM). Best-in-class quarter. Revenue up 35 percent year over year to 35.9 billion dollars.

• Gross margin jumped to 66.2 percent, well above their own guidance. Multi-timeframe uptrend fully intact.

• Daily momentum expanding. No bearish divergence. The cleanest large-cap technology setup in this group.

• Prefer pullback entries into the 360 to 363 zone; breakout trigger above 391.

• ASML. Still the only EUV lithography shop on earth, and a guidance raise confirmed the backlog is strong.

• But a few things deserve attention: the daily chart has a confirmed bearish RSI divergence, management quietly stopped disclosing order bookings, China exposure is shrinking fast, and a new US export bill (the MATCH Act) threatens DUV sales.

• Structure is bullish, internals are softer. Engage on pullbacks or on a clean breakout above 1,550 with momentum confirmation.

• The pair. Both are late-cycle and extended. TSMC is the cleaner long. ASML is still a core holding but deserves either smaller sizing or a hedge given the near-term asymmetry.

TSMC: The Foundry That Doesn’t Miss

Why this matters right now

TSMC just delivered what may be the single most important print in the entire semiconductor complex this quarter. Revenue of 35.9 billion dollars came in above the top of their own guidance range. Gross margin printed at 66.2 percent against a guide of 63 to 65 percent. Operating margin hit 58 percent. Net income rose 58 percent year over year.

The really important detail: this happened while they’re ramping 2 nanometer, a new node that historically dilutes gross margin by 200 to 300 basis points in the early innings. They beat anyway. That’s a quality signal, not a cyclical one.

High performance computing (meaning AI accelerators, networking chips, custom silicon for hyperscalers) now accounts for 61 percent of revenue, up 20 percent sequentially. Smartphones, by contrast, have drifted from 45 percent of revenue a few years ago to around 28 percent today. The business has quietly re-platformed from an Apple iPhone cycle into a hyperscaler capex cycle.

The business, in plain terms

TSMC runs roughly 70 percent of the global foundry market and something closer to 90 percent at the leading edge. Its nearest competitors at 2 nanometer are Samsung (yields still weaker) and Intel (betting on a different lithography approach). For all practical purposes, if you want the best silicon on the planet, you go to TSMC.

Capital intensity is the cost of staying in that position. Management guided 2026 capex to the high end of a 52 to 56 billion dollar range. For context, they spent 40.9 billion in 2025 and 28.9 billion in 2024. About 70 to 80 percent of the new spend goes to advanced nodes (N3, N2, and beyond), with the rest going to advanced packaging (the CoWoS platform that Nvidia and AMD rely on) and specialty technologies.

The Arizona second fab has been pulled forward to 2027, a full year earlier than originally scheduled, and it will produce 3 nanometer chips. Kumamoto phase two is on track for 2028. Dresden enters pilot production in 2027. Each of these fabs represents roughly 15 billion dollars of equipment orders, and most of those orders flow right back to ASML and its peers.

Fundamentals, with the numbers that matter

Full year 2025 revenue was 3.85 trillion Taiwan dollars, which translates to roughly 120 billion US dollars. That’s up from 2.89 trillion in 2024, a 33 percent jump. Gross margin expanded from 56 percent to 60 percent. Net margin went from 40 percent to 45 percent. In Q1 2026, those numbers accelerated further: 66.2 percent gross, 58 percent operating, 50.5 percent net.

For a manufacturer of this scale, those are not normal numbers. They’re closer to what you’d see at a software company than a capital-intensive industrial.

The balance sheet is a fortress. Cash and short-term investments of roughly 105 billion dollars against total debt of about 32 billion. That leaves roughly 74 billion in net cash, on a market cap near 2 trillion. The company will self-fund every single fab in their global build-out without touching that cash pile. Operating cash flow is running at a 90 billion dollar annualized pace.

One thing worth noting on capital allocation: TSMC pays a growing dividend (up 26 percent year over year in the most recent quarter) but runs zero buybacks. That’s a Taiwanese corporate governance choice, not a comment on the stock. Cash is treated as strategic flexibility, not a share count reduction tool.

Forward analyst estimates call for about 155 to 160 billion dollars of 2026 revenue and earnings per ADR around 9.30 dollars, putting the stock at roughly 41 times forward earnings. That’s not cheap, but the consensus gross margin for the full year sits near 62 percent, and Q1 already printed 66. If the company simply holds the line on margins for the rest of the year, the Street has to walk numbers higher.

The fundamental takeaway. A 70 percent share, 66 percent gross margin manufacturer that just beat its own guidance while ramping a new node is about as high-quality an operating story as you’ll find anywhere. The stock isn’t cheap, but the earnings power is underestimated.

The technical picture

On the monthly chart, TSM is in full parabolic mode. Price sits 44 percent above the 20 month moving average and more than 300 percent above the 200 month. The monthly ADX (a trend strength indicator) is at 47.7, which is an exceptionally strong reading, and the stock has printed 12 consecutive green Heikin-Ashi candles. That’s late-cycle behavior. It doesn’t mean the trend is about to end, but it does mean new buyers should respect how stretched the move already is.

The weekly chart is where the actionable read lives. Back in February, TSM hit a peak at 390.20. It then corrected 19.6 percent down to 313.80 in late March, bounced cleanly, and is now back within a few percent of that prior high. Weekly RSI is at 69.5. Weekly MACD has essentially reset (the histogram is barely negative, sitting at minus 0.03), meaning the momentum cooldown from the correction is complete. Weekly ADX is at 30, still firmly bullish, with the positive directional indicator well above the negative.

On the daily, the momentum is accelerating again. Daily MACD is positive and expanding. The histogram keeps pushing higher. The 20 day moving average at roughly 361 is rising. There’s no bearish divergence anywhere in the last 80 days of data. Friday’s move, a 3.3 percent jump on the day, came with the stock reclaiming its anchored VWAP from the February peak. Meaning: the average institutional buyer from the February top is now in profit again. That flips a lot of hesitant holders into adders.

Key levels worth remembering:

• 390.20 is the breakout line. A close above that with volume expansion opens 410 first, then 450, then the 127.2 percent Fibonacci extension at 480.

• 361 is the 20 day moving average and the peak-anchored VWAP, both rising. This is the first line of defense on a pullback.

• 345 is the minus 3 ATR band and also fills a gap from earlier in April.

• 313.80 was the March swing low. It’s also almost exactly the 23.6 percent Fibonacci retrace from the 2022 cycle low, and it held to the dollar. A weekly close below 313 would break the higher low structure and change the thesis.

The technical takeaway. Clean uptrend, momentum expanding, daily divergence nowhere in sight, peak-AVWAP reclaimed. The stretched monthly means new buyers should not chase, but existing holders have no structural reason to sell.

A simple trade plan for TSM

Pullback entries (preferred):

• 360 to 363. This is the 20 day moving average plus the anchored VWAP from the February peak. First line of defense on a normal dip.

• 345 to 348. Deeper support at the minus 3 ATR band with a gap fill. If the market gives you this zone, risk-reward improves materially.

