"Patience is a Super Power" - "The Money is in the waiting"

Tuesday, September 8, 2026

IONQ has effectively assembled a quantum conglomerate!

 


IonQ — Updated Business & Investment Report

September 8, 2026 | NYSE: IONQ

Today's announcement materially strengthens the IonQ investment thesis. The important development is not simply that IonQ has announced a 256-physical-qubit machine. It is that Superion 256 is the first product built around an architecture IonQ intends to manufacture repeatedly and scale toward fault tolerance, while the recently acquired SkyWater gives IonQ direct control over much of the semiconductor fabrication needed to execute that roadmap.

My updated view is that IonQ has evolved from one of several promising quantum-computing companies into something substantially broader: a vertically integrated quantum technology platform spanning compute, fabrication, networking, photonics, sensing, security and software.

That does not mean IonQ has won quantum computing. IBM, Google, Quantinuum and others remain formidable competitors. But among publicly traded pure-play quantum companies, I believe IonQ now has the most complete strategic architecture for turning quantum technology into a large commercial business.


1. The September 8 announcement changes the story

6

IonQ today unveiled Superion 256, its sixth-generation quantum-computing platform. The important specifications are:

  • 256 physical trapped-ion qubits
  • first fully integrated 256-qubit QPUs already fabricated at SkyWater
  • ions have already been trapped in a prototype system
  • orders are being accepted
  • customer deliveries are planned for 2027
  • Superion becomes the underlying platform on which IonQ expects subsequent compute products to be built.

That last point matters most.

This isn't supposed to be a one-off 256-qubit laboratory machine.

Superion is intended to become a scalable product architecture.


2. The significance of SkyWater is becoming much clearer

IonQ completed its roughly $1.8-billion acquisition of SkyWater on July 31. SkyWater brings U.S.-based semiconductor fabrication, advanced packaging and manufacturing capabilities directly inside IonQ.

Today's announcement provides the first particularly tangible evidence for the strategic logic of that acquisition:

IonQ isn't merely talking about manufacturing integration—the first Superion chips have already been fabricated at SkyWater.

That potentially removes one of the biggest problems facing quantum startups:

How do you get from an excellent laboratory experiment to manufacturing thousands—and eventually millions—of repeatable quantum components?

IonQ is attempting to solve that problem internally.

Previously the chain looked approximately like:

IonQ design → outside fabrication → packaging → integration → IonQ quantum computer

It increasingly becomes:

IonQ architecture → IonQ/SkyWater fabrication → packaging → trapped-ion QPU → IonQ system → IonQ network → IonQ software

That vertical integration is unusual in quantum computing.

SkyWater also continues operating as a merchant semiconductor foundry, meaning IonQ potentially obtains a second business model: supplying technologies and fabrication services to the broader quantum ecosystem.


3. IonQ has effectively assembled a quantum conglomerate

This is where I think investors can underestimate what IonQ management has been doing.

The acquisitions increasingly resemble pieces of one architecture.

CapabilityIonQ / acquired technologyStrategic purpose
Quantum processorsIonQTrapped-ion quantum computing
Electronic qubit controlOxford IonicsScalable ion control
Semiconductor fabricationSkyWaterQPU manufacturing
Photonic interconnectLightsynqConnect quantum processors
Quantum memoryLightsynqDistributed quantum computing
Integrated photonicsNexus PhotonicsOptical integration
Quantum networkingQubitekk / ID QuantiqueQuantum internet
Quantum securityIDQQuantum-safe communications
Quantum sensingVector AtomicTiming/navigation/sensing
Space networkingCapella/Skyloom capabilitiesSpace-based infrastructure
Software/automationSeed InnovationsEnterprise/cloud integration

IonQ completed the Oxford Ionics acquisition in September 2025, adding patented trapped-ion control technology, while Lightsynq brought photonic interconnect and quantum-memory capabilities designed specifically to help connect quantum processors into larger systems.

This is increasingly analogous to building the pieces required for a quantum data centre, rather than simply building a quantum computer.


