My response on Zscaler and SentinelOne

Hi WSM007,
I’m afraid that I agree a little with you about Zscaler as I reduced my position by about a third, but not because I was worried about the one metric “Billings”. It was because I was worried about their business model with a very long sales cycle. Added to that was the increased very effective competition from Palo Alto who directly competes with Zscaler, but also because of imminent competition from Cloudflare, who has a very short sales cycle. All of that seemed worthy of a tapering by a third although most is just worry about things that may happen, rather than things that have. Then I could add in the Billings issue. On the other hand, I couldn’t even imagine selling out of Zscaler just based on two quarters of Billings “only” growing at 54% and 58%!!! But that’s just me.

Now let’s talk about SentinelOne. I put a lot of my Zscaler money into Sentinel and think of it as one of my strongest companies. I’m sorry, but I can’t even figure out where you are coming from on this one. The “bad” quarter that you are complaining about was tremendous in my opinion.

I’m sorry to say this but you seem to be giving a classic example of giving a tiny detail from an odd point of view and basing your decision on that. As Rubenslash pointed out above:

Operating leverage: Why do you compare with previous quarter when there is so much seasonality involved? If you compare YoY, they improved operating margin by 54 percentage points and FCF margin by 17 percentage points…. SentinelOne increased ARR per customer from 27.8K in Q1 2020 to 45.5K in Q1 2022 and it has been increasing every quarter. Crowdstrike’s ARR / customer decreased from 110K in Q1 2020 to 107K in Q1 2022.

Let’s look at Sentinel’s actual results. They are growing enormously fast.

Total revenue was up 109% to $78 million, from $37 million.
ARR was up 110% to $339 million
Total customer count was up 55% to over 7,450 customers
Customers over $100K grew 113% to 591.
NRR rate was a record 131%, up from 124% a year ago and from 129% last quarter
Adj Gross margin was a record 68%, up 15 points from 53%.
Adj Operating margin was -73% up 54 points from -127%.
Cash was $1.6 billion

That is an awesome report! We have no other company currently like it.

Did you read the prepared remarks in the conference call??? Wow!!! Here are highlights from my notes (somewhat shortened and paraphrased). After reading them you may find it hard to believe that you were selling out based on two data points… but Hey! That’s just my opinion! I may be completely wrong about this.

Guidance: We’re excited to integrate Attivo, which is now included in our guidance. Based on the strong demand environment for our business, we’re increasing our organic growth outlook and adding in expectations for Attivo. I’ll provide details around Attivo to help with initial modeling purposes, but we don’t intend to break this out going forward.

In Q2, we expect revenue of $95 million to $96 million, reflecting a 109% growth at the midpoint. We expect organic growth in the low to mid-90% range. [That means they will have revenue growth of about 115% and organic growth of just under 100%]

For the full year, we are raising our outlook by about $37 million, to $403 million to $407 million. This reflects 98% revenue growth at the midpoint. As part of our improved guidance, we’ve increased our organic growth expectations to mid-80% growth from 80% previously. [With three more quarters to raise you can just imagine where that those be by year end]

Conference Call
We had another excellent quarter. The strength of our results reflect two important dynamics.
First, the demand for cybersecurity remains incredibly strong, and we’re executing well.
Second, we continue to achieve significant margin expansion stemming from our land and expand strategy and operational efficiencies.
On top of the excellent sales results, we generated our largest ever pipeline in Q1.

We’re also raising our full year revenue growth guidance to 98% at the midpoint.

Our land and expand strategy is working extremely well. We added a record number of new customers in the quarter, even more than our seasonally strong fourth quarter. On top of that, our net retention rate was a record 131%. And finally, we continue to extend the breadth and diversity of our business.

We closed the acquisition of Attivo, an important milestone, which we believe establishes us as a leader in identity security. We’re now covering essential attack services across endpoint, cloud and identity, all of which offer significant growth potential. Cloud security was once again our fastest-growing product offering.

