AI护城河真的存在吗？

人工智能领域存在护城河吗？

Do moats exist in AI?

Motley Fool 隐藏宝石投资现在开始。

Motley Fool hidden gems investing starts now.

欢迎来到 Motley Fool 隐藏宝石投资。

Welcome to Motley Fool hidden gems investing.

我是 Travis Hoium，今天和我一起的是 Lou Whiteman 和 Matt Frankel。

I'm Travis Hoium joined today by Lou Whiteman and Matt Frankel.

各位，现在是一年中比较有意思的时候，因为我们现在正处于日历第三季度的末尾。

Guys, we have a it's kind of an interesting time of the year because we're at the end of the calendar third quarter.

财报季还没开始，但人工智能领域有很多变动，未来一个月到六个月可能会有几家公司上市，Anthropic 很可能是第一家。

Earnings season hasn't begun yet, but there is a lot of moving and shaking in the world of artificial intelligence, couple of IPOs that are potentially coming in the next month to six months with Anthropic likely to be first.

所以我想聊聊，如果我们看这些公司，不妨从宏观角度来看。

So I wanted to talk about if we're looking at some of these companies, let's take a big picture approach.

我的问题之一是，人工智能领域真的存在护城河吗？

And one of the questions that I have is, do moats really exist in artificial intelligence?

如果你看看投资的历史，找到有护城河的公司是赚钱的绝佳方式。

If you look at the history of investing, finding companies with moats is a phenomenal way to make money.

在八十年代，护城河是由供应和大型品牌驱动的。

In the eighties, moats were driven by supply and big brands.

所以，你知道，只要买你能买到的最大的、最好的品牌，拥有最多客户的零售商，你作为投资者会表现得非常好。

So just, you know, buy the biggest best brand you possibly can, The retailer with the most customers, you're gonna do phenomenally well as investor.

聚合器在两千年代和二十一十年代赢得了需求平台，比如亚马逊、Netflix、优步。

Aggregators kind of won the demand platforms, Amazon, Netflix, Uber in the two thousands and the twenty tens.

但是，Lou，在人工智能的世界里，护城河存在吗？

But Lou, do moats exist in the world of artificial intelligence?

因为看起来好像一个护城河只存在五分钟，然后另一个模型发布了，大家都转向ChatGPT，然后，哦，Muse发布了。

Because it seems like it one exists for five minutes and then another model's released and everybody moves over to chat GPT and then, oh, Muse is released.

所以现在大家都在尝试Muse。

So now we everybody's trying out Muse.

这些护城河看起来非常脆弱，还是你有不同的看法？

It seems like these are incredibly fragile moats or do you see it differently?

特拉维斯，你该提前给我打个预防针的，因为这可是我死磕到底的话题。

So Travis, you should have given me a trigger warning here because you you you this this is a hill I'll die on.

你问我这个问题算是问错人了，因为我觉得金融界关于护城河的讨论，99%都是胡扯。

I I'm a terrible person to ask this in part because I think 99% of the discussion of moats in finance is just balderdash.

我根本不相信护城河真的存在。

I don't think moats really exist.

就算存在，也是极其罕见的。

If they exist, they're very rare.

而且作为投资者，你只能在事后才看得出来。

And as an investor, they're really only recognizable in hindsight.

我不觉得在当下能找出很多例子。

I don't think in real time there are plenty of examples.

2014年有一本关于护城河价值的书挺有名的。

There was a famous 2014 book about the value of moats.

你翻翻看，里面提到了大概20家公司，现在一半都已经倒闭了。

And you look through, there's 20 or so companies that are mentioned in that, half of them are out of business now.

对吧？

Okay?

所以我的意思是，我们真正在讨论的其实就是竞争优势，但到了某个程度你就无法克服了。在AI领域我几乎看不到任何护城河，因为从定义上讲，这些公司连定价权都没有。

So everything I mean, all we're really talking about is competitive advantage that gets to a I point where you can't overcome don't see any moats in AI, almost by definition, because none of these companies even have pricing power.

怎么可能有护城河呢？

How can you have a moat?

你连和客户谈价格的主动权都没有，又怎么能说你有那种无法被征服的优势呢？

How can you have this idea that you cannot be conquered when you can't even control the terms with your customer on pricing?

