On CRWD. Taking up the Challenge

On CRWD. Taking up the Challenge.

When I commented that in no way could Crowdstrike’s quarter be considered a “fantastic” quarter, as someone had claimed, but perhaps just a somewhat better than expected quarter, I was challenged to look at the whole picture. I haven’t been following the company since I sold out of it , but here goes, I accept the challenge.

1 – Total revenue growth yoy looks like this


**2021	        85%     84%     86%     74%** 
**2022	        70%     70%     63%     63%** 

As you can readily see, as of a quarter ago, revenue growth was falling off a cliff at 63%, down from 86% a year ago, and down from 70% the quarter before. This quarter they stopped the bleeding at 63%, but this certainly wasn’t a fantastic quarter, just a quarter that was above the 57% growth that many were anticipating. They’ve seemed to have stabilized.

2 – How about sequential revenue growth?


**2021		17            12        17       12**
**2022        	14            12        12       13**

Yes, they were up slightly from the quarter before, but we are talking well within the range of variation, and certainly nothing fantastic.

3 – Subscription revenue growth?


**2021	       89%      89%       87%     77%** 
**2022	       73%      71%       67%     66%**

Well, they dropped a point from the quarter before, but otherwise have seemed to have stabilized. Nothing fantastic.

4 – Subscription gross margin percent was 79%, down from 80% a year ago, but basically stable like everything else.

5 – Operating cash flow margin was down both sequentially and year over year. Probably nothing to worry about but “fantastic”???


**2021	        55%   28%        38%       43%** 
**2022	        49%   32%        42%       37%**

6 – Free cash flow margin, the same as operating. Down a little sequentially and yoy, but probably not worrysome.


**2021		 49%     16%          33%       37%**
**2022		 39%     22%          33%       29%**

7 – Adjusted net profit margin, a definite improvement, but certainly not knocking it out of the ballpark.


**2021           03%    04%      08%     12%**
**2022	       08%    08%      11%     16%**

8 – Subscription customers growth from 2017 to 2022 has looked like this below. 2022 is the 65% at the bottom. Not bad for the size it’s at, but they are looking for smaller customers now according to management, so even that 65% has to be tempered by size of customer.


**176%**
**173%**
**103%**
**116%**
 **82%**
 **65%**

9 – Oh! I almost forgot ARO percent gain


**2021            88          87        81       75**
**2022		73	    70        67       65** 

Still falling off, but gradually.

10 – And ARO growth sequentially:


**2021		14            15        15       16**
**2022        	13            12        13       14**

Same old thing, not bad, not great.

To summarize, not bad, not great, nothing really outstanding, nothing really terrible. Operating and free cash flow margins dropping, but offset by a small rise in net income margin.

All in all, a company now stabilizing at a much lower level than it had been growing at. Yearly revenue growth rate levels 2018 to 2022 have been 125%, 110%, 93%, 82%, and 66%!!!

What can I say? When I said that someone who called this a “fantastic” quarter had gotten “carried away,” was I wrong? I’m afraid that he was comparing results with his own very conservative expectations, rather than thinking about the actual company results.

Best,

Saul

139 Likes

Monkey thought he knew a few things; now he’s scratching his noggin at what used to seem like the basics.

Doesn’t a company’s size and scale determine the relative worth of the revenue growth?

If I have 10 Billion in revenue and I grow it by 70 to 63 to 63%, the final number according to my abacus is huge.

If I have 1 Million in revenue and grow it by 100 to 95 to 90%, sure, the growth rate is sexy like a lioness, but the banans in my coffers are way, way fewer.

Durability at scale is the key here, no? Growth rates that neglect scale imply they can just stay high forever, which is obviously impossible.

And remember the days when we thought 30% growth was high? So CRWD just grew 63% y/o/y for the second consecutive quarter, which means they grew the same amount after being much larger! So the fact they didn’t decelerate further at a much larger scale is a way of saying the business results were better than the previous quarter’s.

What if we knew CRWD would stay at 63% growth for the next 4 quarters? Would that be “stable” or would that be tremendously fantastic?

Are we anchoring to past growth rates simply because they were higher? Don’t we know that of course they will drop as the company becomes larger? Isn’t dropping by much less a form of wild success at CRWD’s huge Annual Revenue Run Rate?