I’ll focus on three key topics related to our business: one, the strong demand environment; two, our path to profitability driven by our strong business model featuring attractive unit economics and operational efficiency gains; and three, the superiority of our autonomous security platform, which delivers leading protection and detection as evidenced by our leadership in this year’s MITRE ATT&CK evaluation for the third year in a row.

First topic, the demand environment. Demand for our mission-critical security has never been stronger. Cybersecurity is one of the top IT spending priorities, and we haven’t seen that change despite macro conditions. Many secular trends are driving strong demand for cybersecurity, including digital transformation, expanding attack surfaces and data proliferation. The consequences and risks of not being protected by a leading cybersecurity solution are just too hot.

Endpoint remains the engine that fuels our growth. In addition, we’re seeing significant growth from our add-on capabilities. For example, our cloud workload protection solution continues to reach new heights and was our fastest-growing module approaching 10% of ACV. Cloud security represents a vast greenfield opportunity. Enterprises are rapidly shifting workloads to the cloud, which requires advanced protection.

Our solution is cloud native and directly integrating to the Kubernetes control plane, delivering autonomous front-end protection. Customers are choosing Singularity cloud in conjunction with endpoints and on a stand-alone basis. The scale of cloud footprint in early deal sizes indicate a much larger future potential.

Second topic, An increased focus on both growth and profitability. Our win rates remain high as we continue to secure wins across a significant majority of competitive situations. I’m pleased that our win rates improved among larger deals. And once we start protecting a customer, they remain a customer. And customers are choosing us to protect more and more of their network. Our net retention rate reached a new high of 131%. Our total addressable market is vast, growing to over $50 billion, significantly larger than just a year ago. We’ve expanded our Singularity XDR platform to cover more attack surfaces than ever, including endpoint, cloud, identity and an increasing number of emerging capabilities.

Meaningful gross margin improvement. We’re able to collect data once and reuse for multiple security applications, all enhanced by our DataSet back end. Customers are adopting more of the Singularity platform every quarter with notable growth from our cloud data retention and Ranger modules. These capabilities deliver high incremental margin. At the same time, our increasing scale and data optimization is improving our cost efficiency.

Third main topic, the technological differentiation of our Singularity XDR platform. The best way to evaluate the technical performance of an endpoint platform is through the MITRE ATT&CK evaluation framework, an emulation of real-world attack techniques and enterprise requirements. This is as close to a fact-based level playing field as it gets. This year’s evaluation results again paints a very compelling picture. For the third year in a row, SentinelOne leads the test results with superior visibility and automation.

You cannot reverse engineer this type of performance. Out of all the vendors evaluated, our Singularity XDR platform achieved 100% prevention, 100% attack detection, the highest analytical coverage and zero detection delays.

One thing is for certain, attackers will not hit pause or idly sit by waiting for a human-powered service to detect and eventually respond to an alert. We’re delivering autonomous protection through AI and machine learning. Our platform represents one of the largest operational implementations of AI in the real world.

A year ago, we acquired DataSet to become the unifying data backend to address the speed, scale and scope of modern security needs. DataSet is performing well in security and non-security use cases. We just introduced Kubernetes Explorer, which helps manage the health and performance of Kubernetes clusters, deployed applications and underlying infrastructure. A month ago, we added identity protection to our portfolio through the acquisition of Attivo.

We recently conducted an employee survey, and 99% of Sentinels said they’re proud to work at SentinelOne.

[Sentinel can easily add Crowd’s human intervention, but it would be very hard for Crowd to add Sentinel’s AI autonomous response. I think Crowd is on the way to very gradually becoming the old guard, while Sentinel, also very gradually becomes the new AI driven “best way”]

Our customers with ARR over $100,000 grew 113%. In addition, our win rates in these large deals increased. Here are just a few examples of the broad-based strength we’re seeing. We extended our success in state and local governments into the federal arena by securing a major federal agency in partnership with CISA, our largest federal deal to date (a multi-million dollar deal) . We were selected based on our performance in a rigorous evaluation spanning over 100 requirements and because of our cost-effective extended data retention and multi-tenant capabilities. This showcases why we’re winning against the competition time and time again. We continue to secure large enterprises from around the world across all verticals from major North American telecom operators to iconic media brands and multinational conglomerates.