我看不到这里有任何持久的竞争优势，而且我也不觉得短期内会出现。

I don't see any permanent competitive advantages here, and I don't anticipate that happening anytime soon.

马特，你也这么看吗？

Matt, do you see it the same way?

我比卢对AI的护城河稍微乐观一点。

I'm a little less pessimistic about the moats in AI than Lou.

但这些护城河显然很脆弱。

But the moats definitely appear fragile.

我的意思是，几年前，ChatGPT明显有先发优势。

What I mean by that is a couple years ago, ChatGPT clearly had the first mover advantage.

一年前，在查询量方面，他们占了79%的市场份额。

A year ago, they had a 79% market share when it came to just query volume.

那是2025年初。

That was the start 2025.

现在降到了54%。

Now it's down to 54%.

那25个百分点的市场份额就这么没了。

That's twenty twenty five percentage points of market share that that's gone.

同一时期，Claude从大约1%涨到了9%。

In the same time, Claude went from roughly 1% to 9%.

而且，能力本身并不是护城河。

And and the capability is not the moat.

这一点，我和Lou的看法完全一致。

That's one place where Lou and I will clearly agree.

所有前沿AI模型在能力上其实都差不多，差距很小。

All of the the frontier AI models are within a little you know, a narrow band when it comes to capability.

我觉得真正的护城河有那么几个。

That there there's a couple of true moats that I see.

我不知道有没有人完全抓住了这些机会。

I don't know if anyone's captured them completely yet.

一个是深入企业的工作流程，就是成为工作流程的一部分。

One is capturing enterprise workflow, like being ingrained in workflow.

这也是为什么那些所谓会被AI颠覆的软件公司，收入增长反而更快，客户流失也不严重。

It's the same reason that some of the software companies that, quote, could be disrupted by AI are still growing their revenue faster, not seeing too much customer churn.

因为他们已经融入了工作流程。

It's because they're embedded in workflow.

比如Claude Code就是一个很好的例子。

Like, Claude Code is a big example of that.

我每天都在用Claude CoWork。

I use Claude CoWork every day.

我不会把它换成能力更强的模型，因为我已经依赖它了。

I'm not going to switch that to a more capable model because there I already depend on it.

另一个我看到的护城河是分发渠道。

The the other one is distribution that I see.

想想 Gemini。

Think of Gemini.

Gemini 的使用量在过去一年里增长了 450%。

Gemini usage is up 450% over the past year.

为什么？

And why?

不是因为他们有定价权，也不是因为别的，而是因为 Gemini 已经融入了谷歌做的每一件事。

Not because they have pricing power, not because anything of that, because they Gemini is ingrained into everything Google does.

它被强推给每一个用谷歌地图、Gmail 和谷歌搜索的人。

It it's being, you know, force fed to everyone who uses Google Maps, who uses Gmail, who uses, you know, Google Search.

所以分发渠道是一个巨大的竞争优势。

So distribution is is a big competitive advantage.

我不知道这种模式能持续多久，但看起来确实有可能保持一段时间。

I don't know how durable of a mode it is, but that seems to be something that could have some staying power here.

确实令人印象深刻。

As impressive.

这跟我们为什么都用必应是一个道理。

It's the same reason we all use Bing.

哎呀。

Oh, man.

提出来吧。

Bring it up.

那么，Lou，这让我想到另一个问题。当我们看这个领域时，和过去相比有什么不同？无论是看消费品公司、零售商，还是过去二十年的科技行业，最终获胜的公司都是打败了它们面对的竞争对手，但那时它们并没有同时和所有其他公司竞争，对吧？

Well, so, Lou, that does bring me to my other question, which is when we look at this space, what seems so different than in the past, whether you're looking at consumer packaged goods or retailers or even just the last twenty years in technology, that was all companies that the companies that ended up winning ended up beating the competitors that they had, but then they weren't competing with also all the other companies, right?

比如香蕉公司不会和麦片公司竞争。

Like the banana company isn't competing with the cereal company.

但现在所有这些科技公司，都在某种程度上为AI的未来相互竞争。

But now we have all of these tech companies, all of them in some way competing with each other in the future of AI.

所以今年年初Anthropic领先，然后突然之间，我们以为已经没戏的META，现在可能成为2026年最引人注目的产品发布。

So you have Anthropic takes the lead early this year and then suddenly out of nowhere, META, who we thought was kind of done and dusted is is now potentially is the most compelling product release of 2026.

