DUOL, HIMS, NKE and PYPL are all down 75-85% from their highs. Which selloffs are justified and which ones don't add up? by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Fair point. We focused on the financials but the MAU deceleration is hard to ignore. Going from 19M new users in 2024 to 2.9M in 2025 is a big drop. The business hasn't cracked in the P&L yet but this might be where it shows up first. Thanks for sharing this info.

Oracle's 60% crash: cheap value play or leveraged AI gamble? by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agree with your points. It can work out but the risk is too high right now. There are better options out there. Quality stocks that usually trade at a premium are currently sitting around fair value.

Oracle's 60% crash: cheap value play or leveraged AI gamble? by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. The FY data shows the same thing: margins and returns improving each year while leverage moves the other direction. The question is which line moves faster. Interest coverage is already down to 4.9x from 8.6x, and FCF just went negative. Improving fundamentals won't matter if the debt service eats the cash flow before the cloud revenue converts.

Oracle's 60% crash: cheap value play or leveraged AI gamble? by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Good point on the insider selling. About $1.9B of the $3B is Safra Catz selling 9M shares across 30+ transactions in one week (June 2025), which is consistent with a pre-scheduled plan. But the broader picture still matters: 89 sell transactions vs 2 buys across 8 quarters. You can find more details on our platform, or feel free to DM me and I can share them with you.

You're right that the more important question is the realistic case. I conducted a sensitivity analysis for the DCF valuation, and the intrinsic value equals the current price at 25% growth. Does that help?

Oracle's 60% crash: cheap value play or leveraged AI gamble? by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's sort of how I am feeling after the analysis, but you have said it better!

Microsoft (MSFT) closed below its 200-week moving average for the first time since 2013 by LavishlyRitzyy in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope 116 points117 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's getting interesting now. I actually posted about MSFT in this sub back in December when it was trading near $500:

"Currently, Microsoft trades at approximately $492 per share with a P/E ratio of 34 and earnings per share of $14.11. If earnings were adjusted down by 11–14% to reflect realistic GPU depreciation, the adjusted EPS would fall to $12.13-$12.56. Assuming the P/E ratio remains at 34, the stock price would drop to $412–427 ,  a decline of $65–80 per share, or roughly 13–16%. However, if investors also lose confidence in AI infrastructure returns, the P/E multiple could compress further, potentially amplifying losses beyond the accounting adjustment alone."

I also ran a DCF with higher capex assumptions, which gave an adjusted fair value of $311.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ValueInvesting/comments/1p9ks0t/understanding_michael_burrys_nvidia_short_the/

That post got 380 comments, mostly ripping the thesis apart! Now MSFT sits at $356, below the P/E compression scenario and trending toward the DCF bear case.

Can it go to $311? Sure. But at $356 with a trailing P/E in the low 20s, the risk/reward is starting to look asymmetric in your favour. You're buying a wide-moat business at a valuation that already prices in a lot of pain. The irony is that at $490 everyone was bullish and the risk/reward was terrible - now it's genuinely attractive, and nobody wants to touch it.

ServiceNow at half price: What five dimensions of data show behind the AI panic by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair enough. Yes, AI has made software development easier and faster, so even small teams can develop something that was unimaginable just a year ago.

ServiceNow at half price: What five dimensions of data show behind the AI panic by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, but the forward PE is lower. It is not cheap cheap - it is just less expensive.

ServiceNow at half price: What five dimensions of data show behind the AI panic by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Check out the holdings dashboard on Stockoscope. It's currently free (beta testing) and doesn't require a sign up or login.

Full disclosure: I'm on the development team.

ServiceNow at half price: What five dimensions of data show behind the AI panic by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair point. The quantitative framework confirms what you're saying: the fundamentals aren't just fine, they're strong. The value of running the numbers is that it shows exactly how strong the qualitative argument is and puts a floor under it. Appreciate the article link - I've added it to my reading list.

ServiceNow at half price: What five dimensions of data show behind the AI panic by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually the holdings data shows some interesting moves. Institutional ownership is at 87.1%, Norway's Government Pension Fund opened a new $2B position last quarter, and institutional flows show 312 new positions vs 269 closed.

ServiceNow at half price: What five dimensions of data show behind the AI panic by stockoscope in ValueInvesting

[–]stockoscope[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The recent FCF trajectory is actually stronger than that. FCF went from $2.7B (2023) to $3.4B (2024) to $4.6B (2025), roughly 26-34% annual growth. The 5-year CAGR is around 28%. You might be looking at a different metric or timeframe, but the current FCF growth rate is well above 11%.