[BidClub_]
Sohn Conference Foundation · · 10 分钟

Kristov Paulus 在 Sohn 2025 推介 Robinhood

Kristov Paulus

YouTube
TL;DR
  • 演讲者在文字稿标题中被标为 Kristov Paulus,但自我介绍时称自己是 Christoff Pollace,将 Robinhood 推介为“hyperco 竞争者”。这类公司“能更快地做出产品”、拥有“不可思议的愿景”,并且“在结构上被华尔街低估”。Cultura Capital Management Fund 最大的仓位是 Robinhood;在演讲前5天内,该股上涨了30%。他的核心判断是,GameStop 事件后的失序局面已经发生实质性改变:“产品愿景一直都在,但现在执行力和组织能力也跟上了。”
  • 与前员工及公司内部人士的尽调访谈,构成了这轮反转逻辑的锚点。一名前员工形容 GameStop 时代是“一切都在分崩离析”;另一名2022年加入公司的人士称,公司员工从300人增至3,000人,却没有任何组织架构。如今,各业务线由总经理负责,产品以“绝对疯狂的速度”上线,Gold 这一关键项目也终于开始成形。相比之下,2021年6月达到2200万个已入金账户后的18个月里,Robinhood 总账户数仅增加不到100万,且几乎没有产品发布。
  • 数据印证了文化转变:客户留存率从2021年的80%升至过去12个月的95%,达到“最佳同类企业级 SAS”的水平;NPS 从负数升至18,仅次于 Interactive Brokers,后者在他看来并不真正具备可比性;过去12个月的有机净入金超过 GameStop 时代水平的2倍。
  • 定性层面的不对称性,来自未来20年美国预计发生的84万亿美元财富转移:婴儿潮一代将财富传给千禧一代和 Gen Z。即便假设资产规模排名前2%的财富会流向私人银行和房地产,他仍认为市场机会有30万亿美元,而 Robinhood 的渗透率不到1%。Robinhood 在千禧一代和 Gen Z 账户数量上接近最接近可比公司的2倍,触达该群体约14%;其用户中75%属于这一群体,而 Schwab 的对应比例大约只有十几个百分点。
  • 追赶空间同样清晰:Robinhood 每个已入金账户的资产约为9000美元,远低于 Schwab 的15.7万美元,但同比增长58%;新转入账户的资产约为这一水平的10倍,即每个账户9万美元。到2028年,ARPO 可能大致翻倍,但仍只有 Schwab 每用户 ARPO 的一半。
  • 在此之上,还有多层期权价值:按每1美元交易额计算,加密业务的费率约为股票业务的40倍,而 Robinhood 面向消费者的定价比 Coinbase 低约三分之二;退休业务资产超过100亿美元,用户数增长100%,资产增长140%;国际业务已有150,000名客户,尚未真正计入模型,因此“有点像免费期权”;过去3个季度 Robinhood 回购了约6亿美元,现有回购计划还剩流通股的2%。
  • 估值方面,传统玩家的 P/E 为17–24倍、PEG 为0.8–3倍;Robinhood 过去12个月收入增长51%,利润率超过60%,他认为增量利润率还可以更高。在指出股价5天上涨30%、估值数据已不再完全准确后,他给出的数字是未来12个月 EPS 约26倍,基准情景盈利约12倍,牛市情景约10倍。他认为,即使宏观环境转差,Robinhood 的定价仍合理,同时承认利息收入意味着公司并非完全不受宏观影响。在 PEG 低于1倍的情况下,他看到3至6倍的风险回报,押注产品线可能带来超预期上行。
摘要 · 为研究而整理的核心内容

1. “hyperco 竞争者”框架:为什么 GameStop 不是正确的参照系

  • 演讲者这样定义 Cultura Capital Management Fund 的选股框架:寻找“hyperco 竞争者”——拥有“不可思议的愿景”、由“愿意冲破一切阻力的领导者”带领、并且“在结构上被华尔街低估”的公司。Robinhood 符合这一标准;Vlad Tennv “令人难以置信的好头发”不在推荐逻辑之内。
  • 他要挑战的既有认知,来自 GameStop 事件以及 Vlad Tennv 在国会作证的经历。尽调访谈将那个时期描述为“一切都在分崩离析”;另一名受访者称,公司员工从300人增至3,000人,却没有任何组织架构。

2. 反转是可量化的,而不只是轶闻

  • Robinhood 在2013年至2020年间快速推出产品,用户数增长至1000万。GameStop 事件期间,公司在2021年6月一夜之间扩张至2200万个已入金账户;18个月后,总账户数仅增加不到100万,也没有产品上线。过去18至24个月里,组织已经彻底改变:各业务线重组至总经理体系下,执行速度达到极限。
  • 硬数据同样支持这一点:客户留存率从2021年的80%升至过去12个月的95%,达到最佳同类企业级 SAS 的水平;NPS 从负数升至18,仅次于 Interactive Brokers,但演讲者认为后者所处市场不同,实际上并不可比;过去12个月的有机净入金超过 GameStop 时代水平的2倍。

