Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Friday, October 9, 2026

Back to today

From X

@StableBread 5 clicks

Fajasy on X

The S&P 500 lost 18% in 2022, and the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate, the main U.S. bond index, lost 13%, its worst year since it began in 1976. Over the same year, $XLE, the S&P 500 energy sector ETF, returned 64%, gold was flat, and cash earned ~1.5%. Now what if I told you there's a framework that would've said to own cash and energy in 2022, not stocks and bonds? That framework is called Gave's Four Quadrants, after Charles Gave, co-founder of Gavekal, a macro research firm. It uses two ratios built from market prices, the S&P 500 vs. Oil and Gold vs. Treasuries, to place the economy in one of four environments, and it describes what to own and what to avoid in each. Here's how stocks, bonds, gold, and cash tend to perform in each environment: → Deflationary boom: Stocks, bonds, and cash rise, and gold underperforms. → Inflationary boom: Stocks and gold rise, cash does very little, and bonds fall. → Deflationary bust: Bonds and cash rise, gold stays fairly stable, and stocks fall. → Inflationary bust: Gold and cash rise, while stocks and bonds fall. In my backtest of Gave's rules from 1970 to September 2026, a portfolio split equally between cash, the S&P 500, and either 10-year Treasuries or gold, whichever the framework favored, would have returned 5.7% per year after inflation. Its max drawdown was 28%, vs. 54% for the S&P 500. As of the end of September 2026, the two ratios place the U.S. in an inflationary boom phase. But since January 2025, the S&P 500 to gold ratio has been below its 7-year average, which has often come a few months before the S&P 500 to oil ratio drops below its own 7-year average. If that happens, the U.S. is back in an inflationary bust phase, like 2022. So how do you read the two ratios yourself, and what do they say to own today? That's what I walk through in my new ~20-minute video!
@StableBread

Fajasy on X

The Navy plans to buy more ships, and BWX Technologies $BWXT doesn’t charge a set price per reactor. $BWXT makes the fuel, reactor cores, steam generators, and other reactor components for the Navy’s Virginia- and Columbia-class submarines and Ford-class carriers. $BWXT now produces two to three of these reactors/year, Joe Miller, president of Government Operations, said at its Investor Day on September 29, 2026. The Navy buys under multi-year pricing agreements, so orders arrive in large blocks: → February 2025: $2.1B of naval reactor component contracts. → July 2025: $2.6B, including options. → May 2026: $1.45B, mostly long-lead material (parts ordered years before a ship is built) under the first of five annual task orders through 2030. → October 2026: $189M of naval fuel, to be completed by August 2027. $BWXT’s plants carry large fixed costs, so final pricing depends on how many ship sets (all the reactor components for one ship) the Navy orders, CFO Mike Fitzgerald said at Investor Day. The Navy’s 30-year shipbuilding plan, released in May, calls for (1) “buying two attack boats per year for the next 30 years,” meaning Virginia-class submarines, (2) a new carrier every four years instead of every five, and (3) 15 nuclear-powered Trump-class battleships, per USNI News, the U.S. Naval Institute’s news service. $BWXT’s own read of the plan is naval growth of 4-6%/year from the existing ship classes. Each Ford-class ship set takes ~8 years to deliver, so ordering a carrier every five years left gap years with one ship set in $BWXT’s plants instead of two. CEO Rex Geveden said on the Q2 call that the four-year cadence takes out “that revenue bathtub that we’ve been going through” and has “a bigger volume impact than even adding a battleship.” The next carrier’s long-lead orders come in 2028, but Fitzgerald said at Investor Day the faster cadence won’t really show up in $BWXT’s numbers until around 2030. A Trump-class battleship would use one Ford-class reactor (a carrier uses two), so $BWXT could build the reactor on its existing lines, but Congress still has to fund the program. Fitzgerald said $BWXT’s 2030 targets exclude the battleship program, so congressional funding would be extra growth.
@convequity 3 clicks

