Supply-chain bottleneck arbitrage. Given a super-trend (AI infra, energy transition, defense, semiconductor reshoring, space economy), decompose its physical supply chain down to Layer 2/3 choke points (optics, lasers, InP/SOI substrates, IC substrates, probe cards, specialty fiberglass...) and surface under-the-radar listed companies sitting on each bottleneck. Scores each link on 6 scarcity criteria, applies mandatory valuation gates (PS/PE/safety-margin) via the financial_rigor tool, and Munger-style reverse-validates. Outputs a ranked bottleneck opportunity board. Use when the user wants hidden beneficiaries of a structural trend rather than already-priced leaders.
90%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Decompose a super-trend (user-specified, e.g. "AI infrastructure", "energy transition") into its physical supply chain and hunt for bottleneck-arbitrage opportunities.
Don't ask "which AI stock to buy" — ask "if this trend keeps expanding, which link runs out first?"
Traditional research chases leaders and known tracks. This skill inverts: start from the choke points of the physical supply chain and find companies nobody notices but that the whole industry must wait on when they run short.
The edge: Layer-1 bottlenecks (GPU, HBM, power) are already priced in. The real alpha is in Layer 2 and Layer 3 — optical modules, lasers, InP substrates, SOI wafers, epitaxy equipment, wafer-level test, IC substrates, specialty fiberglass.
| Criterion | Requirement | How to verify |
|---|---|---|
| Durability | ≥3-5 years of certain growth | Search industry forecasts, capex plans |
| Physicality | Needs real hardware/material/equipment build | Distinguish "software upgrade" from "physical expansion" |
| Scale | Global capex >$50B/year | Search top players' capex guidance |
| Acceleration | Demand growth > supply expansion | Compare demand growth vs capacity plans |
Use web_search to verify. Reference super-trends: AI infrastructure, energy transition (nuclear/grid/storage), defense modernization, semiconductor reshoring, space economy.
Don't stop at concepts — decompose to physical entities.
Layer 0 (end): final product/service
Layer 1 (core component): already closely watched → priced in, limited alpha
Layer 2 (sub-component/material): low attention, alpha-rich
Layer 3 (upstream equipment/raw material)
Layer 4 (infrastructure): power, cooling, land, talent, certificationsLayer 0: AI model training/inference services
Layer 1: GPU/accelerators, HBM, servers, data centers
Layer 2 (focus zone):
- Network interconnect: optical modules, fiber, switch ASICs, copper cables
- Optical comms core: lasers (EML/VCSEL/CW), modulators, photodetectors
- Semiconductor materials: InP substrates, GaAs substrates, SOI wafers, SiC substrates
- Advanced packaging: CoWoS interposers, HBM TSV, ABF substrate film
- PCB/substrate: high-frequency PCB, IC substrates, specialty fiberglass
- Test: wafer-level test (probe cards), burn-in, ATE
- Thermal/cooling: liquid cooling, CDU, immersion fluid
- Power connection: busbars, UPS, distribution, transformers
Layer 3: epitaxy equipment (MOCVD/MBE), lithography/etch, high-purity metals (In/Ga/Ge), specialty gases, sputtering targets, certifications (MSA/Telcordia)
Layer 4: power (nuclear/gas/transmission), cooling water, data-center land/permitsFor other trends, use web_search with queries like {trend} supply chain bottleneck, {trend} shortage critical component, {trend} capacity constraint, {trend} sole source supplier.
