Sure, #1 thing is toxic financing structure/float dynamics. Best example is current Neoclouds landscape: - $IREN is basically trash, since they have $6,000,000,000 ATMs and virtually infinite dilution, likely selling into every rally (structural overhang) - While $NBIS is now YTD 153%+, from optimal structures (eg. $NVDA direct funding, mix of convertibles, etc.). - On the other hand, $CRWV has endless debt interest given they took out high interest rate loans to finance GPUs. It's extremely nuanced, but you need to take a look at the float dynamics. If they're legitimately a good company, then it might be a good idea to go long after all the existing holders get diluted to oblivion. But if you care about your equity appreciation, it's a good idea to stay far away from toxic financing structures or toxic overhang (eg. debt interest, that eats away at a company FCF long term) With smaller companies, they have this all the time, like $SLNH, where there's new $500m ATMs on a $250m MC. Or like $BKKT where there's endless dilution to fund executive pay. With these companies you're basically transferring your money over to the company while influencers talk about them. So those are red flags. With many software names like $SNAP, they mask stock-based compensation with profitability. So while the company optically looks profitable, you'll likely see the value of your equity decrease due to dilution. There's endless types of these share structures you need to look when screening ideas. 跟着Serenity学投资: @aleabitoreddit 想请教一个具体问题： 你在筛选这类早期机会时，除了「现实世界观察 + 行业人脉」，还有没有一个你自己总结的「最小验证 checklist」？比如某个信号一旦出现，你就会把仓位从观察池提到重仓池？ 非常欣赏这种把金融、VC和硬科技研发背景融合起来的打法，期待继续看你分享！