Podcast trade ideas

We Study Billionaires

TIP861: Reddit (RDDT): Record Cash Flow, Collapsing Share Price w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

Nov 15, 202614h

Kyle Grieve and Shawn O'Malley revisit Reddit (RDDT), whose stock fell roughly 30% after Q3 2026 despite 50%+ revenue growth, because management warned Google AI answers are cutting traffic and daily users could shrink double digits next quarter. Shawn, a shareholder at ~$105 average cost, says he's a happy buyer below $100 on ~17x operating profit, while Kyle likes the business but wants more time before adding; both stress Google-dependency risk as the key variable. They also note Shawn owns Alphabet and passed on AppLovin.

Positions · 3

• 1:06:04RDDTLongShawn says below $100 per share he is a happy buyer, arguing ~17x operating profit for a 40%-growth, 90%+ gross margin, debt-free business needs no heroic assumptions. — Shawn O'Malley+0.4% since episode
  Why this trade

  “below a $100 per share. Personally, I'm a happy buyer.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Speaker claims fair value is lower than a year ago but that under $100 he would buy more.
  2. Shares trade near $100 with ~40% guided growth and roughly $1B+ annual free cash flow, so valuation is undemanding on owner's earnings.
  3. Result: stay long and add below $100, watching logged-in users and Google traffic.
• 28:51GOOGLLongShawn says he is an Alphabet shareholder 'too proudly' and views Google and Reddit as mutually dependent, with Google still crawling Reddit's content heavily. — Shawn O'Malley+0.1% since episode
  Why this trade

  “As I mentioned, I'm an Alphabet shareholder too proudly.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Shawn states he proudly owns Alphabet shares alongside Reddit.
  2. Google's AI answers rely on human conversation content like Reddit's, supporting its search franchise.
  3. Result: continued long ownership of Alphabet as the traffic landlord in the dynamic.
• 7:55APPAvoidShawn says he is 'pretty glad we decided to pass on' AppLovin, using it as the cautionary example of how fast growth deceleration can revalue high-multiple tech stocks. — Shawn O'Malley-0.1% since episode
  Why this trade

  “AppLovin was one that I'm pretty glad we decided to pass on” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Shawn uses AppLovin as the illustration of a stock punished when growth decelerates from 60% to 50%.
  2. He explicitly states relief at having passed on the investment.
  3. Result: an avoid stance rather than a position.

Ideas · 1

• 1:08:05RDDTLongKyle calls it a good, compelling business with a formidable user-side moat but says open questions on Google dependency and user growth mean holding, or possibly adding lower, is sensible. — Kyle Grieve+0.4% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I still think it's in a really, really good position. I still do think though... there's still just a lot of questions for me.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle identifies Google's AI answers cutting off click-through traffic as a real, current risk, not a distant one.
  2. He still sees user-side network effects, 90%+ gross margins, and diversification of advertisers as durable strengths.
  3. Result: leave the position alone and consider adding if next quarter is uglier at a lower price.

We Study Billionaires

TIP860: Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited (CP.TO): Irreplaceable Moat, Unproven Compounding w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

Nov 12, 202686h

Kyle Grieve and Sean O'Malley analyze Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CP.TO), calling it a wide-moat railroad with an irreplaceable three-country network but unproven capital efficiency after the $31B Kansas City Southern deal. Kyle's valuation lands around $111-$165 per share versus a ~$122 price, implying roughly 7% annual returns, so both hosts explicitly pass on the stock and prefer redeploying capital into Uber; they note indirect rail exposure via Berkshire's BNSF.

Positions · 3

• 1:18:56CPAvoidA wide-moat, hard-to-disrupt railway, but ROIC has dropped to ~7% post-merger and the stock trades near intrinsic value, so the hosts pass. — Kyle Grieve–
  Why this trade

  “with the company's share price being right around intrinsic value, I'm perfectly fine taking a pass on this business.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle's base case yields ~$165 and bear case $111 versus a ~$122 share price, roughly 7% annual return.
  2. That falls short of their 12% hurdle rate and offers little edge.
  3. Both hosts explicitly say they are fine taking a pass on the stock.
• 1:19:58UBERLongUber is cited as the example of entrenched oligopoly discipline producing billions in free cash flow, and Sean prefers adding capital there over CPKC. — Sean O'Malley-1.4% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I would be much more excited for example, to put more capital into a company that we're really excited about like Uber instead.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean argues Uber and Lyft settled market share and stopped subsidizing rides, lifting take rates and free cash flow.
  2. He contrasts this proven compounding with CPKC's unproven returns.
  3. Sean says he would be much more excited to put more capital into Uber instead.
• 1:19:58BRKBLongThey already hold indirect railroad exposure through Berkshire's ownership of BNSF, which they call a decent business generating tons of cash despite ~3% growth. — Sean O'Malley+0.1% since episode
  Why this trade

