【Planet Labs (PL) Q1 FY2027】 The stock price crashed despite good earnings. Thinking about the end of space AI momentum after taking profits
I have reviewed Planet Labs' (PL) Q1 FY2027 earnings.
First, my current PL position is zero.
In my article after the previous Q4 earnings, I categorized PL as a "time-limited momentum satellite."
I held it as a stock to capture momentum in the space, AI, and defense themes before the SpaceX IPO, with a policy to exit before the listing.
After that, I sold all of my PL shares.
I planned the sale in three stages and was able to take profits at quite good levels. As a result, it is a success story where I significantly grew my portfolio.
This time, these are the earnings that were released after that.
To conclude, PL's Q1 earnings were not bad.
In fact, the business is quite strong.
Revenue is up 42% year-over-year.
Backlog is over $900 million.
D&I, or Defense & Intelligence, demand is strong.
The sovereign reconnaissance satellite for Sweden was also launched within four months of the contract.
The story as a space AI company is also progressing with AI apps, SuperRes, and Pelican Gen2.
Even so, the stock price crashed after the earnings.
The market environment was also quite bad.
The Nasdaq fell significantly, and the S&P 500 was also sold off.
However, PL's decline cannot be explained by the market environment alone.
PL fell about 26% in regular trading.
I think this should be viewed not as "sold off due to bad earnings," but as "bought up to expectations that even good earnings could not satisfy."
In this article, I will not end the PL earnings review with a simple good or bad.
Is PL moving from a satellite imagery company to an Earth data OS?
Will D&I and sovereign satellite demand turn into an irreversible moat?
Will AI really re-accelerate private and government demand?
And where does the space AI momentum end?
I no longer hold PL.
That is precisely why I will think about whether there is investment merit again with clear eyes.
Q2’26 → Q3’26 → Q4’26 → Q1’27
・Revenue: $73.4M → $81.3M → $86.8M → $94.2M
YoY: +20.0% → +32.6% → +41.0% → +42.1%
QoQ: +10.7% → +10.7% → +6.8% → +8.5%
Looking only at revenue growth, PL has not collapsed yet.
After the growth rate jumped to +41% in Q4, it maintained +42% in Q1.
At the very least, top-line momentum is continuing.
・Revenue composition by business:
Defense & Intelligence: 57% → 61% → 59% → 65%
Commercial: 22% → 23% → 23% → 18%
Civil Government: 21% → 16% → 18% → 17%
Since the Q4 standalone business composition cannot be confirmed, I am using the FY26 full-year figures as a substitute.
In Q1, D&I rose to 65% of the revenue composition.
PL has currently become a company that is quite heavily weighted toward defense and intelligence.
・GAAP Gross Margin: 57.6% → 57.3% → 54.2% → 53.5%
YoY difference: +4.6pt → -3.8pt → -7.9pt → -1.8pt
QoQ difference: +2.4pt → -0.3pt → -3.1pt → -0.7pt
Revenue is strong, but GAAP gross margin is declining.
It was in the 57% range in Q2 and Q3, but dropped to the 54% and 53% ranges from Q4 onwards.
The impact of Satellite Services and new satellite investments is appearing.
・non-GAAP Gross Margin: 61% → 60% → 57% → 56%
YoY difference: +3pt → -4pt → -8pt → -3pt
QoQ difference: +2pt → -1pt → -3pt → -1pt
Non-GAAP gross margin is also on a downward trend.
The 56% in Q1 is better than the company's guidance, but lower than the 59% in the same period last year.
This is the figure that should be viewed most calmly in these earnings.
・GAAP Operating Margin: -24.5% → -22.6% → -41.5% → -37.1%
YoY difference: +15.7pt → +5.7pt → -9.1pt → -18.2pt
QoQ difference: +2.4pt → +1.9pt → -18.9pt → +4.4pt
GAAP operating margin is still a large deficit.
Q1 improved compared to Q4, but it has worsened year-over-year.
With warrant valuation losses and investment burdens, the GAAP-based view is heavy.
・non-GAAP Operating Margin: -4.6% → -4.2% → -8.0% → -11.9%
YoY difference: +10.1pt → +5.3pt → -8.0pt → -9.0pt
QoQ difference: +2.6pt → +0.4pt → -3.8pt → -3.9pt
Non-GAAP operating margin also worsened in Q1.
Revenue is growing, but investment burdens are also increasing.
