Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
FRESH Analysis Report
Aug 19, 2026
4 days ago · 100% complete
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd. (CRDO) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Low · Gem Score -26 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 24 · Value -76 · Sentiment 0 (timing only, not weighted)

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd.

CRDO NASDAQ
Technology · Semiconductors
Grand Cayman, CA KY1-1104, Cayman Islands credosemi.com Updated Aug 19, 12:27am
Price
$245.97
Market Cap
$45.9B
Employees
807
Beta
3.23
Avg Volume
5,435,939
CEO
Mr. William J. Brennan

Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd. is a semiconductor company that develops high-speed connectivity solutions for the global data infrastructure market. The company focuses on enabling efficient, reliable data transmission for applications such as optical and electrical Ethernet and PCI Express used in data centers, cloud computing, and high-performance computing environments. Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd. offers a portfolio that includes integrated circuits, HiWire active electrical cables, optical PAM4 digital signal processors, low-power line card PHY devices, serializer/deserializer (SerDes) chiplets, and SerDes intellectual property licensing. It also provides PCIe retimer solutions, predictive integrity link optimization, telemetry capabilities, and related support, engineering, and royalty services. The company serves hyperscale cloud providers, original equipment and design manufacturers, and optical module manufacturers, supplying components that support growing bandwidth and power-efficiency demands in modern networks. Founded in 2008 and headquartered in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd. operates across key technology regions, including the United States, Mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 19, 2026 6:31am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$234.66
as of Aug 19, 12:40pm (4d ago)
Change · Aug 19
-11.31 (-4.60%)
Day Range
$229.29 – $249.97
52-Week Range
$86.49 – $308.67
50-Day MA
$241.72
200-Day MA
$172.40
Volume
122,721.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 4d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 185,419,000.00
Float 167,899,105.00
Free Float 90.6%
High free float — 90.6% of shares trade freely, ~9.4% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:45pm (4d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:45pm (4d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 19, 2026 3:31am
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
98.00
Stock Price: $245.97
EPS (Diluted): 2.51
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
22.44
Stock Price: $245.97
Total Equity: $2.06B
Shares: 188,232,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
89.13
Market Cap: $45.87B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.16B
EBITDA: $479.64M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$42.8B
Market Cap: $45.87B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.16B
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
68.0%
Gross Profit: $908.35M
Revenue: $1.34B
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
33.3%
Operating Income: $445.01M
Revenue: $1.34B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
35.4%
Net Income: $472.28M
Revenue: $1.34B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
22.9%
Net Income: $472.28M
Total Equity: $2.06B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
49.2%
Operating Income: $445.01M
Tax Rate: 0.7%
Equity: $2.06B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $1.16B
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
10.15
Current Assets: $2.00B
Current Liabilities: $197.09M
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $2.06B
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$7.09
Revenue: $1.34B
Shares: 188,232,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$10.96
Total Equity: $2.06B
Shares: 188,232,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$2.16
Operating CF: $464.29M
CapEx: -$57.30M
Shares: 188,232,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
Last Dividend: $0.00
Stock Price: $245.97
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $472.28M
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 19, 2026 3:31am
Compares CRDO against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:45pm (4d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Revenue $106.5M $184.2M $193.0M $436.8M $1.3B
Cost of Revenue $42.5M $78.0M $73.5M $153.9M $426.8M
Gross Profit $64.0M $106.2M $119.4M $282.9M $908.3M
Operating Expenses $86.0M $127.4M $156.5M $245.8M $463.3M
Operating Income -$22.0M -$21.2M -$37.1M $37.1M $445.0M
Net Income -$22.2M -$16.5M -$28.4M $52.2M $472.3M
EBITDA -$17.2M -$11.7M -$23.3M $59.1M $479.6M
EPS $-0.25 $-0.11 $-0.18 $0.31 $2.65
EPS (Diluted) $-0.25 $-0.11 $-0.18 $0.29 $2.51
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:21am (4d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Cash & Equivalents $259.3M $108.6M $66.9M $236.3M $1.2B
Total Current Assets $332.2M $328.2M $530.3M $713.5M $2.0B
Total Assets $375.7M $397.3M $601.9M $809.3M $2.3B
Current Liabilities $26.5M $31.0M $44.6M $107.7M $197.1M
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $41.5M $49.7M $61.7M $127.7M $232.0M
Total Equity $334.2M $347.6M $540.2M $681.6M $2.1B
Retained Earnings -$90.4M -$107.0M -$135.3M -$83.2M $389.1M
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:45pm (4d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Operating Cash Flow -$30.8M -$24.6M $32.7M $65.1M $464.3M
Capital Expenditure -$17.6M -$21.7M -$15.7M -$36.1M -$57.3M
Free Cash Flow -$48.4M -$46.3M $17.1M $29.0M $407.0M
Acquisitions (net) $0 $0 -$112.9M
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid)
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks $0 $0
Net Change in Cash $155.6M -$150.7M -$41.6M $169.4M $928.6M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 19, 2026 12:45pm (4d ago)
Metric 2023 2024 2025 2026
Revenue Growth +73.0% +4.8% +126.3% +205.7%
Gross Profit Growth +65.9% +12.5% +136.9% +221.1%
Operating Income Growth +3.3% -74.5% +200.2% +1,098.7%
Net Income Growth +25.4% -71.4% +283.9% +805.0%
EBITDA Growth +31.8% -98.7% +353.6% +712.1%
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable 17 computed · 7 not applicable
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for CRDO — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-19
The creme is there an opportunity here? Conditional opportunity
One of the cleanest structural longs on cheap intelligence — Credo's monetized unit is links per accelerator, and that count compounds with every cluster built; the condition is that copper AECs and discrete retiming survive the 224G architecture reset.
Position 77 on exposure 94: the AI capex cycle reaches Credo as raw volume through 68% gross margin and 33% operating margin, already producing $407M FCF on $1.34B revenue, so the savings-to-profit path is proven rather than hoped for. What kills it is not AI demand but architecture and concentration — linear-drive or co-packaged optics removing DSP content, or a top-two customer bringing retimers in-house (customer_diy 38, solution_persistence 57 carry the bear tail to 31). Watch product-mix disclosure between AEC, optical DSP and IP, and any narrowing of sequential growth while hyperscaler networking capex still rises; that divergence appears before the socket loss is announced.
77
AI Position
Strongly favorable - but architecture-dependent
Credo sells the physical wiring of accelerator clusters, so cheaper intelligence directly multiplies its unit volumes — the risk is not demand but whether copper AECs and standalone DSP/retimer silicon stay the chosen way to move those bits.
Exposure 94 Confidence 69 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