  “we have our indirect railroad exposure through Berkshire Hathaway and their ownership of BNSF” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean notes the intrinsic value portfolio owns Berkshire, which owns BNSF.
  2. BNSF generates steady cash for decades but grows revenue and pre-tax income under 3%.
  3. They prefer this existing rail exposure over adding CPKC.

Ideas · 1

• 1:09:07NSCAvoidUnion Pacific's announced plan to merge with Norfolk Southern would create a coast-to-coast rival, a risk CPKC has asked regulators to reject. — Kyle Grieve–
  Why this trade

  “Union Pacific is one of those two giant Western railroads and Norfolk Southern is one of the two biggest railroads in the East.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle says a UP-Norfolk Southern merger would put a dent in CPKC's growth story.
  2. Regulators won't decide until sometime in 2027.
  3. This is discussed as a competitive risk, not a standalone trade.

We Study Billionaires

TIP859: Mercado Libre ($MELI): We Doubled Down on Meli w/ Daniel Mahncke & Shawn O'Malley

Nov 8, 2026182h

▶Watch on YouTube

Positions · 3

• ▶ 0:54MELILongA phenomenally run flywheel of marketplace, payments and credit with huge runway; fintech already 43% of revenue and growing faster, and margins should recover as investment scales back. — Shawn O'Malley-1.5% since episode
  Why this trade

  “We just increased the weighting of MercadoLibre in our intrinsic value portfolio from 5% to 7%.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Mahncke models 2026 revenue growth of ~45% and operating margin recovering to 13-14% by 2030, implying ~$177 EPS and fair value near $3,000.
  2. They increased MELI from 5% to 7% of their intrinsic value portfolio, making it the fifth largest position.
  3. At ~$2,300 with a 20% margin of safety they see it clearing their ~12% IRR hurdle over time.
• ▶ 20:59NULongOwned as a high-quality Latin American fintech; MELI's payroll lending is a nod to Nubank, which takes less risk per loan but earns a lower net interest margin after losses. — Daniel Mahncke+7.8% since episode
  Why this trade

  “another portfolio company of ours, which is NewBank, it does get paid roughly twice as much as NewBank” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Mahncke notes Mercado Pago takes more risk but gets paid roughly twice as much as Nubank, implying Nubank's book is more conservative.
  2. The hosts cite Nubank as part of the digitalization wave they like in Latin America and as an existing portfolio stake.
  3. They hold it as a core Latin American consumer/fintech position alongside MELI.
• ▶ 2:36SELongBought at ~$70 as an incredibly cheap stock; Shopee is MELI's fiercest competitor and an emotional hedge, though Mahncke expects it won't displace MELI in Brazil. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Why this trade

  “yes, I do own Sea Limited in my personal portfolio. Looked pretty smart when I first bought it at about $70” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Mahncke says he bought Sea in the $70s believing it was incredibly cheap and likes how its marketplace, gaming and fintech reinforce each other.
  2. Shopee already holds ~18% of Brazil's $100B e-commerce market and is aggressively building logistics and fintech.
  3. He expects the Latin American market to support two or three players, letting both MELI and Sea grow.

Ideas · 1

• ▶ 2:55KSPILongMahncke calls it a fantastic company he might buy, citing extreme customer entrenchment where Kaspis loans get repaid first; they will speak with management soon. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Why this trade

  “I haven't yet bought Kaspi, but I might eventually do so too because it's a fantastic company.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Mahncke says Kaspi is 'a fantastic company' and that he 'might eventually' buy it.
  2. He notes Kaspi is deeply embedded in Kazakh daily life, giving its lending book unusually strong repayment behavior.
  3. That entrenchment is the 'ultimate bull case' he contrasts with MELI's ecosystem.