从经济和投资的角度来看，挑战的一部分似乎是他们都在追逐同一个目标。

It seems like part of the challenge from an economics and investing standpoint is that they're all chasing after the same puck.

在这样的世界里，利润率和护城河似乎很难建立。

And in that world, margins and moats seem really tough to build.

这些公司都是建立在现有业务上的，虽然不是垄断，但都是各自行业的主导力量。

And these are all companies that built their existing business based not not monopolies, but being the dominant force in an industry.

所以这种情况他们以前没遇到过。

So this is not something they've dealt with.

但我确实觉得这很有趣。

But I do think it's interesting.

我拿Bing开玩笑，但我是认真的。

I made the joke about Bing, but I'm serious with that.

因为是的，现在Gemini是消费者的选择，因为目前没有哪个真的特别好，所以我们只是用现成的。

Because yes, right now Gemini is the thing for consumers because none of it is really that good, so we're just using what's there.

如果这个MetaMuse产品真的好用，那就有理由去尝试别的东西了。

If this MetaMuse product is good, that's a reason to use something different.

而且我觉得如果真有这么有说服力的产品，Gemini就完全没有护城河了。

And I don't think Gemini will have a moat at all then if there's actually a compelling case.

就像Chrome一样，尽管它一开始处于劣势，但就因为它是更好的浏览器，最终赢得了浏览器大战。

Just like Chrome, despite its disadvantage, took over the browser wars just because it was a better browser.

所以再说回护城河，可能我对护城河的标准太高了。

So again, moats, and maybe I just have too high of a standard of moat.

如果我们只是说某些公司在某个时刻有竞争优势，那当然有。

If we're just talking about do some companies have competitive advantages in a moment, of course they do.

资本主义就是这样运作的。

That's how capitalism works.

但是那种可以围绕它来投资的想法，比如我可以信任这家公司，因为它的竞争优势强到我不需要担心，

But this idea that there is something to invest around, like I can trust this company because they have a competitive advantage that's strong enough that I don't have to worry about it.

这在商业中太罕见了。

That is so rare in business.

资本主义的定义就是这些优势很少见。

Just kind of the definition of capitalism is that we see the that these are rare.

所以我觉得我们花了太多时间讨论护城河。

So I just I just think we spend too much time talking about MOD's.

作为一个行业，它还很年轻。

As an industry, it's a very young industry.

而且你说得对，两年前的情况和现在完全不同。

And to your point, two years ago looked very different than today.

我现在甚至不太确定谁有持久的竞争优势。

I don't even really know who has a durable competitive advantage right now.

带着这些问题和对持久竞争优势的思考，我们马上要讨论估值了。

With those questions and the durable competitive advantages in mind, we're gonna talk about valuations in just a moment.

你正在收听 Motley Fool 的 Hidden Gems Invest。

You're listening to Motley Fool, Hidden Gems Invest

嘿，Fidelity。

Hey, Fidelity.

用富达应用投资要花多少钱？

What's it cost to invest with the Fidelity app?

最低1美元起投，美国股票和ETF没有账户费或交易佣金。

Start with as little as $1 with no account fees or trade commissions on US stocks and ETFs.

这听起来太棒了。

That's music to my ears.

我只能说说而已。

I can only talk.

投资有风险，包括本金损失的风险。

Investing involves risk, including risk of loss.

零账户费仅适用于零售经纪账户。

Zero account fees apply to retail brokerage accounts only.

零佣金不适用于被富达指定为专业股票交易员的客户。

$0 commission does not apply to customers designated by Fidelity as a professional equity trader.

少数ETF需支付100美元的服务费。

A limited number of ETFs are subject to a service fee of $100.

详情请见fidelity.com/commissions。

See details at fidelity.com/commissions.

富达经纪服务有限责任公司，纽约证券交易所和SIPC会员。

Fidelity Broker Services LLC, member NYSE SIPC.

隆重推出Fidelity Trader Plus，富达新一代高级交易平台。

Introducing Fidelity Trader Plus, the next generation of advanced trading from Fidelity.

您可以自定义工具和图表，并在桌面端、网页端和移动端无缝使用，随时随地快速交易。

Customize your tools and charts and access them seamlessly across desktop, web, and mobile for faster trades anywhere you go.