Breakout entry (alternative):

• 391 to 393. A daily close above the prior 390.20 peak, with volume expansion, confirms the next leg.

Stop: 313. Below the prior swing low and the 23.6 percent Fib of the multi-year move. A weekly close below this level breaks the higher low structure and invalidates the setup.

Targets:

• First stop at 410 (round number plus one ATR above the prior high).

• Second at 450 (measured move from the correction).

• Third at 480 (127.2 percent Fibonacci extension, the primary swing target).

• Stretch target at 595 (161.8 percent extension, blow-off scenario).

Trail logic:

• At 410, raise the stop to 368 (reclaimed 20 day average).

• At 450, raise to 400 (the breakout level now acts as support).

• At 480, raise to 440 (locks the structural gain).

  

One note on framework. If you follow other technical services, you’ll see them quote a tighter daily stop around 348 and an intermediate invalidation near 332. Both views are correct; they’re just different time horizons. Tighter trail if you’re trading the swing. The weekly 313 level is for medium to long term holders who are willing to give the trade room to breathe. Pick one, stay consistent, and don’t size a position on one stop and then manage it on the other.

ASML: The Monopoly That’s Quietly Being Tested

Why this one needs a closer read

ASML is the only company in the world that makes extreme ultraviolet lithography machines. Full stop. Without these machines, no one, not TSMC, not Samsung, not Intel, can build sub 7 nanometer chips. That’s about as wide a moat as exists in any global industry.

The Q1 2026 print was solid. Revenue of 8.77 billion euros, above consensus. Net income of 2.76 billion, gross margin of 53 percent, EPS of 7.15 euros. The company shipped 67 new lithography systems and 12 used units. EUV revenue alone was more than 4.1 billion euros, and that included two High-NA systems, the next generation of the technology. Management raised full year 2026 guidance to a range of 36 to 40 billion euros, up from the previous 34 to 39 billion.

So why am I flagging caution?

Three reasons, and they’re connected.

First, for the first time in memory, ASML did not disclose order bookings this quarter. Bookings are the closest thing investors have to a leading indicator for a company whose revenue trails shipments by a year or more. Management said intake “continues to be very strong,” but chose to remove the metric from disclosure. That’s a decision, not an accident. Companies don’t quietly withdraw a widely tracked number when it’s comfortable to show.

Second, China exposure is shrinking rapidly. China was 33 percent of 2025 revenue. It fell to 19 percent in Q1 2026. And there’s a new threat on the horizon: a bipartisan US bill called the MATCH Act that would restrict ASML’s DUV (the older, non-EUV) sales to China. Analysts estimate roughly 5 percent of total revenue is directly at risk if this passes, with modest offsets elsewhere.

Third, and most important for the technicals, TSMC has explicitly chosen not to adopt High-NA EUV for its upcoming 1.4 nanometer node. Intel is ASML’s first High-NA customer. Samsung is the second. TSMC, the dominant foundry in the world, is going to stay on standard EUV through 2028 or later. That’s not a death sentence for ASML; the standard EUV tools still sell. But it does mean ASML’s near-term High-NA revenue is more concentrated than it looks. If Intel’s 14 Angstrom process stumbles, the High-NA ramp becomes a Samsung-only story for a while.

Fundamentals, with the numbers that matter

Full year 2025 revenue of 32.7 billion euros, up from 28.3 billion the year before. Gross margin ticked up to 52.8 percent from 51.3. Net income of 9.6 billion. Earnings of 24.73 euros per share. Full year free cash flow was roughly 19 billion euros, which represents close to a 58 percent free cash flow margin. That number alone tells you a lot about the monopoly economics.

The balance sheet is comfortable but not fortress-like the way TSMC’s is. Cash of about 8.4 billion euros against total debt of 2.7 billion leaves net cash of roughly 5.7 billion. Trailing twelve month buybacks have been around 5.3 billion, and dividends another 2.5 billion. Combined, that’s about 40 percent of free cash flow returned to shareholders. Shares outstanding are dropping a couple of percent per year, a quiet compounder effect that benefits patient holders.

One important note on Q1 2026 cash flow: it was negative 2.6 billion euros. That looks alarming until you realize ASML’s quarterly cash flow is famously lumpy because customer milestone payments don’t align with shipments. Q4 2025 operating cash flow was plus 11 billion. The pattern is the same every year. Q1 and Q3 are drawdowns; Q4 is a flood. Not a red flag, just a feature of the model.

Forward consensus expects about 38 billion euros of 2026 revenue at the midpoint and roughly 32 euros of earnings. That puts the stock at about 45 times forward earnings, which is actually a touch more expensive than TSMC on a multiple basis, for a slower growth profile.

Worth noting for peer context: ASML’s 52 percent gross margin and 35 percent operating margin are great, but KLA Corporation, which makes metrology and inspection tools, runs 62 percent gross and 42 percent operating. KLA is higher quality on pure margin metrics. That’s a reason the ASML premium is absolute (huge market cap) rather than relative (no particular multiple edge versus semicap peers).

The fundamental takeaway. This is still a genuine monopoly and a great business. But the valuation demands continued execution, customer concentration is real, and the China and High-NA angles both add near-term variance that isn’t in the price.

The technical picture

Same long-term setup as TSMC in terms of shape. Monthly chart in parabolic mode, price more than 40 percent above the 20 month moving average, monthly RSI in the low 70s. Fully stretched, not broken.

The weekly chart tells a similar story to TSMC in outline: a February peak at 1,547.22, a correction of about 19.3 percent to a late March low of 1,248.11, and a recovery back toward the prior high. Price at the moment sits around 1,470, so about 5 percent below the February peak.

Here’s where the two charts diverge. On TSM, the momentum profile is clean. On ASML, it isn’t.

Three specific things to watch.

The weekly MACD histogram is still at minus 5.24. TSM’s reset was complete. ASML’s is not. Price has recovered; momentum hasn’t fully reset yet. That’s a classic sign of a recovery outrunning its underlying drivers.

On the daily, there’s a confirmed bearish RSI divergence. The February peak at 1,547 was printed at an RSI of 69.7. The prior January peak, at a lower price of 1,473, was printed at an RSI of 78. Price made a higher high, momentum made a lower high. That’s the textbook signature of a trend that’s losing fuel. It doesn’t guarantee a top, but it raises the probability that any test of 1,547 fails on the first try.

And the daily directional indicators (the DMI lines) are nearly tied. Positive DI sits at 26, negative DI at 24. Spread of only 1.6. That’s the smallest directional edge on the chart and a signal that buyers and sellers are roughly balanced at the daily level, despite the strong weekly uptrend.

Volume profile context matters too. ASML trades far above its 250 day value area. The point of control (the price level with the most traded volume over that window) sits at 756, and the top of the value area is 1,308. Current price at 1,470 is in thin air above structural support. That means pullbacks can accelerate once support breaks, because there’s simply no heavy liquidity shelf between here and much lower levels.

Key levels:

• 1,547.22 is the breakout line. To trust it, you’d want to see the daily RSI above 65 on the move, to neutralize the existing bearish divergence.

