◉Tech Investing RadarBY MARC WINN
← Historical patterns

SIMILAR CONDITIONS. DIFFERENT OUTCOMES.

Compare the pattern.
Keep the differences.

Find the shared questions across two episodes, then inspect the evidence that makes each one different.

SHARED RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

1 shared pattern feature

From survival doubt to a viable business

These labels describe retrospective research hypotheses. They are not a similarity probability, forecast or evidence that either case predicts the other.

Important differences

  • The documented business outcomes differ; business progress must be assessed separately from shareholder return.
  • The episodes use different time horizons and cannot establish the same investment window.
  • The episodes occurred in different calendar periods; market conditions are not controlled for.

Missing evidence

  • AMD: annual endpoints do not resolve a two-to-eight-week investment window.
  • AMD: no comparable measured historical sentiment series.
  • Tesla: annual endpoints do not resolve a two-to-eight-week investment window.
  • Tesla: no comparable measured historical sentiment series.

AMD · 2015–2016

AMD: a technical comeback becomes testable

Verified rise
Annual context 2014–2019Episode 2015–2016 shaded

Prior belief

Hypothesis: weak CPU competitiveness constrained the company.

New possibility

Hypothesis: a credible high-performance roadmap could change competitive outcomes.

Alternative explanations

  • Graphics demand
  • Financing and balance-sheet changes
  • A broad semiconductor rally

Evidence gaps

  • Selected retrospectively, rather than discovered by a predeclared stock-universe screen.
  • Belief labels are interpretations, not a measured sentiment series or evidence of market consensus.
  • Daily adjusted prices, liquidity, transaction costs and exact entry or exit boundaries are not verified.
  • Related episodes can overlap and are not independent statistical observations.
  • The January 2017 results release is subsequent outcome evidence, not information available at the 2016 start.
Inspect the full dated evidence →

TSLA · 2019–2021

Tesla: viability and scaling become investable possibilities

Verified rise
Annual context 2019–2024Episode 2019–2021 shaded

Prior belief

Hypothesis: production, cash generation and long-term survival remained open questions.

New possibility

Hypothesis: a scalable electric-vehicle business and wider future opportunities became more credible.

Alternative explanations

  • Broad liquidity conditions
  • Index flows
  • Expectations beyond automotive earnings

Evidence gaps

  • Selected retrospectively, rather than discovered by a predeclared stock-universe screen.
  • Belief labels are interpretations, not a measured sentiment series or evidence of market consensus.
  • Daily adjusted prices, liquidity, transaction costs and exact entry or exit boundaries are not verified.
  • Related episodes can overlap and are not independent statistical observations.
  • The early SEC notices are source-checked publication routes; the attached operating updates need fuller extraction. The annual chart begins after the October 2019 checkpoint.
Inspect the full dated evidence →

Belief descriptions are reconstructed unless the case explicitly identifies contemporary sentiment evidence. Annual charts may cover different dates and use different benchmarks. They must not be read as matched trade results.