快来试试全新的Fidelity Trader Plus吧。

Try the all new Fidelity Trader Plus.

想了解更多我们迄今最强大的交易平台，请访问fidelity.com/traderplus。

Learn more about our most powerful trading platform yet at fidelity.com/traderplus.

投资涉及风险，包括本金损失的风险。

Investing involves risk, including risk of loss.

富达经纪服务有限责任公司。

Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC.

纽交所会员，SIPC成员。

Member, NYSE SIPC.

欢迎回到节目。

Welcome back to the show.

今天我要问你们的第二个问题是，你们怎么给这些AI公司估值？

The second question I have for you guys today is how do you value these AI companies?

这个问题的背景是，SpaceX进行了IPO，其中包含了x AI以及所有相关的内容。

And the context for this is we had the SpaceX IPO, so that includes x AI and all the stuff that involved in that.

我们在他们的招股说明书或者S-1文件里发现，他们实际上主要是一家AI公司，而不是主要是一家太空公司，我觉得这有点讽刺。

We found out in their prospectus or or in their s one that they're actually mostly an AI company, not actually mostly a space company, which is I think a little bit ironic.

但是，Matt，当你看这些公司时，我们看到市场份额有起有落，利润率和定价也有起有落。

But, Matt, as as you look at these companies, we've seen market share ebb and flow, we've seen margins and pricing ebb and flow.

所以考虑到这一点，你怎么给这些公司估值，尤其是当它们上市的时候？

So with that in mind, how do you value some of these companies, especially as they come to market?

比如当Anthropic的S-1公开时，你怎么看它，然后说，这就是我会给这家公司定价的地方，或者我可能会避开的地方？

Like when the Anthropic S1 becomes public, how do you look at that and say, here's where I would price this company to see a value or where I would maybe kind of stay away?

简单来说，我不知道怎么给这些公司估值，别人也不知道。

The short answer is I don't know how to value these companies and neither does anybody else.

我们还没看到公开的S1文件。

Haven't seen a public S1.

Anthropic向公众披露的营收计算方式不一样。

Anthropic uses different revenue calculations that they're revealing to the public.

比如，他们用的是毛收入，不是净收入。

They're using gross revenue, not not net revenue, just for example.

所以，当营收从今年年初的90亿美元增长到7月底的650亿美元，这样的增长速度下，给一家公司估值确实很难。

So it's tough to value a business when revenue is growing at a at a run rate from $9,000,000,000 at the start of this year to $65,000,000,000 as of the end of July.

这是Anthropic的情况。

That's Anthropic.

但就像我说的，我们还没看到公开的S1文件。

But like I said, we we don't we haven't seen the public s one.

他们用的会计方法，我们不知道，因为我们还没看到公开的S1文件。

The the accounting they use, we don't know what accounting they use because we haven't seen the public s one.

我们不知道他们的收入中，企业客户和消费者各占多少比例。

We don't know what percentage of their revenue is enterprise versus consumer.

这对估值影响很大。

That makes a big difference in the valuation.

企业客户的收入通常利润率更高，而且更稳定。

Enterprise revenue is generally higher margin and and stickier.

你知道，他们需要多少钱？

They're you know, how much money will they need?

他们赚了多少钱？

How much money are they making?

我们只能大概猜测Anthropic今年需要多少资本支出。

We can only kinda speculate how much CapEx Anthropic is gonna need this year.

我们真的只能猜测他们现在亏损多少，只能说亏损非常非常多。

We can only really speculate how much they're losing right now other than to say lots and lots.

你知道，这些都会影响估值。

You know, these play into the valuation.

而且根本没有可比性。

And and there's simply no comparison.

我们找不到一家上市公司能作为参照，既增长这么快，规模又已经这么大。

We don't have a basis for comparison to a public company that is growing this fast, that is at this scale already.

SpaceX 在这么大规模下也没有增长这么快。

SpaceX isn't growing this fast at at this scale.

所以我会非常仔细地看那份 S-1 文件。

So I'll be looking at the the s one very closely.

一旦我们拿到真实数据，我可能就能更好地回答你，怎么给 Anthropic 估值，等 OpenAI 的文件出来，也能给它们估值。

Once we have real numbers, I might have a better answer for you as to how how to value Anthropic and and OpenAI when we eventually get theirs.