Every incremental AI cluster multiplies high-speed link count faster than it multiplies GPUs — scale-up and scale-out fabrics need retimers, AECs and optical DSPs per port, so Credo's monetized unit compounds with cluster size, not with software seats.

Primary Pressure

Its customers are among the most vertically capable buyers on earth: hyperscaler ASIC teams and merchant switch/accelerator vendors can absorb SerDes into their own die, and 224G-era link architectures (linear-drive optics, co-packaged optics) can remove the discrete DSP Credo is paid for.

Critical Hinge

Whether copper AEC attach and discrete retiming survive the 224G/scale-up transition at multiple hyperscalers — observable in product mix disclosure (AEC vs optical DSP vs IP), and in whether revenue concentration broadens beyond the top two customers.

Hard to Reproduce

Silicon-proven mixed-signal SerDes at leading rates, signal-integrity and cable-assembly manufacturing know-how, per-link telemetry/diagnostics software embedded in hyperscaler fleet operations, and multi-year design-in slots inside rack architectures.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 95
Moving data between accelerators at ever-higher rates is the most durable need in AI infrastructure.
Model and cluster scaling makes interconnect bandwidth a first-order constraint; the need for reliable high-speed links grows monotonically with compute deployed, independent of which model architecture wins.
cluster port count per GPU deployed · scale-up fabric bandwidth roadmaps · hyperscaler capex on networking share
relevance 92 · confidence 88
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 57
The need persists; whether it is met by copper AECs and discrete DSP/retimer silicon is the live question.
Linear-drive optics, co-packaged optics and SerDes absorbed into host ASICs each remove a piece of Credo's bill of materials; copper reach also shortens as lane rates double to 224G.
LPO/LRO adoption at hyperscalers · copper reach limits at 224G · CPO design-win announcements · AEC vs optical DSP mix
relevance 90 · confidence 58
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 76
Cheap intelligence is demand for Credo, not a substitute for it — but it also accelerates rivals' design cycles.
Abundant model training and inference converts directly into more links shipped; the offsetting effect is AI-assisted EDA compressing digital design timelines for competitors, though analog SerDes and packaging remain empirical work.
tapeout cadence of competitors · AI-EDA adoption in mixed-signal · time-to-silicon for new 224G entrants
relevance 80 · confidence 70
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 64
Credo is partly paid to guarantee link reliability at scale, which buyers are reluctant to own.
Fleet-level link flap and bit-error diagnostics are operational liabilities hyperscalers prefer to push onto a qualified vendor with telemetry tooling; that reluctance slows insourcing even where capability exists.
link telemetry software attach · RMA/field reliability commentary · qualification cycle length
relevance 45 · confidence 55
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 82
As compute becomes abundant, bandwidth-per-watt becomes the scarce good Credo sells.
Power and interconnect are the binding constraints in AI buildouts, raising the relative importance of low-power high-rate links — exactly the asset class Credo positions on.
pJ/bit specified in RFQs · rack power budget allocation to links · pricing per lane over time
relevance 90 · confidence 72
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 38
Its buyers are unusually capable of integrating SerDes and cable electronics in-house.
Hyperscaler ASIC teams and accelerator vendors already license or own SerDes IP and have strong cost incentive to absorb retiming; Credo's defense is time, proven silicon and reliability rather than customer incapability.
hyperscaler in-house retimer programs · SerDes IP licensing by top customers · customer concentration percentages
relevance 88 · confidence 60
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 76
Agents cannot route around physical layer silicon; the bypass risk is architectural, not agentic.
Credo sits below the software stack, so AI intermediation dynamics barely apply; the analogous risk is design-level bypass by integration, already scored elsewhere.
design-in slots per rack generation · reference architecture inclusion · board-level BOM position
relevance 52 · confidence 68
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 51
Link telemetry data is a mild stickiness aid, not an AI moat.
Fleet diagnostics data improves failure prediction and embeds Credo in operations workflows, but it does not compound into a defensible model advantage.
software/telemetry revenue disclosure · predictive-failure feature adoption · fleet deployment scale
relevance 28 · confidence 50
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 79
AI demand is already converting to profit: 68% gross margin, 33% operating margin, $407M FCF.
Fabless operating leverage means incremental AI-driven volume drops through with limited opex growth; the trajectory from -19% to +33% operating margin in two years shows the conversion is real, not promised.
opex growth vs revenue growth · gross margin at higher volume tiers · FCF conversion sustainability
relevance 72 · confidence 76
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 73
The unit — silicon and cables per port — scales with AI buildout but faces per-lane price erosion.
Volume growth should outrun ASP decay while port counts compound, but each architecture transition resets pricing and can collapse content per link if functions integrate.
ASP per lane trend · content per rack disclosure · product mix shift toward IP licensing
relevance 80 · confidence 65
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 54
Analog SerDes is genuinely hard, but the credible rivals are already large and well-capitalized.
Cheap software does little for signal integrity, packaging and qualification, so AI-native entrants are unlikely; the real compression comes from Broadcom, Marvell, Astera and Chinese suppliers attacking the same sockets.
competitor 224G silicon samples · socket losses at key customers · price competition in AEC bids
relevance 75 · confidence 62