Why did the market pop the price by 12% if the results were mediocre? It is insane, so that’s one explanation. What might be another?

Chief Suit Kurtz couldn’t have been more enthusiastic and bullish during the call. Huge market; huge tailwinds; leadership position.

As per the threads above, don’t we also need to consider Crowd’s business holistically? Or are we forever just jumping from the fastest growth rates to the next, without the actual genuine intention of holding for the long term when the long term proves durable at scale?

So for fear of getting my fur singed by Saul, Monkey will conclude that holistically he thought the results were outstanding because of the scale! and that the future looks brighter than ever for Crowd. It’s SentinelOne for which Monkey’s tail is crossed hoping they didn’t get their lunch eaten by Crowd. Only a few days to find out. Hope the market is big enough for both these chimpanzees.

Hugs,

Monkey (Long CRWD and S)

260 Likes

“Or are we forever just jumping from the fastest growth rates to the next, without the actual genuine intention of holding for the long term when the long term proves durable at scale?”

Monkey’s quote above, with emphasis! I for one, am still in the “holding for the long term” camp, and I think ownership in CRWD is a perfect example of understanding and adhering to this principle that need not be conflated with having rose colored glasses on or some strange emotional attachment to a stock.

Thanks Monkey!

-Chris

7 Likes

I like the perspective that Monkey has brought :slightly_smiling_face:! The lens for evaluating a best of the breed Cloud Native SaaS Security company that is proving itself and poised to become the dominant player in end point Security needs to be a little special.

It’s history that in early 2020 CrowdStrike was my largest holding well over 20%; an anomaly in my investing style with the exception of DataDog now. However CrowdStrike still holds a decent 7% in my portfolio as of today.

As I began to rebalance my basket of Security stocks a few months back which makes up around 30% of my portfolio, SentinelOne was the latest entrant to that list.

Zscaler being the largest, followed by SentinelOne and CrowdStrike.

Initially SentinelOne and CrowdStrike was 3:1 for me. However that got down to 2:1 after some introspection for the reasons outlined in this post https://discussion.fool.com/hi-jon-thanks-for-your-post-i-felt-i…

Now with CrowdStrike’s great results, my conviction in the reasons I had outlined in the linked post are stronger and SentinelOne and CrowdStrike hold equal weights in my portfolio at 1:1

I’m seeing telltale signs of CrowdStrike going on to become the dominant player in the end point Security space. But I’m not selling my SentinelOne shares now since I still think they will have a great quarter as the tailwinds are huge. However that story may change in the future.

Wishing everyone well!

Cheers!

ronjonb

P.S. Please don’t follow me and do your own due diligence before investing. I can be wrong.

20 Likes

I invest more like Monkey, looking for the company with more sustainable growth, hopefully at a high rate, but at some point, somewhat less than hyper growth. I feel the longer I own the business, the better I know it and the more comfortable I can become holding it. This way I also have to make fewer changes in investments. I’m willing to accept somewhat lower returns using this approach.

I also see nothing wrong with the approach Saul and others use, selling quickly when there is some deceleration in the growth of the businesses they hold. It requires quicker decision making, but if you are comfortable and accomplished using this approach, the more power to you. It’s just not quite in my comfort zone.

I certainly enjoy reading this board and have learned much from Saul and many others. Thanks to all for your wonderful contributions and best wishes for success in all of your endeavors.

Don

22 Likes

I invest more like Monkey, looking for the company with more sustainable growth, hopefully at a high rate, but at some point, somewhat less than hyper growth. I feel the longer I own the business, the better I know it and the more comfortable I can become holding it. This way I also have to make fewer changes in investments. I’m willing to accept somewhat lower returns using this approach.

Great.

But why are we having multiple posts on this? (Including the first reply that was really damn rude to Saul, that seems to have been nuked in the time I was writing my last post. Monkey’s reply was much much better.)

Saul gave an opinion on the trends over the numbers – and while I agree w/ him that “fantastic” wasn’t a word I’d use to describe the Q, I don’t agree w/ his conviction level, as I still hold it (as do Stocknovice, Gaucho, Poleeko last they reported). Writing posts to highlight how your opinion differs from others here isn’t helping anyone. There are 100s of individual strategies aligning around the overall hypergrowth thesis here. Hand-wringing about why others don’t want to hold a specific company, or in how your strategy expands beyond hypergrowth plays, are just noise.