Let me go into the strength of cloud security, which grew over 50% SEQUENTIALLY !!! in Q1 off a record Q4. To put it in perspective, that’s literally 30 TIMES growth year-over-year. So – we’re at the early stages of what we feel like is going to be a very big market. Cloud security penetration right now is at an infancy level, and we’re seeing a lot of demands. But at the same time, obviously, still, we’re in that cycle of endpoint protection, replacement for incumbents. That’s still the major focus for a lot of these MSSP providers out there. Cloud just represents a major adjacent opportunity that I think they’re starting to get their hands around. And obviously, we’ll be there to help them with that.

We’re landing large seven-figure cloud security deals today. Over time, cloud footprints can be as large or even larger than endpoint. So there is significant expansion potential to come, and we’re already seeing that with several customers. Many of the cloud wins we’re securing today are just a fraction of the full deployment potential. For example, the full cloud estate of a global e-commerce customer could easily be 10x or even larger than the initial deployment. More interestingly, we’re seeing customers buy cloud security both in conjunction with traditional endpoints as well as on a stand-alone basis. Our prowess in cloud security allows us to engage with more accounts, even those that may be currently using an alternative endpoint solution. Cloud security is a greenfield opportunity with significant growth potential. There’s no incumbent vendor in cloud that we’re set to replace. In the vast majority of customers that we see, it’s an expansion.

Gross Margins: The cost of migrating customers to DataSet had been lowering gross margins, but was immaterial this quarter. We’ve migrated all of our largest customers and remain on track to largely complete the migration this summer. Our customers are now realizing profound benefits of using the DataSet back end, resulting in up to 10x performance improvements. We expect gross margin next quarter to be between 68% to 69%, holding the significant progress we made in Q1 and up 6 to 7 points yoy. The progress does not stop here. We’re increasing our full year gross margin guidance to 69% to 70%, up from prior guidance of 65% to 67%. We expect to exit the year in Q4 at or slightly above 70%. We’re marching towards our long-term target of 75% to 80% or higher.

Q – In International, are you seeing displacement against Kaspersky [Russian] given the war. And do you expect to see more displacement versus Carbon Black (part of VM Ware),nin light of the VMware-Broadcom acquisition?

A - Indeed, Kaspersky traditionally had done well in EMEA, Latin America, parts of Asia. And what we’re seeing is really a wholesale movement away from Kaspersky, either by mandate or because folks want a better security platform. Typically, we’re seeing really a combination of both. So that represents an amazing opportunity for us.

About Broadcom acquiring VMware, we’ve seen that movie before when Symantec was acquired. So we have already begun in earnest to replace Carbon Black in very large, large and midsized businesses. We have a technology platform that can literally automate the transition away from Carbon Black, and we expect that to really accelerate in the quarters to come post Broadcom acquisition of VMware Carbon Black. On the cloud side, that’s also true. We feel like VMware represents pretty much a complete new greenfield for protecting cloud workloads.

Saul here. There’s plenty more but that’s probably too long already.

135 Likes

Saul a lot of the Sentinal CC good outlook points apply to several of our companies. So me, I am taking a basket approach

<<<Demand for our mission-critical security has never been stronger. Cybersecurity is one of the top IT spending priorities, and we haven’t seen that change despite macro conditions. Many secular trends are driving strong demand for cybersecurity, including digital transformation, expanding attack surfaces and data proliferation. The consequences and risks of not being protected by a leading cybersecurity solution are just too hot

Cloud security represents a vast greenfield opportunity

. Our total addressable market is vast, growing to over $50 billion, significantly larger than just a year ago.

we’re seeing customers buy cloud security both in conjunction with traditional endpoints as well as on a stand-alone basis. Our prowess in cloud security allows us to engage with more accounts, even those that may be currently using an alternative endpoint solution.

