CRWD · investment memo
NOT UNDERWRITTEN, deliberately, so null is the correct record rather than a gap. The memo's primary instrument is an EV/SALES reverse DCF, for which valuation.md does not require a terminal operating margin ('Terminal operating margin is not required on a sales basis'). The EBIT-basis exit multiple is separately declared UNIDENTIFIED. Section 3 Sensitivity 2 runs the terminal GAAP operating margin across 10.0 / 15.0 / 20.0 / 24.7 (the guided non-GAAP) / 30.0 / 35.0% and returns FAIL at every one, margins -73.9pp to -29.7pp - the point being that the verdict does not depend on the basis. No point estimate is committed anywhere in the folder and none is invented here.
Four distinct questions, one field each. A price is not a thesis: the trigger below forces a re-underwrite and freezes further purchases — it is never an automatic sell.
A daily close below $148.51 triggers a mandatory re-underwrite and freezes further purchases. It is not an automatic sell unless a separate fundamental invalidation condition has been breached.
Not stated. This name has no falsifiable invalidation conditions on file, so it cannot be risk-monitored. That is a gap in the research, not a clean bill of health — recorded rather than hidden.
Type: MEASURED. Logged, scored, and it does not reject the name — the Valuation Criteria already does. Scenario — a second platform incident, or Microsoft Defender bundling, compresses net retention below 110% while SBC at 22.8% of revenue cannot be cut. Probability 30%. Named cause and mechanism, with precedent. The July 19, 2024 incident is not a hypothetical — it happened, and its effect is measurable in CRWD's own disclosure: dollar-based net retention fell from 119% to 112% and revenue growth troughed at 19.8%. The 10-Q still discusses it 55 times, two years later, and the FY2025 10-K sta