Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Monday, October 26, 2026

Back to today

Merger Monday & Election Implications

EQT’s $50 billion merger with Range Resources and Ovintiv’s $1.26 billion acquisition of Logan Energy reshape North American oil and gas alongside Brazil and British Columbia election…

EQT $34BRRC $13B
Bison Insights 7 clicks

From X

@convequity 1 click

Convequity on X

$NVDA vs $AVGO: The Optical Edge NVIDIA can keep growing while facing pressure from more directions. Custom chips, optical supply constraints and specialized inference systems give customers more reasons to consider alternatives. Broadcom’s optical capabilities could help it win the accompanying compute order. Customers need both accelerators and the optical components that connect them to bring capacity online. Securing those components alongside an ASIC purchase could shift the customer’s platform choice toward AVGO. Control across lasers, photonic and electronic chips, and packaging also gives Broadcom more freedom to optimize the complete design. Embedded lasers could reduce the laser power required, easing dependence on scarce, high-power external lasers, although replacement becomes harder. For AVGO, this remains a potential design route. NVIDIA can respond through partnerships, but separate suppliers still have their own margins and product priorities. Google ($GOOGL) and Amazon ($AMZN) are expanding the alternatives through TPUs and Trainium. Our ABBX model allocates 10GW of Anthropic’s 13.8GW planned capacity to those two platforms. The plans span different timelines, but show how a few large buyers could redirect substantial spending away from GPUs. Huawei adds pressure through its integrated optical approach and the prospect of Chinese models supplying cheaper tokens internationally. That could affect both hardware choices and the prices compute providers can charge. Cerebras ($CBRS) targets workloads where faster responses matter. It can compete for latency-sensitive decoding without replacing GPUs across every stage of inference. NVIDIA’s defenses remain substantial. GPU batching supports high total output, flexibility across workloads matters, and its ecosystem is deeply established. Customers can use GPUs for prefill and specialized chips for decoding. Wider enterprise model development would also favor NVIDIA because smaller buyers have less reason to fund custom-chip programmes. At comparable valuations, we prefer adding to AVGO: it can benefit from custom-silicon adoption while helping customers secure the optics needed to deploy it. For NVIDIA, the key question is how much market share and pricing power it retains as customers gain more alternatives.
@StableBread 4 clicks

Fajasy on X

One of the world’s 10 biggest financial institutions signed a deal in 2024 to deploy software from Nubeva Technologies $NBVAF (TSXV: $NBVA). Nubeva won’t name the bank, but its filings leave a trail. The April 2024 release on the deal said revenue from the first 12 months “is not expected to be material,” and no press release or filing has updated the deal since. Nubeva reports revenue by country, and in FY2026, U.K. revenue was $204,055, the same figure as the license line. Nubeva also discloses what share of revenue its largest customers make up. In both of the last two years, U.K. revenue matched one customer’s share almost exactly. In FY2026, U.K. revenue was 40.8% of the total ($204,055 / $500,586), and the two largest customers were 41% each. In FY2025, U.K. revenue was 36.6% ($193,986 / $530,616), and the second-largest customer was 37%. One of the two 41% customers lines up with the support and maintenance line, 41.1% of FY2026 revenue ($205,712 / $500,586), which the last customer of Nubeva’s old TLS (web-traffic decryption) product pays. That means the license revenue, the U.K. revenue, and the remaining 41% customer all appear to be the same account. The FY2025 statements show the 37% customer at 0% of FY2024 revenue, so it started paying in FY2025, the first full fiscal year after the bank deal. In a June 2024 video, CEO Randy Chou said the bank doesn’t want anyone to know it uses Nubeva. If the U.K. customer is the bank, HSBC $HSBC is the likeliest candidate. It’s based in London, and at eighth by assets, it’s the only U.K.-headquartered bank in S&P Global $SPGI’s top 10. Then there’s Netskope $NTSK. The company that bought Nubeva’s key-capture patents runs a public page titled “Netskope + HSBC” that pitches its platform to the bank. It’s a sales page, with a “Meet with your Netskope team” button and a named Netskope sales rep, and it pitches Netskope against a “Bluecoat / Zscaler hybrid approach,” which reads like HSBC’s current setup. It also shows Netskope courting HSBC, not HSBC buying from Netskope, and nothing on the page mentions Nubeva or ransomware. If the bank is HSBC, Netskope, which owns the key-capture patents Nubeva sold, is already pitching Nubeva’s biggest license customer. None of this proves the bank is HSBC. But in the latest quarter (February-April 2026), instead of growing, revenue from the U.K. customer fell ~70% (vs. a 19% rise in the same quarter a year earlier). License revenue was $18,796 ($204,055 for the year minus $185,259 through January), vs. the ~$62K/quarter it averaged in the first three quarters. The FY2026 MD&A doesn’t say whether the license customer renewed. If it didn’t, Nubeva likely lost the bank (possibly HSBC) behind 41% of its FY2026 revenue. The six-month report due by December 30, 2026 will show whether license revenue came back.
@convequity