3. 84万亿美元财富转移,是被错误定价的定性不对称性

  • 演讲者区分了两类不对称性:一类是风险回报和健康估值等定量不对称性;另一类是经常被错误定价的定性不对称性,即“可能向好的事情多于向坏的事情”。未来20年美国预计从婴儿潮一代转移给千禧一代和 Gen Z 的84万亿美元财富,即便排除假设会流向私人银行和房地产的前2%资产,仍对应30万亿美元机会,而 Robinhood 的渗透率不到1%。
  • Robinhood 在千禧一代和 Gen Z 账户数量上接近最接近可比公司的2倍,触达全部千禧一代和 Gen Z 的约14%。这两类用户占 Robinhood 用户基础的75%,而在 Schwab 中仅约为十几个百分点。Robinhood 每个已入金账户的资产约为9000美元,Schwab 则为15.7万美元;前者同比增长58%,新转入账户的资产约为其10倍,即每个账户9万美元。

4. 多层期权价值叠加资本回报

  • 按每1美元交易额计算,加密业务的费率约为股票业务的40倍,同时 Robinhood 的定价比 Coinbase 面向消费者的价格低三分之二。退休业务资产超过100亿美元,用户数增长100%,资产增长140%。
  • 国际市场仍处于早期阶段,目前有150,000名客户,但 Robinhood 正在投入资源进入这些市场。演讲者并未真正将其计入模型,称其“有点像免费期权”。Robinhood 还在过去3个季度回购了约6亿美元,现有回购计划还剩流通股的2%。

5. 股价上涨后估值仍成立:风险回报为3至6倍

  • 演讲者坦率提醒,Robinhood 是 Cultura 最大的仓位,且过去5天上涨了30%,因此此前的估值数据已不再“100%准确”。
  • 传统玩家的 P/E 为17–24倍、PEG 为0.8–3倍。Robinhood 过去12个月收入增长51%,利润率超过60%,演讲者认为增量利润率还可能更高。他给出的估值是未来12个月 EPS 约26倍,基准情景盈利约12倍,牛市情景约10倍。即便宏观环境转差,他仍认为股价定价合理,但也指出利息收入意味着公司并非完全不受宏观影响。在 PEG 低于1倍的情况下,他看到3至6倍的风险回报,押注这个组织可能凭借“连我们都还没想到的产品”带来上行惊喜。
Kristov Paulus

Hi, everyone. Thanks so much for having me. It’s a true honor, and I’m thrilled. I’m Christoff Pollace, founder of Cultura Capital Management Fund that I launched in February of last year. I’m excited to talk to you today about Robinhood—and, to be perfectly clear, not that Robin Hood. Furthermore, I’m not the CEO of Robinhood. While we can agree that Vlad Tennv, CEO of Robinhood, has unbelievably great hair, that has nothing to do with my recommendation today.

In terms of our investment process, we look for hyperco competitors. These are organizations that build products faster, have incredible vision, and are run by leaders who will run through walls. At the bottom of the slide, you can see some of the organizations that we have identified and worked with in the past. We believe that these types of companies are structurally underestimated by Wall Street, and I’m here to tell you why we believe that Robinhood is a hyperco competitor.

Talking about all this organizational excellence, that might not be your first impression when thinking about Robinhood. I think a lot of people, when they think about Robinhood, think about the GameStop scandal. Vlad ended up testifying before Congress. But that wasn’t always Robinhood. This was an incredibly innovative company from the very beginning, employing some of the smartest and best engineers in Silicon Valley, where I’m based.

Speaking with former employees and people there to understand how these organizations make decisions and assess opportunities is a big part of our investment process. In those conversations, we’ve seen tremendous organizational change since the period around GameStop. One conversation mentioned that it felt like everything was falling apart back in that era, around GameStop, and they realized they needed to be more careful. Fast-forward to today, and our conversations are saying that they’re combining the smartest engineering leaders with the best operations and finance people around the organization.

Another conversation with someone who joined in 2022 said the stock was tanking and the company was a mess. The company had grown from 300 to 3,000 people with no structure. Fast-forward to today: they’ve restructured all their business units under general managers, and they’re executing at an absolute breakneck pace, shipping incredible products. Another conversation talked about how they were shipping features rather than holistic strategies. Fast-forward to today, Gold, which is a key initiative, is finally coming together.

