Stocker-Man

My current long-term holding allocation with their current share price as of today: $TSLA 24% (397$) $SOFI 15% (18$) $AMD 15% (216$) $HIMS 10% (15$) $OSCR 9% (12$) $ZETA 7% (15$) $PLTR 6% (130$) $NBIS 5% (100$) $LMND 5% (50$) $PATH 4% (10$) I’m not selling a single share of any of these before 2031 unless my long-term thesis changes. I’m aiming for 4–10x by 2031 across this basket, with a couple names having real 10x+ upside.

I’m now up 58% on $OSCR with an average of $15.06. Going back to the most recent $OSCR earnings, the 3 things I kept talking about all showed up: MLR is improving Guidance was reaffirmed Membership keeps growing That is exactly what you wanted to see. The whole $OSCR thesis was never about one quarter. It was about whether they could scale membership while improving MLR and moving toward sustainable profitability. So far, that is exactly what is happening. Now imagine they actually hit their 2026 guidance: 18.7B+ in revenue 82.4%–83.4% MLR $250M–$450M operating income That is when the rerate can get serious.

$SOFI CEO Anthony Noto keeps buying. He bought another ~$250K worth of shares around $16. That comes after: ~$250K bought last week ~$1.5M bought in March So in just a short period, Noto has put roughly $2M of his own money into $SOFI stock. Yes, dilution matters. But CEOs do not repeatedly buy millions of dollars’ worth of stock in the open market because they think the business is peaking. $SOFI is not the same company it was a few years ago. Members are much higher. Revenue is much higher. The business is more diversified. Profitability is improving. The stock may still look stuck, but the business underneath it keeps scaling.

@valaorh Wouldn’t surprise me. $6.5B feels more like a floor than a ceiling if branded GLP-1s scale, international keeps expanding, and peptides/labs become real growth drivers.

@TheStockerMan By the first quarter of 2027 at the latest, the forecast for 2030 will be raised to +$8B.

$HIMS 2030 thesis was not broken. They reiterated its 2030 targets with high conviction. At least $6.5B in revenue. At least $1.3B in adjusted EBITDA. That is what I care about.

@jcapitalgrowth Even if you use a reasonable EBITDA multiple and assume some dilution, the math still points to a stock that is multiples higher if they execute on the 2030 plan.

@TheStockerMan Yup ...20x EBITDA then makes $HIMS roughly 3-4x where it currently is. I don't care who you are..thats a great return.

Since I posted multiple $HIMS earnings breakdowns, I wanted to take all the key topics and put them into simple bullet points for you guys. My main takeaways: - Q1 was ugly, but I don’t think the 2030 thesis is broken. - The U.S. business clearly took a hit from the GLP-1 reset. - Gross margins were pressured by higher costs and one-time charges tied to the weight-loss pivot. - The $NVO / Wegovy deal came late in Q1, so the real impact should show up more in Q2/Q3. - $HIMS has already fulfilled 125K+ Wegovy product orders within 6 weeks of launch. - FY26 revenue guidance was raised to 2.8B-$3.0B. - Management reiterated its 2030 targets with high conviction: at least $6.5B in revenue and at least $1.3B in adjusted EBITDA. (We did the math on a possible price target for 2030 considering the 2030 targets) - International revenue is growing fast, and Eucalyptus should become a bigger contributor in FY27. - Peptides could be one of the most underrated parts of the story. - Labs, diagnostics, wearables, and AI-led personalization are still early. - $HIMS is not just a GLP-1 trade. It is trying to become the consumer healthcare front door. Q1 was messy. I’m holding $HIMS until 2030 unless the long-term thesis breaks.

I forgot to talk about one of the most important parts of the $HIMS quarter: Subscriber growth. This is where the $NVO partnership could start changing the story fast. $HIMS went from 2.511M subscribers in Q4 to 2.584M subscribers in Q1. That’s around 73K net adds, or roughly +2.9% QoQ growth. Not bad, but also not explosive. Now compare that to what management is saying after the Wegovy launch. $HIMS has already fulfilled 125K+ Wegovy product orders within 6 weeks, and they are now on pace to add 100K+ new subscribers per month within weight loss. That’s the part the market might be underestimating. Q1 subscriber growth was still impacted by the GLP-1 transition. But the $NVO deal only came late in Q1, and Wegovy shipments started in April. So Q2/Q3 is where we actually start seeing what the branded GLP-1 funnel can do. The strategy is simple: Use branded GLP-1s to bring millions of users into the $HIMS ecosystem. Then cross-sell into hair loss, sexual health, mental health, labs, diagnostics, peptides, wearables, and AI-led personalization. Weight loss is not just a product. It is a customer acquisition engine. And if that 100K+ monthly weight-loss subscriber pace holds, the entire $HIMS subscriber growth profile can start looking very different fast.