Cloud security is a greenfield opportunity with significant growth potential. There’s no incumbent vendor in cloud that we’re set to replace. In the vast majority of customers that we see, it’s an expansion.>>>

I have no idea which one will be the big winner. Or which is priced best now. All are hostage to a further general market decline.

4 Likes

Hi Saul,

Sounds like we’re thinking alike on Zscaler. I’m sort of more on the fence than you about keeping some (still have a small position for now), but I’ve certainly reduced it too, because I think others will be stronger. But SentinelOne, I’m out. Obviously they’re still growing fast as you point out, but ARR grew 16% sequentially, which annualizes to 81% annually. That’s nowhere near the well-over-100% growth they’ve been seeing. The last 6 quarters ARR grew sequentially:

27%
23%
23%
20%
23%
16%

The CFO said, While we don’t specifically guide for ARR, I do want to remind you that we are a subscription business, which gives us higher visibility. Our ARR and revenue growth track very closely. Therefore, based on our Q2 revenue guidance, net new ARR should grow at or slightly above 20% sequentially. This is consistent with last year’s Q2 seasonal growth and still comes on top of our Q1 outperformance.

BUT, this year it includes Attivo!!! He later said Attivo would contribute roughly $35 million to ARR in Q2. To get to 20% sequentially they would need to add about $68 million total. So wait…Attivo is contributing more than half of what they will grow sequentially??? Their organic sequential ARR growth (without Attivo) would be more like 10%!? I mean surely they will beat that, but that’s still a heck of a slow down from even the disappointing 16% in Q1.

Also, back to revenue, the CFO said Attivo would contribute about $8 million in Q2. With that included it’s a 22.6% sequential guide. Without that $8 million, it’s a 12.4% sequential guide. Last quarter the sequential guide was 14.3%. To me, that’s just too much slow down for such a company with such a small revenue base, and one that is investing so much into growth. If it were all organic, that would be different. But it isn’t.

Saul, what do you think about the (organic) slow down? Are you willing to give them full credit for inorganic growth?

Bear

44 Likes

Hi Bear, Here’s what they said specifically about Q2

"In Q2, we expect revenue of $95 million to $96 million, reflecting 109% growth at the midpoint. We expect organic growth in the low to mid-90% range".

To me that means they will have revenue growth of about 115% and organic growth of just under 100% (at least).

They also have a new business in Cloud Security which has grown to 20% of their revenue from less than 1% in one year. And that was while total revenue was growing by over 100%, so as they said, Crowd Security grew by over 30 TIMES yoy (and is greenfield).

Perhaps I’m wrong about this, but also perhaps you are over-analyzing.:grinning:

Saul

54 Likes

Bear,

I noted that part as well.

But here is what I thought.

  1. S management said many times that ARR YoY growth typically is tracking closely to revenue growth. Then S guided 95% ORGANIC revenue growth for Q2, with the same 4.5% beat which I believe is conservative enough based on their past beat history, they shall deliver 93.3m ORGANIC revenue in Q2, which is 19.2% QoQ and 104% YoY. If S is to grow revenue by 104% YoY and 19.2% QoQ, their Q2 ARR growth shall be quite close.
  2. Now the CFO was saying ”based on our Q2 revenue guidance, net new ARR should grow at or slightly above 20% sequentially. This is consistent with last year’s Q2 seasonal growth and still comes on top of our Q1 outperformance. In addition, we expect Attivo to contribute approximately $35 million to Q2 total ARR”, let’s analyze it now.

S’s Q2 last year had net new ARR growth 23.3% and CFO was saying their next Q2 net new ARR shall be consistent with last year, assume it will be the same 23.3%. Their net new ARR in Q1 was 47m, hence their Q2 net new ARR would be 58m (47x123.3%), then Q2 total ARR will be 58+339= 397m (Q1 total ARR was 339m), which is 100.5% YoY growth and 17.1% QoQ growth.

Look, this is still a bit lower than Q2’s expected revenue growth but quite close.

