How is nobody talking about this?

These 2 stocks are about to pull a $SIVE type of run: First, for a crazy run, I use a simple framework:

1) Enabler – Does this build the foundation of the AI buildout?
2) Leadership – Experienced founder/insiders with skin in the game?
3) Revenue Quality – Recurring or one-time?
Revenue Growth – Inflection thesis or just steady?
4) Moat – Hard to replicate?
5) Asymmetry – Worst case vs possible reward?
6) Conviction Gap – What we can prove today vs what catalysts will prove.

Keep these in mind.

You're not using grok enough.

Look, my simple prompt outperformed 99.9% of investors. 👇

Since then, the 5 stocks grok chose are up around 50% in the past month and a half.

Here:

1. $CRWD (CrowdStrike) - up 60%
2. $PANW (Palo Alto Networks) - up 60%
3. $FTNT (Fortinet) - up 60%
4. $ZS (Zscaler) - up 30%
5. $S (SentinelOne) - up 40%

I'm telling you, I will repeat this, you're not using grok enough.

These were all of groks top picks, given a simple prompt about Claude Mythos.

I also did an even simpler prompt the day before, on April 6th (look here: x.com/__Con_/status/…)

Grok picked 5 more companies:

1. $TMC - up 30%
2. $DOCN - up 80%
3. $AXSM - up 40%
4. $NRIX - up 11%
5. $MOD - up 40%

On average, around a 50% in a month and a half as well.

Now, imagine a good prompt.

As seen below:

@grok what are the top 5 stocks to invest in, given this criteria:

"First, this framework (my thesis for finding 100% gainers):

"Here's my framework: The first, most important question is "what type of company are you investing in?" There are 6 types: 1) Slow Growers: Large, mature companies with stable earnings and low growth, usually bought for safety and dividends rather than big returns (ex: $F ). 2) Stalwarts: Financially strong blue-chip companies growing steadily enough to outperform the market without being high-risk (ex: $GOOGL ). 3) Fast Growers: Smaller rapidly expanding companies with the potential to become “10-baggers” through sustained high growth (ex: $SIVE). 4) Cyclicals: Companies whose profits rise and fall heavily with economic cycles, making timing especially important (ex: $COIN ). 5) Turnarounds: Struggling or distressed companies that could recover dramatically if management fixes core problems (ex: $NIO ). 6) Asset Plays: Companies trading below the hidden value of their assets, such as real estate, cash, patents, or subsidiaries (ex: $CYPH ). My favorite 4 (the ones I stick to): Turnarounds, Fast Growers, Cyclicals, and Asset Plays. Of course, these are higher risk, higher reward, but when they pay off, they pay off BIG TIME. Once you break your company into these sectors, you must make what we call a "thesis" for it. To create a thesis, you must do 3 things, which are 1. look at the company's financials, 2. look at the stock's technicals, 3. see where the economy is headed (and the company's role in it). Here's how we do those things: 1) Look at company financials: shows us where the company is headed in terms of how they're producing. I usually look at 3 core metrics, which we want to see increase: - Net income (this shows the company has been innovating in their production) - Gross profit (this shows the company has been lowering cost of their product they're selling) - Total Revenue (this shows people actually want their product) While this is the general trend we would like to be seeing, in some stocks, such as fast growers, a catalyst might increase all of these metrics in the future (that we haven't seen in the past). Or for turnaround companies, maybe management changed, and with it, their goals for the company in the future -> increasing all financials. Or in cyclicals, maybe all these 3 core metrics are down this quarter/year because crypto has been down this year, but if crypto goes up, these metrics go up again. So, you must look at these financials relative to what type of company it is. 2) Look at the stock's technicals: shows us how buyers/sellers are reacting to certain prices (also shapes our entries/exits). I use 3 main things: - Support/resistance lines: people look at the chart and sell/buy given previous lines (if everyone believes it will happen, it usually does) - Fibonacci levels: this shows us where buyers/sellers will get more emotional (subconsciously) given how humans act. - Elliot wave theory: any, and every move in a chart can be calculated (in cycles), all due to human psychology. Elliot wave theory continued: These cycles (movements in the chart) can be categorized into 2 areas: impulse and corrective waves. Impulse Wave: (1-2-3-4-5) Wave 1: The initial move in the trend direction (smart money buys early). Wave 2: Pullback (prices retrace, but don’t go below the start of Wave 1). Wave 3: The strongest and longest move (mass adoption of the trend). Wave 4: Another correction, often weaker than Wave 2. Wave 5: Final push in the trend direction (fueled by FOMO). Corrective Wave (A-B-C): Wave A: Price goes against the trend. Wave B: Partial retracement (people think trend will continue). Wave C: Final move down, completing the correction. Remember, so 1-2-3-4-5, A-B-C. Simple enough. And remember, it works due to human psychology (so this is mainly for exits/entries). 3) Look at where the economy is headed (and how this stock fits in with it): look at government incentive programs, overall risk-on vs risk-off environment, and consumer psychology. For the short-term trading, technicals + a clear short thesis is more important than fundamentals. For the long-term investing, fundamentals + a clear short thesis is more important than technicals. Seems simple enough. Financials + technicals + a clear thesis (of where it'll shape our future economy). That's really it."