4. Walking Cat may ultimately be more important than Superion

The Walking Cat architecture announced in April is the intellectual foundation underlying the roadmap.

IonQ describes it as an end-to-end architecture covering error correction, logical architecture, compiler and physical machine design.

Its significance is straightforward.

Today's quantum computers have physical qubits.

Useful fault-tolerant quantum computing requires logical qubits protected by error correction.

Walking Cat is IonQ's proposed bridge between the two.

IonQ's updated roadmap is extraordinarily ambitious:

YearPhysical qubitsLogical qubits
2026100–256+12
202710,000800
202820,0001,600
2029200,0008,000
20302,000,00080,000

IonQ is targeting approximately 99.99% physical-qubit fidelity through this scaling trajectory.

This is where SkyWater, Oxford Ionics and Lightsynq begin fitting together.

**IonQ trapped ions

  • Oxford electronic control
  • SkyWater manufacturing
  • Lightsynq/Nexus photonic interconnects
  • Walking Cat error correction
    = distributed fault-tolerant quantum computing.**

That is a much more compelling architecture than simply attempting to construct one gigantic quantum processor.


5. It reinforces the networked-computer thesis

One aspect of IonQ's strategy that I consider particularly attractive is modular scaling.

Eventually there are practical limits to how many qubits can conveniently be controlled inside a single quantum processing unit.

The alternative is analogous to classical supercomputing:

build many powerful processors and connect them.

Lightsynq's photonic interconnect technology is intended to allow separate trapped-ion processors to communicate quantum mechanically. IonQ has already demonstrated two connected commercial quantum computers, an important early step toward distributed quantum computing.

This potentially produces:

QPU → quantum node → interconnected nodes → quantum data centre → quantum network

And eventually:

quantum internet.

That is why I continue to regard IonQ's networking acquisitions as strategically important rather than peripheral.


6. IonQ also delivered an important cryptography result today

Today's Superion announcement somewhat overshadowed another potentially important development.

IonQ published what it describes as the first fully compiled end-to-end resource estimate for using Shor's algorithm against 256-bit elliptic-curve cryptography.

Using Walking Cat, IonQ estimates that approximately:

20,000 physical qubits

could attack secp256k1 in approximately:

26 days.

Importantly, such a machine does not exist today. IonQ itself explicitly notes that no current computer can execute this attack.

But compare the requirement with the roadmap:

2028 target: ~20,000 physical qubits / 1,600 logical qubits.

That illustrates why IonQ simultaneously wants to own quantum computing and quantum security.

The same technology potentially creates the cryptographic threat—and the commercial demand for quantum-safe networks.


7. Financial performance is finally becoming meaningful

This part of the IonQ story has changed dramatically.

Q2 2026

IonQ reported:

MetricQ2 2026
Revenue$80.1M
YoY revenue growth287%
Cash + investments$3.0B
Pro-forma cash after SkyWater~$2.0B
Adjusted EBITDA loss($120.3M)
Adjusted EPS($0.33)

Revenue exceeded the midpoint of guidance by approximately 20%.

More importantly, the composition is improving:

  • roughly 50% international
  • roughly 60% commercial
  • approximately 25% multi-product.

That suggests IonQ is becoming less dependent upon isolated U.S. government research contracts.


8. Don't be frightened by the $1.87-billion GAAP Q2 loss without understanding it

The headline GAAP loss was enormous:

$1.868 billion / $5.08 per share.

But it badly exaggerates the underlying operating loss.

Approximately $1.576 billion resulted from changes in fair-value measurements. IonQ's adjusted EPS loss was $0.33, and adjusted EBITDA loss was $120.3 million.

The company is unquestionably burning substantial cash as it invests aggressively.

But IonQ is not economically losing nearly $1.9 billion every quarter in normal operations.

That's an important distinction.


9. Today's revenue-guidance increase is significant

Immediately following Q2, IonQ guided to:

$280–290 million 2026 revenue

excluding SkyWater.