但你知道，那会很有意思，那是我真正会重点关注的 S-1 文件之一。

But there there you know, it it'll be really interest that's one of the s ones I'm really gonna be paying attention to.

Matt，你会看哪个数字？

Matt, is there one number that you would look at?

我想问 Lou 关于九十年代对比的问题。

I I'm just I I wanna ask Lou about comparisons to the nineties.

但是，你知道，在九十年代，大家会看像眼球这样的指标。

But, you know, in in the nineties, you would you would look at metrics like eyeballs.

我觉得现在已经不这么做了，但你会看收入这个数字，然后说，天哪。

We're not I don't think doing that anymore, but is is revenue the number that you would look at and say, oh my gosh.

他们的收入同比增长了800%，而且年化运行率已经达到650亿美元。

They're growing revenue at 800% year over year, and it's at a $65,000,000,000 run rate.

所以，我不知道，给个合理的倍数，那可能就是我感兴趣的地方。

So therefore, I don't know, put a reasonable multiple on that, and that's where I would maybe be maybe be interested.

看收入是个好指标吗，还是说要看盈利能力方面的东西？

Is is that a good number to look at, or is there something in profitability?

嗯，回到MOD的讨论，收入留存是我真正会看的数字。

Well, going back to the MOD conversation, revenue retention is a number that I would really look at.

这些公司留住收入的能力怎么样？

How well are these companies retaining revenue?

还是说，有人这个月为Claude付20美元，下个月为ChatGPT付20美元，就这样一直下去？

Or is someone paying $20 this month for Claude, dollars 20 next month for ChatGPT, and so on and so on?

他们的收入流失得很快吗？

Are they churning revenue really fast?

我想看看单位经济是不是在变好。

I want to see if the unit economics are getting better.

就像我们在MOD讨论里说的，这些公司都还没有建立起定价权。

As we said in the MOD discussion, none of these companies have established pricing power yet.

随着这些公司指数级扩张，还要建设算力等等，单位经济会怎样？

The unit economics as these companies scale exponentially and have to build out their compute and things like that?

单位经济是在变好还是变差？

Are the unit economics getting better or worse?

你只要看看毛利率的趋势就能看出来。

And you can see that by just looking at the gross margin trend over time.

所以，结合收入留存和毛利率趋势，你就能很清楚地看到这些业务的真实情况。

So between revenue retention and gross margin trends, you'll you'll get a really clear picture of the real situation with these businesses.

回到你最初的问题，我怎么给这些公司估值？

So back to your original question, how do I value these companies?

答案是更少。

The answer is less.

和Matt一样，我不知道少多少，因为我们还没看到实际数字。

And like with Matt, I don't know how much less because we haven't actually seen the numbers.

我觉得这两家公司似乎都不太愿意拿出审计过的数字，但肯定比我们听到的要少。

I don't think either of the companies seem to want to put forward the audited numbers when you say something, but less than what we're hearing.

我来告诉你为什么。

And I'll tell you why.

不是说它们没有价值。

It's not to say they're not without value.

这两家公司都有巨大的价值，但我们讨论的数字会让它们跻身全球最有价值公司前十名。

Both companies have massive amounts of value, but we are talking about numbers that would place them among the top 10 most valuable companies in the world.

我接受有一天它们可能达到这个水平的说法。

I will buy the argument that one day they could be.

这个我认。

Will accept that.

我甚至可能会同意。

I might even agree.

但我猜这些公司将来不会都成为最有价值的公司。

But my guess is all of these companies will not be among the most valuable in the future.

有些会失败，有些会严重落后。

Some will fail, some will be seriously second best.

所以我不愿意假设这些公司中的任何一家能在未来几代人中实现巨大增长，因为我甚至不知道谁是赢家。

So I am not willing to assume mega growth for generations to come from any of these people when I don't even know who the winner is.

只是，那里确实有实质内容。

It's just it it it's there's a there there.

这不是eToys那种炒作水平，但我们从未试图让eToys成为万亿美元的公司。

This isn't e toys level hype, but we never tried to make e toys a trillion dollar company.

即使其中一些，你回到pets.com。

Even some of those, you go you go back to pets.com.

我们几个月前在节目里讨论过这个，但它的市值相对于它在互联网泡沫中获得的关注度来说，小得惊人。

We talked about this on the show a few months ago, but its market cap was shockingly small for as much mindshare as it got from the .com bubble.

