HScreen

rendered 2026-08-29 14:15 UTC STALE inputs (245h)

GOOGL · Alphabet Inc. 12d old

conviction4
coverage tierT1-FULL
horizon12 months

Return distribution probability-weighted scenarios, never collapsed to a point

-18%23%
+21%47%
+50%30%
EV +20.73%
why these probabilities: Legs are defined against what the market expects; each is built forward from a growth rate to a multiple to a price. Price basis 345.9 on 2026-08-17. BASE (+21%, p=47%) — CONSENSUS DELIVERED, deliberately not an independent forecast. Dated consensus: FY2026 revenue growth 23.7% across 36 analysts at 2.4% dispersion, FY2027 22.5% across 39 (fmp:/stable/analyst-estimates?symbol=GOOGL&period=annual, 2026-08-17T16:03:03Z). I use the REVENUE consensus, not EPS: the EPS series is internally incoherent (+90.3% FY2026 then -25.8% FY2027), a pooled fiscal-period artefact named in evidence_gaps. Build: FY2025 revenue 402.8bn at 32.0% operating margin; apply 23.7% → FY2026 revenue ~498bn; hold margin at 32% (TAC/mix tailwind, GOOGL/GOOGL_2025Q1.json:49, against rising server depreciation from a ~60%-servers mix, GOOGL/GOOGL_2025Q4.json:46) → operating income ~159bn. On the ~12.1bn diluted share count implied by 132.2bn net income and 10.91 EPS, core FY2026 EPS is ~11.4; carrying 22.5% growth into FY2027 at the same margin gives ~14.5. At 345.9 the market already pays ~30x core FY2026, so it has pulled FY2027 forward. Base holds 29x on ~14.5 twelve months out → ~420, +21%. That lands near the 427.55 street target but is not derived from it; the target is a cross-check. BULL (+50%, p=30%) — GROWTH MATERIALLY ABOVE CONSENSUS: FY2027 revenue growth ~28% versus consensus 22.5%, a 5.5pp gap, wi
not built — options-implied distribution on the same axis, with the KL number and where the disagreement sits
needs: desk-options implied bands (v1.4 Part 4a) — activates at 60% coverage; currently 33%

Visibility how far ahead this name can be seen

not built — visibility score
needs: visibility_score.py

Trust how much weight this name's own record can carry (credibility Z)

not built — credibility
needs: credibility.py

Sizing survival-first size (half-Kelly) vs the enforced ladder

kelly not computable — no data

Payout durability does the distribution survive a downturn?

PASS
DPS trajectoryinsufficient_history
interest cover now175.32x
interest cover at FORWARD rates46.5x

Falsifiers what would prove this wrong

Google Cloud revenue growth remains above 20% year-on-year, sustaining the operating-leverage assumption in the base and bull legs
Operating margin holds at or above 30% while committed capex runs, i.e. the ~60%-servers depreciation load does not overwhelm incremental revenue
EPS revision breadth turns positive and converges toward revenue revision breadth within two quarters
TPU externalisation becomes real: a named third-party customer commitment is disclosed, not merely discussed by research houses
Search revenue growth stays in double digits — the bear leg assumes deceleration, not franchise impairment, and this is the line between them
Consensus FY2027 revenue growth is not revised below 15%

Conflicts surfaced, never netted out (T4)


The EPS revision tape does NOT confirm the revenue tape — the most material disagreement here. Revenue: 30 up / 4 down, breadth 0.765, 2.79 moves/30d. EPS over the same 365 days: 10 up / 8 down, breadth 0.111, 1.48 moves		high

Three of four signal desks do not exist, so the conflicts this system is built to surface cannot be checked on this name. Specifically the options-implied anchor is null on every row of both grids because desk_options.js		high

Our probability-weighted expected return (+20.7%) is BELOW the street's dated implied return (+23.6% to a 427.55 target; 83 analysts, Buy, range 350-475) by 2.9pp. The disagreement is structural rather than about the bas		medium

The consensus EPS data is internally incoherent and was not used. FY2026 EPS growth +90.3% (39 analysts) followed by FY2027 -25.8% (42 analysts), FY2028 revenue dispersion 35.8%, and FY2029-30 EPS coverage collapsing to 		medium

The pack retrieved NO substitution commentary for GOOGL against its named rivals for the same customer spend (MSFT, AMZN), and states explicitly that absence of evidence of insourcing is not evidence of its absence. Alph		medium

The case against independent adversary, different model family (P6) broken

Version history from the research record

archived versions3
archivedhashbytes
2026-08-17T14:24:5509a45cea7b8834,831
2026-08-17T15:40:005a0d6b0b34fa35,058
2026-08-19T05:54:53d9d70830bcc538,048

What changed in the latest version

+provenance:
+ produced_by: analyst-aisemi
+ produced_at: 2026-08-17
+ inputs:
+ - system/evidence-packs/GOOGL.md (build_evidence_pack.py, 2026-08-17T16:02:39Z)
+ - system/state-files/GOOGL.json (state.v1, 2026-08-17T13:16:40Z)
+ - estimates_query.py drift/outliers as_of 2026-08-17T16:03:23Z
+ - fmp:/stable/analyst-estimates?symbol=GOOGL&period=annual as_of 2026-08-17T16:03:03Z
+ depot_classes_read: A,B only — Class D (own prior research) not read; blind re-score preserved
- value: 'Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ, USD, mkt cap ~$4.19tn). Three reported divisions: Google Services (Search,
- YouTube, Android, Chrome, Play, hardware), Google Cloud, and Other Bets. FY2025 revenue $402.8bn,
- operating income $129.0bn (32.0% margin), net income $132.2bn, reported EPS $10.91. ROE 31.8%, ROIC
- 21.8%, current ratio 2.01, EV/EBITDA 21.1x, EV/sales 9.5x. 198,933 employees. Within the AI demand
- cascade GOOGL sits at tier 2 (hyperscaler): it owns the capex decision and writes the cheques to hardware,
…diff truncated
Rendered from canonical artifacts only (T1) — no terminal database exists. Every figure is read from the system's own files at render time; where an artifact is missing the panel names the dependency rather than showing an empty box. No execution path exists anywhere in this interface (T5), not even a link.