AI Lens thesis

AI reaches Credo as pure volume: the scarce resources in an intelligence-abundant world are power and bandwidth between accelerators, and Credo owns a piece of the bandwidth layer at 68% gross margin with 33% operating margin already achieved on $1.34B revenue — cheap intelligence does not substitute for its product, it orders more of it. The exposure is therefore enormous and directionally positive, but the value capture is contested from both sides: buyers with in-house SerDes ambitions above, and Broadcom/Marvell/Astera plus architecture shifts beside. AI-assisted design tooling shortens digital iteration but does little for analog/packaging/qualification, so entrant compression is real but slower here than in software; the honest read is favorable economics with a genuinely wide tail driven by architecture and concentration, not by whether AI demand persists.

Thesis breaker A lead hyperscaler announcing internally-designed retimer/AEC silicon or a scale-up fabric that eliminates discrete DSPs, visible as flat-to-down sequential revenue while cluster deployments keep rising.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside Power-per-bit becomes the binding constraint in AI data centers; if Credo's link power advantage becomes a specified rack-level requirement, it converts from component vendor to architectural dependency with pricing that survives volume ramps.

Downside Concentration means the AI tailwind and the customer-integration risk arrive through the same one or two counterparties — a single roadmap change at one buyer can reverse a triple-digit growth rate without any change in industry AI spend.

Outcome range spread 62 · unresolved

31Bear case
76Central case
93Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-19 12:57

The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.

Accelerating Credo is compounding revenue at roughly triple-digit YoY with earnings growing faster still, riding AI back-end interconnect demand while taking visible share inside an already-booming category — acceleration is real near-term, but the structural rung must clear a very high implied bar. conf 7/10
Share gain Category growing · Category (semis, and specifically AI data-center connectivity) is in a confirmed boom with ~26% median recent growth and 16.9% 3-year industry revenue CAGR. Credo's +205.7% recent revenue YoY sits roughly 187pp above the industry's ~18.4%, and earnings growth outpaces revenue — it is not merely riding the tide.
Next 2 quarters
Accelerating
Ramping programs already qualified, expanding content per rack, and a booming category mean the next two prints most likely show continued triple-digit-to-high-double-digit YoY with earnings leverage amplifying it. Order lumpiness is the main variance source, not direction.
↑ above expectations
Year 1
Growing
Full-year trajectory stays strongly positive on the existing ramp plus optical DSP and PCIe retimer contribution, but the growth rate almost certainly steps down from the ~200% print as the comparison base resets. That is deceleration within very strong growth, not weakness.
≈ inline with expectations
Years 2–3
Growing
The interconnect content thesis has multi-year legs — each speed transition renews the socket and PCIe/optical lines add independent ramps. But sustaining hyper-growth off a far larger base while NVIDIA, Broadcom, Marvell and hyperscaler ASIC teams have both capability and incentive to insource SerDes is a materially harder task than the last two years.
↓ below expectations
The creme: each rung's call measured against what's already printed (vs analyst estimates · vs guidance / FY consensus · vs price-implied growth) — expectations in print are already in the price, so only the variant margin can pay. Hover a rung's chip for the margin read.
Growth drivers
82 AEC/HiWire attach at hyperscale AI clusters — Active electrical cables win the short-reach, in-rack and rack-to-rack links where optics burn too much power and passive copper cannot reach at 800G/1.6T. Interconnect count scales with GPU count, not with server count, so Credo's unit demand levers off cluster scale-out rather than general IT spend. This is the mechanism behind the measured +205.7% revenue YoY versus an industry ~18.4%.
59 Product-line broadening into optical DSP and PCIe retimers — Beyond AECs, PAM4 optical DSPs, line-card PHYs and PCIe Gen5/6 retiming expand the addressable content per rack and give a second and third ramp behind the first. Each adds a design-win cycle that is somewhat independent of the flagship AEC customer, which is what turns a single-product spike into a multi-year ramp.
51 Operating leverage on a fabless model — Earnings YoY (+805%) far outpacing revenue YoY (+206%) shows fixed R&D and opex being spread over a much larger base with margins intact. Industry-wide operating margins are also expanding (+3.5pp/3yr), so the leverage is not being competed away yet — earnings growth can exceed revenue growth for several more quarters.
42 Category boom provides demand cover — Sector in confirmed boom phase, category median recent growth ~26%, industry revenue CAGR 16.9%. Credo is not fighting the tide for growth; a rising category means design wins convert to volume quickly and pricing pressure is deferred.
Growth risks
73 Customer concentration — A ramp of this magnitude concentrated in a handful of hyperscaler programs means a single platform re-spin, qualification slip, or dual-sourcing decision can flip a quarter from acceleration to decline. Revenue confidence is flagged Low with 0.397 volatility for exactly this reason.
60 In-house SerDes and merchant-silicon insourcing — NVIDIA, Broadcom, Marvell and the hyperscalers themselves all have both the IP and the incentive to absorb SerDes/retiming into switch and accelerator silicon or into cable assemblies from larger vendors. This is the structural threat to the years-2-3 rung: content per rack could be captured upstream even as the category keeps growing.
55 Mathematical base effect — Triple-digit growth cannot repeat off the new base; the quarterly trend is already tagged decelerating. Even excellent execution likely produces a step down in growth rate, which matters because the structural comparator (price-implied ~60%) requires sustained hyper-growth, not just growth.
28 Copper-to-optics substitution risk — If linear-drive or co-packaged optics economics improve faster than expected, some AEC sockets shift to optical modules where competition is far broader. Credo has optical DSP exposure as a hedge, but the mix would be lower-content and more contested.
25 AI capex digestion — Interconnect orders are pulled forward with cluster builds; any hyperscaler pause between generations creates an air pocket that hits a concentrated supplier harder than a diversified one. Macro is neutral but 10y at 4.72 keeps capex discipline live.
AI training and inference clusters are shifting spend from compute-only toward the wiring between accelerators: scale-up and back-end networks now grow faster than server count because links scale with GPU count and with per-lane speed transitions (400G→800G→1.6T). Power per bit has become the binding constraint in the rack, which structurally favors low-power electrical solutions for short reach and DSP-based optics beyond it. Credo sits precisely on that content layer. The counterforce is vertical integration: the same scale that creates the socket makes it worth owning, so the durable question is whether Credo's per-generation SerDes lead and qualification incumbency stay ahead of hyperscaler and merchant-ASIC insourcing. Macro is a second-order input here — neutral rates with a positive curve do not gate AI capex in the next year, though they do enforce eventual ROI discipline.
Growth position composite +5
ShrinkingStallingHoldingGrowingAccelerating
90Next 2 quarters · Accelerating
70Year 1 · Growing
70Years 2–3 · Growing
+5Composite (−100…+100)
A research prediction, not advice. Forward-graded: each rung is scored against the prints that follow it. Not an input to the GEM designation — track record first.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-19 12:44:45
Verdict Overvalued — QoQ growth already decelerated to 7.4% while multiple prices in perpetual 50%+; fair value ~$160-180, wait for Q2 print or drawdown before committing.