这些都是世界上最大的公司。

These are some of the biggest companies in the world.

卢，最后说一句。

Lou, final word on this.

在这个领域，是不是暂时避开这些AI相关的股票，直到我们更清楚这个行业的竞争优势，也就是你所说的那些，到底是什么，这样比较好？

Is this an area where it's just okay to stay away for a while in any of these sort of AI related names until we get better answers on what the competitive advantages, as you might call them, are gonna be in the industry?

我是说，任何东西只要价格合适，都是好交易。

I mean, anything is a good deal at a price.

也许有一天我们看到这些数字，比我想象的要好，那我可能会重新考虑。

And maybe if we one day see these numbers and they're better than I think they are, then maybe I'll reconsider.

但现在，我觉得我们了解得还不够。

But right now, I don't think we know enough.

我是说，马特刚才提到了，但你看，显然他们现在报告的是收到的收入，而不是真正属于他们的收入。

I mean, Matt was talking about it, but look, apparently what they're doing right now is they are reporting revenue collected, not revenue that goes to them.

所以如果我产生了100亿美元的收入，但其中60亿是付给联盟伙伴之类的。

So if I am generating $10,000,000,000 in revenue, but 6,000,000,000 if it's going out the door to affiliates and stuff like that.

那我们解释一下这是什么意思，因为如果你不熟悉这个，举个例子，优步就是个好例子。

So let's explain what that means, because if you're not familiar with this, example, Uber is a good example.

如果你花20美元坐一次优步，优步不会把这20美元算作收入，那是20美元的预订量。

If you pay $20 for an Uber ride, Uber does not count that as $20 in revenue, that is $20 bookings.

抽成比例，通常是25%左右，才是优步的收入。

The take rate, which is usually about 25% is going to be Uber's revenue.

所以5美元的收入，20美元的总预订量，他们就是这样报告的。而你说的是，Anthropic，至少从我们现在知道的情况来看，说我们有20美元的收入。

So $5 in revenue, dollars 20 in gross bookings, that's the way that they would report it and what you're saying is that Anthropic, at least from what we know right now is saying we have $20 in revenue.

从我们所知道的来看，再说一次，能看到那些经过审计的财务数据真是太好了，对吧？

From what we know, and again, lot of this is really nice to see those audited financials, wouldn't it?

但是是的，在我们了解更多之前，我只是觉得，说不是所有公司都值几万亿美元，这不算什么批评或激进的观点。

But yeah, until we know more, I just, look, I don't think it's really a slam or a hot take to say not all companies are worth trillions of dollars.

但现在，我们被要求假设所有这些公司都值一万亿美元。

But right now, we are being asked to assume that all of these companies are worth a trillion dollars.

我觉得我们可以有点耐心，让事情慢慢发展。

I think we're allowed to be a little patient and let that simmer.

看看这些公司的义务是什么也会很有趣，因为这些义务是以数千亿美元的现金来衡量的，而他们目前还没有这些现金。

It'll be interesting to see what too, what the obligations are for these companies because those are measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars cash that they do not yet have.

我们回来的时候，我实际上会从卢和马特那里拿一些股票。

When we come back, I'm gonna actually get some stocks out of Lou and Matt.

他们今天对人工智能领域感兴趣的是什么？

Where are they interested in in the AI space today?

你正在收听的是Motley Fool和Jim的投资节目。

You're listening to Motley Fool and Jim's Invest

你刚刚发现你的销售团队面临无法完成配额的风险。

You just found out that your sales team is at risk of missing quota.

别慌。

Don't panic.

直接问Rippling AI。

Just ask Rippling AI.

由于它基于你的实时人员和业务数据，Rippling AI可以从Rippling和Salesforce中提取指标，生成一个适合会议使用的仪表板，显示配额完成情况、人员编制计划以及按地区划分的月度收入与配额对比。

Since it's built on your real time people and business data, Rippling AI can pull metrics from Rippling and Salesforce into a meeting ready dashboard showing quota attainment, headcount plan, and monthly revenue to quota by region.

几秒钟内，你就能清楚看到配额风险背后的原因，并在错过之前解决它。

In seconds, you'll see exactly what's behind your quota risk and fix it before it's missed.

问题得到解答，行动已经采取，危机化解了。

Question answered, action taken, crisis averted.