Today management updated consolidated guidance to:

$450–460 million

including SkyWater only from its July 31 acquisition date onward and eliminating intercompany revenue between SkyWater and IonQ.

Compare the progression:

2025 actual revenue: $130M
2026 original guidance: $225–245M
after Q1: $260–270M
after Q2: $280–290M
September 8 combined guidance: $450–460M

That is an extraordinary change in scale.

Some of it is acquisition-driven, so investors should not interpret $455 million as purely organic quantum-computing growth. But IonQ still expects roughly 100% organic growth in its legacy business.


10. What should we expect from Q3?

IonQ has not yet officially announced the Q3 reporting date in the materials I found. Third-party earnings calendars currently place it in early-to-mid November, so I would treat any precise date or consensus EPS number as provisional rather than company guidance.

More important than EPS will be five things:

  1. Organic IonQ revenue growth
  2. SkyWater revenue and margin contribution
  3. Superion customer orders
  4. cash burn following the acquisition spree
  5. evidence that the 2027/2028 technical milestones remain on schedule

The first combined IonQ/SkyWater quarter is going to make historical comparisons considerably messier.

I would therefore focus less on headline GAAP EPS and much more on organic revenue, RPO/bookings, adjusted EBITDA, cash consumption and technical milestones.


11. Does IonQ now lead quantum computing?

This requires an important qualification.

I would not say IonQ is definitively ahead of every quantum company.

IBM has tremendous quantum expertise and enterprise relationships. Google has demonstrated exceptionally important quantum-error-correction research. Quantinuum remains arguably IonQ's closest trapped-ion technological competitor.

My current technology ranking (of the "pure plays")

RankCompanyArchitectureWhy it mattersMy rating
1IonQTrapped ionFull-stack strategy, SkyWater manufacturing, networking, photonics, Superion/Walking Cat9.5/10
2QuantinuumTrapped ionExceptional fidelity, 50 logical qubits, advanced QEC, Helios commercially available9.4/10
3InfleqtionNeutral atomPotentially excellent scalability + sensing/timing businesses8.7/10
4D-WaveAnnealing + gate modelMost commercially mature specialized quantum approach8.3/10
5RigettiSuperconductingFast gates, in-house fabrication, but fidelity remains an issue7.8/10

The gap between #1 and the other publicly traded pure plays has, in my assessment, widened during 2026.


12. The most important competitive advantage may be something investors aren't valuing yet

Consider what IonQ now owns.

A competitor wanting to build a large quantum computer may need:

  • semiconductor fabrication
  • advanced packaging
  • ion-trap hardware
  • control electronics
  • lasers
  • photonics
  • quantum memory
  • networking
  • error correction
  • software
  • cybersecurity
  • manufacturing expertise.

IonQ now has all those capabilities internally.

That opens the possibility of IonQ eventually selling more than IonQ computers.

It could become a merchant supplier to the quantum industry.

That is precisely why management keeps using the analogy:

"NVIDIA of quantum."

I would not take that comparison literally—IonQ is nowhere remotely close to NVIDIA's economics, market position or profitability.

But strategically, the aspiration makes sense.

Instead of betting solely on selling complete quantum computers, IonQ wants to provide the infrastructure upon which other quantum systems and applications can be built.


13. Major investment risks

This remains an extremely speculative stock.

The largest risk is execution against the roadmap.

Moving from 256 physical qubits to:

10,000 → 20,000 → 200,000 → 2,000,000

in only four years is an extraordinary engineering challenge.

The second is acquisition integration. IonQ has assembled an enormous number of technologies and organizations very quickly.

Third is dilution and capital allocation. Acquisitions such as the roughly $1.8-billion SkyWater transaction and approximately $1-billion Oxford Ionics acquisition are substantial relative to IonQ's size.

Fourth is valuation. Investors are already paying heavily for technological success that won't be demonstrated for several years.

And finally, competitors will not stand still.