• 1,425 is the daily 20 day moving average, and the peak-anchored VWAP from February sits a touch below at 1,394.52. That’s the first line of defense.

• 1,385 is the 50 day moving average and aligns with a cluster of open gaps from earlier this month.

• 1,248.11 is the March swing low and the structural invalidation. Below that, the 200 day moving average at 1,160 comes into play, then the 50 percent Fibonacci retrace near 1,056.

The technical takeaway. The structure is bullish and the monopoly thesis still prints money. But the daily divergence, the tight DI spread, the chaotic open-gap pattern from recent weeks, and the air-pocket below current price are all real reasons to prefer a smaller size or a patient entry over a full-weight chase.

A simple trade plan for ASML

Pullback entries (preferred):

• 1,420 to 1,425. Daily 20 day moving average plus anchored VWAP from the February peak. First zone to watch.

• 1,385 to 1,395. Daily 50 day moving average and open gap cluster. Better risk-reward on a deeper flush.

Breakout entry (alternative):

• 1,550 to 1,560, with daily RSI above 65 on the move. The RSI condition matters. Without it, the bearish divergence is still in play.

Stop: 1,248. Below the March swing low. A weekly close below this level opens the door to 1,160 and invalidates the recovery structure.

Targets:

• First at 1,600 (round number and upper band projection).

• Second at 1,700 (upper weekly Bollinger projection).

• Third at 1,815 (127.2 percent Fibonacci extension).

• Stretch at 2,155 (161.8 percent extension).

Trail logic:

• At 1,600, raise the stop to 1,425 (the 20 day moving average holds and the divergence is neutralized).

• At 1,700, raise to 1,550 (the prior peak becomes support).

• At 1,815, raise to 1,680 (trails roughly 2 ATR below the prior target).

  

Same framework note as TSM. Other services using tighter daily stops flag invalidation around 1,410 to 1,374. That’s a weekly swing trader’s stop. The 1,248 level is for medium to long term positioning with room for noise. And a detail that’s easy to miss: most tactical views are not calling out the daily bearish RSI divergence. I am, because in a mature trend, that’s exactly the kind of signal that eventually matters. It’s one of the strongest reasons to lean toward pullback entries rather than chasing the breakout.

Position Sizing, Because This Is Where Most Plans Die

Before the bottom line, a word on sizing, since it’s the part people skip.

Risk in a trade is defined by the distance between your entry and your stop, not by the share price. A hundred dollar stock with a two dollar risk and a thousand dollar stock with a twenty dollar risk are functionally identical if you size them right.

Pullback entries are closer to the stop, so they allow more shares for the same risk. Breakout entries are further from the stop, so they require fewer shares. Don’t be tempted to tighten the stop to fit a bigger position. That’s how good theses turn into bad P&L. Scale into a position across two or three entry zones when possible, rather than putting everything on at one price. Trades you’re forced to hold through a normal drawdown work better when you have dry powder left to add on weakness.

The Bottom Line

TSMC and ASML sit on the same demand curve but in very different places right now. The quality of the underlying businesses is unimpeachable in both cases. These aren’t momentum stocks; they’re the physical plumbing of the AI cycle, and that plumbing is not about to be replaced.

But the tape is telling us two different stories in the short term. TSMC is the cleanest major technology setup I can find right now. A 58 percent earnings beat, a 170 basis point margin beat over their own guidance, a daily momentum profile with no divergences, a peak-anchored VWAP reclaimed, and a weekly structure that just completed a normal 19 percent corrective reset and is now pressing prior highs with real momentum behind it. The risk-reward on a pullback into the 360 to 363 zone is excellent. A breakout above 391 confirms the next leg. The structural invalidation at 313 is far enough below to let the trade breathe.

ASML is trickier. The fundamental story is still a monopoly, and the guidance raise proves the 2026 backlog is there. But the decision to stop disclosing order intake, the shrinking China exposure, the looming MATCH Act, TSMC’s delayed move to High-NA, and the confirmed daily bearish RSI divergence together warrant more caution. The right approach isn’t to avoid it; it’s to size it smaller than TSMC, prefer pullbacks over breakouts, and consider a simple hedge like a collar if you’re running both positions at meaningful size.

If capital has to be deployed into the pair today, the pair trade is straightforward: TSMC at the larger weight, ASML at the smaller. Both hold long-term, both respect the invalidation levels, both trim into stretched weekly extensions.

There’s a quiet lesson here for medium to long term investors. Great businesses don’t always offer great entries. Knowing the difference between buying a stock you love at any price and buying the same stock at the right price is most of the game. TSMC and ASML will both compound capital over a five to ten year window. Whether they compound yours depends on where you step in, where you step out, and how much rope you’re willing to give them in between.

Trade the structure you have, not the one you want. Size for the stop, not the story. And when a high-quality chart shows you a subtle warning, take it seriously even when the headline number is great. That’s the difference between being early and being right.

The content in this post is provided for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice, a recommendation, or an offer to buy or sell any security, and should not be relied upon as the basis for any investment decision. The views expressed reflect personal analysis as of the date of publication and are subject to change without notice as market conditions evolve.

All price levels, technical setups, fundamental assessments, and trade plans discussed are illustrative frameworks based on publicly available information and market structure. They are not guarantees of future performance. Markets are inherently uncertain, and every investment carries the risk of loss, including the potential loss of principal. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

It was decisive. Just not in the direction most were expecting.

Gold sold off hard. From the January all-time high of $5,595, spot gold dropped to $4,320 in late March. GLD, the SPDR Gold Shares ETF, fell from 510 to 399. That is a 22% drawdown peak to trough, the sharpest correction in the entire bull cycle.

And then it bounced.

Gold is now sitting at $4,744 (GLD at 440), roughly 40% of the way back from the low. The weekly trend structure held. The higher low pattern survived. And the same forces that drove the rally, central bank accumulation, supply constraints, and geopolitical risk, remain in place.

But the recovery is not clean. It is happening on declining volume, into heavy overhead resistance, with short-term momentum already stretched. That matters.

This is not a moment for conviction. It is a moment for precision.

Let us walk through it.

Key Takeaways

• Gold corrected 22% from the January ATH and held above the critical $4,300 structural floor

• The secular bull trend remains intact on all higher timeframes

• The bounce is real but volume is not confirming it, which limits near-term upside confidence

• Price is testing a major resistance cluster at $4,800 (GLD 440-442) that aligns across Fibonacci, Ichimoku, and moving average structures

• A pullback to $4,600-$4,700 (GLD 425-435) would offer a high-quality entry with clearly defined risk

• Invalidation is $4,320 (GLD 397). Below that, the entire thesis changes.

The forces behind gold have not changed. But expectations need to catch up with price.

Demand, Supply, and What Is Actually Driving Gold

Gold does not have earnings. It has forces. And the force that matters most right now is structural demand that does not care about price.

Central banks purchased 863 tones in 2025. That is not a spike. It is the continuation of a multi-year regime shift in how sovereign institutions manage reserves. Poland led with 102 tones for the second consecutive year. China continued buying. The trend has spread to Malaysia, South Korea, and Uzbekistan. J.P. Morgan forecasts 755 tones for 2026, a step lower than the peak but still nearly double pre-2022 averages.