当你有关键的业务问题需要答案时，不要只是提交工单，然后等上几周才拿到过时的报告。

When you have critical business questions that need answers, don't just file a ticket and wait weeks for an outdated report.

描述你的需求，让 Rippling AI 根据你的实时人员和业务数据立即构建，无论是带有详细图表的仪表板，还是带有正确触发器、条件和审批的自动化工作流。

Describe what you need and have Rippling AI build it instantly from your live people and business data, whether it's a dashboard with detailed charts or automated workflows with the right triggers, conditions, and approvals.

准备好掌控你的业务了吗？

Ready to rule your business?

前往 rippling.ai/fool，获取唯一一款能让你全面了解情况并在整个组织中执行复杂操作的 AI。

Head to rippling.ai/fool to get the only AI built to give you full visibility and take complex actions across your entire organization.

网址是 rippling.ai/fool。

That's rippling.ai/fool.

今天就注册获取独家访问权限，rippling.ai/fool。

Sign up for exclusive access today, rippling dot a I slash fool.

欢迎回到节目，各位，今天我们来聊聊人工智能领域的投资机会。

Welcome back to the show, guys, as you look for opportunities in the world of artificial intelligence today.

你现在关注哪些股票？

What kind of stocks are you looking at right now?

我觉得，很多AI基础设施股票在过去一个月里都跌得很惨。

So, I mean, there there are a lot of these AI infrastructure stocks that have, you know, cratered over the past month.

有些公司虽然财报很好，还上调了业绩指引，但股价还是跌了。

Some of them did so after, you know, reporting great earnings, raising guidance, things like that.

不过即便如此，很多股票依然非常贵。

But even after that, there's a lot that are very, very expensive.

我相信你和卢都会同意，我对那种市盈率高达100倍的电力公司不感兴趣。

I'm sure you and Lou would both agree that I'm not interested in a power company that's trading at a 100 times revenue or something like that.

但还是有一些股票依然很有吸引力。

But there are a few that are still really attractive investments.

Modine Manufacturing就是我现在关注的一只股票。

Modine Manufacturing is one that I have my eye on right now.

股票代码是MOD。

Ticker symbol is MOD.

如果你听说过Comfort Systems，那是一个更受欢迎的卖铲子卖镐头的投资标的。

It's if you've ever heard of Comfort Systems, that's a more popular picks and shovels play.

他们做的事情几乎一样，但估值对我来说合理得多。

They do almost the same thing, but the valuation just makes a whole lot more sense to me.

他们专注于热管理，特别是冷却。

They specialize in thermal management, specifically cooling.

数据中心业务无疑是公司目前最令人兴奋的部分。

And the data center business is not surprisingly the most exciting part of the company right now.

总体来看，在最近一个财年，他们的营收同比增长了23%。

Overall, their revenue grew 23% year over year in the latest fiscal year.

数据中心业务的营收增长了90%。

The data center revenue grew 90%.

他们刚刚从一家超大规模云服务商那里拿到了一份价值40亿美元的多年期合同。

They just got a $4,000,000,000 multiyear deal from one of the hyperscalers.

我们不知道是哪一家，但这是用于冷却产品和数据中心的。

We don't know which one, but it's for cooling products and data centers.

这是个很大的问题。

It's a major problem.

数据中心越复杂，需要的冷却就越多。

The more complex data centers get, the more cooling they're gonna need.

而且不像其他一些卖铲子的公司那么贵，Modine的远期市盈率只有22倍。

And unlike some of the other companies in the picks and shovels space that are really expensive, Modine trades for 22 times forward earnings.

他们预计未来几年数据中心收入年增长率在50%到70%之间。

They expect 50 to 70% annualized data center revenue growth over the next couple of years.

其中大部分已经锁定了。

Most of that's already booked.

他们预计2027财年整体销售额增长20%到35%，调整后的EBITDA增长超过40%。

They're guiding for 20 to 35% overall sales growth in their current the 2027 fiscal year, more than 40% growth in adjusted EBITDA.

记住，这项业务远不止数据中心，如果你对AI建设能持续多久持怀疑态度，这家公司值得一看，因为它确实是个多元化的业务，尽管其他部分显然没有数据中心增长那么快。

Remember, there's a lot more to this business than data centers, which is kinda if you're, you know, skeptical about how long the AI build out's gonna go on at this pace, this could be a good one to look at because it is a truly diversified business, even though obviously the rest of it isn't growing as fast as the data center side.

