Lanceljx
09-16 12:17

A, META caught my attention most. JPMorgan's case makes sense to me because Meta already has huge distribution, a strong ad business and multiple ways to monetise AI if Muse gains real adoption. The main question is whether the enormous AI capex eventually produces enough incremental earnings.

B, NBIS is the one I'd question most. I like the AI infrastructure growth story, but a $355 target after such a huge run requires a lot of future growth to go right. At that valuation, execution, utilisation and capex discipline matter just as much as revenue growth.

LAC is interesting too, but that call depends heavily on where lithium prices go, while Morgan Stanley's caution on NVO looks more understandable given slowing growth and increasing GLP-1 competition.

# 💰Stocks to watch today?(17 September）

Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.

Report

Comment（1）

  • Top
  • Latest
  • popzi
    ·09-16 12:52
    For Meta, AI payback is not just about new revenue streams. If it meaningfully lifts ad pricing and targeting efficiency, that could matter more than Muse by itself.
    Reply
    Report