Second, and lastly, this framework (@mkfilko thesis for finding 100% gainers):

"Here is my framework: Question zero: enabler or beneficiary? Before anything else. Does this company build the foundation of the AI buildout, or just use AI to improve a service? Enablers are examples like semis, memory, neoclouds, photonics. The picks and shovels. Beneficiaries are fintech, SaaS, healthcare. Enablers capture the most value right now because they can't be skipped. Demand is outstripping supply. The odds of picking a winner are higher. Beneficiaries fight in crowded markets, and at worst AI eats them. See the recent SaaS bloodbath. Pick enablers to be included in your portfolio want enablers. 1. Leadership. Everything about a company stems from the top, the culture, the finances, the engineering, the technology, the customer relations etc. > Does the founder have experience that actually maps to this company, or a resume from an unrelated field? > How long has the CEO been in the seat? > Is it founder led? > Do they own real stock, and are they buying in the open market or quietly selling? > Any history of missing their own guidance, related party deals, or restatements? And if so, why? Unproven at this scale is fine if the credentials fit and their own money is on the line. Documented dishonesty is an instant fail. 2. Revenue Quality. > Is it recurring, or a one time lump that won't repeat? > Is it spread across many customers, or does one whale carry the whole number and could walk tomorrow? > Where does it come from geographically? One country, or many? Heavy China exposure is a different risk than a diversified base across the US, Europe and Asia. > Does the cash flowing in match the revenue being booked, or is the growth living on paper? 3. Revenue Growth. This is crucial for finding 10 baggers > Is there a credible inflection coming, or just a steady trailing rate? > Is the capex already in the ground to support it? If not there are dilution risks. > Is the customer pipeline named, or hand waved? > Is there any guidance on revenue growth given by management? A flat company with a real inflection ahead beats a steady grower with nothing coming. 4. Moat. The edge that protects them. Extremely important to find winners in the long run as well. > Is it an artificial moat, the Lululemon or Nike kind, built on brand and marketing that a competitor can erode with enough spend? Or is it something only this company can do? > Switching costs, multi year qualification cycles, patents, sole supplier status? > Has anyone with money and reputation on the line validated it? A named hyperscaler, a platform leader, a strategic investor on the board? > External validators are hard evidence, not narrative. Counterparties don't sign off on weak operators. 5. Asymmetry. Risk to reward at today's price. Most people get this backwards. It is not "the stock has run, I missed it." It's "does the upside still pay me for the downside." > What's my floor? Cash on the balance sheet, trust value, book value? > If the bear case hits, how far do I actually fall? > If the thesis works, where does it go? > Does the probability weighted upside still beat the downside by a wide margin? A stock that has 5x'd and still pays you 2 to 1 is more asymmetric than one that has done nothing and pays you 1.3 to 1. There are many ways to value a company, for me, the best way to value growth stocks is looking at their forward earnings/revenues and comparing it to peers. This is what I did with $BRUN to determine it was undervalued. Find your style. 6. Conviction Gap. The space between what I can prove today and what the next catalysts will prove. > What is genuinely unknown right now? > Which way does the existing evidence lean? > What specific event would convert the unknown into fact? When does that event happen? A wide gap with evidence pointing the right way is the whole game. It means the market is pricing in uncertainty I have a reasoned view on. Thin analyst coverage isn't a red flag here. It's the opportunity. I write the bear case out in full and pick at it before I ever post. If I can't convince myself first, I won't try to convince you. To summarise 0. AI Enabler over beneficiary. 1. Leadership I trust. 2. Real revenue. 3. Forward growth. 4. A moat only they can build/is hard to replicate. 5. Asymmetry that pays me. 6. A gap with a catalyst to close it. You can take these 6 criteria to come up with a composite score to decide whether you want to decide to invest in the company or not. 7. How I integrate TA into all of this. The fundamentals tell me what to buy. The technicals tell me when. The best setup is when both line up. Great fundamentals with a broken chart just means you bag hold while you wait, sometimes for years even! See $PATH . Arguably the right company, sadly the wrong tape. And this is huge opportunity cost. So once a name clears my framework, I check the chart for confluence. > Is the stock breaking out of a downtrend or a long consolidation? > Are the EMAs stacked bullish, shorter over longer, all sloping up? > Is there real volume driving the move, or is it drifting on nothing? Each one on its own may be noise, but stacked together, they can be a signal. That confluence is the difference between catching the entry and riding the wave, or being early and bleeding.""