This buying is not speculative. It is strategic reserve diversification. It does not reverse on a 15% drawdown. If anything, lower prices accelerate it.

At the same time, supply remains structurally constrained. Despite gold prices rising 65% in 2025, mine production grew only 1%. Recycling increased just 2%. New project discoveries are declining, permitting timelines are lengthening, and capital costs are rising. Most major miners are guiding flat or lower output for 2026.

That asymmetry is the most durable argument in the gold market. Demand is structurally elevated and price-insensitive. Supply is structurally capped and slow to respond. When a market has those characteristics, corrections do not become bear markets. They become buying opportunities.

Investment demand adds another layer. Global gold ETFs added 801 tonnes in 2025, the second strongest year on record. US ETF holdings hit 2,019 tonnes ($280 billion in AUM). Yet relative to previous bull cycles, holdings remain modest, particularly in Asia and Europe. That suggests there is room for further accumulation if conditions remain supportive.

The geopolitical overlay has shifted but not disappeared. The US-Iran conflict, which drove the January spike to $5,595, reached a fragile two-week ceasefire on April 8. That removed the acute panic premium. But “fragile ceasefire” is not “durable peace.” The risk premium has compressed, not collapsed. Any re-escalation would immediately reprice gold higher.

The most credible bearish force is the Federal Reserve. Rates remain at 3.75-4.00%, and March FOMC minutes flagged concerns that Middle East-driven inflation could require further hikes. Swaps markets currently price near-zero probability of a cut at the April FOMC. High real rates increase the opportunity cost of holding a non-yielding asset, and that headwind is real.

But here is the tension the market is pricing: inflation is sticky while nominal rates are elevated, which means real rates are not tightening aggressively. Gold does not need rates to fall. It needs real rates to stop rising. And they have.

The fundamental picture, in short, is this: the structural bid from central banks and supply constraints creates a floor. The geopolitical premium creates optionality to the upside. The Fed creates a ceiling until something changes. That is a consolidation environment with a bullish skew, not a breakdown.

The fundamentals built the floor. Now let us look at how price is behaving on top of it.

Technical Analysis

Weekly Structure: Intact, Oversold, and Recovering

Start from the top. The weekly chart is the one that defines the trend, and the trend survived.

GLD rallied from 261 in February 2025 to 510 in January 2026. The correction took it to 399. Every weekly moving average is still rising. The EMA20 (426) was just reclaimed. The EMA50 (379) was never threatened. The higher-low pattern, the defining feature of a bull market, held.

What makes the weekly particularly interesting right now is the StochRSI. It is sitting at 5.4, which is one of the deepest oversold readings in the dataset. In the context of a rising-EMA weekly structure, this is historically one of the highest-probability mean-reversion setups available. The base rate for a 8-15% rally over 6-10 weeks from this condition is strong.

The weekly MACD is the counterweight. The histogram is at -6.09 and still worsening. Momentum on the highest timeframe has not confirmed the bounce. Until the weekly MACD histogram flattens and turns, the recovery is technically unconfirmed on the most important timeframe.

Weekly RSI sits at 58, neutral. It corrected from the 80s during the selloff but never broke below 40, which in secular uptrends typically marks the floor.

The Ichimoku picture on the weekly is bearish short-term, with a Tenkan/Kijun cross below and price below the Kijun (446). But the forward cloud remains far below current price, meaning the longer-term Ichimoku regime is still bullish.

Daily Structure: Damaged But Repairing

The daily chart tells the story of how sharp the selloff was and how the recovery is behaving.

Price fell from 492 to 400 in 15 trading days. Peak volume on the capitulation day was 37 million shares. OBV dropped from 773 million to 600 million. That is institutional distribution, not retail noise.

The recovery has brought price back to 440 (as of April 9), but the volume signature is different. Bounce days are averaging 10-14 million shares versus 18-37 million on the decline. OBV has recovered to 649 million. Price has recouped 40% of the decline, but volume participation has recouped only 28%.

That divergence is the most important observation on the daily chart. It does not kill the bull case, but it means the bounce is fragile and vulnerable to a swift reversal if sellers re-emerge.

On the moving average front, price has just crossed above the daily EMA20 (434) for the first time since mid-March, and is testing the EMA50 (439). The EMA100 (425) and EMA200 (391) are intact below. The EMA20 has crossed below the EMA50, which is a bearish cross, but price is attempting to reclaim the EMA50 from below. If it holds above 439 for several sessions, that is constructive.

Daily MACD is improving. Both lines remain negative, but the histogram has been positive and rising for 8 consecutive bars. That is the momentum inflection. The Kalman filter has turned positive with accelerating speed, confirming the direction change is real, not noise.

The problem is timing. Daily StochRSI is at 96. Williams %R is at -1.2. Both are at extreme overbought readings. A pullback in the next 2-5 sessions is highly probable.

The daily Ichimoku is firmly bearish. Price is below the cloud, which sits between 452 and 467. That overhead supply zone is the major hurdle for any sustained recovery. A move above the cloud would be a significant structural shift.

Daily Fibonacci retracement from the swing high (510) to the swing low (360): the 50% level sits at 435 (just reclaimed) and the 38.2% at 453. Current price is between them, grinding toward the more important 38.2% resistance.

4-Hour Structure: Bullish, But Testing a Critical Level

The 4-hour chart is where the short-term mechanics live, and they are constructive.

Price is above all short-term EMAs (EMA20 at 431, EMA50 at 437, EMA100 at 439, EMA200 at 425). The EMA20 has crossed above the EMA50. MACD has crossed above zero for the first time since the selloff began. RSI is at 58, healthy with room to run.

But price is sitting at a precise confluence: the 4-hour Fibonacci 61.8% retracement from the ATH to the March low lands at 441. The Ichimoku cloud base on the 4-hour sits at 442. The daily EMA50 is at 439. The daily Kijun is at 440.

This is a four-way resistance convergence at 440-442. It is one of those levels where the resolution will define the next $20+ move.

And the volume is troubling. The 4-hour SMA20 of volume has collapsed from 9.4 million to 4.7 million. The most recent bars show volume ratios below 0.01. The move higher is happening in a vacuum. Moves on thin volume are inherently fragile.

4-hour Heikin-Ashi candles have printed 5 consecutive bullish bars. That is clean short-term momentum. But it is arriving at resistance with no volume behind it.

Technical Conclusion

The weekly structure is intact and deeply oversold, which creates a structural bid for the medium term. The daily is repairing but unconfirmed on momentum, and overbought in the short term. The 4-hour is bullish but sitting at a critical resistance confluence on evaporating volume.

The most probable near-term path is a pullback from the 440-442 zone, followed by a higher-low formation, followed by a second attempt at resistance with better conviction. The quality of that pullback, where it holds and how volume behaves, will determine whether this recovery has legs or fades.

The levels are set. Now let us build the plan around them.

Our Trade Plan

Entry Zones

Pullback entry (primary): $425-$435 (Gold $4,600-$4,740)

This is the daily EMA20, the daily Fibonacci 50%, and the 4-hour EMA50. If price pulls back from the 440-442 resistance, this is where structural buyers should re-engage. The highest-quality risk/reward in the current setup.

