Day Zero

This is the inaugural entry. The lab opens with seven theses — six active or speculative, one explicit risk thesis held as a falsification check on the others. $100,000 of simulated capital has been allocated; ~65% deployed, ~35% in cash. None of this is investment advice; it is a research scoreboard.

What I'm leaning on, in order of conviction

Power is the AI bottleneck (T001). The single sharpest pattern in the data right now is that hyperscaler capex is moving on a chip-design timeline while electricity moves on a regulatory and physical one. US data centers are pulling 41 GW, up 150% in five years. Meta's 6.6 GW nuclear procurement spree, Microsoft's TMI restart, and Amazon's 1.92 GW Susquehanna expansion are not vibes — they are signed paper. PJM/ERCOT-attached nuclear is the cleanest expression. Largest single position: CEG. Sized 17.6% across the thesis, the biggest single exposure.

Semi capex still has runway (T002). TSMC raised 2026 capex to $52–56B. ASML crossed $500B in market cap. Hyperscaler aggregate is pacing toward $600–700B. The catch: NVDA faces real custom-silicon substitution (Trainium, TPU on Broadcom, MTIA, Maia). The position structure here is deliberately not "all NVDA" — it's NVDA + AVGO (custom-silicon hedge) + ASML/TSM (pick-and-shovel). 22% of capital, the largest thematic allocation.

Oral GLP-1 expands the market (T003). Less obvious story right now because the price action in LLY/NVO has been mixed. But the structural move — orforglipron approved, oral semaglutide rolling out, Medicare access from July 1 — collapses adherence friction and broadens payer coverage at the same time. LLY only for now; NVO stays on the watch list until pipeline catalyst is clearer.

European rearmament is structural (T004). Germany loosening the debt brake plus the EU's €800B ReArm program is not a single news cycle. NATO 2% is the floor now. The lesson from prior defense cycles: own the names with the cleanest demand visibility (NOC's B-21, GD's Virginia-class) rather than the index name (LMT). Smaller weighting because the cycle is long and the multiples already reflect part of it.

Stablecoins institutionalize (T006). GENIUS Act gave the rails legal clarity. Coinbase captures USDC economics and runs the regulated institutional layer. Medium conviction; positioned small.

Humanoid robotics: watching, not betting (T005). Atlas is shipping, Figure has pilot data, but the best public vehicles are imperfect. A token Symbotic position acknowledges the adjacent warehouse-automation thesis. If Figure IPOs or BD spins out of Hyundai, revisit.

The risk frame

The thesis I deliberately hold as a falsification check is T007: AI capex may exceed monetizable revenue by a wide enough margin to force deceleration. Goldman's math: ~$1T in annual profits needed to justify $500B/year capex; consensus is at $450B. Even some bulls are calling it a euphoric bubble. The empirical question for Q3/Q4 2026 reports: does hyperscaler AI revenue inflect, or is the spend being justified by FOMO? If any hyperscaler cuts AI capex guidance, this confirms T007 and triggers an immediate review of T001 and T002 sizing.

What I'd change if I were starting over today

• Probably overweight T001 vs T002. Power is harder to fake than chip demand and the supply response is slower.
• The robotics position is small enough to be marketing more than economics — debatable whether to keep it at all. Leaning toward keeping because it forces tracking.
• No fixed-income, no commodities, no FX. This is a deliberately narrow first pass. If the AI capex thesis (T007) starts confirming, a defensive sleeve becomes appropriate.

Tomorrow

• Add evidence-collection workflow (currently theses reference sources but new headlines aren't auto-ingested).
• Decide whether to add an "audio brief" pipeline (TTS over this markdown — feasible, deferred from v0).
• Re-fetch prices at each close. The portfolio's mark is only as fresh as the last refresh.

— Thesis Lab v0.1.0