We saw these motions with Okta – I and Saul held it longer than others here like Bear, Gaucho and Stocknovice, as the company was well positioned and its growth trend was sloping down slowly, as profitability ramped upwards. It was entering a PHASE 2 of “hypergrowth” to “profitable growth”. That’s the point that folks start trimming it heavily, and some exit sooner than others. I ultimately exited when product cadence became suspect, not the waning growth. Saul exited when another company interested him more, and he needed the cash.

CrowdStrike is approaching this same transition, as it drops from 100%s to 80%s to 60%s growth. Yet, it is still hypergrowth (if that means > 50%), and there is nothing alarming in the execution and it is signalling it will remain over 50% for some time. A large swath of folks here are trimming it on the overall down trend. Some went further and exited, while others still hold to ride the execution and favorable trends from here (for me, hopefully a wave of Federal biz). The reality is that it was 20% in most ports a year ago… now more like 4-8% for those that still hold.

Think of it like this – for Saul, it’s now maybe 9th or 10th most interesting company he is considering, so it has been pushed out of his condensed port. For others, it is their 6th or 7th, and so remains in their condensed port. And if you have a broader number of positions, or want to own “profitable growth”, it will easily remain in your port.

Feel free to own “profitable growth” as well as “hypergrowth”. Feel free to continue to hold CrowdStrike. Feel free to continue to post about it – a bit less than 1/2 of the major folks who post their ports here still own it. There are many companies that have exited most ports that are still discussed. (Ahem, Upstart… I kid, I kid.)

Bottom line, the posts in this thread after Saul’s number crunching aren’t adding anything to the discussion about CROWDSTRIKE. He gave his opinion. Process it and if your conviction still holds, great.

-muji

110 Likes

Muji explained this even better than I did, and a big thanks to him.

The only thing that I would add is that at NO place in my post starting this thread did I say that Crowdstrike had a bad quarter or that you should get out.

I had earlier said that the person who had called it a “fantastic” post was “a little bit carried away” which is certainly a soft comment. Someone challenged me to look at the whole picture and show that it wasn’t fantastic, so I took up the challenge.

I wrote a very calm, bland post on Crowdstrike, going through their metrics one by one to evaluate the whole company, and concluded “to summarize, not bad, not great, nothing really outstanding, nothing really terrible. Operating and free cash flow margins dropping, but offset by a small rise in net income margin…All in all, a company now stabilizing at a much lower level than it had been growing at.” I concluded that the person who called it a fantastic quarter must have had much lower expectations (as many of us had, expecting revenue growth to continue falling).

I couldn’t believe that people got angry at me because they THOUGHT I criticized their beloved company. I wasn’t criticizing it. I simply presented the metrics, and showed that the metrics were mostly unchanged with a few up a little and a few down a little.

Wow! getting angry at someone because they present the metrics to you, and no longer hold a company, isn’t appropriate on our board which is built for crowd sourcing of opinion and the discussion that is associated with that !!! Muji was correct. It’s 9th or 10th on my list but I only am currently holding my top seven.

Angry or attacking posts on our board will be deleted, and if you continue with them you will be banned from the board.

Saul

111 Likes

3/11/22
What I did:
I sold half my 7.5% position in Crowdstrike to add 25% more to my 10.5% position in Zscaler and add a little to Monday.com

Why I did it:
I agree that Crowdstrike will continue to be a 60% grower and is a phenomenal company doing all the right things to grow their TAM and take share. Thanks to Saul for clearly showing the relative strength in the numbers. And thanks to Monkey for helping me keep in mind the amount of bananas involved. I saw Crowdstrikes Q4 as good and their having great tailwinds, especially while they are at scale. Crowdstrike is just not as a predictable grower when compared to Zscaler (big nod to WSMs’ Billing to Rev correlation). I had thought that Crowdstrike could actually reaccelerate revenue growth. They did not.
After going back over Zscalers Quarterly CC and reading Jonwayne’s notes from what I believe was the Barenburg conference this month referencing The Zs CEO. He ‘always’ has seen Zscaler as providing more than just security services. I had not.