That's it.

Now we wait.

Don't make the same mistake by question groks ability again.

Start using grok, lol.

- Con @grok what are the top 5 stocks to invest in, given this criteria:

Here's my framework: The first, most important question is "what type of company are you investing in?" There are 6 types: 1) Slow Growers: Large, mature companies with stable earnings and low growth, usually bought for safety and dividends rather than big returns (ex:$F). 2) Stalwarts: Financially strong blue-chip companies growing steadily enough to outperform the market without being high-risk (ex:$GOOGL). 3) Fast Growers: Smaller rapidly expanding companies with the potential to become “10-baggers” through sustained high growth (ex: $SIVE). 4) Cyclicals: Companies whose profits rise and fall heavily with economic cycles, making timing especially important (ex:$COIN). 5) Turnarounds: Struggling or distressed companies that could recover dramatically if management fixes core problems (ex:$NIO). 6) Asset Plays: Companies trading below the hidden value of their assets, such as real estate, cash, patents, or subsidiaries (ex:$CYPH). My favorite 4 (the ones I stick to): Turnarounds, Fast Growers, Cyclicals, and Asset Plays. Of course, these are higher risk, higher reward, but when they pay off, they pay off BIG TIME. Once you break your company into these sectors, you must make what we call a "thesis" for it. To create a thesis, you must do 3 things, which are 1. look at the company's financials, 2. look at the stock's technicals, 3. see where the economy is headed (and the company's role in it). Here's how we do those things: 1) Look at company financials: shows us where the company is headed in terms of how they're producing. I usually look at 3 core metrics, which we want to see increase: - Net income (this shows the company has been innovating in their production) - Gross profit (this shows the company has been lowering cost of their product they're selling) - Total Revenue (this shows people actually want their product) While this is the general trend we would like to be seeing, in some stocks, such as fast growers, a catalyst might increase all of these metrics in the future (that we haven't seen in the past). Or for turnaround companies, maybe management changed, and with it, their goals for the company in the future -> increasing all financials. Or in cyclicals, maybe all these 3 core metrics are down this quarter/year because crypto has been down this year, but if crypto goes up, these metrics go up again. So, you must look at these financials relative to what type of company it is. 2) Look at the stock's technicals: shows us how buyers/sellers are reacting to certain prices (also shapes our entries/exits). I use 3 main things: - Support/resistance lines: people look at the chart and sell/buy given previous lines (if everyone believes it will happen, it usually does) - Fibonacci levels: this shows us where buyers/sellers will get more emotional (subconsciously) given how humans act. - Elliot wave theory: any, and every move in a chart can be calculated (in cycles), all due to human psychology. Elliot wave theory continued: These cycles (movements in the chart) can be categorized into 2 areas: impulse and corrective waves. Impulse Wave: (1-2-3-4-5) Wave 1: The initial move in the trend direction (smart money buys early). Wave 2: Pullback (prices retrace, but don’t go below the start of Wave 1). Wave 3: The strongest and longest move (mass adoption of the trend). Wave 4: Another correction, often weaker than Wave 2. Wave 5: Final push in the trend direction (fueled by FOMO). Corrective Wave (A-B-C): Wave A: Price goes against the trend. Wave B: Partial retracement (people think trend will continue). Wave C: Final move down, completing the correction. Remember, so 1-2-3-4-5, A-B-C. Simple enough. And remember, it works due to human psychology (so this is mainly for exits/entries). 3) Look at where the economy is headed (and how this stock fits in with it): look at government incentive programs, overall risk-on vs risk-off environment, and consumer psychology. For the short-term trading, technicals + a clear short thesis is more important than fundamentals. For the long-term investing, fundamentals + a clear short thesis is more important than technicals. Seems simple enough. Financials + technicals + a clear thesis (of where it'll shape our future economy). And here is my second framework: Question zero: enabler or beneficiary? Before anything else. Does this company build the foundation of the AI buildout, or just use AI to improve a service? Enablers are examples like semis, memory, neoclouds, photonics. The picks and shovels. Beneficiaries are fintech, SaaS, healthcare. Enablers capture the most value right now because they can't be skipped. Demand is outstripping supply. The odds of picking a winner are higher. Beneficiaries fight in crowded markets, and at worst AI eats them. See the recent SaaS bloodbath. Pick enablers to be included in your portfolio want enablers. 