Convequity on X

We exited $LITE at the start of 3Q26 and stayed out at the 4Q26 rebalance. Lumentum's exposure to AI optics is real, but it depends on design choices that are still open. 1. Lumentum is one of the suppliers of high-power lasers for external laser sources, where the laser sits in its own module and feeds light to the optics. Growth in AI optics lifts this business only as far as customers choose these designs. 2. Co-packaged optics (CPO) puts the optics in the same package as the chip. Some CPO designs keep external lasers, which suits Lumentum. Others move the light source closer to the package, or replace lasers with microLEDs, tiny LEDs used for short links. Wider use of these would cut demand for its lasers. 3. Laser and silicon-photonics technology built for LiDAR (laser-based sensing) is being adapted for data-center links, which could bring new competitors. We have added LiDAR exposure and will cover it in Part 2 or 3 of our 4Q26 rebalance series. 4. Optical circuit switching (OCS) connects fibers by steering light between them. Lumentum's MEMS switches use tiny movable mirrors and suit many ports, low loss and paths that stay in place for long periods. Designs that must change paths quickly and in smaller units are more likely to use silicon-photonics switches. MEMS should win a meaningful share, but probably not all of it. Lumentum keeps credible exposure to external lasers and OCS, but both depend on unsettled design choices. At the 4Q26 rebalance, that uncertainty was enough for us to stay out.
@StableBread 2 clicks

Fajasy on X

“Tens of billions of new opportunity” is how BWX Technologies $BWXT CEO Rex Geveden describes uranium enrichment, the middle of the nuclear fuel chain. After naval reactors, $BWXT’s other big government business is uranium, which it calls special materials. It covers processing, downblending (diluting Cold War-era high-enriched uranium into lower-enriched fuel), and now enrichment for defense use. $BWXT says revenue grew from ~$285M in 2023 to ~$550M in 2026 guidance, 24%/year, and expects high-single to low-double-digit growth from there to 2030. Geveden named its two largest growth programs on the August 3 call, high-purity depleted uranium (HPDU) and defense fuels enrichment. $BWXT’s release on its purchase of Aerojet Ordnance Tennessee (A.O.T.) from L3Harris $LHX calls the unit the “sole provider of depleted uranium to the U.S. government.” Nine months after the purchase closed, $BWXT won a $1.6B, 10-year contract to produce up to 300 metric tons/year of HPDU at A.O.T.’s Jonesborough, Tennessee site. HPDU is depleted uranium metal refined to the purity the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the Department of Energy (DOE) agency running the nuclear weapons complex, needs at its Y-12 plant to maintain the deterrent. Construction starts in late 2026, per $BWXT’s Investor Day on September 29, 2026. For defense fuels, the military needs unobligated uranium, meaning uranium free of the peaceful-use pledges attached to foreign-supplied material. An August 2026 report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress’s audit arm, says the last U.S. plant able to enrich unobligated material, the Paducah plant in Kentucky, stopped in 2013. In September 2025, NNSA awarded $BWXT a sole-source contract valued at $1.5B to license, build, and run a pilot enrichment plant at Erwin, Tennessee, per the same report. $BWXT built a centrifuge manufacturing facility in Oak Ridge in seven months, plans to test its first prototype centrifuge by the end of 2026, and expects to file the Erwin license application in Q1 2027, with the plant running ~2035. Enrichment sits in the middle of the fuel chain, between uranium producers like Energy Fuels $UUUU and fuel plants like Erwin. The Investor Day deck says what’s “required to meet defense fuel needs through 2052” is $36.8B or more, citing the GAO and $BWXT’s own estimates. NNSA projects enough high-enriched uranium for naval propulsion “until the 2050s,” and enough unobligated low-enriched uranium for tritium (a hydrogen isotope used in nuclear warheads) through the early 2040s, per the same GAO report. Still, $BWXT earns revenue while it develops, licenses, and builds the plant, which is why the enrichment program drove most of the government segment’s Q2 2026 revenue growth.

Investor Letters

All letters

Boyz in the Hood

Robinhood’s AI agents, 24/7 equity trading and 10:1 crypto perpetual futures encourage higher retail trading velocity, leverage and…

HOOD $98B
WHAT ARE WE DOING? “Contrarians At The Gate”

Vertiv Holdings Co. (VRT)

Vertiv's 33% stock decline followed a 2026 forecast increase, despite a $15 billion backlog and rising AI data-center demand for power and…

VRT $94B
SixSigmaCapital: Navigating the Financial Markets
TYL · long

Tyler Technologies INC

Tyler Technologies, TYL, is positioned as a resilient govtech software provider if AI disrupts enterprise SaaS.

TYL $14B
Value Investors Club

Research Roundup Vol. LI

Nvidia’s Q2 2027 triple-digit growth and above-consensus FY28 outlook reinforce AI infrastructure spending, while Symbotic’s new automation…

SYM $26B
Monte Independent Investment Research

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

109 publications

Newsletters 92

YouTube 4

Blogs 12

Seeking Alpha 45 of 216

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

74 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

189 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.