Initially I also thought this 397m Q2 total ARR should include Attivo’s 35m, but after I did some math I thought that didn’t make sense. Here is the reason:
If Attivo’s total ARR 35m is to be included, then their organic ARR is only 362m, meaning net new ARR for Q2 will only be 362-339=23m, that’s lower than their net new ARR in the past 6 quarters and total ARR QoQ is only 6.8%! And Considering ORGANIC revenue is to grow 19.2% QoQ in Q2, there is no reason to believe 397m Q2 total ARR here includes Attivo’s 35m, especially if we read those bullish comments in the entire CC by the management (I read the transcript once and further listened to the CC - they can’t be more confident I have to say)

Hence my understanding is that their ORGANIC total ARR is likely to be 397m with 35m additional ARR from Attivo in Q2, total ARR will be 432m in Q2.

Think about that, this is really what “net new ARR” means. For the same business, you need to do apple to Apple comparison to get this “NET NEW” ARR. For Attivo, since the acquisition was closed only in Q2, their Q2 “NET NEW” ARR doesn’t have an apple to compare as Q1’s ARR has zero contribution from Attivo. But when they calculate total ARR, they can include Attivo without any problem.

That’s why CFO added “in addition” here.


based on our Q2 revenue guidance, net new ARR should grow at or slightly above 20% sequentially. This is consistent with last year’s Q2 seasonal growth and still comes on top of our Q1 outperformance. In addition, we expect Attivo to contribute approximately $35 million to Q2 total ARR”

S indeed delivered one of the best Q1 ERs among our companies.

Hope this helps.

Zoro

45 Likes

Regarding ZS Saul wrote: “… I was worried about their business model with a very long sales cycle. Added to that was the increased very effective competition from Palo Alto who directly competes with Zscaler, but also because of imminent competition from Cloudflare, who has a very short sales cycle.”

Peter Offringa has similar concerns:" Normally, I would let the long term thesis play out, but I also see an increasingly competitive space for Zero Trust/SASE solutions (now called Security Service Edge or SSE). While Zscaler is a leader in that category currently, it’s not clear to me that their pace of innovation will maintain their competitive moat over time. This could result in declining sales growth or operating margins, as competitors win some share of deals and bundle SSE services with their broader platform suite."

If you want to see his complete comments, here is the link:

https://commonstock.com/post/1d15e90f-2b06-4621-bb2a-1e9f3cc…

7 Likes

Saul,

You commented about SentinelOne’s last earnings: “That is an awesome report! We have no other company currently like it
It’s true that there is no other company currently growing like S, but my disagreement here is why aren’t we putting S in comparison to when CRWD was growing at the same run rate? CRWD should be our standard for investing in this segment of the cybersecurity market.
I don’t think we should trap ourselves in a ‘growth at all costs’ mentality.

There was a Bank of America 2022 Global Technology Conference yesterday that SentinelOne’s CFO and head of investor relations participated. There were some comments they made that I want to highlight.

CFO: When I think about stock-based comp, ours has been traditionally higher on a percentage of revenue basis based on our scale…
…When I think of our burn as a percentage of shares outstanding at approximately 4%, we’re an industry standard

No, no, no, no, no.
That’s not what I want. I don’t want “industry standard”. I want the best of the BEST. I want CRWD quality growth.

And SentinelOne is so far removed from CRWD even when you exclude stock based compensation!
SentinelOne pulled in revenue of 78.3M at 109% YoY, and is burning cash to the tune of -73% nonGAAP operating margin and -70% FCF.
When CRWD was at 80.5M revenue, growing at 107% YoY, they had improved to -35% nonGAAP operating margin and FCF -4%.

LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE!!! They have the same triple digit revenue growth rate, but S has disastrously different burn rates!