14. What would make the thesis fail?

I would become materially more cautious if IonQ:

misses the 10,000-qubit 2027 target, cannot demonstrate scalable error correction, experiences meaningful deterioration in fidelity as qubit counts increase, fails to demonstrate photonic interconnection between larger processors, burns through cash substantially faster than expected, or repeatedly pushes its fault-tolerant roadmap backward.

Conversely, successful execution of the 2027 10,000-physical-qubit / 800-logical-qubit milestone would be one of the most important technical validations in the company's history.


15. Updated Investment Scorecard

CategoryMy assessment
Core quantum technology10/10
Fault-tolerance strategy10/10
Manufacturing strategy10/10
Quantum networking10/10
Vertical integration10/10
Commercial traction9/10
Revenue growth10/10
Balance sheet9/10
Profitability3/10
Valuation4/10
Execution riskHigh
Long-term upsideExceptional

Overall speculative-growth rating: 9.3/10


Investment conclusion

My IonQ thesis has actually strengthened following today's announcement.

Previously, the investment case largely rested on the belief that IonQ's trapped-ion architecture, high fidelity and networking strategy could eventually produce scalable fault-tolerant quantum computing.

Today we have another piece of evidence.

SkyWater has fabricated the Superion processors.
The prototype is trapping ions.
Superion is being offered commercially.
Walking Cat defines the fault-tolerant architecture.
Lightsynq/Nexus provide the photonic scaling path.
Oxford Ionics provides additional control technology.
SkyWater provides manufacturing.

And IonQ now guides to approximately $450–460 million of 2026 consolidated revenue while retaining roughly $2 billion of pro-forma cash/investments following the SkyWater transaction.

The distinction is increasingly important:

IonQ is no longer merely trying to build a better quantum computer.

It is trying to build the industrial infrastructure for quantum computing.

That is why I believe today's Superion announcement is more important than the jump from 100 to 256 physical qubits might initially suggest. Superion + Walking Cat + SkyWater + Oxford Ionics + Lightsynq/Nexus gives IonQ a credible architecture for moving from hundreds of physical qubits to thousands, then potentially tens or hundreds of thousands of interconnected qubits.

For a long-term speculative investor, I would therefore continue to regard IONQ as the premier publicly traded pure-play quantum holding, while recognizing that the valuation demands substantial technical execution.

The next major inflection point isn't simply Q3 earnings.

It is evidence that Superion can become a manufacturing platform rather than merely another quantum machine.

If IonQ demonstrates that—and then credibly moves toward 10,000 physical / 800 logical qubits in 2027—the argument that IonQ is developing into the platform company of the quantum industry becomes considerably harder to dismiss.

IonQ's Superion 256 announcement
IonQ's updated 2026 financial outlook
IonQ's technology roadmap
IonQ Investor Relations



Tuesday, September 1, 2026

Do you have dry powder for the "Great Ai rotation"? 10 Stocks we like for the next 3 to 12 months!


                  Despite reports to the contrary, the Ai buildout continues to grow!

The Great AI Rotation Fall 2026

10 Stocks Positioned for the Next Phase of AI Infrastructure

September 1, 2026 — A RetireFund Working Investment Report

The next leg of AI spending is increasingly moving beyond GPUs and into the bottlenecks surrounding them—memory, optical connectivity, Ethernet/copper networking, custom silicon, power delivery, cooling and physical data-center systems.

That thesis remains intact despite today's weak tape. On September 1, the S&P 500 fell 0.71% and the Nasdaq 1.03% as long-term yields rose and oil prices jumped. That macro backdrop argues for staged entries rather than chasing rebounds, particularly because several of the best AI-infrastructure names have already undergone significant corrections.

My conclusion after updating the numbers is that COHR, CLS and MU remain the three stocks I would begin with, but the full 10-stock ranking contains several opportunities that may be almost as attractive—particularly MRVL and QCOM.