We Study Billionaires

TIP858: McDonald's ($MCD): Generational Compounder in Historical Drawdown w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

Nov 5, 2026254h

The hosts analyzed McDonald's ($MCD) as a high-quality real-estate-like franchisor trading ~30% off its high, but both ultimately passed on the stock, citing uncertainty around GLP-1 weight-loss drugs (a potential terminal risk to fast-food demand) and insufficiently compensated downside at ~$220 fair value. They see only ~10% expected returns unless the multiple re-rates or the 'Next Strategy' reinvestment works better than expected, and explicitly say they would not own shares.

▶Watch on YouTube

Positions · 2

• ▶ 1:22:43MCDAvoidDespite a 30% drawdown and a real-estate-backed margin of safety, GLP-1 adoption and weak brand perception create a terminal-value risk they aren't compensated for at ~$220 fair value. — Speaker 2-2.9% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I just don't see how I could sleep at night owning shares in McDonald's.” — Speaker 2

  1. Hosts model ~$220 fair value with mid-single-digit EPS growth and ~3% dividend yield, implying ~10% returns.
  2. GLP-1 drugs could structurally shrink fast-food demand, and the 'Next Strategy' rent relief cuts revenue growth.
  3. Therefore they say they don't feel adequately compensated and would not own the stock today.
• ▶ 59:45Chick-fil-ALongShawn says Chick-fil-A is the only fast food he eats, and if it were public he would buy shares 'hand over fist,' citing superior unit economics and brand perception. — Speaker 2–
  Why this trade

  “I do wish they were public because if they were, I would be buying shares hand over fist.” — Speaker 2

  1. Shawn states he wishes Chick-fil-A were public and would be buying shares hand over fist.
  2. He cites ~$24B US sales, $7.7M average unit volume (nearly 2x McDonald's), and stronger service/brand.
  3. That is an explicit personal buy intent on the private company, though no listed ticker exists.

Ideas · 3

• ▶ 50:06LLYLongThe speakers frame GLP-1 drugs like Eli Lilly's Zepbound as a powerful, spreading force that chemically rewrites cravings and threatens fast food, implying a structural tailwind for the drug makers. — Speaker 6+0.6% since episode
  Why this trade

  “medications like Wegovy from Novo and Zepbound from Eli Lilly target specific receptors to achieve two massive shifts in consumer behavior” — Speaker 6

  1. Speaker 6 cites Zepbound from Eli Lilly as targeting receptors to slow digestion and blunt reward pathways.
  2. Hosts note ~11-12% of US adults use GLP-1s and next-gen peptides could be twice as effective, accelerating adoption.
  3. That adoption is framed as a secular growth driver for the GLP-1 producers, though no explicit buy call is made.
• ▶ 50:06NVOLongThe episode treats GLP-1 drugs like Novo's Wegovy as an accelerating, globally spreading force reducing appetite and junk-food cravings, a structural tailwind for the drug maker. — Speaker 6-1.8% since episode
  Why this trade

  “medications like Wegovy from Novo and Zepbound from Eli Lilly target specific receptors” — Speaker 6

  1. Speaker 6 names Wegovy from Novo as a GLP-1 therapy that slows digestion and rewrites reward perception.
  2. Hosts say usage has nearly quadrupled in two years and global rollout has barely begun.
  3. That supports GLP-1 producers' growth even though no explicit recommendation is given.
• ▶ 1:05:22NKEAvoidDaniel invokes Nike as a cautionary analogy for McDonald's: a dominant global brand that has 'lost what made them special,' serving as a negative comparison rather than a buy case. — Speaker 1-7.0% since episode
  Why this trade

  “to me, they sort of have lost what made them special ten to fifteen years ago” — Speaker 1

  1. Daniel says McDonald's is 'a bit in a situation like Nike,' having lost its special edge.
  2. The comparison is used to explain why he is unexcited about McDonald's despite scale and brand.
  3. The implied read-through to Nike itself is negative, though no explicit short or avoid call is made.

We Study Billionaires

TIP857: S&P Global, Novo, Deckers Brands w/ Stig Brodersen, Tobias Carlisle, & Hari Ramachandra

Nov 1, 2026351h

Three value investors pitch stocks the market has fallen out of love with: Hari Ramachandra pitches Novo Nordisk (NVO) at ~12x forward earnings, arguing the obesity franchise is mispriced as a melting ice cube with optionality from the oral drug and amicretin; Stig Brodersen pitches S&P Global (SPGI), which he just bought at $399, seeing a wide-moat ratings/indices duopoly with 10-15% expected returns; Tobias Carlisle pitches Deckers Outdoor (DECK) at ~11x earnings with $1.6B net cash and buybacks at 80% of FCF. Toby also flags On Holding (ON) as a pricier HOKA competitor and Lukewarm on Nike.

