Por Maksym Misichenko · Nasdaq ·
Lo que los agentes de IA piensan sobre esta noticia
The panel consensus is bearish on Monday.com and Cerebras, citing decelerating growth, reliance on stock-based compensation, and questionable valuations based on unproven technology and market adoption.
Riesgo: Wafer-scale yield risk and customer concentration for Cerebras, and structural deceleration and stock-based compensation reliance for Monday.com.
Oportunidad: None explicitly stated.
Este análisis es generado por el pipeline StockScreener — cuatro LLM líderes (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) reciben prompts idénticos con protecciones anti-alucinación integradas. Leer metodología →
En este episodio de Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing, los colaboradores de Motley Fool Jon Quast, Matt Frankel y Rachel Warren discuten:
Para ver episodios completos de todos los podcasts gratuitos de The Motley Fool, visita nuestro centro de podcasts. Cuando estés listo para invertir, consulta esta lista de las 10 mejores acciones para comprar.
¿Creará IA el primer billonario del mundo? Nuestro equipo acaba de publicar un informe sobre una pequeña empresa poco conocida, llamada "Monopolio Indispensable" que proporciona la tecnología crítica que Nvidia e Intel necesitan. Continuar »
Una transcripción completa aparece a continuación.
Antes de comprar acciones de Cerebras Systems, considera esto:
El equipo de analistas de Motley Fool Stock Advisor acaba de identificar lo que creen que son las 10 mejores acciones para que los inversores compren ahora… y Cerebras Systems no fue una de ellas. Las 10 acciones que pasaron el corte podrían generar rendimientos monstruosos en los próximos años.
Considera cuando Netflix entró en esta lista el 17 de diciembre de 2004… si hubieras invertido $1,000 en el momento de nuestra recomendación, tendrías $469,293! O cuando Nvidia entró en esta lista el 15 de abril de 2005… si hubieras invertido $1,000 en el momento de nuestra recomendación, tendrías $1,381,332!
Ahora, vale la pena señalar que el rendimiento total promedio de Stock Advisor es de 993% — un rendimiento aplastante del mercado en comparación con el 207% del S&P 500. No te pierdas la última lista de las 10 mejores, disponible con Stock Advisor, y únete a una comunidad de inversión creada por inversores individuales para inversores individuales.
**Rentabilidades de Stock Advisor a fecha del 16 de mayo de 2026. *
Este podcast fue grabado el 11 de mayo de 2026.
Jon Quast: ¿Qué deberían hacer los inversores con una nueva ola de IPOs que se acerca? Estás escuchando Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing. Bienvenido a Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing. Soy Jon Quast, y hoy me acompañan los colaboradores de Fool Matt Frankel y Rachel Warren. Más adelante en el programa, queremos hablar sobre una nueva IPO que viene al mercado, así como una pregunta tuya sobre qué hacer con las nuevas IPOs cuando salen a bolsa.
Pero primero, queríamos hablar sobre el informe de resultados que salió esta mañana y es de Monday.com. Esta es una empresa de software empresarial, y hemos estado hablando de la muerte de las acciones SAT. Y esto me recuerda a la rutina de Monty Python donde dicen, saquen a sus muertos, y uno dice, todavía no estoy muerto. De hecho, me estoy mejorando. Monday.com se agrupa con las acciones que están condenadas, y reportó hoy. Al mercado aparentemente le encantó. Porque, hombre, la acción subió aproximadamente un 25% en la negociación pre-mercado. Veo que ha bajado desde eso ahora que estamos grabando, pero es una acción que se desplomó más del 70% en el último año, pero debe haber algo aquí que al mercado le gustó, Rachel.
Rachel Warren: La acción ha recibido una paliza masiva durante el último año, significativamente a la baja. Vale la pena señalar que la acción de Monday.com todavía está bajada aproximadamente un 50% año hasta la fecha en el momento en que estamos grabando este episodio. Creo que lo que hemos estado viendo es realmente, creo que mucho del apetito del mercado que ha rodeado a muchas acciones de software. Este miedo de que la IA generativa pueda interrumpir la adquisición de clientes de Monday.com, tal vez hacer obsoletas sus herramientas de gestión de proyectos. Pero certamente, había algunas cosas que al mercado le gustaron. Para empezar, Monday.com superó las expectativas de los analistas en la línea superior con $351 millones en ingresos. Eso fue un aumento del 24% año tras año. La empresa también entregó ganancias ajustadas por acción de $1.15. Eso es comparado con lo que los analistas esperaban de solo $0.93 por acción. La dirección también elevó su guía para 2026. Ahora buscan generar aproximadamente $1.5 mil millones en ingresos. El lanzamiento de su nueva plataforma de trabajo de IA, también, la tasa de retención de dólares neta fue del 110%. Ciertamente hubo algunos buenos números que al mercado parece que le gustaron.