Executive ranking

RankCompanySept. 1 priceAI roleCurrent stanceAlpha score
1Coherent (COHR)$272.03Optical interconnect / photonicsBUY9.6/10
2Celestica (CLS)$296.24 USAI servers / switches / hardware platformsBUY9.5/10
3Micron (MU)$933.44HBM / DRAM / NANDBUY, staged9.3/10
4Marvell (MRVL)$210.40Custom silicon / networkingBUY9.1/10
5Qualcomm (QCOM)$166.61Edge AI + emerging data-center computeBUY8.9/10
6Vertiv (VRT)$255.97Power / coolingBUY on weakness8.6/10
7Broadcom (AVGO)$368.55Custom AI ASICs / networkingBUY after earnings clarity8.5/10
8Credo (CRDO)$206.63High-speed copper/optical connectivityStarter only8.2/10
9Applied Optoelectronics (AAOI)$103.39Optical transceiversSpeculative BUY7.8/10
10Bloom Energy (BE)$213.63Behind-the-meter data-center powerWAIT / starter only7.5/10

Prices are September 1 U.S. closes where available. COHR closed at $272.03, MU at $933.44, MRVL at $210.40, QCOM at $166.61, VRT at $255.97, CRDO at $206.63, AAOI at $103.39 and BE at $213.63. CLS closed around $296.


1. Coherent — COHR

My #1 near-term AI-rotation idea

At $272.03, COHR is roughly 38% below its $440 52-week high. That alone doesn't make something inexpensive, but the underlying business has continued moving in the opposite direction.

Fiscal Q4 revenue reached $2.05 billion, while non-GAAP EPS was $1.74. More importantly, management guided fiscal Q1 2027 revenue to $2.2–$2.4 billion and non-GAAP EPS to $1.85–$2.05.

That means the stock has experienced a major multiple reset while the company's operating trajectory remains positive.

The strategic attraction is optical connectivity. AI clusters require exponentially more bandwidth between accelerators, racks and data centers. As accelerator performance rises, connectivity becomes a limiting factor. That places optical transceivers, lasers, photonics and datacom components directly in the AI capital-spending stream.

My price map

COHRAction
$265–$280Buy first tranche
$245–$260Strong add
$225–$240Aggressive add if fundamentals intact
>$315Stop chasing; reassess

I would expect the first meaningful rerating to take COHR toward approximately $320–$340. A successful FY2027 ramp could eventually justify $375–$425+.

The risk is that optical components remain cyclical. If hyperscaler capex suddenly slows, COHR's multiple can contract rapidly.

12-month working range: $360–$425.


2. Celestica — CLS

Best combination of quality and growth

Celestica may be the strongest business in this group at today's price.

The company has raised 2026 revenue guidance to $20.5 billion and adjusted EPS guidance to $11.30, representing expected year-over-year growth of approximately 65% and 87%, respectively. Management has also said it expects growth to accelerate again in 2027.

At approximately $296, that $11.30 EPS outlook implies a price-to-current-guidance ratio of roughly:

$296 ÷ $11.30 ≈ 26.2×

For a company producing that level of earnings growth, that is considerably more reasonable than the headline stock chart suggests.

CLS's 52-week range is roughly $183.66–$474.02, putting the shares almost 38% below the high.

My price map

CLS — NYSEAction
$285–$305Buy
$265–$280Strong add
$245–$260Exceptional opportunity if outlook unchanged
>$340Don't chase

For Canadians, the TSX listing is particularly useful. The investment thesis is the same; currency simply changes the quoted share price.

12-month working range: $375–$450.

I would not require CLS to revisit its previous $474 high for this investment to work very well.


3. Micron — MU

The most unusual dislocation of the group

This is where our hedge-fund discussion matters.

Micron was indeed one of the enormous positions held by Situational Awareness, the highly leveraged AI-focused fund that suffered a 67% July loss and was pressured to liquidate most of its roughly $16 billion public-equity portfolio. Citadel purchased much of that portfolio and subsequently disposed of more than 80% of its acquired risk. Reuters confirms the forced unwind.

More specifically, the fund's June filings showed Micron and SanDisk accounting for more than 56% of the portfolio. Micron subsequently fell roughly 24% in July.