Positions · 4

• 4:25NVOLongGood 100-year-old business at 12x forward earnings where the market prices a melting ice cube; bad news is baked in with downside protected by a 4.5% dividend and upside from the oral GLP-1 and amicretin pipeline. — Hari Ramachandra+3.4% since episode
  Why this trade

  “It's a good business at a price that assumes that it's a melting ice cube.” — Hari Ramachandra

  1. Trades at ~12x forward earnings vs Lilly at 24x, with mid-single-digit growth, 4.5% dividend and regulatory moat in diabetes/obesity.
  2. If amicretin succeeds by 2028, returns could reach 18-22% versus 8-10% in the base case; the market values it as a mediocre #2 player.
  3. Buy as a downside-protected, decent-return bet rather than a double next year.
• 44:14SPGILongI bought a $3.99. — Stig Brodersen+1.0% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I bought a $3.99.” — Stig Brodersen

  1. Ratings is an oligopoly protected by regulation and adverse selection—issuers pay to get both Moody's and S&P ratings—while indices earn 69% margins on trillions of AUM.
  2. Stock has gone sideways five years on multiple compression to ~23x earnings while fundamentals printed cash; AI risk concentrated in Capital IQ (~6-8% of market cap).
  3. Stig took a 1% position at $399 with intrinsic value estimated at $450-500 and 10-15% expected returns.
• 1:03:09DECKLongHOKA and UGG owner at ~11x earnings with $1.6B net cash and no debt, buying back 80% of free cash flow; at $77 it's priced for no growth while base case fair value is ~$113. — Tobias Carlisle–
  Why this trade

  “At $77 this is being priced as if it has no growth.” — Tobias Carlisle

  1. Priced at 11x earnings and ~7-8x EV/EBITDA, ~15% of market cap in cash, $4.7B buyback authorization (>40% of market cap) vs stagnant share count down 7% YoY.
  2. Loyal brand followings, clean one-share-class governance and strong capital allocation; macro squeeze on consumers and tariffs are cyclical.
  3. Base case $113 (60% probability), bear $72, bull $161—skew favorable with buybacks putting a bid under the stock.
• 1:07:57NKEAvoidNike is down ~80% from its peak on marketing missteps and tariff/consumer pressure, but Toby finds it 'not interesting at these levels' versus cheaper Deckers and On. — Tobias Carlisle-2.6% since episode
  Why this trade

  “It's not interesting to me at these levels” — Tobias Carlisle

  1. Nike has fallen ~75-80% over five years on marketing missteps, direct-to-consumer missteps and a squeezed consumer.
  2. Toby checks the chart periodically but says it's not interesting at these levels, preferring DECK's net cash and higher margins.
  3. Treated as an avoid relative to the pitch rather than a short.

Ideas · 3

• 6:35LLYLongCited as the winner in GLP-1 obesity with tirzepatide showing better efficacy and ~60% market share, trading at 24x forward earnings versus Novo's 12x. — Hari Ramachandra+0.7% since episode
  Why this trade

  “Eli Lilly has taken up 60% of the market share.” — Hari Ramachandra

  1. Hari notes Lilly's tirzepatide works better for weight loss and took 60% market share from Novo.
  2. That efficacy lead is the reason Lilly commands double Novo's multiple, positioning it as the category leader.
  3. Discussed as the comparative benchmark, not an explicit buy recommendation.
• 32:47MCOLongReferenced as the other half of the ratings duopoly whose bonds-issuer customers need both ratings, making it a similarly protected franchise. — Stig Brodersen–
  Why this trade

  “S and P has 45%, Moody's around 40%” — Stig Brodersen

  1. Stig explains S&P and Moody's ratings complement rather than substitute: issuers need both to clear mandates and avoid paying higher yields.
  2. Moody's holds roughly 40% of the more attractive public ratings market.
  3. Mentioned as peer context rather than a standalone buy call.
• 1:06:54ONLongToby names ON as the most direct HOKA competitor, growing faster with the founder still there, at 14x forward earnings after a 40% slump—but he prefers DECK on net cash and margins. — Tobias Carlisle+0.3% since episode
  Why this trade

  “ON, they're the sort of most direct competitor to HOKA, growing a little bit faster...trading at 14 times forward earnings.” — Tobias Carlisle

  1. ON competes directly with HOKA in running shoes and is growing a bit faster than Deckers.
  2. Trades at 14x forward earnings, more expensive than DECK's ~11x, though down 40% from its high.
  3. Offered as an alternative for exposure, with Toby explicitly preferring Deckers on cash and margins.