And don’t forget what was already mentioned before about customer growth for S dropping to 55% YoY, while CRWD was still growing customers at 105% YoY at the time. This is a red flag as a future indicator of revenue deceleration for SentinelOne if they don’t reverse this substantially (as I wrote here: https://discussion.fool.com/-customer-growth-dropped-from-70-yoy…)

Here’s your other red flag indicator of ‘growth at all costs’ desperation. SentinelOne’s CFO knows the market is too competitive out there and they don’t have a distinct enough tech advantage vs current competitors to grow as profitably like CRWD was a couple years ago:

CFO: One of the things right now – it’s never going to be cheaper for me than right now to go after the market that we’re in. If I were to try to make a faster advancement to profitability, like I’m giving up market share or potential market share to my competitors. And to fight back to get that back later, it’s going to cost more.

I am not saying the correct strategy for SentinelOne today is to slow down revenue growth to improve profitability faster. I think what they are doing is the best they can manage in the current market. But that’s the problem! The results are the results, and they show that they aren’t growing how the best of the best should!

It is undeniable that SentinelOne is growing in an inferior quality every which way compared to CRWD at similar scale. I don’t care that the market was “less competitive” back in 2019, or that CRWD had a first mover advantage at the time. That’s NOT a good enough excuse. We want the best of the best results, NOT the “best we can do despite the market circumstances”.
Otherwise, I might as well go back to investing in UPST because it’s “the best in AI lending”. Who cares!? UPST is dealing with market and macro problems out of its control and its results have shown disappointments.
Similarly, why should I invest in SentinelOne that can’t grow as well as CRWD used to do? They don’t deserve a free pass just because the market is more competitive today than in 2019.
SentinelOne might have a slightly better tech edge in some aspects over CRWD, but that technological difference is clearly NOT a large enough lead to produce the highest quality growth.

There was also another comment that emphasized the frantic ‘growth at all cost’ problem for S.

Analyst: So if I go back to margins, you guided margins higher. But if I’m not wrong, you also guided OpEx higher, beyond Street expectations. So what drives it? What’s the outlook for expenses?

CFO: So we said we’d be in the 55 – negative 55% to negative 60% EBIT margin for the year. We’re doing all that while also picking up the expenses from Attivo. In addition to that, I spent $3 million in Q1 on legal and diligence costs. Over the remainder of the year, I probably have about $9 million of costs that were more one time in terms of advancing the integration to make sure that we have a comprehensive product later this year. So obviously, I absorbed $12 million of expense that wasn’t in my original forecast while keeping the same guidance. If you think about that, that means I would have guided down about 3% if I didn’t have that. So we look at that as success.

I laughed out loud at this response. This is a joke. Really, this is the best explanation the CFO can come up with? Blaming the ridiculous operating expense guide on Attivo’s acquisition? The only change they can explain is that if $12 million of acquisition expenses were removed, it would only improve EBIT margin by 3%, and they call this is a ‘success’??
To put it in perspective, the $3M in Attivo costs in Q1 is a drop in the bucket compared to the $141.412 MILLION in operating expenses in Q1.

The unspoken explanation is clear to me - they have to spend like crazy for growth, because this market is harsh.

Just look at their ARR per customer, S is at 45K versus CRWD doing well over 100K ARR per customer in every single quarter of CRWD’s public market existence.
Combine this fact with SentinelOne’s customer growth sliding down to 55% YoY already.
How can you reasonably expect SentinelOne to avoid rapid organic revenue growth deceleration over the next several quarters with this math?

77 Likes

I remember that when CRWD went public in 2019 with a -23% operating margin, people thought they went IPO too early and were very skeptical.

Lo and behold in 2021, a raft of companies went public with a worse than -50% operating margin and the market cheered. Special shoutout to S, AMPL, MNDY, GTLB etc.

Clap clap to the VCs and their management team for creating so many bagholders among mom and pop investors.

These companies are really still at the venture capital investment stage and not suited for the public markets - VCs have a seat on the board, have access to monthly reports of detailed metrics, and have a huge influence on the operations of these companies. What do we have? almost nothing - other than a quarterly report on the key metrics. I would avoid those companies.

Cats

21 Likes

Sentinel One

The so called deceleration in customer growth is no deceleration. It’s tough comps to the previous quarter.