So this is one situation where we can reasonably say:

At least part of the selloff was related to portfolio mechanics and leverage rather than Micron's operating performance.

Micron's latest reported quarter was extraordinary: revenue of $41.46 billion, non-GAAP EPS of $25.11 and operating cash flow of $25.39 billion.

MU closed September 1 at $933.44, down 2.64% for the day.

My price map

MUAction
$900–$950First tranche
$850–$890Strong add
$800–$840Aggressive add
>$1,025Wait for consolidation

I would not buy a full MU position at once because memory is notoriously cyclical and expectations have risen enormously.

Nevertheless, this may be the stock with the best chance of a violent rebound if investors conclude the July forced-selling episode has completely cleared.

12-month working range: $1,150–$1,350, with materially greater upside possible if HBM pricing remains unusually strong.


A correction to our earlier hedge-fund discussion

After checking the primary/current reporting more carefully, I would refine what I told you earlier.

There is strong evidence for forced selling affecting MU, and there is evidence that Bloom Energy was also a major Situational Awareness holding. The fund's other disclosed major holdings included SanDisk, Taiwan Semiconductor and Nebius.

I do not have equivalent evidence tying COHR or CLS directly to that forced liquidation.

So I would no longer characterize their corrections as proven consequences of the Situational Awareness unwind.

That distinction matters.


4. Marvell — MRVL

The stock that almost breaks into the top three

MRVL is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

It reported record fiscal Q2 2027 revenue of $2.739 billion, up 37% year over year, while data-center revenue growth accelerated to 46%. Management said AI-related bookings remain exceptionally strong and expects growth to accelerate through the remainder of fiscal 2027.

Yet the shares suffered a severe post-earnings correction.

MRVL closed at $241.45 on August 27, fell more than 10% on August 28, and finished September 1 at $210.40.

That is exactly the type of earnings-related dislocation I look for.

Entry strategy

$200–$215 is attractive.

Below $195, I would become significantly more aggressive provided no customer-loss information emerges.

MRVL is particularly interesting because it touches both sides of the AI infrastructure equation:

custom accelerators and high-speed connectivity.

12-month working range: $270–$325.

If you asked me which stock could displace MU from the top three, MRVL would be the one.


5. Qualcomm — QCOM

The sleeper

QCOM closed September 1 at only $166.61.

That valuation reflects the market's continuing tendency to treat Qualcomm primarily as a smartphone-chip company.

But Qualcomm is increasingly positioning itself across:

edge AI,
automotive,
robotics,
industrial systems,
PC computing,
and now data-center AI.

Its investor materials explicitly highlight a comprehensive data-center roadmap, while the company continues expanding its AI/high-performance-compute positioning.

This is therefore the stock in the ten where the AI optionality is least fully priced in.

That doesn't make QCOM the stock most likely to surge tomorrow. It makes it one of the best asymmetric opportunities if the market begins assigning value to its data-center effort.

My entry range

$160–$170: Buy.

$150–$158: Strong buy.

Below $150 without a fundamental deterioration would be especially attractive.

12-month working range: $205–$235.

For a multi-year Physical-AI portfolio, I would actually rank QCOM above several stocks that rank higher here on short-term momentum.


6. Vertiv — VRT

The picks-and-shovels power winner

AI accelerators are useless without power conversion, thermal management and cooling.

Vertiv sits almost perfectly in this bottleneck.

Q2 was strong enough for management to raise full-year guidance. It now expects approximately $14 billion in 2026 sales, around 31% organic growth, and adjusted EPS of approximately $6.65–$6.75, roughly 60% above 2025 at the midpoint.

At $255.97, however, that implies roughly:

$255.97 ÷ $6.70 ≈ 38× adjusted 2026 EPS.

That is why VRT ranks #6 rather than #2.

The company is excellent.

The valuation is still demanding.

Shares have nevertheless fallen about 20% over the preceding three months.

Entry range

$240–$255: acceptable starter.

$220–$235: very attractive.

Below $215: strong buy, assuming guidance holds.