有时候无聊一点反而是好事。

Sometimes boring is good.

卢，你在哪里看到机会？

Lou, where are you seeing opportunities?

所以我现在对卖铲子的游戏不太感兴趣，因为我们已经处于周期后期了。

So I am less interested in picks and shovel game this right now because we are kind of late in the cycle.

卖铲子的听起来很棒，而且是在主要受益者已经涨过之后，一种比较聪明的参与趋势的方式。

Picks and shovels sound great and they are kind of a clever way to get in on a trend after the primary beneficiaries have already

二阶导数，如果你愿意这么说的话。

Second derivative, if you will.

所以如果一阶导数太贵了，这就是一个后门。

So like if the first derivative is too expensive, this is a backdoor way in.

但现在，当那些实际公司比卖铲子的还便宜的时候，为什么要买铲子呢？

But right now, why buy the pick and shovels when the actual companies that they serve are trading at a discount to them?

马特说得对，莫丁作为卖铲子的确实挺便宜，但你还是可以拿那个22倍市盈率跟Alphabet比一比。

Matt's right, Modine is pretty cheap for a pick and shovel, but you can still that 22 times earnings, compare that to Alphabet.

而且，你知道，为什么不直接买Alphabet呢？

And, you know, why not just buy Alphabet?

我的答案虽然很无聊，但我会选英伟达、Alphabet、微软这些公司，主要是因为它们有很多种赢法。

And that's I mean, as boring as my answer is, my answer would be the NVIDIA's, the Alphabet's, the Microsoft's, mostly because they have multiple ways to win.

我不需要那个。

I don't need it.

这不是一个全有或全无的AI赌注。

It's not an all or nothing AI bet.

它们都有其他业务。

They aren't they all have other businesses.

即使AI不是我们想的那样，或者它们的AI不是它们所期望的，

Even if AI isn't what they we think or even if their AI isn't what they

最坏的情况似乎就是我们稍微放慢支出，然后有更多现金。

hope What seems like the worst case scenario is we we just slow our spending down a little bit and we have more cash.

而且我们还有这个其他很棒的业务。

And we still have this other great business.

但是你看，这里有个更简单的方法。

But look, here's an even easier way.

大家一直在担心标普500指数过于集中，我们知道它对这些AI超大规模企业的权重太高了。

People have been stressing out about there's too much concentration in the S and P 500, that we know it's too heavily weighted for these AI hyperscalers.

但如果你今天想投资AI，那其实是优势，不是弱点。

But if you were looking today to invest in AI, that's an advantage, not a weakness.

所以直接买标普500指数，你就能获得大量AI敞口，而不用在趋势后期承担单一公司的风险——或者我不该说后期，但至少不是早期。

So just buy the S and P 500 and you'll get plenty of exposure to AI without having to take single party risk late in or I shouldn't even say late, but not early in the trend.

所以我觉得说实话，标普500可能比任何其他选择都更好。

So I think honestly, the S and P 500 might be a better choice than anything.

嗯，我很期待接下来一两周内能看到Anthropic的S-1文件。

Well, I'm excited to see it's could be in the next week or two that we get the s one from Anthropic.

虽然看起来它一直在推迟，但之后我们会有更多内容可以讨论，比如数字看起来怎么样，潜在的护城河或竞争优势是什么，不过这里有很多值得聊的。

Although, it seems like it keeps getting pushed back, but then we'll have more to talk about what what the numbers look like, what the potential moats or competitive advantages look like, but lots to discuss here.

一如既往，节目中的人可能持有他们谈论的股票，而Motley Fool可能有正式的建议支持或反对，所以不要仅仅根据你听到的内容来买卖股票。

As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear.

所有个人理财内容都遵循The Motley Fool的编辑标准，未经广告商批准。

All personal finance content follows The Motley Fool's editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers.

广告是赞助内容，仅供参考。

Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only.

要查看完整的广告披露，请查看我们的节目说明。

To see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes.

我是Travis Hoium，代表Lou Whiteman、Matt Frankel和玻璃后面的Dan Boyd。

For Lou Whiteman, Matt Frankel, and Dan Boyd behind the glass, I'm Travis Hoium.

感谢收听。

Thanks for listening.

我们明天见。

We'll see you here tomorrow.