r/valueinvesting
Burry 对英伟达的看法可能是对的，但我们要等多久？
作者回测了 NVDA 的短期动量，担忧其可预测性可能在价格崩盘前失效，重蹈思科当年的覆辙。
- 英伟达表现出强劲的短期动量延续性，涨跌日次日延续正确的概率达 70-75%。
- Michael Burry 对英伟达的长期看空逻辑可能是对的，暗示其估值严重过高。
- 英伟达的短期可预测性可能会在价格实际崩盘前悄然失效，类似思科当年的崩盘。
我一直在关注他从一开始提出观点以来，对思科和英伟达的言论。这些说法很难忽视，也很难用巴里一贯的风格去判断时机。
他可能确实对英伟达看对了，但我们要等多久才能看到他的预测成真？他的操作总是拖得特别久。我对这种长期布局有点不耐烦，于是开始换种方式思考，转而关注短期走势——比如几小时、1到10天内，以及下一个交易时段收盘前的动向。
我深入研究了一段时间，把每个方向性走势都与实际下一个交易日的收盘价进行了比对，总共分析了超过600次英伟达的数据。
上涨日的预测准确率约75%，下跌日约70%，这已经不错了，因为50%被认为是随机的，相当于抛硬币。
涨跌之间的差距只有5个百分点，比我在这种股票上预期的还要紧密。大多数高动量股票都有明显的方向倾向，但英伟达没有。我从未在如此受瞩目的股票上见过这种平衡状态。
对于那些不想等上好几年看巴里长期预测兑现的人来说，这个数据其实很有用。如果一只股票在下一个交易时段延续同方向的概率达到70%到75%，你根本不需要知道巴里2027年是否正确。你只需要搞清楚今天的价格变动暗示了明天会怎样。
真正让我担心的是，这种一致性是否会在价格崩盘之前悄然瓦解。思科就是个例子，它们的短期可预测性在崩盘前就已经崩溃了，很多人却只盯着估值，错过了信号。
在我看来，这才是值得追踪的重点，而不是傻等两年看他的预言兑现。
现在我每天早上都会看一下。好奇有没有人也在这一波行情中转向了短期视角，或者有其他看法愿意分享？
NVDA right now is priced like the chip demand will dry up tomorrow. If it wasn’t priced like that this shit woulda been over 300 like yesterday
Not a prediction on where nvidia will go, but if a couple of months or years is too long for you to wait, id seriously check out different subs
NVIDIA is the least diversified business. Dozens of their customers are accountable for 90% of the toral revenue - Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Tesla, SpaceX, Oracle and Meta.
NVIDIA has the most to lost from AI, because once AI demand is met nobody will spend trillions of dollars on chips annually.
AI demand may continue to grow for a long time. Jevon's paradox is real. AI will be more like energy, in that we find more and more uses for it the cheaper it becomes.
Energy is light years more universal than AI, because you can apply it everywhere, but AI, as of today, is only applicable at automating digital tasks like coding, writing emails and consolidate information from different sources.
I'm not particularly bullish on AI for the long term but AI could feasibly be deployed in some sense in every one of the scenarios in your brackets.
Haha. Your post gives me even more confidence in AI - people still think AI as a coding and editing tool. It means the vast majority don’t know what it can do yet. Great news!
The last statement around not spending on chips is ridiculous.
Do you think we will have more or less technology in the future that needs chips?
Space, compute, military, self driving, data centers, automation, robotics....
AI demand, in general, is less of a concern than just increasing competition in the chip space. Nvidia's margins are totally unsustainable.
To be clear Burry has been saying this for months because he was wrong the first time so now he’s just waiting to be vindicated. I have no idea when Nvidia will crash but I think the crash will be thirty to fifty percent as worst and I think a few years from now it can crawl back up the company is just too important and it’s not like the dot com bubble where there are no profits Nvidia is incredibly profitable and still innovating.
Burry has been saying this for years
There’s not enough cash to sustain CapEx spend beyond the next few years without insourcing chips. GOOG AMZN TSLA among others are making this move.
AI is real= make your own chips.
AI is a bubble= chips are overvalued
It’s not sustainable to spend trillion dollars annually if you don’t have the same amount of returns.
The Internet example is very good - because just like 99.9% of the planet doesn’t use more than 50MBit Internet speed (which was provided already 15 years ago) the same way 99.9% of the planet doesn’t need 50 billion AI tokens usage per day on trillion parameters model.
The "priced for perfection" argument makes sense at 36x earnings. But look at the cash conversion — $102.7B operating cash flow on $120B net income. That's not accounting fiction, it's real money.
The real question isn't whether AI demand slows (it will eventually). It's whether the market's already pricing in that slowdown. At 55% net margins, even a 20% revenue hit leaves them printing cash.
What's your timeline for the capex digestion period?