@NetWorthNotes Thanks bro!

@TheStockerMan Great growth stock overall. Great research bro

Let’s do the actual $ZETA price target math. $ZETA is trading around $16.69 today with a market cap of ~$4.0B. 2026 guidance midpoint: Revenue: ~$1.785B Adj. EBITDA: ~$397M FCF: ~$235M That means $ZETA is trading around: ~2.2x 2026 revenue ~10x 2026 adj. EBITDA ~17x 2026 FCF For a company growing revenue ~37% YoY, adj. EBITDA ~42–43%, and FCF ~42–43%, that multiple looks cheap. Using 2026 revenue guidance: 3x sales = ~$22/share 4x sales = ~$30/share 5x sales = ~$37/share 6x sales = ~$45/share 7x sales = ~$52/share Using 2026 adj. EBITDA: 15x EBITDA = ~$25/share 20x EBITDA = ~$33/share 25x EBITDA = ~$42/share 30x EBITDA = ~$50/share So my fair value range is probably: Bear/base case: $25–$30 Strong base case: $35–$45 Bull case: $50+ At $16–17, the market is basically saying $ZETA deserves a low-growth, low-quality multiple. But the numbers say the opposite. 50% Q1 revenue growth. Raised 2026 guidance. ~22% EBITDA margin guide. ~13% FCF margin guide. Positive GAAP net income expected this year. 19 straight beat-and-raise quarters. The multiple does not match the execution. That’s why I think $ZETA is one of the cleaner rerate setups in software right now.

@ArkhamInvests Price action has been brutal, no doubt. But that’s usually where the opportunity is if the fundamentals keep improving. The market is rewarding hype right now and ignoring profitable growth in names like $ZETA.

@TheStockerMan Such a garbage stock/price action but stupid space companies that don’t make any money go to $70B

$ZETA is down ~10% since earnings… but the quarter was not weak at all. Here’s the full breakdown: Q1 revenue: $396.3M Growth: +50% YoY Beat vs estimates: ~7% Adj. EBITDA: $66.1M Adj. EBITDA growth: +42% YoY Adj. EPS: $0.16 vs $0.12 est Billings: $398.3M, +53% YoY And the most important part: $ZETA raised full-year 2026 guidance. Revenue guide: $1.779B–$1.792B Midpoint: ~$1.785B Implied growth: ~37% YoY Adj. EBITDA guide: ~$396M–$398M Midpoint: ~$397M Implied adj. EBITDA margin: ~22.3% Free cash flow guide: ~$235M FCF margin: ~13% So the market is selling a company doing 50% revenue growth, raising guidance, expanding EBITDA, and guiding for positive GAAP net income in 2026. That’s the disconnect. The concern is probably quality of growth: Marigold contribution, political revenue normalization, and whether AI actually creates durable enterprise demand. But even excluding Marigold, revenue growth was still 29%. Athena is also important here. Management said Athena is already driving major AI usage and helping with vendor consolidation. That’s the thesis: It’s an AI-powered marketing platform with first-party data, enterprise customers, expanding margins, and a 19-quarter beat-and-raise streak. The stock is down because software multiples are under pressure and investors still don’t fully trust the story. But if they keep compounding revenue near 30%+ organically while expanding margins, this selloff will look very short-sighted.

@stb8444 Exactly. If you’re not in the crowded semi and AI infra trade, the market is giving you almost zero credit right now. $ZETA is executing, growing fast, and still getting treated like dead money. That usually doesn’t last forever.

@TheStockerMan zeta now kvyo all destroyed for no reason. just as $be beat on extra 250m extra on revenue and went up 40-50b in a month. it’s a tough market man unless you’re in the crowded semi trades

@DD_Henney Thanks!

@TheStockerMan good napkin math 🔥

@Gkov1111 Different category for sure, but I think the point is that $ZETA is undervalued. Data centers get all the hype, but application-layer AI winners can compound too….

@TheStockerMan Compare it to data centre and photonics generational stocks 😁

@NetWorthNotes Same mindset. If they keep printing 30-50% growth, the market eventually has to adjust.

@TheStockerMan This is exactly why I bought a $ZETA Jan 2028 call. Super cheap rn and I love the price of $ZETA. The market isn’t seeing the growth engine it is

@Investinc_Intel Exactly. At this valuation, I think a double is very realistic if they keep executing and the market starts giving them credit for the growth and AI angle.

@TheStockerMan I’ll take a double from here

I actually agree microbiome testing could be a huge category long term, especially if $HIMS wants to become a true personalized healthcare platform. But I don’t think they need every category on day one to be “serious.” The model is clearly moving toward labs, diagnostics, wearables, AI-led personalization, and more proactive care. Microbiome could fit perfectly into that over time. The bigger question is whether $HIMS can keep stacking categories while making the whole experience easier, cheaper, and more trusted than the traditional system.