Convequity on X

$RBRK's backup engine breaks data into fixed-size blocks, for example 4 MB, and stores only the unique blocks across backups. Commvault and Cohesity instead divide data into variable-sized chunks, with the boundaries set by the content itself. Each design has a trade-off. With fixed blocks, a small change inside a block means the whole block gets written again, so Rubrik uses more storage. In return, hashing and comparing blocks is simple, which means faster backups and lower compute overhead. With variable chunks, only the changed portions are written, so storage use is much lower. Working out chunk boundaries and hashes as the data comes in takes more CPU and memory, which can slowdown backups. Cohesity offsets part of this with a scale-out architecture that processes in parallel across nodes. The two designs fit two different jobs. Variable-length deduplication suits long-term archives, where storage cost matters more than speed. Fixed-block deduplication suits recovery after a hack or ransomware attack, where fast restores and predictable performance matter more than saving storage. That matches how each company started. Rubrik came into the market in 2014 focused on security and on getting critical data back quickly after a breach. Cohesity started from a different idea. It built its own file system that spreads data across many servers, each with its own computing power. Backup copies stay readable like normal files, so companies could search and analyze them where they sit, without restoring them first. Security came second. The two are now moving closer together. Cohesity has leaned much more into security and recovery, especially after buying Veritas's backup business in 2024.
@aleabitoreddit 2 clicks

Serenity on X

$CCXI looks like it's going public Q4 2026. And my hope is that it sort of looks like $OKLO if they generate enough excitement. Watched the investor presentation the other day, just waiting for the public listing anytime soon (I personally added some the other day). Big fan of humanoids, pretty confident physical AI shift is coming next. I'm personally not looking too much about the price action while it's in its filing phase, fun usually begins after ticker change. We'll see what happens

Investor Letters

All letters

Molina & Kinsale

Molina Healthcare and Kinsale Capital’s earnings are reassessed through a long-term lens, emphasizing conviction and detachment during…

MOH $11BKNSL $8.1B
Bearstone 8 clicks

Tower Semiconductor Deep Dive

Tower Semiconductor’s low-loss photonics chips halve lasers in 1.6T optical modules, supporting a $680 million annualized photonics run…

TSEM $22B
CV's Substack 10 clicks
WRBY · long

Warby Parker

Warby Parker's $25 valuation does not capture potential upside from smartglasses alongside its core omnichannel eyewear business.

WRBY $3.1B
Value Investors Club 3 clicks

Margin Call

Petrobras’s Morpho-1 well revived hopes that Brazil’s Equatorial Margin can become a major new oil frontier after hydrocarbons were…

PBR $81B
Doomberg 12 clicks

Our Views on CoreWeave

CoreWeave's financial statements point to a business model familiar to the authors after a closer review of the AI infrastructure company.

CRWV $34B
WHAT ARE WE DOING? “Contrarians At The Gate” 12 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

129 publications

Newsletters 109

YouTube 4

Blogs 15

Seeking Alpha 66 of 259

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

91 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

190 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.