The following is lining up with the technical explanations Muji has put forth in his service.

Zs CEO: "And when it came to name Zscaler, some people said, call it security cloud this and that. I said, every company will have a word cloud in the name in every company. I don’t want to use either cloud or security in the name. And I don’t want to restrict us to security. So we will do whatever can be done by sitting in line. When you’re sitting in line like a switchboard, like an international airport, you should do everything…we built Zscaler Digital Experience because we’re sitting in the middle. We see the applications side, we see the user side of it. And our lightweight agent is collecting telemetry to tell us what’s going on where. It became an amazingly useful service because all performance products are built around the given network between the branch office and the data center…So ZDX is an amazing product. It’s the fastest-growing service for us. We were very happy when ZPA grew fast. ZDX is actually growing faster than ZPA. So it’s wonderful. We are very pleased with the performance of it.”

Zscalers much improved ability to execute on the growing market adoption of what their selling gives me Great Confidence, to believe that Zscalers’ continued acceleration in Revenue growth will be commensurate with this growing momentum of their business.

Thanks to the amazing crowdsourcing here!

Jason

19 Likes

I have been lurking here for awhile. Sometimes there are discussions about companies that I own, and I find value in reading peoples’ opinions here, especially if they are different than mine. I have never posted here, and I probably never will again because I don’t feel that I have anything significant to contribute. I do not follow the investing methodology that is practiced here, so there is no point in cluttering the board with my thoughts, only to have them deleted. But I do have to say that this…

Writing posts to highlight how your opinion differs from others here isn’t helping anyone.

…is a pretty dangerous belief to hold. If that really is the prevailing attitude here, then this place will become nothing more than an echo chamber. Maybe it will be a very effective one if you all happen to be right most of the time, but insulating yourselves from opposing viewpoints seems rather foolish to me.

I did not see the posts that were deleted, so maybe I am missing the context in which this statement was made. If that is the case, feel free to delete this post. But either way, I do think there is a tendency on this board for folks to rally around certain ideas, and when those ideas become less appealing to the “respected elders” of the group, it seems to be expected that others will either fall in line, or remain silent. Not always. This is not a black-or-white assessment of the mindset here. It’s just something that I have perceived as I read this board on a daily basis.

That’s my opinion, for whatever it’s worth. Good luck to all, from the loudest voices to the most silent lurkers, and everyone in between.

44 Likes

Welly, I appreciate you calling out my sentence: Writing posts to highlight how your opinion differs from others here isn’t helping anyone.

I was quite inarticulate. By opinion, I meant opinion on CONVICTION, not COMPANY EXECUTION.

Debate over company execution is encouraged, and we try to avoid being an echo chamber (which is difficult as we tend to share excitement about these companies. Criticism is encouraged. Having a concentrated port means having highly-focused opinions on these companies, and it is always important to hear arguments for and against. For all the occasional flake of being echo chamber here, it is easy to prove we are not: Some own Snowflake, some do not (due to valuation). We talk over its merits often.

But that kind of discussion wasn’t happening in this thread, it was mulling over the fact Saul didn’t have this company in his port, while others still do – a debate about conviction levels. Emotions seemed to spill over after his take on the numbers (which to him, confirmed his recent exit, vs the market & many here seeing positive signs).

I think we can see why the discussion of CRWD is getting a bit more emotional of late. It’s been a long-time hold, that built into a top position for many. It’s the perfect kind of long-term Rule Breaker stock the Fool loves. But in most exits here, it is due to some glaring reason, some big fault in the execution that we all agree upon. (See Zscaler’s sales stumbles in late 2019, or Alteryx at the start of the pandemic, or Fastly after its usage-based surge quickly waned.) I think CrowdStrike is a bit of a rare occurrence, in that folks are not exiting for execution failures, but due to the sheer size of the company shifting from hypergrowth to profitable growth. I brought up Okta as another example of this. This has caused CRWD to gradually shift from 1st…2nd…3rd position in port to 6th…8th…10th. Some still own it, some do not. It tends to start getting replaced with other interesting companies, even a rising direct competitor.