Pullback entry (secondary): $413-$420 (Gold $4,500-$4,570)

Daily Fibonacci 61.8%, 4-hour EMA200, and the late-March swing lows. This zone only comes into play if the first support fails. An entry here means wider risk but significantly better asymmetry.

Breakout entry: $456-$460 (Gold $4,970-$5,010) on a daily close with above-average volume

Clearing the daily Fibonacci 38.2%, the 4-hour cloud top, and the daily Ichimoku cloud base confirms the weekly uptrend has resumed. This entry trades price for conviction.

Invalidation

$397 (Gold $4,320), daily close below.

The March structural low. A break here means the recovery has failed, the weekly Fibonacci zone is broken, and the daily EMA200 (391) is under direct threat. The correction is no longer corrective. Exit fully.

Targets

• T1: $452-$455 (Gold $4,930-$4,960). Daily Fibonacci 38.2%, Ichimoku cloud base, 4-hour Fibonacci 50%. First meaningful resistance above the current zone.

• T2: $465-$470 (Gold $5,070-$5,120). Heart of the daily Ichimoku cloud. Clearing this confirms the trend has resumed.

• T3: $483-$492 (Gold $5,260-$5,360). Prior high-volume reversal zone and 4-hour Fibonacci 23.6%. Full recovery from the March decline.

• T4: $510+ (Gold $5,550+). All-time high retest. Only reachable if weekly MACD flips bullish and volume confirms.

  

Rolling Stop Logic

• At T1, raise stop to $430. Locks in above daily EMA20 and confirms a higher low.

• At T2, raise stop to $450. Price has cleared the cloud. A return below means the breakout failed.

• At T3, raise stop to $465. Former cloud resistance becomes structural support.

Position Sizing

The distance between entry and stop defines risk per share. Position size should be calibrated so a stop-out represents a tolerable loss relative to total capital.

• Wider stop means smaller position. Tighter stop means larger position.

• Primary entry ($430) to stop ($397) is $33 risk per share. Moderate distance, standard sizing.

• Secondary entry ($417) to stop ($397) is $20 risk per share. Tighter risk, allows a larger position for the same dollar exposure.

• Breakout entry ($458) to stop ($397) is $61 risk per share. Wide distance, smaller position required.

Decide the maximum dollar amount you are willing to lose before entering. Divide by risk per share. That is your size.

Bottom Line

Gold’s bull market is not over. The 22% correction was violent, but it held exactly where it needed to hold: above the weekly EMA50, above the daily EMA200, and within the Fibonacci retracement zone that defines a healthy correction in a secular uptrend.

The structural forces, central bank buying at 800+ tonnes per year, inelastic mine supply, and persistent geopolitical risk, have not changed. If anything, lower prices have made them more potent.

But the recovery is not yet proven. Volume on the bounce is significantly weaker than volume on the decline. Short-term oscillators are stretched. And price is sitting at the most important resistance confluence on the chart at 440-442.

This is a patience setup, not a chase setup.

The optimal positioning is to wait for a pullback into the $425-$435 zone, where risk is clearly defined and the reward path to $465+ offers attractive asymmetry. If price breaks above $455 on volume, the breakout entry becomes valid with a different risk profile.

The single most important level remains $397. Above it, the bull case is alive and the structural floor holds. Below it, the thesis changes entirely.

Position around the levels. Let the market come to you. And when it does, size the trade based on the risk you can define, not the return you hope for.

This article is for informational and educational purposes only and reflects personal opinion, not individualized investment advice. Nothing here should be interpreted as a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. All investments involve risk, including the potential loss of principal. Market conditions can change quickly, and past performance does not guarantee future results.

First, thank you so much for reading and supporting us. We genuinely appreciate your interest, comments, and feedback! We look forward to giving you many more actionable analyses as the year progresses.

Second, you should already know how well has performed since our first analysis in December, and how it continued to grow even after our follow up last month.

For those of you who haven’t seen those analyses, you can check them out below:

We called the entry at $44.56, mapped three specific targets, set our stops, and let the trade run.

All three targets hit within fifteen trading days.

The stock went on to reach an all-time high of $72.59, a 63% gain from entry, and as of today it's still trading at $70.87. We've been fans of this name since before it was obvious, and the thesis hasn't changed.

What has changed is the price, and that means the trade plan needs updating too.

Share

Subscribe now

Where We Stand

Let’s start with the numbers, because they deserve to be stated plainly.

In our initial analysis of , the stock was trading at $44.56 and was sitting in the middle of the secondary entry zone we had identified ($44.30–$44.60). Anyone who acted on that plan entered approximately at the right price, on the right day, and for the right reasons.

Since then:

• Target 1 ($47.60–$48.40) was hit on January 5, 2026 (three trading days after the article).

• Target 2 ($50.80–$51.00) was hit on January 13.

• Target 3 ($53.40–$54.90) was hit on January 21 (fifteen trading days in).

• The stock went on to reach an intraday all-time high of $72.59 on March 30, representing a peak gain of +63% from the December entry.

• As of today, April 6, trades around $71, still +59% from that original entry.

Our second article, published March 12, saw a breakout above $65.50, with targets at $68.50 and $72–$75. That trade returned approximately +8% from the $65.75 mid-entry, with the stock currently still well above the entry level.

Two articles. Two trade plans. Every target hit. The thesis has been confirmed at every step.

The question now is simple: where does the trade go from here?

Subscribe now

What Has and Hasn’t Changed

The fundamental picture has not changed materially since March 12. TechnipFMC remains the same business we described then: a long-cycle offshore infrastructure company with a record $16.6 billion backlog, a $29 billion opportunity pipeline, net cash of $602 million, and 2026 guidance pointing to Subsea EBITDA margins of 21–22% (the highest in company history). Free cash flow guidance of $1.3–$1.45 billion for 2026 remains intact.

Quick Fundamentals Summary as of Q4 2025 / March 2026 Update:

• Revenue: $9.93B for full-year 2025, up 9% YoY. Subsea alone: $8.67B

• EBITDA: $1.82B adjusted, up 33% vs 2024. Subsea margins at 20.1%, up 340bps YoY

• Free cash flow: $1.45B for the year, more than double 2024 levels

• Balance sheet: Net cash of $602M. Total debt down to $430M. Essentially debt-free.

• Capital returns: $1B returned to shareholders in 2025, 2x the prior year

• Backlog: $16.6B, up 15% YoY. Multi-year revenue visibility through 2028

• Opportunity pipeline: $29B on the Subsea Opportunities List, a company record

• 2026 guidance: Subsea revenue $9.2–$9.6B, Subsea EBITDA margins 21–22% (highest ever), FCF $1.3–$1.45B

• Competitive moat: 80%+ of Subsea inbound in 2025 came via direct awards, iEPCI, and Subsea Services, not open bidding

At $44.56, this was an under-the-radar momentum setup.

At $70.87, it is a trend continuation trade at all-time highs.

That is a different animal.