PL is not yet a company evaluated by profit margins, but is in the stage of confirming growth and conversion to future CF.
・Adjusted EBITDA: $6.4M → $5.6M → $2.3M → -$1.0M
Adjusted EBITDA margin: 8.7% → 6.9% → 2.6% → -1.1%
Adjusted EBITDA turned negative again in Q1.
However, since the company guidance was -$6M to -$3M, the actual result was better than expected.
The next Q2 guidance is for a profit of $0 to $5M, so this will be a check of the results.
・Rule of 40: Q1 FY2027 is 41%
The Rule of 40 is an indicator that adds the revenue growth rate and the Adjusted EBITDA margin.
In Q1, the revenue growth rate was 42.1% and the Adjusted EBITDA margin was -1.1%, for a total of 41%.
However, this time, it is a Rule of 40 achieved through revenue growth, not profit margin.
・GAAP EPS: -$0.07 → -$0.19 → -$0.48 → -$0.40
・non-GAAP EPS: -$0.03 → approx. $0.00 → approx. $0.00 → -$0.03
GAAP EPS for Q1 was -$0.40.
The valuation loss on warrant liabilities is large, and there is a lot of noise here.
However, as long as SBC and dilution remain, it is dangerous to be reassured by non-GAAP alone.
・Operating CF: $67.8M → $28.6M → $20.6M → $15.4M
Operating CF margin: 92.3% → 35.2% → 23.8% → 16.4%
Operating CF is positive, but it has been declining recently.
There is large quarterly volatility due to advance payments for government projects and milestone payments.
What we should look at is whether FCF can be maintained as positive for the full year.
・Capital Expenditure: $21.5M → $27.7M → $23.0M → $18.0M
Capital Expenditure / Revenue ratio: 29.3% → 34.1% → 26.5% → 19.1%
Q1 CapEx was $18.0M, which is low for the last four quarters.
However, for the full FY2027, it is expected to be $80M to $95M.
PL continues to be in an investment cycle for next-generation satellites and manufacturing capacity expansion.
・FCF: $46.3M → $0.9M → -$2.3M → -$2.5M
FCF margin: 63.1% → 1.1% → -2.7% → -2.7%
FCF was negative in Q1, following Q4.
Revenue and Backlog are strong, but current FCF is still weak.
It is highly likely that the market disliked this.
・SBC: $13.5M → $13.5M → $15.5M → $16.5M
SBC / Revenue ratio: 18.3% → 16.6% → 17.9% → 17.5%
SBC, or stock-based compensation expense, is still heavy.
It is a cost that dilutes the value of existing shareholders instead of reducing cash.
A revenue ratio in the 17% range cannot be ignored by long-term investors.
・Ending share count: 307.9M → 313.6M → 335.3M → 356.4M
QoQ: +1.9% → +1.8% → +6.9% → +6.3%
The number of shares is also increasing.
Accounting noise derived from warrants will disappear, but the increase in the number of shares remains a reality.
If you look at PL, you need to look not only at revenue growth but also at value per share.
・Cash and short-term investments: $271.5M → $677.3M → $640.1M → $730.8M
Cash on hand is substantial.
Cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments at the end of Q1 were $730.8M.
Anxiety regarding funding has receded, but confirmation of investment recovery is yet to come.
・RPO: $690.1M → $672.5M → $852.4M → $816.0M
・Backlog: $736.1M → $734.5M → $900.4M → $906.1M
RPO is Remaining Performance Obligations, which are contracted but not yet recognized as revenue.
Backlog is $906.1M, the highest level ever.
What is important is whether this will turn into not just revenue, but high gross margin and FCF.
・Q2 FY2027 Guidance
Revenue: $102M to $107M
Median: $104.5M
QoQ: +11.0%
YoY: approx. +42%
non-GAAP gross margin: 52% to 55%
Adjusted EBITDA: $0M to $5M
CapEx: $21M to $27M
Q2 guidance is not bad.
While revenue is expected to grow by double digits QoQ, gross margin is expected to decline from the Q1 actual of 56%.
Next time, the focus will be on the balance between revenue growth and gross margin.
・FY2027 Guidance
Revenue: $425M to $441M
Median: $433M
YoY: approx. +40.7%
non-GAAP gross margin: 52% to 54%
Adjusted EBITDA: $0M to $10M
CapEx: $80M to $95M
Full-year FCF: Specific amount not disclosed, but the company aims for full-year FCF profitability
Full-year revenue guidance was revised upward.
