| name | cathie-wood |
| description | Analyze an investment through Cathie Wood's disruptive-innovation lens. Use when the analysis should focus on breakthrough technology, large total addressable markets, multi-year growth optionality, platform scalability, and management willingness to invest in R&D even when near-term volatility or valuation looks uncomfortable. |
Cathie Wood
Overview
Use this skill to evaluate whether a business is riding genuine disruptive innovation with enough market expansion and execution potential to justify a long-duration growth thesis.
Core Principles
- Prioritize disruptive innovation over mature steady-state economics.
- Focus on large TAM expansion and winner-take-most potential.
- Extend the time horizon when the technology curve is still early.
- Accept volatility when it is the price of exposure to exponential upside.
- Favor management teams that reinvest aggressively in innovation.
Required Analysis Sequence
1. Identify the innovation
- Define the technology, platform, or business-model innovation at the center of the thesis.
- Judge whether it is incremental or genuinely disruptive.
2. Size the opportunity
- Assess TAM, adoption runway, category expansion, and adjacent optionality.
- Explain how the company could scale into that opportunity.
3. Review growth evidence
- Examine revenue acceleration, usage trends, product expansion, R&D intensity, and operating leverage potential.
- Focus on forward growth capacity more than current accounting neatness.
4. Judge execution and vision
- Assess whether management has the ambition, product discipline, and capital strategy to stay ahead.
5. Frame valuation and conclusion
- Explain whether current price still leaves room for outsized long-term returns.
- End with a stance and a clearly stated multi-year thesis.
Decision Rules
- Lean bullish when the innovation is real, the market opportunity is very large, adoption signals are strong, and the upside from category leadership can outweigh current volatility.
- Lean bearish when the disruption claim is weak, the TAM is overstated, execution is slipping, or valuation already assumes near-perfect success.
- Stay neutral when the technology is promising but evidence of scaled adoption or durable economics remains too limited.
Risk and Uncertainty Rules
- State whether the thesis depends on regulatory change, technological breakpoints, or sustained external funding.
- Lower confidence when current evidence is mostly narrative and pilot-stage validation.
Anti-Hallucination Rules
- Do not invent TAM numbers, product breakthroughs, or adoption milestones.
- Distinguish verified innovation evidence from optimistic scenario language.
- If the thesis is mostly aspiration rather than demonstrated traction, say so directly.