The raw trajectory is genuinely extraordinary: quarterly revenue went from $59.7M (Aug-2024) to $437M (May-2026), a 7.3x expansion in seven quarters, with net margin flipping from -16% to +38.7%. Sequential growth Q4→Q1 was $407M→$437M, or 7.4% QoQ — that's a sharp deceleration from the prior $268M→$407M (52% QoQ) and $223M→$268M (20% QoQ). The "Revenue Confidence: decelerating" tag is understating it — this is the single most important number in the file. If Q2 FY27 prints another 5-10% sequential, annualized run-rate settles near $1.9B, not the $2.5B+ that a 34x P/S implies the market is discounting. FCF of $407M on $1.34B revenue (30% FCF margin) is real and impressive; balance sheet ($1.16B cash, zero debt, 10x current ratio) removes any solvency question. This is not a fraud, and it's not a "narrative platform" in the SaaS sense — it's a fabless semi riding an unusually steep customer concentration wave.

Where I diverge from the prior models: the classification engine tagged this "narrative_platform" with confidence 1 (which the anomaly warnings then propagate as "profit metrics are lagging") — that's just wrong for a hardware company already generating 38.7% net margins and $464M operating cash flow. Profit metrics here are not lagging; they are the point. The synthesis verdict ("High Conviction Required") and Thesis score (-8, essentially balanced) are directionally reasonable but too soft. At 34x TTM sales and ~28x forward sales assuming another year of growth, CRDO is priced for a Nvidia-adjacent monopoly outcome in SerDes/AECs. The bear case the market-forces layer flags — hyperscaler in-housing, customer concentration (Amazon and Microsoft reportedly >70% of revenue), commoditization — is the historical base rate for merchant silicon selling into 3-4 buyers with infinite engineering budgets. Marvell and Broadcom exist precisely to compress this pricing.

The contrarian bull angle worth stating: if the QoQ deceleration is a supply-driven pause (packaging/CoWoS-like constraints) rather than demand softening, and 800G→1.6T transitions extend the cycle through CY27, then $1.34B could become $2.5-3B by FY28 with margins holding. Under that scenario, 245 isn't crazy — you're paying ~18x FY28 sales for a category-defining name. But that requires believing the largest customer doesn't in-house AECs (Amazon has publicly explored this), that Astera Labs and Marvell don't take share, and that gross margin holds 68% as volumes scale — historically unprecedented for merchant SerDes at scale. The insider selling on 2026-07-31 (ten separate sales, mostly small — looks like coordinated 10b5-1 or option exercise, not panic) is background noise, not signal.