Jon Quast: Matt, ¿qué te llamó la atención?
Matt Frankel: En resumidas cuentas, el mercado estaba cotizando tres cosas, crecimiento que se ralentiza rápidamente, compresión de márgenes y el riesgo de disrupción de la IA. Este trimestre realmente mostró mejores resultados de lo esperado en las tres cosas. Rachel noted that Monday beat expectations on the top and bottom line. They give excellent guidance. Beyond those headlines, looking at RPOs remaining performance obligations, which is future booked work, that was up 33% year-over-year. Anytime you see future revenue growing faster than current revenue, it's generally a good sign, and the market takes it as such. Enterprise customer expansion is a very impressive story. Monday's clients that account for more than $100,000 in annual recurring revenue, that grew by 39% year-over-year in the quarter, much higher than the overall top line. Those tend to be very sticky customers, so that's a part of the story the market's really paying attention to.
Management specifically pointed out that 10% of new annual recurring revenue was driven by AI specifically, and that it expects that to continue to grow. They just announced their new CS plus credit business pricing model, which a lot of AI software companies are expected to do. They just announced that last week, and it will be rolled out over time, and it should help keep revenue growing as AI can do more of its customers work for them. Finally, on the issue of margins, operating margin doubled to 6% from 3% a year ago. Despite the really strong revenue growth, management said that headcount is going to remain relatively stable for the next year, and that is a good indicator that we should see margins expand even further. All three areas looked really good.
Jon Quast: Something that you said just then, Matt, you talked about how the market was pricing in a rapid deceleration in the revenue growth rate. But I wonder if maybe the celebration here from the market wasn't premature because if you do look at the numbers, the top line is continuing to decelerate. In the fourth quarter, it had 25% growth. That was last quarter, 25%. This quarter, the growth was 24%, and then next quarter, it's expected to be 18%-19% growth. The trend line is still slowing down, and the margin improvement was great and everything. I think that it still leaves the core question to the thesis intact here. Is that is this business starting to approach a ceiling, and the decelerating growth would tend to indicate that because of the AI tooling that's coming out, is that siphoning off some of its potential business and causing it to have a less big opportunity than what investors thought a couple of years ago?
Rachel Warren: I think that's the major tension here. This was a pretty significant growth story a few years ago. Certainly, monday.com is becoming a more mature enterprise business. But that acceleration unit is real. When you're seeing mid-20s growth slow down to 18%-19% next quarter, that's not really the trend line you want to be looking at. The slowdown is coming a few factors. You've got smaller businesses that are tightening their belts. Monday.com is really leaning heavily into moving up market to grab those bigger corporate contracts. They're expanding their multi-product strategy. They really have to squeeze more value from the customers that they already have.
I think the big question that the market still has that a lot of investors still have is whether monday.com becomes a victim of AI or the master of it. You've got the bear case, which is that AI might eventually just allow teams to build their own custom workflow. That makes a platform like this one redundant. Now monday.com and their management are obviously betting that AI will be the glue for their platform. That new AI work platform I mentioned, it's designed to automate the tedious parts of project management, try to make the software stickier for their clients. For me, the biggest drawback for this business or the stock, I should say they're not profitable on a GAAP basis. They're still really leaning heavily into stock-based compensation. I think the stock is probably going to be under pressure for a while.
Jon Quast: Matt, go ahead and give us a counterargument here.
Matt Frankel: As I mentioned, the growth in RPOs and the AI-specific revenue growth, they're certainly encouraging, and revenue is expected to slow over the next quarter, but remember that that seats-and-credits model is going to take several quarters at a minimum to roll out to all of its customers. Keep that in mind. But they're not out of the woods. What they needed to do they did. They reframed the narrative from Monday is losing to AI to maybe AI could be a tail one for Monday. They needed to reframe the narrative like that, and they did that with this quarterly report. But at the same time, I would place a big emphasis on that word maybe in that sentence. I personally am not a buyer here. It's on my radar, especially with the massive buybacks they're doing, but they are not out of the woods yet, but solid quarter. Credit where it's due.
Jon Quast: Credit to where it's due, indeed, but that's all the time we have for Monday. When we come back from our break, we're going to be talking about an AI semiconductor company that could go public as early as this week. You're listening to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing.
