Stocks

江苏雅克科技股份有限公司（深交所：002409） 本文按 2026 年 7 月 1 日的信息时点整理，使用此前已披露的报告。下文的成长判断是本文分析，并非公司业绩承诺。 长期成长视角 1. 核心逻辑：材料供应商能否持续参与客户的技术升级 雅克科技的观察重点是电子材料与 LNG 保温绝热板材。公司年报介绍，半导体前驱体用于存储和逻辑芯片，并通过与客户合作研发、测试认证推进产品应用。理解这门生意，需要把具体材料与客户的生产工艺联系起来。资料：2025 年年度报告，第三节 本文的投资假设是：如果一种材料能够在客户的新一代工艺中持续通过验证，并转化为稳定采购，供应商才有机会把研发投入变成长期收入。值得研究的是这种转化能否重复发生，而不只是某个产品是否进入热门赛道。 判断竞争优势，可以从三个问题入手：新产品有没有形成量产收入，老产品能否维持盈利能力，新增收入需要占用多少资金。客户认证是观察起点，持续交付、利润和回款才是后续验证。 LNG 板材应单独评估订单执行和资金回收。将不同业务放在一起看总收入，容易掩盖各自的增长来源；对公司的成长判断，应建立在分业务的证据上。 2. 财务验证：收入增长之后，利润与现金是否跟上 2025 年，公司营业收入为 86.11 亿元，同比增长 25.49%；归母净利润为 10.00 亿元，同比增长 14.77%；扣非归母净利润为 9.54 亿元，同比增长 5.91%；经营活动现金流净额为 10.31 亿元。资料：2025 年年度报告，第 7 页 这组数据支持“规模扩大”的判断，但利润增速低于收入增速，尚不能据此认定规模优势已经充分兑现。后续需要核对产品结构、成本与费用变化，判断新增收入能留下多少利润。 2026 年第一季度，营业收入为 19.73 亿元，同比下降 6.85%；归母净利润为 2.67 亿元，同比增长 2.47%；扣非归母净利润为 2.44 亿元，同比下降 3.81%；经营活动现金流净额为负 4,236.41 万元，上年同期为负 3,215.91 万元。资料：2026 年第一季度报告，第 2 页 归母利润和扣非利润的方向不同，提醒我们要分别看待主营经营表现与非经常性项目。单季现金流也需要结合收付款节奏判断，不能直接外推全年。对长期成长的验证，应持续比较收入、扣非利润和现金流，而不能只挑其中最亮眼的一项。 3. 反向检验：什么情况会削弱成长假设 首先是技术投入未能转化为商业回报。如果新品长期停留在测试阶段，或量产后盈利不足，研发能力就还没有变成股东收益。跟踪重点应是可核实的量产和销售进展。 其次是增长消耗过多资金。如果收入扩大同时伴随应收账款、存货和资本开支持续增加，就需要重新评估增长的质量。经营现金流扣除资本开支后的表现，比单看净利润更能帮助判断企业是否具备自我支持扩张的能力。 最后是价格中包含的预期。即使业务发展符合判断，过高的买入价格仍可能压低投资回报。本文未建立估值模型，因此不据此给出目标价或买入结论。 雅克科技值得继续研究的问题是：能否持续把材料研发转化为客户采购，再把收入转化为现金回报。截至本文设定的信息时点，年度增长与一季度放缓同时存在，后续判断应随证据更新。

INTEL Co.(NYSE:INTL) James Anderson 1. The Core Thesis: “The Amazon of Used Cars” Anderson’s belief in Carvana mirrors his early bet on Amazon at Baillie Gifford. He identifies three “Lollapalooza” effects (as Munger would call them) working in harmony: Vertical Integration & Efficiency: Traditional dealerships are fragmented and burdened by high “bricks-and-mortar” costs and human sales commissions. Carvana’s Inspection and Reconditioning Centers (IRCs) treat car refurbishment like a high-speed factory line, driving unit costs down in a way a local dealer never can.

AAOI Co.(NYSE:AAOI) James Anderson 1. The Core Thesis: “The Amazon of Used Cars” Anderson’s belief in Carvana mirrors his early bet on Amazon at Baillie Gifford. He identifies three “Lollapalooza” effects (as Munger would call them) working in harmony: Vertical Integration & Efficiency: Traditional dealerships are fragmented and burdened by high “bricks-and-mortar” costs and human sales commissions. Carvana’s Inspection and Reconditioning Centers (IRCs) treat car refurbishment like a high-speed factory line, driving unit costs down in a way a local dealer never can.

Carvana Co.(NYSE:CVNA) James Anderson 1. The Core Thesis: “The Amazon of Used Cars” Anderson’s belief in Carvana mirrors his early bet on Amazon at Baillie Gifford. He identifies three “Lollapalooza” effects (as Munger would call them) working in harmony: Vertical Integration & Efficiency: Traditional dealerships are fragmented and burdened by high “bricks-and-mortar” costs and human sales commissions. Carvana’s Inspection and Reconditioning Centers (IRCs) treat car refurbishment like a high-speed factory line, driving unit costs down in a way a local dealer never can.

Cash flow Human resource

Palantir：Ontology title: “Palantir CEO Alex Karp: The Costly Illusion of ‘Buying Models’” date: 2026-03-10 keywords: [“Alex Karp”, “Palantir”, “AI Strategy”, “Enterprise AI”, “Ontology”, “Operating System”] draft: false Palantir CEO Alex Karp: Why “Buying AI Models” is Becoming the Most Expensive Illusion for Enterprises Almost every Fortune 500 company is currently doing the exact same thing: Purchasing AI subscriptions. Plugging into a few Large Language Models (LLMs). Announcing to the board: “We have an AI strategy.” But Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir ($PLTR), offers a blunt assessment of this approach. He says: “Just buying models in an enterprise will eventually become a form of self-pleasuring, and at the expense of the enterprise’s own interests.” This statement is jarring because it strikes at a hard reality: many companies treat “using AI” as a strategy rather than “transforming the business through AI.” What most enterprises are doing right now looks like this:

NVDA Research 📊 Valuation Framework: The PR Ratio (Profitability Ratio) Following the investment philosophy of @ericwarn (Ding Ning) and the principles of James Anderson, I utilize the PR Ratio to evaluate NVIDIA’s valuation beyond simple P/E multiples. Key Formula: PR = (P/E) / (ROE × 100) Strategic Analysis (As of April 2026): Traditional P/E ratios often flag NVIDIA as “expensive.” However, the PR Ratio reveals a different story: The ROE Factor: Driven by the massive shift to the Rubin architecture and the expansion into Physical AI, NVIDIA’s ROE has surged to approximately 75%. The Calculation: With a Forward P/E of 45x and an ROE of 75%, the PR ≈ 0.6. Verdict: According to @ericwarn’s “0.5-1.0-1.5” rule, a PR of 0.6 indicates that the high P/E is fully justified by NVIDIA’s extraordinary capital efficiency. We are paying for earning power, not just speculative growth. Trade 2003

Mark Zeckerberg Cash flow Human resource

Temperiaory

Marriot get back from the Covid Brand

Elon Musk

Jeff Bezos Human resource

Steve Jobs Tim Cook Great Company in the world. Cash flow Human resource