I agree with the synthesis direction but push harder: this is overvalued, not "high conviction required." Fair value on a demanding-but-defensible frame — 15x FY27 revenue of $2.0B (assuming 50% YoY off current run-rate, well above the implied QoQ trajectory) with 35% FCF margins — gets you to roughly $30B market cap, or ~$160/share. The current $246 embeds a scenario where FY28 revenue exits above $3B and margins expand further, which requires no customer in-housing, no ASIC competition winning sockets, and continued AI capex acceleration. The base rate on all three simultaneously is low. I'd wait for either the Q2 print to confirm re-acceleration (would need >15% QoQ to justify current multiple) or a drawdown to the $160-180 range where the risk/reward on the platform-monopoly narrative becomes defensible. Owning here is paying the narrative peak while the growth rate is already visibly rolling over — the worst combination.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-19 12:45:05
Verdict Overvalued at $245.97 — superb execution is real, but 34.7x sales and ~98x earnings imply years of dominant AI-driven compounding; fairer entry would be below $170 unless revenue re-accelerates toward a $2B+ annual run-rate.

What stands out is not that Credo is “just” growing fast, but how violently its economics inflected in less than two years. Quarterly revenue went from $59.7M in August 2024 to $437.0M in May 2026, a 7.3x jump, while net margin moved from -16.0% to 38.7%. Annual revenue similarly exploded from $193.0M in FY2024 to $1.34B in FY2026, and operating income swung from a $37.1M loss to a $445.0M profit. This is not promotional software-style growth with weak unit economics; gross margin hit 67.8% in FY2026, operating margin 33.3%, free cash flow was $407.0M on $464.3M of operating cash flow, and the company sits on $1.16B of cash with no debt. The core read from the raw data is that Credo has real product-market fit in an AI-linked bottleneck and converted that into elite semiconductor profitability extremely quickly.

The problem is that the stock price is not valuing a great semiconductor company; it is valuing a future monopoly-like compounding machine. At $45.9B market cap, investors are paying roughly 34.7x trailing sales, about 98x earnings, and 89x EV/EBITDA for a business that just earned $472.3M and generated $407.0M of free cash flow. Even after backing out the $1.16B cash pile, EV/revenue is still 32.0x. Those multiples can work for a brief period if revenue is about to double again, but the quarterly sequence already hints at the first law of gravity: growth is still huge, yet maturing. Revenue rose from $170.0M to $223.1M to $268.0M to $407.0M to $437.0M over the last five quarters. The two most recent quarters added just $30M sequentially after a massive $139M jump the quarter before. That is not a collapse, but it is exactly the kind of early deceleration that makes 30x+ sales dangerous. A company can be outstanding and still be a poor stock when the market capitalizes one extraordinary year as though it is a base rate.

I also think some of the “ignore profit metrics” framing is wrong here. This is no longer a pre-profit concept stock where only top-line trajectory matters. Once a semiconductor company is producing 68% gross margins, 35% net margins, 30%+ operating margins, and 30%+ FCF margins, valuation must reconnect to earnings power. On today’s numbers, the business is excellent, but the stock still needs years of near-flawless execution. If revenue reached $2.0B with 30% net margins, net income would be roughly $600M; at the current market cap that would still be about 76x earnings. Even at $2.5B revenue and 30% net margin, you get $750M of earnings, still around 61x. That math tells you the market is not merely paying for growth through FY2027; it is paying in advance for a long runway of dominance, sustained margin superiority, and minimal competitive erosion. In semis, that is a heroic set of assumptions.

The best case against my skepticism is that the data already show unusual durability. Sequential revenue did not really “roll over” after the big ramp; it held at $407.0M and then increased again to $437.0M, while net margin stayed almost perfectly stable at 38.6% and 38.7%. That suggests the big jump was not purely one-off pull-forward or a low-quality volume dump. Annual cash generation also largely corroborates earnings: $472.3M of net income versus $464.3M of operating cash flow is not the profile of fabricated demand, and capex is light at $57.3M, so the model can scale efficiently. The balance sheet is pristine, ROIC is listed at 49.2%, and the company did move from subscale losses to elite profitability faster than most semis ever do. A smart bull would say that if Credo is becoming a critical merchant supplier into AI interconnect and retimer/optical-adjacent architectures, then traditional “semiconductor commoditization” instincts may understate the length of the window. I weigh that argument seriously; it’s why I’m not calling the business broken, only the stock overpriced.

What would change my mind is not another backward-looking beat on margins; it is evidence that the current revenue run-rate can keep compounding fast enough to justify a $46B valuation. Specifically, I would need to see revenue sustain above roughly $500M per quarter soon and then keep growing, rather than flattening in the low-$400Ms. If annual revenue power starts looking like $2.0B-plus with gross margins still above 65% and operating margins above 30%, the multiple can de-risk faster than I expect. Conversely, one quarter of revenue stalling near $430M or a margin drop from the high-30s net margin area into the 20s would expose how much perfection is embedded. Until proved otherwise, I think Credo is a great company being priced as though the hardest part of the story is over, when in reality the valuation now demands the next miracle.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-19 12:45:43
Verdict Excellent operator, wrong price — overvalued at $246 / ~35× sales; fair value nearer $140–170 on normalized 25–30% growth

The numbers describe a company that went from barely relevant to genuinely elite in under two years. Credo printed $1.34B in fiscal 2026 revenue after $437M the prior year — a 205% leap — and converted that scale into a 68% gross margin, 33% operating margin, and 35% net margin with $472M of net income and $407M of free cash flow on only $57M of capex. The quarterly path is the real tell: $135M → $170M → $223M → $268M → $407M → $437M, with net margins climbing from roughly 22% to nearly 39%. Zero debt, $1.16B cash, ROIC near 49%, and a current ratio above 10 confirm this is not a story stock fabricating profits. Technical differentiation in high-speed SerDes for AI clusters is real and already showing up in unit economics that most fabless peers never reach.