ADVERTISEMENT: Dell PCs with Intel inside are built for the moments that matter for the moments you plan and the ones you don't. Built for the busy days that turn into all night study sessions, the moment you're working from a cafe and realize every outlet is taken. The times you're deep in your flow, and the absolute last thing you need is an auto update throwing off your momentum. That's why Dell builds tech that adapts to the way you actually work, built with a long-lasting battery, so you're not scrambling for the closest outlet, and built-in intelligence that makes updates around your schedule, not in the middle of it. They don't build tech for tech's sake. They build it for you. Fine technology built for the way you work at dell.com/Dell PCs built for you.
Jon Quast: Welcome back to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing. We have a question coming up about IPOs in just a moment. But before we go there, we want to talk about an actual IPO that could happen as early as this week. Many investors may not have heard about it, but you're going to be hearing about it. The company is called Cerebras, and Cerebras is in the news today because it just increased the expected IPO range for what it's going to be going public at. The company is looking to raise nearly $5 billion in its IPO. That would value it at around $50 billion. This is going to be a big IPO, and I do want to note, as well, that this is an incredible increase in the valuation just from a few months ago. Back in September, the company did a series G funding round and was valued at about eight billion at the time. This is roughly 6X, what it was valued at just what, seven months ago. Very interesting. But this is going to be a big IPO. Rachel, go ahead and start us off here. What is Cerebras and how does this company make money?
Rachel Warren: Essentially, Cerebras is looking to build a massive alternative to Nvidia's empire by rethinking what a chip even looks like. Instead of making thousands of small chips from one silicon wafer, they actually use the entire wafer to create one giant processor, the wafer-scale engine. They say this can train and run AI models far faster than traditional GPUs. They don't just silicon. They package it into these multimillion-dollar supercomputer systems that handle everything from power to liquid cooling in a single unit.
They make money through a few different channels. One is selling these massive hardware appliances. They provide recurring software and support services. They also offer AI as a service, where companies can rent time on their chips via the Cloud. Now, they've recently landed very significant deals with hyperscalers like AWS in March. They signed a binding term sheet with AWS. That was the first major hyperscalar to commit to deploying Cerebras systems in their data centers. They just signed a big deal with OpenAI, and a lot of the excitement around these deals is what you're seeing in that updated IPO range of 150-$160 per share. You're seeing reports that demand is 20 times oversubscribed for the IPO. They could raise nearly five billion in their public debut. This is certainly an upcoming IPO that the market is going to be paying very close attention to.
Jon Quast: Matt, I'm just curious here, and I know it's on every listener's mind as we talk about this what competitor alternative to Nvidia? That sounds exciting. What would be some brief bull and bear cases for Cerebras stock when it goes public Matt?
Matt Frankel: It's pretty clear, actually. The bull case is the truly unique nature of Cerebras' hardware. Independent testing shows one of their products, the CS3 delivers 21 times faster inference than Nvidia's flagship GPU and with 32% lower costs when you include things like energy and hardware. There's a case to be made that Cerebras is well-positioned for the shift away from training AI models, which is what we've been doing so far and why Nvidia's GPUs have been so successful to running AI models where speed becomes the most important thing, and that's where they excel.
That's especially true as the agentic AI boom unfolds. The big agreements with OpenAI and AWS, Rachel mentioned, they certainly help the bull case, as well. At IPO, Cerebras is going to trade for roughly 100 times sales, assuming a $50 billion market cap, but it grew revenue by 76% year-over-year with a 47% GAAP net margin last year. There's a lot to like there on the bull side. There are several bare cases other than the valuation and the general hype surrounding the IPO. Customer concentration is huge, which Rachel can touch on in a bit. It's important to mention that Nvidia is developing competing products, and Nvidia has pretty much an unlimited R&D budget, which would scare me, investing in any competitor of Nvidia. There's a lot of future growth priced in here, and there's more that can go wrong than a lot of investors seem to think, especially if you buy the $50 billion valuation.
Jon Quast: Rachel, what else do you see in this?
Rachel Warren: I think there's a few different ways to look at this. Obviously, there's the bull case really, I think, goes back to Cerebras' architectural mode by using one massive processor on a single wafer instead of thousands of small chips. They could eliminate a lot of the bottlenecks we've seen. It could make its hardware significantly faster for next-gen AI reasoning. I think the most obvious bare case for anyone looking at this business that it's importan
Cuatro modelos AI líderes discuten este artículo
"Monday.com is experiencing fundamental revenue deceleration that AI-feature integration is unlikely to reverse, making the current market optimism premature."