1. Leadership. Everything about a company stems from the top, the culture, the finances, the engineering, the technology, the customer relations etc. > Does the founder have experience that actually maps to this company, or a resume from an unrelated field? > How long has the CEO been in the seat? > Is it founder led? > Do they own real stock, and are they buying in the open market or quietly selling? > Any history of missing their own guidance, related party deals, or restatements? And if so, why? Unproven at this scale is fine if the credentials fit and their own money is on the line. Documented dishonesty is an instant fail. 2. Revenue Quality. > Is it recurring, or a one time lump that won't repeat? > Is it spread across many customers, or does one whale carry the whole number and could walk tomorrow? > Where does it come from geographically? One country, or many? Heavy China exposure is a different risk than a diversified base across the US, Europe and Asia. > Does the cash flowing in match the revenue being booked, or is the growth living on paper? 3. Revenue Growth. This is crucial for finding 10 baggers > Is there a credible inflection coming, or just a steady trailing rate? > Is the capex already in the ground to support it? If not there are dilution risks. > Is the customer pipeline named, or hand waved? > Is there any guidance on revenue growth given by management? A flat company with a real inflection ahead beats a steady grower with nothing coming. 4. Moat. The edge that protects them. Extremely important to find winners in the long run as well. > Is it an artificial moat, the Lululemon or Nike kind, built on brand and marketing that a competitor can erode with enough spend? Or is it something only this company can do? > Switching costs, multi year qualification cycles, patents, sole supplier status? > Has anyone with money and reputation on the line validated it? A named hyperscaler, a platform leader, a strategic investor on the board? > External validators are hard evidence, not narrative. Counterparties don't sign off on weak operators. 5. Asymmetry. Risk to reward at today's price. Most people get this backwards. It is not "the stock has run, I missed it." It's "does the upside still pay me for the downside." > What's my floor? Cash on the balance sheet, trust value, book value? > If the bear case hits, how far do I actually fall? > If the thesis works, where does it go? > Does the probability weighted upside still beat the downside by a wide margin? A stock that has 5x'd and still pays you 2 to 1 is more asymmetric than one that has done nothing and pays you 1.3 to 1. There are many ways to value a company, for me, the best way to value growth stocks is looking at their forward earnings/revenues and comparing it to peers. This is what I did with $BRUN to determine it was undervalued. Find your style. 6. Conviction Gap. The space between what I can prove today and what the next catalysts will prove. > What is genuinely unknown right now? > Which way does the existing evidence lean? > What specific event would convert the unknown into fact? When does that event happen? A wide gap with evidence pointing the right way is the whole game. It means the market is pricing in uncertainty I have a reasoned view on. Thin analyst coverage isn't a red flag here. It's the opportunity. I write the bear case out in full and pick at it before I ever post. If I can't convince myself first, I won't try to convince you. To summarise 0. AI Enabler over beneficiary. 1. Leadership I trust. 2. Real revenue. 3. Forward growth. 4. A moat only they can build/is hard to replicate. 5. Asymmetry that pays me. 6. A gap with a catalyst to close it. You can take these 6 criteria to come up with a composite score to decide whether you want to decide to invest in the company or not. 7. How I integrate TA into all of this. The fundamentals tell me what to buy. The technicals tell me when. The best setup is when both line up. Great fundamentals with a broken chart just means you bag hold while you wait, sometimes for years even! See $PATH. Arguably the right company, sadly the wrong tape. And this is huge opportunity cost. So once a name clears my framework, I check the chart for confluence. > Is the stock breaking out of a downtrend or a long consolidation? > Are the EMAs stacked bullish, shorter over longer, all sloping up? > Is there real volume driving the move, or is it drifting on nothing? Each one on its own may be noise, but stacked together, they can be a signal. That confluence is the difference between catching the entry and riding the wave, or being early and bleeding."

These are the two stocks I'm going to be betting on for all of 2026...

1. $NIO

2. $RIVN

Here's the thesis behind them...🧵 Here's NIO:

1) NIO - Revolutionary Battery Swap Technology

- NIO’s battery swap stations let drivers exchange a depleted EV battery for a fully charged one in under 2-5 minutes, which is way faster than charging or refueling.

- Plus, this gives users the option to upgrade temporarily to a long-range battery version for road trips, without needing to pay for the whole extra battery (which can go almost 650+ miles, more than any other EV by far).

- This creates a defensible moat in convenience, reducing range anxiety and accelerating EV adoption.