**>100k	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4		Q1-Q3 Average	Q1-Q4 Average**
2021	122	145	173	219			
2022	277	345	416	520			
2023	591						
							
**QoQ**							
2021		19%	19%	27%			
2022	26%	25%	21%	**25%**			
2023	14%						
							
							
**QoQ Raw**							
2021		23	28	46		32	       32
2022	58	68	71	**104**		66	       75
2023	71						

1) 4Q22 (25% sequential growth or 104 customers added sequentially) was an outlier (bolded). A particularly strong quarter. 1Q23 compets with it = tough comps.

2) 1Q23 is still in line with the average raw customers added per quarter (which is 66 if you ignore the 4Q22 outlier). In fact, 1Q23 is still above the average customer growth per quarter.

And that’s the issue if you only look at recent QoQ% numbers.

Profitability: As previously mentioned by others, there is seasonality in Q2 and it will improve next quarter. If this doesn’t happen, this would break the thesis for me, but it is very unlikely.

We can - with a high probability - expect them to improve the profitability further since
a) this is a pattern for several quarters already
b) they gave guidance for the next quarter (which was already halfway through at last earnings call) to improve profitability further.

There is nothing wrong with Sentinel One if things play out how we expect them to.

KISS/Keep things stupid and simple. Don’t over-engineer. Don’t get lost in one time QoQ numbers or other soft KPIs like google trends, trustpilot reviews, employee count etc. and focus on what matters.

29 Likes

It’s true that there is no other company currently growing like S, but my disagreement here is why aren’t we putting S in comparison to when CRWD was growing at the same run rate? CRWD should be our standard for investing in this segment of the cybersecurity market.

I’m sorry Jon, but I think that that argument is just silly. By that argument, no company we are in is worth investing in now because none of them are growing as well as Crowd was when they were at $80 million a quarter, and if a company isn’t doing as well as Crowd was doing five years ago we shouldn’t invest in it!

Why in God’s name should we be evaluating SentinelOne, or any other company, according to what Crowd was doing some four or five years ago? We can’t go back and invest in Crowd back then. We should evaluate any company according to what IT, the company we are investing in, is doing! We can only invest in what we have now!

Besides, the world of five years ago is past and gone. Why should we expect that Sentinel should do the exact same things in the world we are currently in, with inflation, Fed tightening, companies laying off workers, a war in Eastern Europe, China becoming more aggressive, etc. We can only invest in the time we are in, and you acknowledged above that “It’s true that there is no other company currently growing like Sentinel.”

Well that’s right now, in this time. Sentinel is one of the best companies that we have to invest in in the world we are living in now. To say that we shouldn’t invest in it because it isn’t doing this or that that Crowd was doing five years ago seems laughable to me.

But Hey! That’s just the way I see it. I may turn out to be completely wrong.

Saul

85 Likes

The so called deceleration in Sentinel’s customer growth is no deceleration. It’s tough comps to the previous quarter… The fourth quarter of 2022 (25% sequential growth or 104 customers added sequentially) was an outlier, a particularly strong quarter. 1Q23 competes with it if you look sequentially, which is very tough comps.

Thanks mooo for pointing that out so clearly. And the point was even more marked than you said :grinning:. If the number of adds in fiscal 2022 went 58, 68, 71, 104… well, that 104 adds in the fourth quarter was up 45% sequentially, not just 25%, and up a mammoth 126% from the 46 adds in the same quarter the year before.

If 45% more customers sequentially jumped on in the 4th quarter (to make their own accounting easier, and start their own fiscal year), it’s obvious that the following 1st quarter would be down. But if you look at the 4th quarter and the 1st quarter (last quarter) together, they are huge. They added 175 customers in the two quarters, compared to just 104 yoy (up 68% yoy)!!!

As Rubenslash said so clearly in his post about margins

Why do you compare with previous quarter when there is so much seasonality involved? If you compare YoY, they improved operating margin by 54 percentage points and FCF margin by 17 percentage points.

In this case Sentinel’s first quarter of 71 adds weren’t actually down at all, but were up 22% plus from the 58 adds the year before.

