HScreen

rendered 2026-08-24 14:15 UTC STALE inputs (125h)

KLAC · KLA Corporation 5d old

conviction2
coverage tierT2-PARTIAL
horizon12 months

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

-34%22%
+13%46%
+38%32%
EV +10.66%
why these probabilities: All legs built forward from reported FY2026 EPS of 3.68 and priced off NTM EPS as at August 2027, i.e. FY2028 EPS, from 193.055 on 2026-08-18. Dividend adds ~0.5%. BASE = the market's expectation, DELIVERED: consensus revenue growth of 33.9% in FY2027 and 19.0% in FY2028 with EPS growth of 47.8% then 21.0% (fmp:/stable/analyst-estimates, 2026-08-19), giving FY2027 EPS ~5.44 and FY2028 EPS ~6.58. We apply 33x to that 6.58, down from the 35.5x the stock pays for FY2027 EPS today, because a year further into a cycle whose growth decelerates from 47.8% to 21.0% earns less multiple, not more: 33 x 6.58 = ~217 plus ~0.9 dividend = +13%. This is BELOW the street's 225 target and the gap is entirely the multiple, not the estimates. BULL = materially faster growth: revenue +45% in FY2027 (versus consensus 33.9%) and +25% in FY2028 (versus 19.0%), which is what management's own framing implies — a served market it now reads at mid-to-high-30s growth with KLA at close to 2x that (KLAC/KLAC_2026Q4.json:57) — run through the company's stated 40-50% incremental operating margin leverage (KLAC/KLAC_2026Q4.json:9) and a 14.5% planning tax rate, for FY2028 EPS of ~7.00. At 38x, a multiple the stock demonstrably paid inside its 52-week range (307.37 high implies ~56x FY2026 EPS), that is ~266 plus dividend = +38%. BEAR = materially SLOWER growth, not collapse: revenue +15% in FY2027 against cons
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

ladder (enforced)3%
kelly-derived (report-only)0.05%
divergence2.95pp
inputsEV(ann) 10.66% · σ 26.09 · Z

Falsifiers what would prove this wrong

The served market is growing mid-to-high-30s and KLA grows close to 2x that, per management's 2026Q4 characterisation
Customer capex funds the bull leg — 2330.TW 2027 capex at or above the ~76-80bn supplier read
The memory-pricing headwind stays contained at ~100bp and does not widen
Process-control competitive position is unbreached — KLA holds or gains share from 6.5x the number two
Service revenue compounds at 13-15% and is not capex-cyclical, bounding the bear leg
China WFE export controls do not remove a demand block outright

Conflicts surfaced, never netted out (T4)


Our probability-weighted expected return is +10.7% against a street-implied +17.1% from the 225 median target (44 analysts, consensus Buy, 28 buy / 14 hold / 2 sell). We adopt consensus growth verbatim, so the entire 6.4
high

The revision tape is UNAVAILABLE — eps_drift and rev_drift return 0 rows, breadth 0.0, direction flat. So the strongest routine corroboration of estimate direction cannot be checked in either direction for this name. A c
high

Our p_bear of 22% sits 17.6pp above the interpolated node_pooled base rate (~4.4%) and 22pp above the historical (0.0%) at our -34% magnitude. We hold the position: both anchors have effective_n 5, are flagged noisy, and
high

The state file's key-metrics block is internally inconsistent with its own income statement: ev_to_sales 29.47 and ev_to_ebitda 69.49 cannot both be reconciled with a 252.18bn market cap against 13.579bn of FY2026 revenu
medium

Consensus dispersion widens sharply along the curve — 0.6% revenue dispersion at FY2026, 7.5% at FY2027, 12.5% at FY2028, 18.2% at FY2029 — and analyst count thins from 20 to 9 to 4. Our scenarios diverge exactly where t
medium

None of the four signal desks exist at this phase and desk_options.json holds no reachable chain for KLAC, so the view is UNTESTED against options pricing, positioning, technical structure or factor profile. This is not
medium

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

Version history from the research record

archived versions1
archivedhashbytes
2026-08-19T08:32:01050f301e82ea32,490
One version only — the archive was created today. The diff view fills in on the next re-run.
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.