@TheStockerMan They need to offer microbiome testing and products or it just isn’t a serious healthcare company. It’s basically the modern Rockefeller healthcare system with a better UX and more convenience.

Alright here’s my thoughts on $HIMS earnings… I’ll be posting a couple more posts to dissect the entire earnings because there’s a lot to unpack here, but my first reaction: Q1 was messy, but I don’t think the thesis is broken. I think this was the ugly reset quarter from the weight-loss pivot. Headline numbers: - Revenue: $608M - Total revenue: +4% YoY - U.S. revenue: $530M, down 8% YoY - Rest of World revenue: $78M, up 969% YoY - Gross margin: 65% GAAP - Adjusted gross margin: 70% excluding one-time charges - Subscribers: 2.58M - Q2 guide: $680M-$700M - FY26 revenue guide raised to $2.8B-$3.0B I’d like to note that the U.S. clearly absorbed the GLP-1 reset, but international is starting to become a real growth engine. $HIMS is no longer just a U.S. telehealth story. The biggest thing I’m watching is Q2. The company guided Q2 revenue to 680M-$700M, and at the high end that would be roughly 29% YoY growth. That’s where the re-acceleration starts to become visible. Now the bear argument is also fair: The $NVO deal wasn’t struck until March 9th, basically near the end of Q1. And those compounded semaglutide patients were not going to switch to branded overnight. So the concern is that this ugly earnings print and margin compression happened before Q2 fully reflects the loss of the compounded semaglutide business, which was a major driver of the weight-loss economics. That’s the real risk. Q2 needs to prove the branded GLP-1 pivot can actually offset that pressure. But the reason I’m not panicking is because management reiterated the 2030 targets with “high conviction.” Long-term guide: - At least $6.5B of revenue by 2030 - At least $1.3B of adjusted EBITDA by 2030 Based on my math from my prior posts using the 2030 guidance we are looking at a 120$ stock (not including expansion and peptides). At the midpoint of 2026 guidance, $HIMS is guiding for roughly $2.9B of revenue this year. To get from $2.9B in 2026 to $6.5B in 2030, they need around 22% annual revenue growth. For a company expanding into weight loss, sexual health, hair loss, mental health, labs, diagnostics, international markets, peptides, wearables, AI-led personalization, and broader consumer healthcare… That is not crazy. So my view is simple: Q1 was ugly. Q2 is the prove-it quarter. The 2030 thesis is still intact.

@RatCatDoge Again… there were some things I didn’t like but also loved. I do think $HIMS is a hold till 2030.

@TheStockerMan Earnings was stupid bullish

Moving on to the next two things that really matter from $HIMS earnings: Gross margins and the U.S. vs international revenue split. This is where the quarter gets more interesting. People are going to look at $HIMS gross margins and panic. And honestly, I get it. Gross margin came in at 65% on a GAAP basis, which looks ugly compared to where the business has been historically. But the context matters. Management said approximately $28M of one-time charges negatively impacted gross margins by roughly 5 percentage points in Q1. Adjusted for those costs, gross margin was closer to 70%. Why did this happen? The weight-loss pivot. $HIMS incurred roughly $33M of restructuring costs, primarily tied to write-downs related to the compounded GLP-1 supply chain. Around $28M hit gross margins, and the remaining $5M impacted operations and support costs. So yes, margins were ugly. But a big part of the margin compression was directly tied to the transition away from the old compounded GLP-1 setup and toward a more durable branded and more personalized weight-loss model. That matters. The bear case is that margins are structurally lower going forward without the compounded semaglutide economics. The bull case is that Q1 included transition noise, one-time costs, and supply chain clean-up that should not repeat at the same level. Now let’s look at the revenue split, because this might be the most important part of the quarter. United States revenue: $530M Down 8% YoY Down 4% QoQ Rest of World revenue: $78M Up 969% YoY Up 23% QoQ Total revenue: $608M Up 4% YoY Down 1.5% QoQ So yes, the U.S. business clearly got hit during the GLP-1 reset. No sugarcoating that. The U.S. decline is the bear case. But the Rest of World growth is the bull case. International revenue is already starting to show why ZAVA mattered and why Eucalyptus could be a huge unlock. The Eucalyptus deal is expected to close mid-2026, which means only partial FY26 contribution depending on timing. The full impact should really start showing up in FY27. This is exactly why I don’t view $HIMS as just a U.S. GLP-1 story anymore. The U.S. business is going through a reset. But international is becoming a real growth engine. The market is focused on the margin hit and U.S. slowdown. I’m focused on whether this transition leads to a more durable, global, multi-category consumer healthcare platform… and this was my longterm thesis all along.