Monday.com's Q1 results are a classic case of 'less bad is not the same as good.' While beating EPS expectations and showing 39% growth in $100k+ ARR customers is impressive, the structural deceleration—from 25% to a projected 18-19%—suggests the company is reaching a saturation point in its core project management niche. The pivot to AI-driven pricing is a defensive necessity, not a growth catalyst, and the reliance on stock-based compensation remains a major drag on true GAAP profitability. Investors are conflating operational efficiency with a fundamental business model evolution that has yet to be proven at scale.
If Monday.com successfully transitions to an AI-agentic platform, the 'sticky' nature of their enterprise contracts could create a high-margin, recurring revenue moat that justifies a premium valuation despite slowing top-line growth.
"Both Monday.com and Cerebras are pricing in multi-year flawless execution when the evidence shows deceleration (Monday) and unproven customer stickiness (Cerebras) at valuations that leave no room for execution risk."
Monday.com's 25% pop masks a decelerating growth story (24% Q1 vs. 25% Q4, guiding 18-19% next quarter). The market priced in AI disruption risk and got margin expansion instead—real, but insufficient to justify the narrative flip. RPO growth at 33% YoY is encouraging, but that's booked work, not proof of durable competitive moat. The $1.15 EPS beat is on adjusted basis; GAAP profitability remains elusive. Cerebras' $50B valuation (100x sales) rests entirely on AWS/OpenAI deals and inference-speed claims. Independent testing is cherry-picked; Nvidia's R&D moat is underestimated. Both stocks are pricing in perfection.
Monday.com's enterprise customer expansion (39% growth in $100k+ ARR accounts) and 10% new revenue from AI suggest genuine product-market fit expansion, not just margin arbitrage. Cerebras' wafer-scale architecture is genuinely differentiated—if inference becomes the bottleneck (plausible), they could own a real wedge.
"N/A"
[Unavailable]
"Cerebras' IPO is likely overvalued given uncertain TAM, concentration risk, and execution hurdles that may prevent margin expansion from meeting lofty expectations."
Cerebras' hype hinges on a wafer-scale AI accelerator with AWS/OpenAI deals and a $50B IPO, but the core economics and market must be questioned. The TAM for such ultra-premium hardware is likely narrower than perceived, and the business is deeply exposed to customer concentration, cycle timing of hyperscalers, and AI model shift toward inference rather than training. Valuation at ~100x forward-looking sales implies outsized growth and margin leverage that may never arrive if pricing pressure, competition from Nvidia, and integration costs bite. The article glosses over profitability, support costs, and long-cycle capex that can derail near-term returns.
But if AI hardware demand stays strong and Cerebras lands more large-scale deals, the moat could widen and the stock could re-rate; the upside appears greater than the risk at current pricing.
"Cerebras's wafer-scale architecture introduces a single point of failure risk that is being completely overlooked by the market's current valuation."
Claude and ChatGPT are fixated on Cerebras's valuation multiples, but they are ignoring the massive technical risk of 'wafer-scale' reliability. Unlike Nvidia's modular H100/B200 architecture, a single failure on a Cerebras wafer is a catastrophic yield event. If their inference-speed claims don't translate to massive, sustained uptime in real-world data centers, the $50B valuation isn't just 'pricing in perfection'—it is pricing in a hardware miracle that has yet to be stress-tested at scale.
"Cerebras' risk isn't wafer-scale reliability—it's whether hyperscalers will abandon Nvidia's ecosystem for marginal inference gains."
Gemini's wafer-scale yield risk is real, but it's not new—Cerebras has shipped systems to Argonne, NERSC, and others without reported catastrophic failures. The actual risk is subtler: even if reliability holds, their TAM depends on hyperscalers choosing custom silicon over Nvidia's proven ecosystem. That's a market adoption problem, not an engineering one. ChatGPT flagged customer concentration; that's the real vulnerability.
[Unavailable]
"The main risk is reliability and total cost of ownership in production, not mere speed; a downtime spike or costly maintenance could erode margins and justify skepticism on the $50B valuation."
Responding to Gemini: wafer-scale yield risk is real, but the bigger flaw in Cerebras' bear thesis is reliability and total cost of ownership in live data centers. A single wafer defect or downtime spike forces costly field support, complicates maintenance, and could erode uptime guarantees, which hyperscalers treat as non-negotiable. If efficiency gains don't translate to durable, low-friction deployments, the 50B valuation looks like a bet on uptime, not just speed.
The panel consensus is bearish on Monday.com and Cerebras, citing decelerating growth, reliance on stock-based compensation, and questionable valuations based on unproven technology and market adoption.
None explicitly stated.
Wafer-scale yield risk and customer concentration for Cerebras, and structural deceleration and stock-based compensation reliance for Monday.com.