I’ll leave you with this one: in 2021, the company could have used more gray hairs on the executive team, which I think is a fair assessment. Fast-forward to today, the product vision was always there, but now the execution and organization have caught up.

One of the hallmarks of a hyperco competitor is product velocity. This is one of the things that we look for. If you look at the early period for Robinhood, from 2013 to 2020, they were tremendously successful, shipping unbelievable products and gaining 10 million users in short order. Then, when the whole GameStop debacle happened, they grew overnight and scaled overnight, reaching 22 million funded accounts in June 2021, when that occurred. Eighteen months later, they had added less than 1 million total accounts and weren’t shipping products.

In the last 18 to 24 months, that has entirely changed. This organization is executing better than it ever has before, and we see many different ways that they can be successful. This isn’t just on the culture side; we’re seeing it show up in business metrics as well. Their customer retention rate was 80% in 2021, and their last-12-month customer retention rate is now 95%, in line with best-of-breed enterprise SAS. Looking at net new deposits, when they had this massive inflow from the GameStop situation, their organic net deposits in the last 12 months have been more than 2x that period.

They went from a negative Net Promoter Score, a customer-satisfaction measure, to an 18 NPS. While that’s not a heroic number, it’s actually the second-highest NPS across all brokerages, second only to Interactive Brokers, which isn’t really comparable because it’s a very different market.

For our philosophy, it’s not enough to have a hyperco competitor. We pick our spots and try to find situations where we see both quantitative and qualitative asymmetries. Quantitative asymmetries are pretty well understood: good risk-rewards and healthy valuations. But qualitative asymmetries are very often mispriced, and what I mean by that is situations where more things can go right than go wrong.

Chief among those, I believe, is that Robinhood has tremendous qualitative asymmetry. The biggest piece is the $84 trillion of wealth transfer due to take place over the next 2 decades in the United States, from the baby boomer generation to millennials and Gen Z. Even if you exclude the top 2% of assets and assume those go to private banks and real estate, that is still a $30 trillion opportunity, and Robinhood has less than 1% penetration in it.

Who is going to benefit from this tsunami of cash that’s coming? When you look at the number of accounts for millennial and Gen Z users, Robinhood has nearly 2x its closest comparable, with roughly 14% of all millennials and Gen Z. Comparing that with Schwab, roughly a teens percentage of Schwab’s users are millennials and Gen Z, versus 75% for Robinhood.

We see multiple ways that Robinhood can close the gap with incumbents. If you look at assets per funded account, it’s roughly $9,000 today versus $157,000 at Schwab. Those numbers are advancing rapidly: assets per account grew 58% year over year in the most recent quarter. Even more impressively, new account transfers are coming in at roughly 10x that level, at $90,000 per account.

We think this is going to be a durable tailwind for years to come, and we believe this is a situation where many things can go right. Obviously, this is not a macro-immune business; they derive interest income, but we see multiple ways those risks could be mitigated. We talked about the growth in assets per account. Another big opportunity for them is crypto: they get roughly 40x higher take rates from crypto per dollar traded than from equities. It’s massively accretive to their business, and they’re still pricing below Coinbase, at a two-thirds discount to Coinbase’s pricing for consumers.

They’re entering new verticals like retirement, which is in excess of $10 billion in assets, with users growing 100% and assets growing 140%. They’re very early in international markets, with 150,000 customers, but they’re making the investments today to enter those markets. We don’t even really factor this into our model; it’s sort of a free option. On top of that, they are actively buying back stock. They bought back roughly $600 million worth in the last 3 quarters, and they have 2% of the float remaining in their existing buyback.

Adding all this up, as we look at their ARPO, we think that, versus today, it can roughly double by 2028. To put that into comparison, that would still only be half of Schwab’s ARPO per user.

In terms of valuation, traditional players trade at 17 to 24 times P/E and 0.8 to 3 times PEG. When you look at Robinhood, its business metrics are far superior to those of any of the companies on that list: 51% last-12-month revenue growth and 60%-plus margins. We believe there are multiple reasons why their incremental margins are even higher than that.

A couple of caveats: fortunately for Cultura, this is our largest position, and it’s up 30% in the last 5 days. Unfortunately for this presentation, all these valuation numbers are no longer 100% accurate, but we still believe this is a highly asymmetric opportunity. It’s roughly 26 times 12-month EPS; in our base case, around 12 times earnings. We think that in a bull case this could be 10 times, and even in a more negative macro situation, this is quite reasonably priced.

Assuming this trades below a 1x PEG, we still believe this is a 3-to-6-times risk-reward. Again, underwriting this business as a hyperco competitor is betting on the organizations that are more likely to surprise us to the upside with products that not even we are thinking about.