The entry criteria are different, the risk management is different, and the patience required is different.

Technical Picture

Weekly (structural view):

• Price at $70.89, well above all major EMAs: 20W at $58.81 → 50W at $48.00 → 100W at $39.17

• Weekly MACD: 7.75, above signal (6.74), histogram rising, no exhaustion signal

• Weekly RSI: 82.7 - elevated and extended. Has been above 75 for weeks. This doesn’t mean the trend breaks, but it does mean mean-reversion risk is real. A pullback to reset RSI toward 60–65 would be completely healthy and normal.

• Structural trend invalidation: weekly close below $58.81 (20-week EMA)

Daily (trade management view):

• Price above 20-day ($67.78), 50-day ($63.14), 100-day ($56.83), 200-day ($49.00) — all rising

• Daily MACD: 2.19, above signal (2.11), histogram positive

• Daily RSI: 64.2. Healthy, not extended, room to run

• ATR: $2.41 (≈3.4% daily range) - factors into stop placement

• Note: March 30 printed a spike high to $72.59 with a large intraday reversal, that level is a clear resistance that needs to be absorbed before a clean break higher

Intraday:

The intraday structure is not showing distribution. It is showing a measured retest of the all-time high zone with controlled price behavior on both sides of the test.

Technical Conclusion: Trend intact on all timeframes. Weekly RSI extended. Daily structure clean. ATH resistance at $72.59 needs to be broken or respected. Patience and level discipline are the edge here, not momentum chasing.

Share

Trade Plan

If You’re Already Holding (from Dec or Mar entries)

You are carrying a 40–60% gain. The structure no longer supports holding full size without a plan.

Trim zone: $72.40–$74.00. Reduce size on any push into or through the ATH. Lock in a portion. You don’t have to exit, just right-size for the next phase.

Hold the core with a trailing stop at $67.50 (just below the 20-day EMA). Every major pullback in this rally has been bought at the 20-day. A daily close below it, with MACD turning negative and RSI breaking below 55, is the signal to cut the remainder.

If stopped out, reload zones:

• $67.50–$68.50 (20-day EMA)

• $63.00–$64.50 (50-day EMA - deeper reset, cleaner entry)

Structural exit: Weekly close below $58.81 ends the thesis entirely.

Subscribe now

If You’re Starting Fresh (new position)

Buying at all-time highs without a plan is how good fundamentals turn into bad trades. Two setups worth waiting for:

Read more

F5 Networks is not that, but it is doing something just as impressive: compounding earnings, expanding margins, growing a sticky recurring revenue base, and positioning itself at the exact intersection of enterprise complexity and AI infrastructure demand.

It is an infrastructure and control-layer business that helps enterprises deliver, manage, and secure applications across increasingly fragmented environments. As workloads spread across on-premise systems, private cloud, public cloud, APIs, and now AI-driven architectures, the value of that control layer rises.

It doesn’t trade like a theme stock. That’s part of the opportunity.

The complication is that F5's flagship product, BIG-IP, has a serious security flaw that is actively being exploited in the wild. What was initially described as a denial-of-service vulnerability was later reclassified as a remote code execution issue, meaning attackers can potentially take full control of affected systems. That does not automatically change the long-term thesis, but it does matter for investor positioning because F5 sells trust as much as it sells infrastructure.

Subscribe now

Key Takeaways

• Q1 FY2026 revenue of $822M, up 7% year over year, with non-GAAP EPS of $4.45 up 16% from a year earlier

• Six consecutive quarters of double-digit product revenue growth, including 37% systems growth in Q1

• Nearly 20 consecutive quarters of EPS beats

• Recurring revenue of $570M represents 69% of total revenue; 86% of software revenue now comes from subscriptions

• Non-GAAP gross margin of 83.8% and non-GAAP operating margin of 38.2%, up 80 basis points year over year

• Full-year FY26 guidance raised to 5–6% revenue growth and non-GAAP EPS of $15.65–$16.05

• TTM free cash flow of $861M; $300M in share repurchases in Q1 alone

• The BIG-IP vulnerability is a real overhang, even if Q1 demand disruption was minimal

Subscribe now

What F5 Does, and Why It Matters More Now

F5 sits in the application delivery and security layer. The control plane that manages traffic, secures APIs, optimizes performance, and keeps applications fast and available regardless of where they run. On-premise, private cloud, public cloud, edge, F5’s platform is designed to work across all of it.

Enterprise workloads are no longer centralized. They’re fragmented by design, and AI is adding another layer of complexity on top: more data movement, higher throughput requirements, and entirely new categories of runtime security exposure.

F5 management identified three structural forces reshaping customer infrastructure decisions, and the customer wins disclosed in Q1 2026 make these concrete rather than thematic:

• Hybrid multicloud adoption: European regulations like NIS2, GDPR, and DORA are accelerating this by imposing resilience and digital sovereignty requirements. F5 wins here because it delivers and secures applications in any form factor, anywhere, without requiring customers to rearchitect their operations

• Enterprise AI investment: AI deployments create demand for high-throughput data pipelines, intelligent GPU load balancing, and runtime security for AI models and APIs. Q1 wins included a global technology OEM, a financial services leader deploying AI guardrails, and an energy company shifting from public AI consumption to private model hosting

• Converged platforms: Enterprises are consolidating fragmented point products. F5’s Application Delivery and Security Platform positions it as a consolidation destination rather than a point solution at risk of displacement

Subscribe now

Fundamental Analysis

On fundamentals, F5 is doing fantastic. Since Q2 2021, F5 has beat EPS expectations every single quarter. On the revenue side, it barely missed expectations twice in the same period.

Revenue and Earnings

• TTM revenue: ~$3.14B, up from $3.09B at fiscal year-end and $2.82B the year prior

• Q1 FY26 revenue: $822M, the strongest quarter to date

• Product revenue: $410M in Q1, up 11% year over year

• Systems revenue: up 37% year over year in Q1

• Six consecutive quarters of double-digit product revenue growth

• TTM diluted GAAP EPS: $12.08, up from $9.55 in FY2024 and $5.27 in FY2022

• Non-GAAP EPS Q1 FY26: $4.45, up 16% year over year

Margins and Profitability

• Non-GAAP gross margin: 83.8%, essentially flat year over year and exceptional for an infrastructure business

• Non-GAAP operating margin: 38.2%, up 80bps year over year

• GAAP operating margin: 26.0%, weighed down by stock-based compensation, acquisition costs, and $17.5M in cyber incident costs

• TTM EBITDA: ~$884M on $3.14B revenue representing an an ~18% EBITDA margin, trending higher

• TTM operating income: $789M, up from $412M in FY2022. The improvement is structural, not cyclical

Cash Flow and Capital Returns

• TTM operating cash flow: $906M

• TTM capex: ~$45M

• TTM free cash flow: $861M (~27% FCF margin)

• Q1 FY26 share repurchases: $300M, equivalent to 201% of that quarter’s free cash flow

