MercadoLibre [MELI]
The memo issues NO position verdict. Criteria are scored; the book decides. This section sizes and constructs the expression if the book allocates.
Equity is the default and needs no argument (MEMO_BRIEF, "Vehicle"). No LEAP is proposed because the
required input — measured option IV minus trailing 252-day realised vol — was not retrieved inside the
time box. Trailing 252-day realised vol is 39.8% (screen record, vol_252d_pct). Without a measured
IV the vol spread is unquantified, so per the standing rule the vehicle defaults to equity. Recording
this as an explicit non-computation rather than asserting a reason the document cannot support.
| Spot | $1,833.15 |
| 12-month target (3-yr p25 EV/EBIT 36.82x on NTM EBIT) | $2,288, +24.8% |
| Low case (multiple flat at today's 14th percentile) | $2,031, +10.8% |
| Downside case (NIMAL continues falling — named cause) | $1,370, −25.2% |
| Reward : risk vs the named downside | 1.0 : 1.0 |
That reward:risk is not attractive on its own. What carries the name is the implied-path margin (+28.2pp) and its robustness across the entire 18-cell exit-multiple × FCF surface, not the 12-month skew. A book that ranks on valuation margin should look at this differently from one that ranks on 12-month upside, and this memo is explicit about which is which.
size_bucket: large ($92.9bn market cap), 39.8% realised vol, ADV not a constraint. Evidence grade B
— per valuation.md rule 5, uncertainty reduces position size and never the operating assumption. The
two named evidence gaps (unquantified GMV redefinition; contested FCF definition) argue for the lower
half of whatever band the book assigns to a B-grade State-C name.
Correlation note for the book: MELI, RBA and BKNG were underwritten together as "network-effect marketplaces". They are not one exposure. MELI is LatAm consumer credit and FX; RBA is North American used-equipment and insurance-salvage supply; BKNG is European travel demand. The shared label is a research convenience, not a factor.