12-month working range: $310–$350.


7. Broadcom — AVGO

Possibly the best AI company here—but not necessarily the best entry today

Broadcom's fundamentals are astonishing.

Fiscal Q2 AI semiconductor revenue reached $10.8 billion, increasing 143% year over year, driven by custom AI accelerators and networking.

That is precisely where the AI capex cycle is going.

But AVGO reports September 2, meaning buying aggressively tonight would effectively be making an earnings-event bet. Broadcom closed September 1 around $368.55 and remains well below its $495 52-week high.

I therefore prefer:

wait for tomorrow's earnings reaction.

A good report followed by a sell-the-news decline could give us a much better entry.

12-month working range: $440–$500, subject to tomorrow's numbers.


8. Credo — CRDO

Tremendous growth, dangerous expectations

Credo is one of the purest AI-connectivity companies available publicly.

Its just-reported fiscal Q1 2027 revenue was $479 million, up 114.7% year over year, while non-GAAP net income increased approximately 140%.

Yet CRDO fell 8.65% today, closing at $206.63, after already declining sharply from the $280 area in mid-August.

This is interesting—but different from CLS.

CRDO carries much more valuation risk because the market already recognizes the growth story.

Entry range

$195–$210: starter.

$175–$190: meaningful buy.

Below $170: potentially very attractive.

I would not build the entire position today.

12-month working range: $260–$310.


9. Applied Optoelectronics — AAOI

High-risk optical torque

AAOI is the smallest and most speculative optical-networking idea on this list.

The shares closed September 1 at $103.39, down about 4%, versus a 52-week range of roughly $18.50–$233.67.

That enormous range tells you almost everything you need to know about the risk.

If AI optical transceiver demand remains strong and AAOI executes manufacturing expansion correctly, the upside can be enormous.

But this is not COHR.

The balance sheet, customer concentration, margins and execution risk justify a substantially smaller position.

Entry range

$95–$105: speculative starter.

$80–$90: attractive speculation.

I would limit AAOI to perhaps 3–5% of an AI infrastructure basket.

12-month working range: $140–$180, but with unusually wide error bars.


10. Bloom Energy — BE

Fantastic theme; difficult stock price

Bloom's underlying growth is extraordinary.

Q2 revenue reached $1.065 billion, increasing 166% year over year, and management raised full-year revenue guidance to $3.9–$4.2 billion, approximately 100% growth at the midpoint.

And there is a forced-selling angle here too: Bloom was among Situational Awareness's significant holdings and dropped roughly 31% during the July AI unwind.

BE subsequently recovered and closed September 1 at $213.63.

So why only #10?

Because the valuation now assumes a tremendous amount of future success.

The business opportunity may be one of the largest in the entire portfolio, but price discipline is essential.

Entry range

$180–$195: interesting.

$160–$175: buy.

Below $155: strong speculative buy.

At $213+, I would wait.


The portfolio I am planning to construct

If the objective is maximum reasonable alpha rather than simply owning all ten equally, I would not use a 10%/10%/10% structure.

For a hypothetical CAD $100,000 AI-infrastructure portfolio, mine would look approximately like this:

CompanyWeightCAD amountRole
COHR17%$17,000Optical connectivity
CLS17%$17,000AI hardware infrastructure
MU14%$14,000Memory/HBM
MRVL12%$12,000ASIC/network silicon
QCOM11%$11,000AI optionality / Physical AI
VRT9%$9,000Power/cooling
AVGO8%$8,000Custom compute/networking
CRDO5%$5,000High-speed connectivity
AAOI3%$3,000High-beta optical
BE4%$4,000Distributed power

That puts 71% of the portfolio in my top five.

I prefer that concentration because the purpose of this portfolio isn't index-like diversification. It is targeted participation in the physical infrastructure bottlenecks created by AI.


But I would not invest the $100,000 today

This is perhaps the most important part of the report.

With Treasury yields rising, equities weak on September 1, and September historically prone to volatility, I would deploy approximately:

Stage 1 — Now: 40%

Establish COHR, CLS, MU, MRVL and QCOM.

