Hey this is tom and in this video i'll explain to you why kathy wood and arkhanvest just purchased 1.2 million shares of volunteer. There's not a lot of secrets here, it's a great company, but she has a great reason which i'll show you here using a full dcf. Yes, i'm gon na do a full dcf on palantir you'll, get to see it step by step, because that dcf is basically critical to me, showing you why kathy wood loaded, the boat on planeteer just last week - and she was not the only one - a lot of Institutional money is flowing into palantiy recently. In fact, companies like blackrock vanguard, a lot of the big hitters are putting more and more money into palantir.

The institutional holdings of this company have doubled doubled in the past four months, and the pace is only getting stronger and stronger now out of those eleven hundred institutional shareholders in poland. Here you know how many of them are short. 22. literally two percent 98 is long.

Two percent, the short: now that shows you everything. Nobody in smart money is actually shorting. This talk out of this crazy 22.. I don't know what you know, probably wrong key or maybe the cleaning lady went over the keyboard.

I don't know what happened, but essentially i mean nobody's really shorting it now. The real question is why all of this institutional money is flowing in? Why kathy wood, which actually holds about five percent of the institutional float 32 million shares she holds about five percent of the entire 700 million float? So the question is what the hell is going on here now in this video i'll show you why, using even the most insanely, absurd conservative assumptions, palantir is still grossly grossly undervalued and why, if you're an institutional money with some patients, that's a good entry point for You i mean, if you look at a company, you say well, this company is outperforming it's growing nicely. The management is good, it's getting revenues, free cash flow and the stock price. Just ain't matching up because of different reasons like macroeconomics, fear of interest rates, or, basically you know just general fudd, like they had with tesla for a couple of years.

If that kind of disconnect exists between a share price and a company's performance, usually institutionals look for an entry price, but because they're patients and because they're not idiots they'll, wait for a sweet spot and i think that's what they're seeing right now. Essentially it's 16 bucks. 16 and a half bucks they're, basically saying well, it's going to be very hard for us to lose money on this talk if we get in at 16 and a half if we have patience, because as i'm about to show you right now, i mean even with The insanely conservative assumptions that i've used there's still 50 upside from 16 and a half all the way up. Even if you think the company is total garbage - and you know if you have a good deal like that, a lot of institutionals will jump on it, which is exactly what's going on.

Let me show you on the computer okay, so this is my dcf 2022 2027 five-year dcf revenues are based on a 30 annual growth based on the company's guidance which i think is sandbag. I think they're intentionally giving a low estimate of 30 annual growth, but will use it just to keep it conservative. This is the cost of goods structure for the next five years, selling general administrative. Now, if you look at the historical numbers, you'll see that this actually is lower than the sgna in 2021 and 2020..

The reason is that 2120 was also loaded with sbc stock, with computation that kind of artificially inflated sgna. And if you look at years without sbc, basically before the dpo, which by definition created a lot of sbc and before alex carp, got his new batch for the next 10 years, you see that it's around 700 million. So we use 750 and we give it a nice little bump every year. Also we have r d expenses right here, which is in line with what the company is doing and now we can talk about the ebitda.

So basically the result is this ebitda right here and, as you can see right here, we use the 21 tax rate. Now this is insanely conservative. Over the past five years, the company lost a lot of money. They've accumulated a lot of losses which they can carry forward to years, where they actually have profits, because if we add it up, we get about 11 and a half billion or 11 billion.

Here. A lot of it will be offset against the many many years of losses the company accumulated over the years. So not all of this will be paid because, as you should know, a lot of four words can be done with losses. Losses can be carried forward to years in which you have gains from previous years in which you lost money, and god knows pilate lost a lot of money.

So this is another ultra-conservative assumption. As you can see right here, we have capex assumptions of 200 million over the course of the next five years, which is again a joke. It's insane planeteer is not going to invest half not even one-fourth of this number. It's not a company that has a lot of capex, i mean it's a software business, i mean they don't really invest in buildings and and machinery and stuff like that, i mean the expense is basically r d and salaries.

So this is just a crazy assumptions. Just to you know, go crazy here, um a 10 discount rate and, as you can see right here at four percent, perpetual growth rate right here and at this point you should also pay attention to this number below the net. Debt is 2.2 billion. A lot of cash very low debt, as you remember, this was intentional by the company and if you calculate all of this, you get two numbers: the dcf value is 44 billion and the ebitda multiple, which should be 25.

We used 18 here just to be conservative will give you a nice 55.1. The average will give you 49.6, which is 49.57 higher than the current price of 33 billion and 200, which the company is currently trading it. So, even if you apply the most conservative assumptions in history completely go ballistic on this company, it still has 50 it's pretty much free money for these institutionals and they're, literally picking it up from the ground and you'd, be shocked. How simple the formula for this is basically great company panic selling equals money simple, as that now all of these institutionals will be quietly buying, as the price is dipping.

All the real investors, gon na, be shaking their balls gon na be shaking their arms gon na be shaking they'll, be paper handing out of the stock while these guys quietly move in this is exactly what's going on here. But then again not everybody is built for a two three four year holding period, even though they say they are. I mean this is what the stock requires, if you don't have the stomach for a couple of years of losses because virtually stay away from this now, if this was helpful, let me know below also try to take my calculation completely go crazy with it. If you can make me look like an idiot post it in comments, i'm not going to delete any comments.

If you can basically confirm what i said here, go crazy. If you want to make a little bit more of a you know, aggressive assumption, let's see where it gets you in any case, this dcf calculation will be available to download in full for you to play around with on our patreon page. If you want to join it's five dollars per month and if anything you'll get the success spreadsheet but you'll also be a part of a community you'll be supporting the channel. Our zoom calls the updates everything the discord.

The link is in the description and in the pen comment i'll see you there, hopefully in a minute later.