• Commitment: at least 50% of annual FCF directed to buybacks

• $622M remaining on authorized repurchase program as of December 31, 2025

• Diluted share count reduced from ~61,100 in FY2022 to ~58,460 TTM

Balance Sheet

• Total assets: $6.29B

• Total debt: $268M, almost entirely capital lease obligations, zero traditional financial debt

• Cash and investments: $1.22B at end of Q1 (after the $300M buyback)

• Common equity: $3.54B, up from $2.47B in FY2022

• Net tangible assets: $1.01B, up from near-zero four years ago

• Deferred revenue: $2.06B, up 6% year over year. Strong forward revenue visibility

Guidance

• FY26 revenue growth guidance: raised to 5–6% (from prior 0–4%)

• FY26 non-GAAP EPS guidance: raised to $15.65–$16.05 (from prior $14.50–$15.50)

• FY26 non-GAAP operating margin guidance: raised to 34–35% (from 33.5–34.5%)

• Q2 FY26 outlook: revenue $770–790M, non-GAAP EPS $3.34–3.46

Valuation

• Price-to-earnings (TTM GAAP): ~25x

• Forward non-GAAP P/E: ~19x

• EV/EBITDA: high-teens to low-twenties

• Price-to-sales: ~5.5x TTM

These are fair multiples for a business with 83%+ gross margins, 27% FCF margins, and 69% recurring revenue. They are not cheap multiples. Upside from here depends on continued execution, not multiple expansion.

Subscribe now

The Risk That Deserves Honest Treatment: The BIG-IP Vulnerability

No credible analysis of F5 skips this.

F5 is managing through a serious cybersecurity incident involving a remote code execution vulnerability in BIG-IP. CVE-2025-53521 was added to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog after confirmed active exploitation in the wild.

In October 2025, F5 disclosed a security incident affecting its BIG-IP systems, the details of which prompted the company to begin an internal investigation and remediation effort that resulted in $17.5 million in incident-related costs being excluded from Q1 FY26 non-GAAP results.

Then in late March 2026, the situation escalated when CVE-2025-53521, a BIG-IP APM vulnerability, was reclassified from a denial-of-service flaw to an unauthenticated remote code execution issue, meaning attackers could potentially take full control of affected systems under certain configurations. CISA added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog shortly after, confirming active exploitation in the wild. F5’s response has included rapid customer mobilization, security automation investments, product hardening, and deeper engagement with CISOs across its customer base.

What we know:

• $17.5M in cyber incident costs excluded from non-GAAP operating income in Q1

• Management reported minimal Q1 demand disruption

• Customer feedback on the security response was described as positive

• F5 mobilized global sales and support teams rapidly to help customers remediate

What management is focused on going forward:

• Further investing in security automation across operations

• Enhancing product and development environment security

• Sharing learnings with the broader security community

Why this still matters even if the financial hit looks contained:

F5 is in the middle of a major push to position itself as a trusted security and platform vendor. A confirmed remote code execution exploit in the flagship product creates friction at exactly the wrong moment. The direct cost is manageable. The reputational exposure in procurement conversations, renewal cycles, and competitive evaluations takes longer to measure and longer to heal.

The incident looks like a manageable overhang rather than a thesis-breaker. For this to stop being an investor concern, two things need to happen: the vulnerability needs to be fully patched and verified across the customer base with no further escalation, and F5 needs to deliver two to three clean quarters of unaffected demand that demonstrate customer trust remains intact.

Subscribe now

Technical Analysis

The Big Picture: A Recovery With a Warning Label

Weekly chart:

• FFIV experienced a sharp decline from its 2024 highs into a multi-month base, followed by a recovery that has retraced a meaningful portion of that move

• Price is now pressing into a significant resistance zone that previously acted as major supply

• The Elliott Wave structure on the weekly chart carries an important caveat: the current advance may represent a corrective bounce within a larger incomplete structure, not a clean resumption of the prior bull trend

• Under the bearish interpretation, a larger corrective leg remains possible if the current structure fails to break out with conviction. This is not the base case but it must be acknowledged

• The weekly Kalman trend bands confirm the recovery from the lows is real, but also show price entering a zone where sellers previously dominated

Daily chart:

• Price is above all key moving averages (20, 50, 100, 200 EMA) with the stack aligned bullishly

• Momentum is positive but not overheated. RSI in the low 60s, MACD constructive

• Recent pullbacks have been shallow and quickly bought, characteristic of an uptrend with genuine demand underneath

• The key test is whether price can break and hold through the $304–306 resistance zone on a closing basis

Read more

After a huge run in 2023, 2024, and 2025, the market is entering a much less forgiving phase.

That is the real story.

This is no longer a backdrop where investors can assume falling inflation, friendly policy, and ever-rising confidence will keep lifting broad indices. The setup has changed. Growth has cooled. Inflation is lower than it was, but it is still vulnerable to energy shocks. War and geopolitical stress can push oil higher and keep supply chains messy for longer than the market would like. And after such a strong three-year run, valuations and expectations were already elevated.

That matters because markets do not just react to reality. They react to the gap between reality and expectation.

Right now, that gap still looks too wide.

This is why 2026 has the ingredients to be a frustrating year for index investors. Not necessarily a crash year. Not even necessarily a deeply negative one. But a year where prices can swing sharply, rallies can fail, and both the Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500 can spend a lot of time moving without making much real progress.

The Nasdaq is more exposed because it carries the richest expectations, the greatest sensitivity to rates, and the heaviest dependence on future growth. The S&P is steadier, but not as insulated as many investors think, because so much of its leadership overlaps with the same mega-cap names that drive the Nasdaq.

So this is not a call for panic. It is a call for realism.

The easy upside phase looks over. Now the market has to prove it deserves higher prices.

Key Takeaways

Nasdaq 100

The long-term quality is still outstanding. The problem is that quality is already expensive, expectations are still high, and AI monetization may take longer than the market first hoped. That leaves the Nasdaq more vulnerable if inflation stays sticky and rates stay firm.

S&P 500

The S&P 500 is broader and healthier than the Nasdaq, but not immune. Its diversification helps, but many of its most important holdings are the same giant growth names driving the Nasdaq. If leadership cracks, both indices feel it.

The 2026 setup

This looks like a year of volatility, failed follow-through, and selective opportunity. Markets can bounce. They can even rally hard. But unless inflation cools cleanly and growth re-accelerates, broad indices may struggle to produce the kind of steady gains investors have grown used to.

The Real Problem: Expectations Still Belong to an Easier Market

The cleanest way to understand this year is simple.

The macro backdrop no longer matches the optimism built into the market.

For most of the last three years, investors had a powerful combination working in their favor. Inflation was expected to cool, growth held up better than feared, and the biggest companies in the market delivered both earnings strength and a compelling long-term AI narrative. That was enough to support rising multiples and repeated dip-buying.

Now the setup is tougher.

If energy prices stay high because of war and geopolitical instability, inflation can remain sticky even as growth slows. That is a difficult mix for equities. It pressures consumer spending, compresses margins, and keeps central banks from turning openly supportive. Energy matters because it is the fastest way to reprice the entire soft-landing narrative. It can hit transport, industrial costs, household budgets, and inflation expectations all at once.

That is why this matters so much for valuation.