The market, however, has priced the inflection as if it were the base rate. At $245.97 and a $45.9B enterprise, Credo trades at roughly 34× trailing sales, 32× EV/revenue, and 98× earnings. That multiple structure only works if the 206% growth year is the opening act of a multi-year 40–60% compounder with locked-in pricing power. The most recent quarter undercuts that assumption hard: sequential growth collapsed from 52% ($268M to $407M) to just 7% ($407M to $437M). Annualized run-rate is already near $1.75B; the easy inventory-and-ramp phase is behind them. Secondary signals flag low revenue confidence and a decelerating quarterly trend, which is exactly the pattern that destroys 30×+ sales multiples in semis. Heavy same-day insider selling across multiple filings adds no comfort at these prices.

I am therefore treating Credo as an excellent business trading at a valuation that embeds the AI-capex supercycle continuing without pause and Credo retaining merchant sockets against hyperscaler vertical integration. The $46B capitalization is not supported by current cash generation when growth is already rolling over; it is supported by a narrative that SerDes is an unassailable chokepoint. That narrative is vivid and currently dominant, but fabless history and customer concentration argue it is fragile. The prior models that call this “high conviction required” and score the thesis slightly negative are directionally correct — the execution is not the dispute; the terminal multiple and duration of hypergrowth are.

The strongest counter-argument is straightforward and quantitative. If hyperscaler AI spend stays elevated and Credo simply grows 45–50% for two more years while holding mid-30s net margins, earnings power approaches $1B and the multiple compresses into a merely expensive rather than absurd range; the 49% ROIC and 68% gross margin already demonstrate pricing power that pure commodity SerDes vendors never achieve. Design-win stickiness and the bandwidth bottleneck story are not fiction, and the fortress balance sheet means Credo will not dilate or distress if the cycle hiccups. A smart bull would also note that FCF of $407M arrived almost immediately upon scale, so cash quality concerns are overstated relative to the growth phase. I weigh this less because the last printed quarter already shows the deceleration the bull case needs to not happen, and because 34× sales leaves almost no room for any integration, pricing, or capex-normalization surprise.

What would flip me is concrete re-acceleration: two consecutive quarters of 20%+ sequential revenue growth with margins stable above 35%, or explicit multi-year hyperscaler volume commitments that underwrite 50% growth through fiscal 2028. Conversely, another sub-10% sequential quarter or any guidance implying growth settling into the mid-20s would confirm the multiple is structurally wrong.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 1.0; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +0.0 vs panel · self: 3.0
GPT gpt-5.4 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +0.0 vs panel · self: 3.0
Grok grok-4.5 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +0.0 vs panel · self: 3.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), plus AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-19 13:00:11
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Great business, wrong price — wait 8/10
Credo is a genuinely great AI-infrastructure business at a price that already worships the FY26 breakout — pass at $232.68, build a shopping list toward $150.
The cruxWhether the market keeps paying ~113x trailing FCF for one year of scaled profitability into a 224G architecture transition where hyperscalers have every incentive to in-source SerDes.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from CRDO's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionHeavy Dilution
Earnings QualityGood Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+24
Strong
edge √Σ 123 · risk √Σ 99 · conf 7/10

Credo has undergone a genuine step-function transformation. Revenue went from $193M (FY24) to $437M (FY25) to $1.34B (FY26), gross margin expanded from 61.9% to 68%, and operating margin flipped from -19.2% to +33.3%. Net income swung from a $28M loss to $472M profit, and FCF from breakeven to $407M. Altman Z of 121 and $1.44B net cash with zero debt make survival a non-issue - this is a fortress balance sheet with a clearly demonstrated AI/connectivity tailwind driving elite operating leverage. The classification as a narrative_platform is somewhat unfair given the FY26 numbers are hard cash and hard earnings, not story.

Strengths 3
m85
Operating breakout is real and large
Revenue 3.1x YoY to $1.34B, op margin -19% to +33%, FCF $17M to $407M. Not a narrative - the P&L and cash flow both confirm it.
m70
Fortress balance sheet
$1.44B net cash, zero debt, Altman Z of 121. Survival risk is nil; company self-funds all growth.
m55
Gross margin expansion signals pricing power / mix
GM went 60.1 to 57.7 to 61.9 to 64.8 to 68.0% - consistent expansion alongside 3x revenue is unusual and suggests real product leverage, not commoditization.
Concerns 4
m70
Severe per-share dilution
Diluted shares 88M to 188M in 4 years (20.8% CAGR), SBC 13.7% of revenue, no buyback. Per-share compounding is materially throttled versus business compounding.
m45
Unusual insider selling into the ramp
99 sells / 0 buys LTM totaling $70.6M; concentrated July 2026 selling by multiple insiders. Consistent with insiders monetizing a re-rating - not fraud signal, but not a vote of confidence at current levels.
m40
OCF/NI 0.79x and Beneish flag
OCF ($407M FCF plus capex) trails net income ($472M) - typical on a working-capital-hungry ramp but worth verifying receivables and inventory. Beneish M -0.5 exceeds -1.78 threshold.
m35
Customer concentration risk implied by growth shape
A 3.1x revenue year in AI connectivity almost certainly reflects one or two hyperscaler customers - durability of the current run-rate depends on that mix, which the raw data does not disclose.
This is a genuinely strong business right now - the FY26 numbers are not a narrative, they are cash-backed and margin-backed, and the balance sheet removes any survival question. But I refuse to grade it in the 87-plus tier because (a) one year of scaled profitability is not durability, (b) share count expanding at 20.8% CAGR with 13.7% SBC and no buyback is a real per-share drag that most investors underweight, and (c) 99 insider sells to zero buys is what it looks like, regardless of 10b5-1 cover. Solid business, arguably strong business, but not yet a proven fortress - the next two years of maintaining margins and moderating dilution decide whether this stays here or slips.
Verify before trusting this (6)
  • Customer concentration in FY26 10-K - what % of revenue is top 1-2 customers (likely hyperscaler)
  • Receivables and inventory growth vs revenue growth to validate 0.79x OCF/NI
  • Segment/product mix behind the GM expansion to 68% - is it AECs, optical DSPs, or IP licensing?
  • SBC vesting schedule and 10b5-1 plan disclosures behind the July 2026 insider sales
  • Backlog / bookings disclosure to gauge whether the FY26 run-rate is a spike or a new base
  • Any convertible or warrant overhang beyond the reported diluted share count
Valuation / Mispricing
-76
Rich
edge √Σ 22 · risk √Σ 122 · conf 7/10
Price $234.66 vs a defensible deserved range of roughly $140-170 on quality-adjusted forward cash flows - stock is ~40-65% above where the margin of safety starts. attractive below $150.00