Non-GAAP gross margin guidance was also raised from the previous 50-52% to 52-54%.
However, it was not a super surprise that would push the stock price expectations even higher.
PL's Q1 revenue and backlog are strong.
On the other hand, gross margin, FCF, SBC, and dilution are still heavy.
In other words, business momentum is continuing, but it was not the "perfect earnings" that the stock price was looking for.
From here on, revenue growth alone is not enough.
We have entered a phase of watching whether the backlog will turn into high gross margin, FCF, and per-share value.
■ Reasons why the stock price crashed despite good earnings
This time, PL's earnings were good.
Even so, the stock price was sold off significantly.
I think there are five main reasons.
The first is that expectations were too high.
PL was carrying the themes of SpaceX IPO association, space AI, defense, geopolitics, sovereign satellites, and AI apps all on its shoulders.
The stock price had already run quite a bit.
So what the market was looking for was not good earnings.
It was goosebump-inducing, perfect earnings.
The second is gross margin.
Revenue is strong.
However, the gross margin is down year-over-year.
Non-GAAP gross margin is also on a downward trend, at 61% in Q2, 60% in Q3, 57% in Q4, and 56% in Q1.
The third is FCF.
Q1 operating CF is positive, but FCF is -$2.5M.
The full-year FCF profitability policy is maintained, but it has not been confirmed yet in the current situation.
The fourth is SBC and dilution.
SBC is in the 17% range of revenue.
The number of shares is also increasing.
For long-term investors, this is heavy.
The fifth is the market environment.
Both the Nasdaq and S&P 500 were sold off significantly.
However, the market environment alone cannot explain PL's decline.
PL fell by amplifying the market deterioration many times over.
In other words, PL was not sold because it became a bad company.
It remains a good company.
However, the stock price had already priced in the future too much.
■ Is PL moving from a satellite imagery company to an Earth data OS?
So, how is PL's business structure changing?
This is quite interesting.
The essence of PL is not just a company that launches satellites and sells images.
The company's strength lies in its Daily Scan, a data infrastructure that scans the Earth every day.
Furthermore, that data is accumulated as a historical archive.
PL has accumulated an average of over 3,000 images for each point on the Earth's land surface.
This is different from just a single high-resolution image.
It is Earth data with a time axis.
This data is compatible with AI.
LLMs have learned from text on the internet.
However, changes in the physical world cannot be understood by text alone.
Farmland.
Ports.
Forests.
Roads.
Military facilities.
Ships.
Disasters.
Supply chains.
For AI to understand these changes in the physical world, Earth observation data with a time axis is necessary.
PL holds that.
If this structure truly progresses, PL will move closer to an Earth data OS, not a satellite imagery company.
However, it is not yet in its final form.
AI apps are in the private beta stage.
SuperRes is progressing, but it is unconfirmed how much it will contribute to customer unit prices or contract expansion.
Whether Commercial and Civil will significantly re-accelerate with AI is also yet to be confirmed.
In other words, PL could become an Earth data OS.
However, it cannot be said that it "has become" one yet.
■ Is D&I deepening the moat, or is it a geopolitical special demand?
The strongest part of these earnings was D&I.
In Q1, D&I revenue was up over 65% year-over-year.
A $21.9M one-year contract extension from the NGA.
A $7.5M six-month renewal from the US Navy.
An eight-figure dollar contract with an international D&I customer.
The launch of a sovereign reconnaissance satellite for Sweden.
This is quite strong.
D&I is not just a single customer segment for PL.
It has the potential to enter the workflow of national security.
Once incorporated into maritime surveillance, crisis response, wide-area monitoring, and sovereign satellite operations, it is difficult to remove easily.
There is a switching cost here.
There is trust.
There is operational know-how.
There are practical workflows for each customer.
Therefore, D&I growth is a material for moat expansion.
However, looking at it from the other side, it is also a geopolitical special demand.
Ukraine.
The Middle East.
European defense.
The South China Sea.
Taiwan.
Maritime surveillance.
Sovereign satellite demand.
It is precisely because these themes are strong that D&I is growing now.
So what happens when geopolitical demand settles down?
What happens if government budgets are delayed?
What happens if large contracts are not renewed?
This is still unconfirmed.
PL's D&I is strong.
However, to make it a long-term core based on D&I alone, I want to see continuity and renewal rates.
■ Has the "Valley of Death for FCF" that I warned about in the previous earnings output arrived?
In my previous Q4 earnings article, I wrote that "after the SpaceX IPO, dilution and the Valley of Death for FCF are waiting."
So, what happened to that concern in this Q1?
To conclude, the Valley of Death for FCF is not yet confirmed to have arrived.
However, I think we have entered the entrance.
Looking at the full FY2026, PL had improved to $134.4M in operating CF and $52.9M in FCF. This was a significant step forward. PL was a company that had continued to have FCF deficits until then, and it turned to full-year FCF profitability for the first time in FY2026.
Therefore, in the previous Q4 earnings, FCF profitability was a major evaluation point.
However, in Q1 FY2027, while operating CF was a positive $15.4M, FCF was -$2.5M. Since FCF in the same period last year was +$8.0M, it has also worsened year-over-year.
In other words, revenue grew.
Backlog also accumulated.
D&I is also strong.
Even so, FCF returned to negative.
This cannot be overlooked.
Of course, PL's FCF fluctuates significantly every quarter. Due to advance payments for government projects, milestone payments, parts procurement, launches, and the timing of capital expenditures, the figures per quarter fluctuate greatly.
Therefore, it is too early to conclude that "the Valley of Death for FCF has arrived" based on Q1 alone.
However, the point I warned about previously has not disappeared.
In the company's FY2027 guidance, CapEx is $80M to $95M for the full year. It expects $21M to $27M in Q2 alone. This means that PL is still in an investment cycle.
Pelican, Tanager, Owl.
Expansion of manufacturing capacity in Berlin and San Francisco.
AI-enabled solutions.
Sovereign satellite services.
These are investments aimed at future moat expansion.
However, investments must be recovered.
What could be confirmed in this Q1 is that PL has the power to accumulate revenue growth and backlog.
On the other hand, conversion to FCF has not yet been confirmed.
In other words, I think the previous warning of the "Valley of Death for FCF" is still valid.
Rather, the stock price plunge this time might be because the market looked at this.
PL released good earnings.
However, FCF was negative.
And the CapEx investment cycle will continue in FY2027.
Even for a good company, the stock price will be sold off in a phase where cash is not generated.
Especially for a momentum stock that had already been bought up to high expectations.
Therefore, from next time onwards, the most important thing in looking at PL is not revenue growth.
It is whether the backlog will truly turn into FCF.
I want to confirm this.
■ Is Satellite Services a moat or a gross margin crusher?
I think this is the biggest point of discussion this time.
PL is currently growing Satellite Services.
This includes sovereign satellites, dedicated capacity, satellite manufacturing, launches, ground stations, and operational services.
This is strong.
From the customer's perspective, they can have their own space infrastructure in a short period.
From PL's perspective, long-term contracts and backlog accumulate.
Furthermore, satellites launched for customers may also be utilized as PL's data network in other regions.
As management says, this can be a win-win-win for customers, PL, and other customers.
However, as an investor, it is necessary to dissect this.
Satellite Services is different from one-to-many data subscriptions.
Building satellites.
Launching them.
Operating them.
Capital investment is required.
Depreciation will also increase.
Gross margin will also be pressured.
In other words, while this deepens the moat, it also has the potential to distance PL from being a pure high-gross-margin data company.
To put it more strongly, Satellite Services is a path that could evolve PL into a "high-gross-margin Earth data platformer," but it is also a path that could cause it to revert to "capital-intensive space infrastructure civil engineering."
It is better not to rush to a conclusion at this point.
If Satellite Services leads to customer lock-in and future data/AI revenue, this is a moat.
However, if it only increases revenue as a low-gross-margin hardware service, the valuation will be cut.
From next time onwards, what we should look at is not revenue.
It is whether high-gross-margin data/AI solutions will be layered on top of Satellite Services.
■ Will AI re-accelerate Commercial and Civil?
For PL to become truly interesting in the long term, D&I alone is not enough.
D&I is strong.
But I think the long-term TAM is larger in Commercial and Civil Government.
Agriculture.
Energy.
Insurance.
Finance.
Supply chain.
Forestry.
Disaster response.
Environmental monitoring.
PL's Daily Scan truly has value when it becomes possible to search, analyze, and judge such a wide range of physical world changes with AI.
This time, the company started a private beta of AI apps.
It is a concept of searching Planet's data archive in natural language and performing time-axis analysis and report generation.
This is interesting.
Until now, Earth observation data was something used by GIS and remote sensing experts.
If it becomes usable by non-experts through AI apps, the TAM will expand significantly.
However, this is also still a story.
At this point, the ARR of AI apps is undisclosed.
The number of customers is also undisclosed.
The impact on contract unit prices is also undisclosed.
We also don't know how much Commercial revenue grew due to AI.
Therefore, AI is a strong material.
However, as an investment decision, a check of the results from next time onwards is necessary.
I think we need to look at at least 2 to 4 quarters until AI apps start to affect the numbers.
I don't think ARR contribution will suddenly appear in the next Q2.
First, I will look to see if concrete customer cases, scope of use, and contract expansion in Commercial and Civil appear.
After that, I will confirm whether it starts to affect ACV, NRR, and Commercial revenue growth rates within 2 to 4 quarters.
If contract contribution from AI apps or Commercial re-acceleration is not seen even after one year, it is highly likely that it remains just a story.
■ How the space AI momentum ends
This is what I want to think about most in this article.
PL is a good company.
However, even for a good company, there is a phase where it ends as a momentum stock.
Space AI momentum was created by a number of materials.
SpaceX IPO association.
AI.
Defense.
Geopolitics.
Sovereign satellites.
Pelican.
Google Suncatcher.
NVIDIA.
In-orbit AI.
Earth data OS.
With this many materials lined up, it is easy for the market to hunt for stocks.
Especially in the stage where SpaceX is not yet listed, space-related stocks like PL are easily bought as "substitutes before listing."
Because the main player is not yet in the market, funds head toward peripheral stocks.
When I purchased PL immediately after the earnings before last, I organized it as an intense, time-limited momentum satellite before the SpaceX IPO.
After that, I exited before the SpaceX IPO.
Looking at the sharp decline after these earnings, I think that way of thinking was not wrong.
PL's business is not broken.
Rather, it was strong.
Even so, the stock price crashed.
This indicates that space AI momentum has hit the limit of expectations, apart from the good or bad of the business.
If SpaceX itself comes out into the public market, there is a possibility that funds for the space theme will be sucked from peripheral stocks like PL to the main player.
Of course, I know that PL is a unique Earth data OS company different from SpaceX.
However, short-term funds do not look that carefully.
Theme funds head toward the center of the theme.
The center of the space theme is, after all, SpaceX.
If a giant whale called SpaceX appears in the public market, the momentum funds that were riding on peripheral space stocks have the potential to be drawn in at least once.
That is not because PL's fundamentals are bad.
It is because that is the nature of theme funds.
Therefore, PL is a stock that benefited from the SpaceX IPO, and at the same time, it is a stock that has the risk of being sucked into the SpaceX IPO.
We must look at both sides of this.
And, as an aside, I do not think the SpaceX IPO is an event where everyone can be happy.
■ Was my decision to sell correct?
I want to be honest here.
In my previous earnings report, I stated that PL had entered the second half and it was time to think about an exit.
I also wrote that there might be a valley of death for FCF waiting afterward.
PL has a business model that overwhelms other space stocks.
Therefore, I also thought that strong earnings would continue on the surface this time as well.
However, I planned to sell PL before the SpaceX IPO.
As the IPO approaches, the volatility of the entire space theme will increase.
And PL had quite high expectations to cross the earnings report.
So I decided that I should sell before seeing this earnings report.
After I sold PL, PL released strong earnings.
And the stock price fell significantly.
This is not to say that I read the earnings perfectly.
I didn't read the stock price change either.
However, if viewed as a time-limited momentum satellite, I don't think the exit was wrong.
Because the reason I bought PL was not to hold it permanently as a long-term core.
It was to capture the space, AI, and defense momentum before the SpaceX IPO.
That role has ended.
What is dangerous in investing is falling too much in love with the stocks you won with and forgetting your initial time horizon.
PL is a good company.
That's why it's difficult.
Because it's a good company, I'm still curious after selling it.
Because it's a good company, I want to buy it again.
But investing is not something you do with lingering attachment.
I could have anticipated that volatility would increase as the IPO approached and even after the earnings report.
Volatility is risk.
Risk is what you don't know.
And I dispose of things I don't understand within my investment time horizon.
I think this was the right decision.
If I buy PL next time, it won't be the same bet as last time.
I need to see if I can buy it as a long-term Earth data OS, not as a time-limited momentum play.
■ What to wait for if re-entering?
I will not chase PL.
However, I will continue to monitor it.
If I re-enter, I want to clarify the conditions.
The first is achieving the Q2 revenue guidance.
Can they solidly achieve Q2 revenue of $102-107 million?
If they can maintain a revenue growth rate in the 40% range here, the growth momentum is still alive.
The second is the non-GAAP gross margin.
The Q2 guidance is 52-55%.
If it falls below this, the possibility that Satellite Services is becoming a gross margin crusher increases.
Conversely, if it lands around 55%, the decline in gross margin can be seen as controlled.
The third is FCF.
Q1 was -$2.5 million.
The company aims for full-year FCF profitability.
I want to see if the certainty of this increases.
The fourth is Commercial and Civil.
Will AI apps and SuperRes lead to a re-acceleration of Commercial and Civil, not just D&I?
If this can be seen, PL will no longer be just a D&I special demand play.
The fifth is SBC and share count.
Will the SBC/revenue ratio decrease?
Will the increase in share count settle down?
Without looking at this, it is difficult to hold for the long term.
The sixth is the stock price.
PL is a good company, but there is no need to buy a good company at too high a price.
Even though it fell significantly after the earnings report, the valuation is still not light.
I want to see if the space AI momentum cools down and a phase arrives where it can be bought based on business value.
■ Investment decision
The business evaluation of PL has risen.
However, the investment decision is "do not chase."
PL was a good company even after I sold it.
I honestly admit that.
However, as a stock, it is difficult.
Expectations were so high that it was sold even with good earnings.
And going forward, confirmation of the realities of gross margin, FCF, SBC, dilution, and CapEx will be necessary.
The valley of death for FCF that I warned about last time has not disappeared.
Revenue and backlog are strong, but FCF is negative following Q4.
For PL to truly become a company that can be held long-term as an Earth data OS, it needs to turn backlog into FCF from here.
And what I learned from this earnings report is not that PL is finished.
Rather, PL's business is strong.
However, as space AI momentum, it showed an end for once.
The stock price crashes even with good earnings.
This is a very important signal for a momentum stock.
I no longer hold PL.
After SPCX lists, I will look at the space theme itself calmly.
And I will think about my investment decision after the earnings report by looking at the valuation after it has settled.
PL monitoring continues.
If I buy next time, it will be after confirming whether it can truly be held long-term as an Earth data OS, rather than as a substitute for SpaceX.
■ Next checkpoints
・Can Q2 FY2027 revenue achieve the $102-107 million guidance?
・Can it maintain a revenue growth rate in the 40% range?
・Can it maintain a non-GAAP gross margin of 52-55%?
・Will Adjusted EBITDA turn profitable in Q2?
・How much operating CF will be generated?
・Will FCF return to positive?
・Will FCF margin improve?
・Is CapEx managed within the Q2 guidance of $21-27 million and full-year $80-95 million?
・Will the $906 million backlog turn into FCF, not just revenue?
・Will high growth in D&I revenue continue?
・Will Commercial revenue re-accelerate with AI apps and SuperRes?
・Can Civil Government absorb the impact of NASA budget cuts?
・Will Satellite Services become a cross-sell foundation rather than a gross margin crusher?
・Will the SBC/revenue ratio fall from the 17% range?
・Will the increase in share count settle down?
・Will FCF per share improve?
・Will the number of AI app customers, ARR, and specific contract contributions be disclosed?
・After the launch of Pelican Gen2, will there be a track record of 30cm-class resolution and low latency?
・How will the capital circulation to space-related stocks change after the SpaceX IPO?
Thank you for reading to the end. If you found this helpful, I would appreciate it if you could like and follow.
(Disclaimer)The content of this writing is published for the purpose of organizing and recording the author's personal decision-making, etc., and involves hesitation, reconsideration, revision, and hypothesis updating. In addition, the information provided by this writing does not guarantee accuracy, etc. Therefore, as it may not necessarily be appropriate for readers, please recognize that investing in stocks involves significant risk when making investments, and make investment decisions based on your own judgment and responsibility. Note that this does not recommend investment in any financial products or individual stocks, nor does it recommend any investment methods.