To repeat what I said, I find what Sentinel is accomplishing to be awesome (and comparing it to what Crowd did 5 yrs ago seems an exercise in irrelevancy)

Best,

Saul

51 Likes

@mooo
1) 4Q22 (25% sequential growth or 104 customers added sequentially) was an outlier (bolded).

The year before, it grew at 27% for the same period. For the periods immediately preceding and including 4Q22, it grew customers at 26, 27, 25, 21 and 25%. How is 25 thus an “outlier”?

Further, while SentinelOne is not performing close to how CRWD was performing at same size, it’s valuation is also quite lower, as it should be. How much lower? That is a discussion for another board. Every stock has a price…

The real question in my mind is, as CatsUnited states, is S1 investable with this large of a cash burn? An old boss told me once that VC’s get huge premiums for taking chances on startups. But only a few make it and thus there has to be huge rewards for huge risks.

It was rare that companies came public pre-2020 with these sort of financial metrics. The markets became very weighted towards growth (over other financials) during the big run that made this board famous. The market does not care about growth nearly as much now. That would seem like an over-correction, because good growth will fix valuation miscalcs pretty quickly. Growth compounds and the market tends to think linear, not exponential.

For me, the risk/reward is a bit high on SentinelOne given the other investable options at this point in time. Durable growth, with clear evidence of improving financial leverage are two checkbox items I can’t check right now.

11 Likes

In this case Sentinel’s first quarter of 71 adds weren’t actually down at all, but were up 22% plus from the 58 adds the year before.

Saul, you say up 22% YoY like it’s a good thing?

S’s Q2 last year had net new ARR growth 23.3% and CFO was saying their next Q2 net new ARR shall be consistent with last year, assume it will be the same 23.3%. Their net new ARR in Q1 was 47m, hence their Q2 net new ARR would be 58m (47x123.3%), then Q2 total ARR will be 58+339= 397m (Q1 total ARR was 339m), which is 100.5% YoY growth and 17.1% QoQ growth.

Zoro, that really helps, thank you! If you’re correct, that means organic ARR by quarter would look like this:

27%
23%
23%
20%
23%
16%
17%

A nice tick up, but still not what I’m looking for at this stage. And that’s assuming net new grows at 23.3% when they said “20% or slightly above.” Also, what happens in Q3 when Attivo is dragging them down growth-rate wise?

Also, what does the CFO mean by saying the Q2 ARR comes on top of our Q1 outperformance. He sees the sequential 16% ARR growth in Q1 as “outperformance?” Why??? When it was 23% in Q1 last year? I don’t get it.

To Saul and Zoro and others saying that SentinelOne is one of the best companies we’ve got, why aren’t you concerned ARR growth will slow to 80% or even lower? If it does, is that still the best we’ve got?

Bear

14 Likes

@mooo
1) 4Q22 (25% sequential growth or 104 customers added sequentially) was an outlier (bolded).

The year before, it grew at 27% for the same period. For the periods immediately preceding and including 4Q22, it grew customers at 26, 27, 25, 21 and 25%. How is 25 thus an “outlier”?

Hi Chips, I’ll answer for mooo. The 25% was a typo. They went from 71 adds to 104 adds, which was up 45% sequentially (not 25%), which is enormous and certainly an outlier!!!
Saul

15 Likes

Bear,

I do believe a year later after Attivo becomes organic (Q2 FY2024), S’s revenue growth will drop to probably high 80% range but hey by then their quarterly revenue will be around 170m. At that size, you really can’t expect them continue to grow 100%+, even CRWD at that size was growing at around 85% too (and with Covid tailwind).

On 17% ARR QoQ growth in Q2, I have high confidence in fact and see potential upside even, as management guided 95% organic revenue growth and just with the same 4.5% beat as in Q4, they would deliver 19% QoQ revenue growth and I see this has higher upside too with some larger beat based on their past history. (Management was saying multiple times about record pipeline in Q1 also indicated a greater confidence in deliver high total ARR for Q2)

Anyway that’s just what I think and I do believe S shall outperform CRWD at current price.

Zoro

7 Likes