We Study Billionaires

TIP856: Airbnb (ABNB): The Business Outgrew Its Peak, The Stock Hasn't w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

Oct 29, 2026423h

Sean O'Malley and Kyle Grieve revisit Airbnb, with Sean reaffirming his bullish long-term thesis on the second-largest position in their Intrinsic Value portfolio. They note gross bookings reaccelerated to mid-teens growth, take rate has stalled near 13% with sponsored listings delayed, margins are expanding slower than hoped, but the app, international markets and hotels are driving growth. Their view: hold and let it compound, and they see Booking.com and Expedia as losing relative share in alternative accommodations.

Positions · 1

• 1:26:58ABNBLongA capital-light travel tollbooth with a strengthening app-driven moat, reaccelerating gross bookings and a long runway in international markets; intrinsic value roughly met but still 'more than fair'. — Sean O'Malley+11.2% since episode
  Why this trade

  “But I still think it's a wonderful company that is operating very very well and the price is more than fair for shares in it.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean argues the business is in better shape than at his original pitch and there is no reason to sell.
  2. App bookings, first-time bookers and expansion markets (India +60%, Brazil +30%) keep the double-digit growth story intact.
  3. They own it at ~13% weight and prefer inaction, letting the thesis compound.

Ideas · 2

• 31:07BKNGAvoidBooking is spending $5-7B a year on Google ads, growing alternative accommodations only 4% versus Airbnb's 10%, and is losing share on Airbnb's home turf. — Sean O'Malley+6.5% since episode
  Why this trade

  “Booking's latest investor relations deck, they showed a 4% growth in alternative accommodations... Airbnb is still taking market share from them.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean notes Booking's alt-accommodation listings grew just 4% versus Airbnb's 10% nights growth.
  2. Kyle highlights Booking's heavy paid-marketing dependence (a third of revenue) and poor AI customer service.
  3. Conclusion: Airbnb is taking share, making Booking the relatively weaker holding.
• 12:47EXPEAvoidExpedia spends about half its revenue on marketing versus a fifth for Airbnb and its hotel-centric product lacks Airbnb's differentiation. — Kyle Grieve–
  Why this trade

  “about half for Expedia. So I think that gives them the ability to acquire customers for a much cheaper price” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle notes Expedia spends roughly half of revenue on marketing versus a fifth for Airbnb.
  2. Its product is commoditized like Booking's and lacks the group-travel and trust moat.
  3. Result: structurally disadvantaged in alternative accommodations versus Airbnb.

We Study Billionaires

TIP855: Shopify (SHOP): The Big Winner of Agentic Commerce? w/ Shawn O'Malley & Daniel Mahncke

Oct 25, 2026519h

Positions · 1

• 1:18:43SHOPAvoidGreat business executing as well as any on the planet, but at 112x operating earnings the stock prices in perfection with no margin of safety; they'd only buy near $100. — Sean O'Malley-14.4% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I'm sure I'll look terrible by saying that the company is probably about fairly valued at maybe a $100 a share.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Shawn models fair value near $100/share using a 35-45x operating earnings multiple vs. ~112x today.
  2. Shopify doubled but the multiple stayed the same, so buyers today make the same 'priced for perfection' bet they passed on at a higher starting point.
  3. They stay out until a selloff brings the price nearer their intrinsic value estimate.