For each Layer 2-3 link, evaluate 6 criteria:
| # | Criterion | Question | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Supply concentration | ≤3 global suppliers? | 🔴 ≤2 / 🟡 3-5 / 🟢 >5 |
| 2 | Expansion lead time | How long to add capacity? | 🔴 >2y / 🟡 1-2y / 🟢 <1y |
| 3 | Substitutability | Can other tech/material replace it? | 🔴 irreplaceable / 🟡 partial / 🟢 easy |
| 4 | Capacity utilization | Current utilization? | 🔴 >90% / 🟡 70-90% / 🟢 <70% |
| 5 | Demand growth | Downstream demand growth? | 🔴 >50%/yr / 🟡 20-50% / 🟢 <20% |
| 6 | Customer qualification cycle | How long for a new supplier to qualify? | 🔴 >1y / 🟡 6-12m / 🟢 <6m |
Bottleneck grade: 🔴×≥4 → S-grade (single-point failure, highest priority); 🔴×3 → A-grade (severely constrained); 🔴×1-2 → B-grade (stressed but manageable); no 🔴 → not a bottleneck, skip.
For each S/A-grade bottleneck, use web_search / screen_market to find listed companies.
| Criterion | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Listing status | Listed (A/HK/US/JP/TW/EU) |
| Bottleneck revenue share | >30% of revenue from the bottleneck link |
| Market cap | Prefer <$10B (large caps already priced) |
| Liquidity | Average daily turnover >$1M |
A real bottleneck ≠ an investment opportunity. For every company, compute PE/PB/ROE/FCF yield with financial_rigor (command=verify_valuation), and run financial_rigor (command=three_scenario) for scenario valuation:
Sanity check (mandatory): with financial_rigor (command=three_scenario), answer — "buying at current market cap, if the most optimistic scenario fully plays out and I exit at 25× PE in 10 years, what's the annualized return?" <10%/yr → flag "no margin of safety at current price".
| Check | Question |
|---|---|
| Customer validation | Have top customers signed/imported? (check announcements, customer filings) |
| Revenue validation | Is the bottleneck already showing in revenue growth? (last 2-3 quarters) |
| Price validation | Is the product raising price? (industry quotes, analyst reports) |
| Capacity validation | Is capacity really tight? (lead times, customer complaints) |
| Capital validation | Is there expansion capex? (company guidance) |
Use get_financial_statements / get_stock_news / web_search.
| Rank | Company | Ticker | Mkt Cap | Revenue | PS | PE | Bottleneck link | Grade | Share | Growth | Signal | Valuation |
|---|
Market cap, revenue, PS, PE are mandatory — never skip with "TBD". If financials can't be obtained, signal strength ≤★★.
Signal strength (valuation gate directly affects):
After drafting, run report_audit (command=extract → verify each point → command=verdict) as a quality gate to ensure no hallucinated numbers.
🎯 {Company} ({Ticker}) — {one-line bottleneck positioning}
Why it's a bottleneck: (2-3 sentences)
Why this company: (2-3 sentences)
Catalyst timeline:
- Near-term (1-3m): [earnings / capacity / customer win]
- Mid-term (3-12m): [industry trend / expansion node]
Key risks: 1. 2.
Key data: market cap / revenue / PS / PE / growth / bottleneck revenue share
Margin of safety: 10y 25× PE exit method, annualized return XX%. Conclusion: yes/no.
Cross-validation status: ✅ customer / ✅ revenue / ⚠️ valuation stretched / ❌ unverified
Conclusion: deep research / watchlist / skipSave with write_file to the reports directory (e.g. reports/bottleneck-map/{trend}-bottleneck-{YYYYMMDD}.md).
On each run: ① re-check identified bottlenecks (new suppliers? capacity expanded? substitute breakthrough?); ② scan new bottlenecks (web_search last 7 days supply chain / shortage / bottleneck news); ③ update grades (upgrade/downgrade/relieve).
| Bias | Symptom | Counter |
|---|---|---|
| Leader-bias | Search dominated by large caps | Deliberately search small-cap suppliers, add "small cap" |
| English-bias | Miss JP/KR/TW players | Must search JP/KR/TW market suppliers |
| Narrative-bias | Drawn to "AI concept" labels | Look only at actual supply-chain position, not market labels |
| Confirmation-bias | After finding a bottleneck, only seek positive evidence | Force Step 5 reverse checks |
| Recency-bias | Rely on stale info | Prefer last 30 days of data |
HKUDS/Vibe-Trading
2dab6b1
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.