Watchlist · Not Owned
Applied Digital Corp (APLD)
Compare vs. competitors: CoreWeave vs. Nebius vs. Applied Digital vs. Oracle Cloud →
Download full 3-statement model (.xlsx) →
| Market cap | ~$10.66B |
|---|---|
| P/E ratio (TTM) | n/m (unprofitable, -57.77) |
| EPS (TTM) | -$0.36 (most recent quarter, net loss) |
| Dividend yield | None |
| Sector | Data center / GPU cloud infrastructure |
| EBITDAEarnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization — a measure of operating profitability before financing and accounting decisions. EV/EBITDA compares a company's full value (including debt) to this figure, often used to compare companies with different capital structures. | Adj. EBITDA $44.1M (fiscal Q3); $0.5M (fiscal Q1 FY26) |
| PEG ratioPrice/Earnings-to-Growth: the P/E ratio divided by expected earnings growth. Below 1.0 is often read as cheap relative to growth; above suggests the market is pricing in a lot of future growth already. Different providers use different growth-rate assumptions, so figures vary by source. | N/A (not consistently profitable on EBITDA basis) |
| Capex | −$1.77B (TTM) |
Why it's on the list
Applied Digital is building out GPU-cloud and data-center capacity for AI workloads — the same basic business as NBIS and CRWV, at a much smaller market cap. If I believe in the AI-infrastructure buildout thesis broadly, a smaller, earlier-stage name is a legitimate way to express more of that conviction, not just a repeat of positions I already hold.
Why it's not in the book yet
Smaller-cap infrastructure builders carry more execution and financing risk than NBIS or CRWV, and I'm already at a meaningful weight in this exact theme once NBIS, NBIL, and CRWV are added together. Adding a fourth name in the same cluster would concentrate risk further, not diversify it.
What would move me to buy
Trimming or a thesis break in one of my existing AI-infrastructure names that frees up room in that bucket without breaching the clustering risk already flagged in the July letter.