Ideas · 4

• 56:00ETSYAvoidEtsy earns over 100% of operating profit from on-site ads while charging sellers ~25% take, a model that agentic commerce undermines as AI agents match on intent rather than ads. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Why this trade

  “the company earns over 100% of its operating profit from these on-site ads that we mentioned earlier, while charging sellers an all integrate of around 25%.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel argues agents aren't swayed by on-site advertising the way shoppers are, eroding Etsy's ad-driven profit engine.
  2. A successful Etsy seller could build a Shopify store cheaper and get AI-recommended directly.
  3. Pure discovery middlemen get squeezed as merchants defect toward Shopify.
• 1:01:22AMZNLongAmazon keeps leverage via logistics and its own agents, and the growing e-commerce pie can benefit both Amazon and Shopify even as agentic shopping reshapes discovery. — Sean O'Malley+5.8% since episode
  Why this trade

  “the more accurate way to think about it now is the e commerce pie will grow and and probably grow by a lot, and that's good for both of them.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean argues AI likely grows total e-commerce, making the pie bigger for both players.
  2. Amazon retains control of logistics/fulfillment which AI cannot replace, plus its own agent ambitions.
  3. Net view: both can win rather than one necessarily losing to the other.
• 46:43METALongMeta is the safest of the ad platforms in agentic commerce because its ads play during entertainment, not the buying process, and Muse extends it into shopping with a planned transaction fee. — Daniel Mahncke-1.3% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I think Meta is probably the only one that's pretty safe because they play ads when people are looking for entertainment.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel notes Meta ads sit in entertainment, not the purchase funnel, so agents don't displace them.
  2. Meta's Muse plus a stated small transaction fee gives it a new monetization layer.
  3. Hence Meta is relatively insulated versus Google/Amazon advertising risk.
• 47:05GOOGLAvoidGoogle faces a real threat as agentic commerce could erode its core advertising/search-discovery business, though hosts believe it can probably adapt. — Daniel Mahncke-9.3% since episode
  Why this trade

  “But Amazon and Google, I think they actually face a threat here that probably just a year ago, nobody would have imagined that it's possible.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel flags advertising/search as Google's core and directly in the buying process.
  2. AI agents matching on intent bypass traditional popularity-ranked search and its ad model.
  3. He thinks they can figure it out but the threat shouldn't be underestimated.

We Study Billionaires

TIP854: GE Aerospace: Chris Hohn’s Biggest Bet w/ Daniel Mahncke & Shawn O'Malley

Oct 22, 2026591h

▶Watch on YouTube

Positions · 1

• ▶ 47:55TDGAvoidA great business, but its regulatory-moat pricing power has flipped from advantage to risk and beyond 40x earnings it is too much risk, so they pass. — Shawn O'Malley–
  Why this trade

  “the pricing power really turned from an advantage to a risk... beyond 40 times earnings, it just becomes far too much risk for us to get comfortable with. And so that's why we pass on it.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Shawn says TransDigm earns value by squeezing pricing power on government parts without being big enough to be held accountable.
  2. He argues this construct is regulatory-sensitive, echoing FICO where pricing power turned into a risk at high multiples.
  3. Combined with a >40x earnings multiple, they chose to pass on the stock.

Ideas · 3

• ▶ 1:13:11GEAvoidA fantastic, oligopolistic aftermarket cash machine, but at ~40x free cash flow and only high-single-digit expected returns at a 30x exit multiple, they would rather wait for a cheaper price. — Daniel Mahncke+10.7% since episode
  Why this trade

  “I would be surprised that, for example, Chris Hohn, over time, if this keeps being a third of his portfolio, wouldn't sell some stock if we are at these valuations.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Speakers argue GE has a near-monopoly on narrowbody engines, 40% MRO share and a $210B mostly-services backlog at ~40% ROIC.
  2. At ~40x P/FCF, even a generous 30x exit multiple only yields high-single-digit annual returns given ~10% earnings growth.
  3. So it goes on the watch list, not the portfolio: a buy only if the cyclical stock gets meaningfully cheaper.
• ▶ 35:44HEILongNamed as a fantastic aviation aftermarket business and GE's most direct competitor in PMA engine parts, with the regulatory push against OEM pricing power a tailwind. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Why this trade

  “HEICO, on the other hand, is a competitor where they also offer parts for repairs in the older fleets of engines” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Shawn calls HEICO a fantastic business in the aviation space and a profitable parts provider.
  2. Daniel notes HEICO is GE's closest competitor, selling FAA-approved PMA parts for older engine fleets.
  3. Airlines pushing for cheaper certified parts and regulators forcing OEMs to drop warranty restrictions would help HEICO gain share.
• ▶ 13:46SAFRYLongCo-owner of the CFM International 50/50 JV that builds LEAP engines, giving it direct exposure to the same 10,000+ engine backlog and decades of high-margin aftermarket services. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Why this trade

  “The new company was called CFM International and was basically a fifty fifty venture between GE and the company Snecma, which by the way is now called Safran.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel explains CFM International is a 50/50 JV between GE and Safran (formerly Snecma), with each side assembling about half the engines.
  2. LEAP has 10,000+ deliveries and a backlog of 10,000-15,000 engines with shop visits guided to grow ~25%/year through 2030.
  3. Safran therefore shares directly in the LEAP program's services economics that the hosts see as the core value driver.