High-quality growth businesses can still be great investments. But when the macro backdrop becomes less cooperative, the market becomes less willing to pay peak multiples for future perfection. That is especially true after a long run higher.

AI is part of this too. The long-term opportunity is real. But monetization does not happen on the market’s preferred schedule. Capital spending can arrive first. Returns often take longer. If investors become less patient, then even strong businesses can face valuation pressure simply because expectations ran too far ahead of near-term reality.

This is why the key question for 2026 is not whether the economy falls apart.

The better question is whether the market was priced for a cleaner environment than it is actually getting.

The answer still looks like yes.

Nasdaq 100

The market’s growth engine is now its pressure point

The Nasdaq 100 still holds many of the best businesses in the world. That has not changed.

It remains the home of mega-cap growth, semiconductors, AI infrastructure, cloud, and software. If the macro backdrop improves, this will likely be the part of the market that responds most powerfully.

But that same strength creates the problem.

The Nasdaq is where the market stores its biggest expectations. It is where investors have paid the highest multiples for future growth. It is also the index that tends to struggle most when yields stay elevated, inflation remains sticky, or the market starts demanding proof instead of promise.

That is why it looks more vulnerable here than the S&P 500.

Fundamental view

This is not a business quality problem. It is an expectations problem.

The top of the Nasdaq is full of companies with dominant balance sheets, enormous cash generation, and real secular growth drivers. But after three strong years, the market was already pricing in a lot. Continued AI enthusiasm. Continued earnings durability. Eventually, meaningful AI monetization.

That is a high bar.

If inflation proves sticky because of energy, the path to lower yields becomes harder. If yields stay firm, long-duration growth becomes harder to re-rate. And if AI monetization arrives more slowly than investors first assumed, the market may start treating these companies less like limitless growth engines and more like great businesses that were simply priced too richly.

Great companies do not always produce great index returns, especially when the index is already priced for near-perfection.

Fundamental conclusion: The Nasdaq still has the best long-term growth profile in the market. But it also has the least room for disappointment.

Technical view

Technically, the Nasdaq still looks like a bull-market correction, not a full structural breakdown. But the correction is not convincingly finished.

Both major indices have lost their short and medium-term trend structure. The main reason the broader correction thesis still holds, rather than a full bearish breakdown thesis, is that they are still hovering around their 200-day and 50-week support zones.

For NDX, the weekly chart shows price below the 20-week EMA at 24,736.96, but still above the 50-week EMA at 23,779.87. That says the longer-term trend is under pressure, but still intact.

The bigger problem is on the daily chart. Price is below the 20-day EMA at 24,653.38, below the 50-day EMA at 24,919.29, and below the 100-day EMA at 24,869.53. It is only modestly above the 200-day EMA at 24,148.00. That is the key line holding the broader correction thesis together.

Momentum still leans bearish. Daily RSI at 42.72 is weak. Daily MACD remains negative. The daily Ichimoku setup is also still bearish, with price below Tenkan, Kijun, and the cloud. That tells you rallies are still happening under resistance, not above it.

The most important support zone sits at 24,200 to 23,800. That is the area bulls need to defend to keep this looking like a correction rather than something deeper.

The key resistance zone sits at 24,335 to 24,726. If the index starts reclaiming that range, the tone improves. Above that, 24,900 to 25,000 becomes the next real repair zone.

Technical conclusion: The Nasdaq is close enough to support to bounce, but still damaged enough that every rally has to prove itself.

S&P 500

The broader market looks steadier, but not safe

The S&P 500 is in a better position than the Nasdaq. That part is true.

But investors should be careful not to overstate that advantage.

The S&P is broader, which helps in a mixed environment. It has healthcare, industrials, financials, consumer names, energy, and defensives alongside technology. That makes it less fragile when leadership narrows or macro conditions get tougher.

But it is not insulated.

That is the part many investors miss. The S&P looks diversified, but a large share of its real leadership still comes from the same mega-cap names that dominate the Nasdaq. So while the S&P is the steadier chart, it is still heavily influenced by the exact leadership group carrying the highest expectations.

That is why the overlap matters so much.

The S&P is safer than the Nasdaq in this environment. It is just not as safe as the label “broad market” sometimes implies.

Fundamental view

The S&P benefits from balance. That is its main advantage in 2026.

It does not need pure growth leadership to carry the entire index. Defensives can help. Energy can help if oil stays high. Some sectors can absorb a tougher backdrop better than others.

But balance is not immunity.

Slower growth pressures cyclicals. Higher energy prices can hit margins and households. Trade and geopolitical uncertainty reduce visibility for industrials and global supply chains. And if the biggest growth names stop doing the heavy lifting, the broader index still feels it because those companies remain so important to overall index performance.

This is the real distinction between the two indices. The Nasdaq is more exposed to valuation compression. The S&P is more buffered, but still vulnerable to leadership fatigue.

Fundamental conclusion: The S&P 500 is fundamentally more balanced than the Nasdaq, but it still lives under the shadow of the same concentration risk.

Technical view

The technical picture is similar to the Nasdaq, just less severe.

On the weekly chart, SPX is below the 20-week EMA at 6,743.08, but above the 50-week EMA at 6,511.75. That keeps the broader uptrend intact for now.

On the daily chart, price is below the 20-day EMA at 6,724.15, below the 50-day EMA at 6,797.74, and below the 100-day EMA at 6,771.75. It is leaning on the 200-day EMA at 6,594.42. That level matters most because it is the line separating a manageable correction from something deeper.

Momentum remains cautious here too. Daily RSI at 40.17 is weak. Daily MACD is still negative. Daily ADX near 36.01 confirms this has been a real trend move lower, not random noise. Ichimoku remains bearish, with price below the Tenkan at 6,642.34, below the Kijun at 6,713.02, and below the cloud.

The first major support zone is 6,595 to 6,520, followed by 6,490 if that area gives way.

The key resistance zone is 6,640 to 6,740. Above that, the next meaningful improvement zone sits near 6,770 to 6,800.

Technical conclusion: The S&P is holding up better than the Nasdaq, but it has not yet done enough to confirm that the correction is over.

Bottom Line

This is not a market that looks broken.

It is a market that still looks priced for a better macro environment than the one it is getting.

That is the distinction.

After three exceptional years, expectations are still high. Inflation is lower, but not fully gone. Energy can still disrupt the whole disinflation narrative. Supply chains and geopolitics remain part of the story. AI is powerful, but monetization may take longer than investors first assumed. And both major indices still lean heavily on the same leadership group.

That is why 2026 could be the year markets move a lot and go nowhere.

The Nasdaq 100 looks more exposed because it carries higher expectations and greater valuation sensitivity.

The S&P 500 looks steadier, but not immune, because broad index strength still depends more than many investors realize on the same concentrated leadership.

So no, this is not a call for panic (not necessarily).

It is a reminder that the easy money phase looks over. Great companies can stay great while index returns become much harder to earn. That may be the real challenge of 2026.

The market can still rally.
It just has to earn higher prices again.

This article is for informational and educational purposes only and should not be considered investment advice or a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security or index. Investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal.