4 models have responded to the "Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)" challenge. Compare their approaches side-by-side on RIVAL. This response is part of RIVAL's open dataset of 5,600+ AI model responses.
Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)
Gpt 5 2 Chat's response to the 'Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)' challenge.
?Prompt
You are writing an internal investment committee memo for a long/short equity fund. Company (fictional): LedgerLift (ticker: LLLT) – B2B spend management + AP automation SaaS for mid-market enterprises. Use only the information below. Do NOT browse the web. This is a fictional exercise, not investment advice. DATA - Current share price: $46 - Shares outstanding (basic): 190m - Net cash: $1.4B - FY2023 revenue: $560m - FY2024 revenue: $680m - FY2025 revenue: $820m - FY2025 gross margin: 78% - FY2025 operating margin: 18% - Revenue mix: 92% subscription, 8% services (services GM ~25%, subscription GM ~82%) - Customer KPIs: 6,200 customers; ARPA ~$132k; logo churn 6%/yr; gross retention 94%; NRR 123% - CAC payback: 18 months; S&M as % of revenue: 34% in FY2025 - Concentration: top 10 customers = 16% of revenue; top 1 = 3% - D&A: 2.5% of revenue - Capex: 3.0% of revenue - Net working capital investment: 1.0% of incremental revenue - Cash tax rate: 23% VALUATION ASSUMPTIONS (build 2026-2030 forecasts) Base case: - Revenue growth: 21%, 18%, 15%, 13%, 12% - Gross margin: 79%, 80%, 80%, 81%, 81% - Operating margin: 20%, 22%, 24%, 25%, 26% - WACC: 10%, terminal growth: 3% Bull case: - Revenue growth: 25%, 21%, 18%, 15%, 13% - Gross margin: 80%, 81%, 82%, 82%, 83% - Operating margin: 21%, 24%, 26%, 28%, 29% - WACC: 9%, terminal growth: 4% Bear case: - Revenue growth: 16%, 13%, 11%, 10%, 9% - Gross margin: 78%, 78%, 79%, 79%, 80% - Operating margin: 17%, 18%, 19%, 20%, 21% - WACC: 12%, terminal growth: 2% COMPS (fictional peer set) - Peer A: EV/NTM Revenue 9.0x, EV/NTM EBIT 35x - Peer B: EV/NTM Revenue 7.0x, EV/NTM EBIT 28x - Peer C: EV/NTM Revenue 11.0x, EV/NTM EBIT 42x Use the median multiple as your comps anchor, but explain adjustments. TASK Write a pro-level IC memo with: 1) Recommendation (Long/Short/Pass) + 12-month PT range + 2-sentence thesis 2) Business + why it wins / why now 3) KPI quality check (NRR, churn, CAC payback, concentration) and what could be wrong 4) Base/Bull/Bear model: show a compact table for 2026-2030 revenue, EBIT, and unlevered FCF; compute DCF EV, equity value, and implied value per share for each scenario (show key steps, not every line) 5) Comps cross-check: implied EV and per-share range using median multiples 6) Catalysts (3), Risks (5), and "what would change my mind" (3 falsifiable triggers) 7) 10 diligence questions for management Keep the memo under ~1,200 words, excluding tables.
Response
LedgerLift (LLLT) – Internal IC Memo
1) Recommendation, PT, Thesis
Recommendation: SHORT
12‑month PT range: $28–$35 (base-case DCF ~$28; comps floor ~$44 with multiple compression risk)
Thesis (2 sentences): LedgerLift is a high‑quality B2B SaaS business with strong NRR and improving margins, but the stock embeds optimistic terminal assumptions that our DCF does not support. At $46, shares discount a bull‑case outcome despite decelerating growth, elevated S&M intensity, and rising competition in spend/AP automation.
2) Business Overview + Why It Wins / Why Now
What it does: LedgerLift provides B2B spend management and AP automation to mid‑market enterprises. Revenue is 92% subscription with strong gross margins and expansion-driven growth.
Why it wins:
- Sticky economics: 94% gross retention, 123% NRR, diversified customer base (top 10 only 16%).
- Efficient growth: 18‑month CAC payback with high subscription GM (~82%).
- Operating leverage: Clear margin expansion path as S&M moderates and services remain a small mix.
Why now (for a short):
- Growth deceleration: Revenue growth steps down from 21% to low‑teens in the base case by 2029–30.
- Valuation mismatch: DCF implies equity value materially below the current price even with healthy margins.
- Crowded category: Spend/AP automation is competitive; sustaining 120%+ NRR becomes harder at scale.
3) KPI Quality Check (and What Could Be Wrong)
- NRR 123%: Excellent expansion; risk is normalization toward 115–120% as customers saturate modules.
- Logo churn 6% / Gross retention 94%: Solid for mid‑market; could worsen in downturns or if pricing tightens.
- CAC payback 18 months: Attractive, but S&M still 34% of revenue—scaling efficiency is assumed, not proven.
- Concentration: Low single‑customer risk; however, mid‑market cohorts may be more cyclical.
What could be wrong: Upsell runway may be overstated; competitive pricing could compress both NRR and gross margin.
4) Base / Bull / Bear Model & DCF
Operating Forecasts (USD mm)
Base Case
| Year | Revenue | EBIT | Unlevered FCF |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 992 | 198 | 146 |
| 2027 | 1,171 | 258 | 191 |
| 2028 | 1,346 | 323 | 240 |
| 2029 | 1,521 | 380 | 284 |
| 2030 | 1,704 | 443 | 331 |
Bull Case
| Year | Revenue | EBIT | Unlevered FCF |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 1,025 | 215 | 159 |
| 2027 | 1,240 | 298 | 221 |
| 2028 | 1,463 | 380 | 283 |
| 2029 | 1,683 | 471 | 353 |
| 2030 | 1,902 | 552 | 413 |
Bear Case
| Year | Revenue | EBIT | Unlevered FCF |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 951 | 162 | 119 |
| 2027 | 1,074 | 193 | 143 |
| 2028 | 1,192 | 226 | 167 |
| 2029 | 1,311 | 262 | 195 |
| 2030 | 1,429 | 300 | 223 |
DCF Summary (USD bn unless noted)
| Scenario | WACC / g | DCF EV | Equity Value (incl. $1.4B cash) | Value / Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Base | 10% / 3% | ~3.9 | ~5.3 | ~$28 |
| Bull | 9% / 4% | ~6.7 | ~8.1 | ~$42 |
| Bear | 12% / 2% | ~1.9 | ~3.3 | ~$17 |
Key drivers: terminal value sensitivity to WACC/g and sustained 25%+ operating margins.
5) Comps Cross‑Check
Median multiples: EV/NTM Rev 9.0x, EV/NTM EBIT 35x.
- Revenue multiple: 9.0x × FY26E revenue ($992m) → EV ~$8.9B → equity ~$10.3B → ~$54/sh.
- EBIT multiple: 35x × FY26E EBIT ($198m) → EV ~$6.9B → equity ~$8.3B → ~$44/sh.
Adjustment: LedgerLift deserves a quality premium for NRR and margins, but growth deceleration and category competition argue for trading closer to the EBIT multiple than revenue multiple. Comps imply $44–$54, above DCF—highlighting downside if multiples compress.
6) Catalysts, Risks, and Mind‑Changers
Catalysts (next 12 months):
- Evidence of NRR deceleration below 120%.
- Slower new logo growth with S&M still >30% of revenue.
- Broader SaaS multiple compression.
Risks (to the short):
- Sustained 125%+ NRR via new modules.
- Faster S&M leverage than modeled.
- M&A using net cash at accretive multiples.
- Improved competitive moat leading to pricing power.
- Multiple expansion on “Rule of 40+” narrative.
What would change my mind:
- Two consecutive quarters of accelerating net new ARR growth.
- S&M sustainably <28% of revenue with CAC payback <15 months.
- Clear evidence NRR can hold ≥125% at >$1.5B revenue scale.
7) Diligence Questions for Management
- What specific drivers sustain 120%+ NRR beyond the next two years?
- How much of expansion is price vs. product/module adoption?
- Competitive win/loss data vs. other AP automation vendors?
- Timeline to reduce S&M below 30% of revenue?
- Services strategy—why not fully de‑emphasize given low GM?
- Customer cohort performance by size and vertical?
- Pricing power assumptions embedded in out‑year margins?
- Capital allocation priorities for the $1.4B net cash?
- How cyclical is demand among mid‑market customers?
- What KPIs internally signal saturation risk?
Bottom line: LedgerLift is a strong company but an unattractive stock at $46. The risk/reward skews negative as valuation assumes a durable bull case while fundamentals point to normalization.
Turn this model response into notes, narration, or a short video
Partner link
About GPT-5.2 Chat
Capabilities
Categories
Specifications
- Provider
- Openai
- Released
- 2025-12-10
- Size
- LARGE
- Context
- 128,000 tokens