We Study Billionaires

RWH074: True Wealth w/ Matt Ludmer

Oct 18, 2026687h

A wide-ranging conversation about 'true wealth' that includes only limited, mostly illustrative market commentary. The most actionable investing content is Matt Ludmer's 'three pot portfolio' framework, which emphasizes broad low-cost index/ETF exposure (Dimensional funds, Vanguard Total World, S&P 500) held for the long term, a short-term Treasury 'secure base,' and a ring-fenced 'play' pot for things like Tesla or Bitcoin. He expresses optimism on diversified equities and capitalism generally, but makes no specific, explicit stock recommendations.

Positions · 3

• 2:02:36Dimensional Fund Advisors funds (DFA / Dimensional ETFs)LongLudmer uses Dimensional's factor-tilted index funds as the core of his long-term equity pot to own broad diversified markets cheaply. — Matt Ludmer–
  Why this trade

  “I started studying the models that were coming out of Chicago and looking at the work that what Dimensional was doing.” — Matt Ludmer

  1. He argues the winning approach is owning widely diversified portfolios and holding through volatility.
  2. He cites Dimensional Funds/indexing as the model he adopted for the long-term 'part three' pot.
  3. Result: a long, low-cost diversified equity holding meant to compound over 10+ years.
• 2:14:37TSLALongLudmer holds Tesla as a personal 'part two' speculative bet on the future, ring-fenced from his core portfolio. — Matt Ludmer+10.3% since episode
  Why this trade

  “having some money in... As I do in Tesla or something like that, you know, just as a... As my own personal bet on the future” — Matt Ludmer

  1. He describes a middle 'play' pot for opinions and speculation capped in size.
  2. He names Tesla as his own personal bet held in that pot.
  3. Result: a small, conviction-light long position, not a core allocation.
• 2:05:56Broad US/global equity market (S&P 500 / diversified equities)LongLudmer is structurally bullish on a diversified equity portfolio over 10+ year horizons, citing ~10.5% long-run returns and capitalism's growth. — William Green–
  Why this trade

  “a diversified portfolio of big American businesses, so like the S and P five hundred, generated a return of about 10 and a half percent a year.” — William Green

  1. He argues diversified companies keep beating their cost of capital and growing earnings.
  2. CRSP data 1926-2025 showing ~10.5%/yr for large caps supports holding through drawdowns.
  3. Result: stay fully invested in a broad equity pot for the long run.

Ideas · 2

• 2:15:50VTLongA single globally diversified fund is cited as the simple core holding he used for his parents' account. — William Green–
  Why this trade

  “you could also just as easily say what you've done for your parents over the years, which is pretty much just buy them the Vanguard Total World Stock ETF.” — William Green

  1. He favors systematic-risk-level diversification rather than picking stocks or managers.
  2. Host notes he simply bought his parents the Vanguard Total World Stock ETF as the whole portfolio.
  3. Result: a one-fund, buy-and-hold global equity allocation.
• 2:13:14BitcoinLongBitcoin is mentioned only as an example of the speculative 'play' pot, not a recommended position. — William Green–
  Why this trade

  “I've seen you over the years invest in Tesla or buy Bitcoin or buy Google or whatever” — William Green

  1. He describes clients using the middle pot for opinions and speculative bets.
  2. The host cites him buying Bitcoin as an example of that activity.
  3. Result: an illustrative small speculative allocation, not a firm call.