Small VRT/CRDO positions are a maybe.

Stage 2 — Another 5–8% sector correction: 30%

Add primarily to whichever of COHR / CLS / MRVL / QCOM falls without a corresponding earnings deterioration.

Stage 3 — Capitulation or catalyst confirmation: 30%

Use this after either:

a genuine September washout,

or evidence that the AI-infrastructure group has established a higher low and resumed leadership.

This avoids the two mistakes investors commonly make during a correction:

waiting forever for the absolute bottom, or

spending all available cash during the first decline.


The three I am looking to buy by next week

If you wanted to keep this exceptionally simple and buy only three

🥇 COHR

Best rebound setup

$272 is already deep in my preferred first-entry zone.

Its business is growing while its stock has fallen roughly 38% from the high. The connectivity bottleneck is real, and management's FY2027 opening-quarter guidance remains strong.

🥈 CLS

Best business-quality setup

At approximately 26× management's $11.30 EPS guidance, with projected EPS growth approaching 90%, I think the risk/reward is exceptional if Celestica executes.

🥉 MU

Best forced-liquidation/recovery setup

The hedge-fund liquidation is real—not merely speculation—and MU's financial performance is dramatically stronger than its July price action suggested.


Investing a moderate $25,000 as an example

Given today's prices, and although MRVL has become much more attractive after its post-earnings drop.

I like this allocation as entry positions:

PositionUltimate allocationInitial purchase now
COHR$10,000$5,000
CLS$8,750$4,500
MU$6,250$2,500
Cash held back$13,000

So I would put about $12,000 to work now and retain roughly $13,000.

If September gives us another 7–10% AI-infrastructure flush, that cash becomes extremely valuable.

And if the market simply turns higher?

A retail investor would already own meaningful starter positions.


Which one is most likely to “pop” first?

My ranking over the next 30–90 days is slightly different from my long-term ranking:

RankStockWhy
1MUForced-selling overhang + enormous HBM earnings + potential technical snapback
2COHRLarge drawdown + optical-networking rerating
3MRVLFresh post-earnings dislocation
4CLSFundamentals increasingly difficult for market to ignore (Canadian gem)
5CRDOHighest beta if connectivity trade resumes

Over 12–24 months, however, I would put CLS and COHR ahead of MU because their growth is less dependent on memory-cycle economics.


What could invalidate this entire thesis?

There are five things that would negatively impact this scenario!

  1. Hyperscaler capex cuts. If Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Google, Oracle or xAI start materially reducing AI infrastructure budgets, almost everything in this portfolio gets hit. (moderate risk)
  2. Long-duration rates. Today's bond-market selloff matters. Higher yields compress the multiples investors will pay for fast-growth technology. (watch this)
  3. Networking oversupply. A sudden inventory build would hit COHR, CRDO and AAOI disproportionately.(Minimal risk)
  4. Memory pricing reversal. MU's earnings are spectacular precisely because memory economics have become spectacular. That cuts both ways.(Moderate)
  5. AI architecture becoming materially less infrastructure-intensive. This is the existential risk to the entire “trillions of dollars of physical AI infrastructure” thesis.(Moderate risk)

None of those is my base case today.


My September hierarchy

Starter positions by next week

COHR — CLS — MU — MRVL — QCOM

Buy on weakness

Riskier at present

CRDO — AAOI

Wait for a better price

BE

And the most important conclusion from this exercise is that we do not need NVIDIA to keep winning at the same rate for this portfolio to work.

In fact, its strongest scenario may be one in which AI spending keeps climbing but the economic value begins migrating away from the GPU itself toward...

memory, optics, networking, custom silicon, electrical infrastructure and cooling.

COHR, CLS, MU and MRVL now give us four particularly compelling ways to own it at materially reset prices.

I am treating $265–280 COHR, $285–305 CLS and $900–950 MU as actionable first-entry zones right now, while keeping roughly half the intended capital available for September volatility.