My honest $HIMS take: Q1 numbers were ugly. Margins got hit hard because of higher costs tied to the weight-loss pivot. The company had one-time charges from restructuring the old compounded GLP-1 supply chain, and that dragged gross margins down. U.S. revenue was also weak, revenue per subscriber came down, and profitability guidance was lowered. That is the bear case… The compounded GLP-1 business clearly helped the numbers before, and now $HIMS has to prove the branded GLP-1 pivot can replace that growth without permanently crushing margins. But this is also why I think the next couple quarters matter way more than Q1. The $NVO deal came late in Q1, and Wegovy shipments only started in April. So Q1 mostly showed the pain of the transition, not the full benefit of the new branded GLP-1 setup. That’s why Q2 guidance matters so much. If $HIMS can do 680M-$700M in Q2 revenue, then the market has to start asking whether Q1 was actually the bottom. And beyond weight loss, the bigger platform is still expanding. International revenue is growing fast, and that is before Eucalyptus fully contributes. Eucalyptus should be a much bigger part of the story in FY27, not 2026. That matters because $HIMS is slowly becoming less dependent on just the U.S. business. Then you have peptides, which might be the most underpriced part of the story. Dudum sounded very clear that $HIMS is not trying to rush into the category just to be first. They want to be best in market with physician oversight, lab testing, and a safer supply chain. That is exactly how you build trust in a category that already has demand but is still messy and fragmented. Then add labs, diagnostics, wearables, and AI-led personalization. That is the real long-term vision. $HIMS is trying to build a consumer healthcare platform where your data, symptoms, treatments, lab results, wearable insights, and doctor-guided care all connect in one place. That is much bigger than just selling GLP-1s. So yes, Q1 was bad. But bad quarters during major transitions are usually where the best long-term opportunities show up, if the thesis is still intact. For me, the thesis is still intact. This was never a 2026 trade. This was always at least a 2030 hold. And after this selloff, I see it as another discount on the long-term story.

Lastly, the part of $HIMS earnings that I think is being extremely overlooked: Peptides, wearables, data, AI, and management’s overall tone. This is where the long-term story gets very interesting. Andrew Dudum said peptides are a category they are “extremely excited” by. But the key is not just demand. It’s infrastructure. He talked about pairing peptides with physician oversight, lab testing, and a safe supply chain, which does not really exist in today’s gray market. That matters. $HIMS is not trying to be first to market. They are trying to be best in market. Their peptide facility gives them a fully verticalized U.S. supply chain, including domestic API manufacturing. That means more control over quality, purity, reliability, and ultimately brand trust. Peptides already have massive consumer demand, but the market is messy, fragmented, and filled with questionable supply chains. $HIMS could bring medical oversight, testing, trust, and distribution to the category. That is why I think peptides could be a major growth wave that is not fully priced into the 2030 guide. Another underrated comment was around wearables. Management said they eventually plan to introduce support for wearables and devices for deeper customer insights. It is still not clear whether $HIMS plans to manufacture its own wearable or partner with companies like Oura, WHOOP, Apple, etc. (Would be cool) But the direction is obvious. $HIMS wants to become more data-driven, personalized, and proactive. That means: - labs - diagnostics - wearable data - health history - symptoms - treatment response - AI-led personalization - physician oversight This is not just telehealth. This is the early version of a consumer health operating system. The more data $HIMS has, the more personalized the platform becomes. The more personalized it becomes, the more categories it can enter. The more categories it enters, the higher the lifetime value per customer. And lastly, management’s tone did not sound like a company whose growth story is broken. Dudum called 2026 a “defining year” and said $HIMS is not just growing, it is pulling away from the field on the path to becoming the world’s largest consumer health platform. That is a massive statement. The quarter was messy. But the strategy is getting bigger. Peptides. Wearables. Labs. Diagnostics. AI-led personalization. International expansion. New categories. That is why I’m not selling because of one ugly transition quarter.

Following my second $HIMS ER post… One of the biggest $HIMS takeaways: The $NVO/Wegovy turnaround came late in Q1. Shipping only started in April. So the real benefit was not fully reflected in Q1. Management said $HIMS has already fulfilled more than 125K Wegovy product orders within 6 weeks of launch. That is a massive demand signal. This is why Q2 guidance matters so much. Q1 showed the pain from the GLP-1 reset. Q2/Q3 should start showing the benefit from the branded GLP-1 pivot. A $700M Q2 would be around 29% YoY growth. That is where the re-acceleration becomes visible. The market is looking backward at the ugly quarter but I am looking forward at the setup.