The business is genuinely strong - $1.34B revenue, 33% operating margins, $407M FCF - but the price already worships those numbers. A $45.9B market cap on $1.34B revenue is roughly 34x sales and ~113x FCF; even generous scenarios (revenue doubling again to ~$2.7B at 35% FCF margins = ~$950M FCF) leave you at ~48x forward FCF. That is a price that assumes another multi-year leg of hyperscaler SerDes/AEC spend accrues to Credo specifically, without in-house integration by NVIDIA/AMD/hyperscalers eroding share. The 206% growth print is the reason the stock is here, not a reason it goes higher from here.

Cheap signals 1
m22
Real cash generation, not a story
$407M FCF and clean balance sheet mean the multiple is anchored to actual dollars, not adjusted metrics - this prevents a deep-value case but caps downside vs pure narrative names.
Rich / priced-in 4
m78
Priced for perpetual AI capex
$45.9B cap on $1.34B revenue (~34x sales) and ~113x trailing FCF requires hyperscaler SerDes/AEC spend to compound for years with Credo holding share - the base case, not an upside case, is embedded.
m62
Customer-integration risk not discounted
Hyperscalers and merchant GPU vendors have every incentive to in-source SerDes; at this multiple any share loss or ASP compression from a single top customer resets the multiple hard.
m55
Dilution silently eats per-share value
Share count compounding ~20.8% with 13.7% SBC and no buyback means even 25% FCF growth barely moves FCF/share - the headline multiple understates the per-share cost.
m45
One year of scaled profitability
FY26 is the first year of 33% op margins at scale; paying a durability multiple on a single print is how expensive stocks become cheap fast.
I like the business, I do not like the price. $234.66 asks me to underwrite another doubling of revenue at expanding margins with no share loss to in-house silicon, and I am not paid for that risk here - the FCF yield is under 1%. This is the classic case of a genuinely strong company the market fully understands; I want it closer to $150 (~25x forward FCF on a $1.8B revenue scenario) before valuation becomes an ally rather than a headwind. Fairly-valued-to-rich, not a short, not a buy.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Customer concentration disclosure - what % from top 2 hyperscalers
  • Guidance for FY27 revenue and gross margin trajectory
  • Any signal of in-house SerDes programs from top customers in earnings calls
  • SBC as % of revenue trend and any buyback authorization
General Sentiment
+0
tail √Σ 0 · head √Σ 0
Tailwinds 0

None surfaced.

Headwinds 0

None surfaced.

The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+38
Strongly favorable - but architecture-dependent
opp √Σ 127 · thr √Σ 21 · conf 7/10

AI reaches Credo as pure volume: the scarce resources in an intelligence-abundant world are power and bandwidth between accelerators, and Credo owns a piece of the bandwidth layer at 68% gross margin with 33% operating margin already achieved on $1.34B revenue — cheap intelligence does not substitute for its product, it orders more of it. The exposure is therefore enormous and directionally positive, but the value capture is contested from both sides: buyers with in-house SerDes ambitions above, and Broadcom/Marvell/Astera plus architecture shifts beside. AI-assisted design tooling shortens digital iteration but does little for analog/packaging/qualification, so entrant compression is real but slower here than in software; the honest read is favorable economics with a genuinely wide tail driven by architecture and concentration, not by whether AI demand persists.