Debating about these conviction level differences isn’t helpful. Some here have wider portfolios and like to own Phase 2 of hypergrowth, while others have condensed into Phase 1. Fretting about Saul’s lack of a position just seems like folks want to use him as confirmation of their own conviction. There is no need to argue about holding it vs not, or attribute some kind of malice to Saul’s always-emotionless take on company performance.

Enough said.

  • muji
88 Likes

“But that kind of discussion wasn’t happening in this thread, it was mulling over the fact Saul didn’t have this company in his port, while others still do – a debate about conviction levels. Emotions seemed to spill over after his take on the numbers (which to him, confirmed his recent exit, vs the market & many here seeing positive signs).”

Hey Muji! (and Saul)

If you don’t mind, what posts are you and Saul talking about that were so horribly insulting and/or emotional? Are any of them still up? Or have they all been deleted? I woke up this morning and it was as if this board started on fire and people had been offended left and right! I’ve been a daily reader and occasional poster (still doing that 9-5 you talked about, so only so much time to devote) since June 2018 and I’ve literally never seen it like I saw it this morning, and most of you great board heavyweights started to chime in on the topic as things apparently reached a fever pitch.

Now, I was telling Stocknovice the other day, I have pretty thick skin and it takes a lot to offend me, so I’m not bothered by some constructive thought processes around framing posts, whether pre or post earnings, in the context of one’s own expectations, and I doubt Daws is either (though I’m sure he can speak for himself if his hair isn’t already on fire), and at a minimum the 2 of us were right in the crosshairs of the thought experiment for that type of posting. All good, seriously!

As Welly pointed out, perhaps there’s been some deleted posts that really caused a stir, but they must have been deleted pretty quickly? I just think there’s probably a lot of people that are completely neutral on this topic that are thinking “what the heck is happening?” and they don’t see any negative posts that back up what Saul said earlier about attacks or what you are saying above about emotions spilling over.

So maybe the downside of deleting posts is that people start to look back only at the posts they CAN see and think "Which posts are they talking about? Was it something I said or that this other person said that is being construed this way? If it was a deleted post, what did that post say that was so horrible? Did it really say something that horrible?

Message boards are hard. I don’t envy anyone who has to run one, because honestly I’m sure if we all sat down at a table together and just talked like normal human beings, had a drink or two, etc, we’d all be pretty impressed with each other’s intellect and insights, and most likely have a lot more in common than we do differences on most things as we delved into the nuances of each company and our approaches to hyper-growth investing.

Heck, Monkey might even convince one of us to try a Banana Sunrise, and I’d wager we’d even have a laugh or two! Maybe someday in the Metaverse :wink:

Anyway, here’s to a (hopefully) lowered temperature on this topic moving forward, because we need to laugh a little if we can with the kind of hits to the chin we’re all taking on a regular basis these days, regardless of what anyone owns.

-Chris

29 Likes

Shuki,

You said to Saul “You should congratulate them instead of pouring cold water on their a little bit of hope. As a leader of this board you are expected to keep the moral[sic] of the people [up].”.

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

This board exists because Saul (and others) are willing to share their insights, work, and wisdom with the rest of us. They do this because they are good people willing to help educate us. They are not paid to do this. They have ZERO responsibility to hand-hold anyone who reads this board. If you are looking for a board that has a goal regarding people’s morale, this is not it. If a reader of this board needs that, then I suggest s/he look for other information sources, or maybe even re-evaluate the decision to invest in individual stocks.

Saul expressed his opinion about CRWD, and produced the numbers that informed his opinion. I, for one, am very grateful for his input, which I use as information to make my own decisions (I still own CRWD, for instance). That choice is MINE. The results from it are MINE. I do not want the information I receive to be changed, or delayed, because of a fear of offending someone’s morale.

Bruce

71 Likes

Shuki

I have posted on other boards - but the is my 1st post on this board as my expertise rarely lends itself to constructive information here.

I mean no offense – but this board rocks because it has no EQ

And I respectfully submit that if someone wants/needs EQ – this is not the board for them

and I would further suggest - they should not be picking stocks to invest in and should instead use an index fund

Emotion is not helpful in investing

Aloha and a huge thanks to the people who post such valuable information on this board!!!

Bill

13 Likes