We Study Billionaires

TIP853: Aritzia (ATZ.TO): The Women's Apparel Brand Conquering the US, plus Nike, Lulu, and More w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

Oct 15, 2026759h

Kyle Grieve makes a high-conviction long call on Aritzia (ATZ.TO), his largest personal position, arguing the brand still has a long US runway and the stock is ~23% undervalued after a 31% drawdown despite 43% revenue growth and 35% comparable sales. Sean O'Malley declines to buy Aritzia, citing his painful Lululemon experience (LULU mentioned over 30 times) and the fragility of brand-only moats in retail, while noting Nike's failed first-party pivot as a cautionary tale.

Positions · 7

• 0:02ATZ.TOLongKyle's largest personal position: brand-led growth with a long US runway at a discount after a 31% drawdown, implying ~23% upside to his $148 intrinsic value. — Kyle Grieve–
  Why this trade

  “I've owned it since 2020, and it's still actually the largest position in my personal portfolio, and that business is Aritzia.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle argues Aritzia's brand is a durable advantage and the US can support roughly 300 stores versus 76 today.
  2. The stock is down ~31% while revenue grew 43% and comps grew 35%, so growth has decoupled from the price.
  3. His base case of ~15% revenue growth and modest margin expansion yields ~$215, and a 23% discount to intrinsic value.
• 1:24:11ATZ.TOAvoidSean passes: brand is Aritzia's only moat, with no switching costs or network effects, and retail brands can turn quickly. — Sean O'Malley–
  Why this trade

  “you don't have a lollapalooza of moats working to your effect here. There are no switching costs” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean says brand is the one competitive advantage and there is no lollapalooza of moats backing it.
  2. Without switching costs or network effects, he fears a reverse network effect if the brand cools.
  3. His Lululemon loss and lack of direct consumer touchpoints keep his conviction too low to buy.
• 3:04LULULongSean bought Lululemon as a cheap compounder at 10-14x earnings with a wide margin of safety, a bet that has so far gone against him. — Sean O'Malley+12.2% since episode
  Why this trade

  “Lululemon was definitely an easier sell to a cheapskate like me. It was trading very cheaply.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean says he was bullish on Lululemon because it traded at 10-14 times earnings even with slowing growth.
  2. He believed that cheap valuation plus a strong brand gave an adequate margin of safety.
  3. CEO turnover, a proxy fight with founder Chip Wilson, and North American sales deceleration have hurt the position.
• 28:03NKEAvoidSean uses Nike as a warning: cutting wholesale to own the customer backfired when customers proved not as loyal as Nike assumed. — Sean O'Malley+7.3% since episode
  Why this trade

  “Nike pretty famously shot themselves in the foot by getting a bit too greedy a few years ago” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean claims Nike greedily cut third-party retailers like Foot Locker to push customers to Nike stores.
  2. Customers were not devoutly loyal and Foot Locker found rival brands could sell just as well in Nike's prime space.
  3. The takeaway is that owning the customer relationship can go wrong, which supports his caution on brand-only retail moats.
• 7:45GOOGLLongSean's intrinsic value portfolio bought Alphabet at ~$178 when AI chatbot fears were killing search, and it has roughly doubled since. — Sean O'Malley-15.5% since episode
  Why this trade

  “We bought it when the market was convinced AI chatbots were going to kill Google search. Our average cost was around $178 a share.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean says the market feared AI chatbots would kill Google search, creating the entry point.
  2. The average cost was around $178 versus a $355 price today.
  3. He argues a rising stock price is not a reason to sell; only a broken thesis is.
• 6:04ABNBLongSean holds Airbnb in the intrinsic value portfolio as a premium compounder with a long runway, up about a third from cost. — Sean O'Malley+12.3% since episode
  Why this trade

  “if you look at Airbnb, it's trading at over 38 times earnings” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean notes Airbnb trades at over 38 times earnings and the portfolio is not afraid of premium multiples.
  2. The team added it at a lower multiple and it is up about a third from their buy price.
  3. He says he sees Airbnb, Reddit, and Aritzia similarly: compounders where inaction is best.
• 6:04RDDTLongSean holds Reddit in the portfolio; explosive growth has let it grow into a lower multiple despite a 37x P/E. — Sean O'Malley-34.1% since episode
  Why this trade

  “Reddit is at 37 times earnings. So we're definitely not afraid of businesses that trade at a premium” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Sean says Reddit trades at 37 times earnings but the portfolio added it and is comfortable holding.
  2. Reddit's growth was explosive enough that the multiple has compressed over time.
  3. He frames Reddit alongside Airbnb and Aritzia as a long-runway compounder worth holding.