AI opportunities 7
m83
Underlying Need Persistence
Moving data between accelerators at ever-higher rates is the most durable need in AI infrastructure.
m42
Intelligence Commoditization
Cheap intelligence is demand for Credo, not a substitute for it — but it also accelerates rivals' design cycles.
m13
Responsibility Transfer
Credo is partly paid to guarantee link reliability at scale, which buyers are reluctant to own.
m58
Scarcity Migration
As compute becomes abundant, bandwidth-per-watt becomes the scarce good Credo sells.
m27
AI Intermediation Position
Agents cannot route around physical layer silicon; the bypass risk is architectural, not agentic.
m42
AI Margin Conversion
AI demand is already converting to profit: 68% gross margin, 33% operating margin, $407M FCF.
m37
Revenue Unit Durability
The unit — silicon and cables per port — scales with AI buildout but faces per-lane price erosion.
AI threats 1
m21
Customer DIY Preference
Its buyers are unusually capable of integrating SerDes and cable electronics in-house.
One of the cleanest structural longs on cheap intelligence — Credo's monetized unit is links per accelerator, and that count compounds with every cluster built; the condition is that copper AECs and discrete retiming survive the 224G architecture reset. Position 77 on exposure 94: the AI capex cycle reaches Credo as raw volume through 68% gross margin and 33% operating margin, already producing $407M FCF on $1.34B revenue, so the savings-to-profit path is proven rather than hoped for. What kills it is not AI demand but architecture and concentration — linear-drive or co-packaged optics removing DSP content, or a top-two customer bringing retimers in-house (customer_diy 38, solution_persistence 57 carry the bear tail to 31). Watch product-mix disclosure between AEC, optical DSP and IP, and any narrowing of sequential growth while hyperscaler networking capex still rises; that divergence appears before the socket loss is announced.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • cluster port count per GPU deployed
  • scale-up fabric bandwidth roadmaps
  • hyperscaler capex on networking share
  • LPO/LRO adoption at hyperscalers
  • copper reach limits at 224G
  • CPO design-win announcements
  • AEC vs optical DSP mix
  • pJ/bit specified in RFQs
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Growth Outlook
+5
Accelerating
edge √Σ 121 · risk √Σ 116 · conf 7/10

AI training and inference clusters are shifting spend from compute-only toward the wiring between accelerators: scale-up and back-end networks now grow faster than server count because links scale with GPU count and with per-lane speed transitions (400G→800G→1.6T). Power per bit has become the binding constraint in the rack, which structurally favors low-power electrical solutions for short reach and DSP-based optics beyond it. Credo sits precisely on that content layer. The counterforce is vertical integration: the same scale that creates the socket makes it worth owning, so the durable question is whether Credo's per-generation SerDes lead and qualification incumbency stay ahead of hyperscaler and merchant-ASIC insourcing. Macro is a second-order input here — neutral rates with a positive curve do not gate AI capex in the next year, though they do enforce eventual ROI discipline.

Growth drivers 4
m82
AEC/HiWire attach at hyperscale AI clusters
Active electrical cables win the short-reach, in-rack and rack-to-rack links where optics burn too much power and passive copper cannot reach at 800G/1.6T. Interconnect count scales with GPU count, not with server count, so Credo's unit demand levers off cluster scale-out rather than general IT spend. This is the mechanism behind the measured +205.7% revenue YoY versus an industry ~18.4%.
m59
Product-line broadening into optical DSP and PCIe retimers
Beyond AECs, PAM4 optical DSPs, line-card PHYs and PCIe Gen5/6 retiming expand the addressable content per rack and give a second and third ramp behind the first. Each adds a design-win cycle that is somewhat independent of the flagship AEC customer, which is what turns a single-product spike into a multi-year ramp.
m51
Operating leverage on a fabless model
Earnings YoY (+805%) far outpacing revenue YoY (+206%) shows fixed R&D and opex being spread over a much larger base with margins intact. Industry-wide operating margins are also expanding (+3.5pp/3yr), so the leverage is not being competed away yet — earnings growth can exceed revenue growth for several more quarters.
m42
Category boom provides demand cover
Sector in confirmed boom phase, category median recent growth ~26%, industry revenue CAGR 16.9%. Credo is not fighting the tide for growth; a rising category means design wins convert to volume quickly and pricing pressure is deferred.
Growth risks 5
m73
Customer concentration
A ramp of this magnitude concentrated in a handful of hyperscaler programs means a single platform re-spin, qualification slip, or dual-sourcing decision can flip a quarter from acceleration to decline. Revenue confidence is flagged Low with 0.397 volatility for exactly this reason.
m60
In-house SerDes and merchant-silicon insourcing
NVIDIA, Broadcom, Marvell and the hyperscalers themselves all have both the IP and the incentive to absorb SerDes/retiming into switch and accelerator silicon or into cable assemblies from larger vendors. This is the structural threat to the years-2-3 rung: content per rack could be captured upstream even as the category keeps growing.
m55
Mathematical base effect
Triple-digit growth cannot repeat off the new base; the quarterly trend is already tagged decelerating. Even excellent execution likely produces a step down in growth rate, which matters because the structural comparator (price-implied ~60%) requires sustained hyper-growth, not just growth.
m28
Copper-to-optics substitution risk
If linear-drive or co-packaged optics economics improve faster than expected, some AEC sockets shift to optical modules where competition is far broader. Credo has optical DSP exposure as a hedge, but the mix would be lower-content and more contested.
m25
AI capex digestion
Interconnect orders are pulled forward with cluster builds; any hyperscaler pause between generations creates an air pocket that hits a concentrated supplier harder than a diversified one. Macro is neutral but 10y at 4.72 keeps capex discipline live.
vs expectations: ~6m above · 1y inline · 2-3y below
The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
Lower -12.7% v0.6.0 View full prediction →

When we made this prediction on Aug 19, 2026, CRDO was $234.82. We expect it to be $205.00 by Feb 2027, and we consider it great value under $150.00. This is an early model (v0.6.0) — the direction is more reliable than the exact price. Made Aug 19, 2026.

Price when predicted$234.82
Our estimate for Feb 2027$205.00-12.7%
Great value below$150.00
Price history shown (6 Months)

Blue is our prediction, starting the day we made it. Grey is a slower route to the same place — the same destination, taking longer. Black is the actual price, so you can see how we are doing.

Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for CRDO. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.562 · 9b2927c4 · 2026-08-22 16:52:06