▶ Full Post Text
Been going back and forth on Coreweave for a while now so I finally sat down and built out a proper model. Figured I'd share it here since this stock seems to generate strong opinions in both directions.
Quick overview for anyone unfamiliar: Coreweave buys (or finances) Nvidia GPUs, racks them in data centers, and rents that compute out to companies building AI. OpenAI, Microsoft, Meta, Google, bunch of AI labs. Basically AWS for GPUs except it started as a crypto mining operation and pivoted hard into AI. The AI infrastructure market sits around $35B today and is projected to hit $223B by 2030. So the TAM story checks out on paper.
**The growth is hard to argue with**
Revenue went from $228M in 2023 to $1.9B in 2024. Q1 2025 alone was $982M. Backlog went from \~$26B to nearly $55B. They've locked in up to $22B with OpenAI and \~$14B with Meta. Nvidia owns about 7% of the company and signed a $6.3B collaboration deal. These aren't small numbers.
So why am I not just pounding the table on this thing?
**Customer concentration freaks me out.** Microsoft was 60%+ of core revenue in 2024. Top two customers were 77%. We already saw Microsoft pass on some Coreweave capacity that OpenAI then picked up. Fine, worked out that time. But what happens when one of these giants decides to build more in house? Or just negotiates harder because they know Coreweave needs them more than they need Coreweave? This isn't the kind of business that "gently slows down." It gets hit hard and fast.
**The moat is way thinner than people think.** Right now the edge is speed of deployment and relationships. That's it. There's no deep software lock-in. No switching costs that make customers say "we could never leave." Compare that to actual AWS where migrating off is a nightmare. Coreweave isn't there. Not even close.
**The balance sheet though. This is the big one.** $25B+ in total debt commitments over the last 18 months. $1.75B in senior notes at 9% interest. Some projections have them at $32B in debt by 2026. The entire business model is basically "borrow aggressively, build like crazy, and pray AI demand bails us out." If it works, the equity flies. If there's any hiccup, equity holders are the shock absorber. That's just how leverage works.
And on top of that, dilution has been relentless. Pre-IPO rounds, the IPO at $40, strategic equity to Nvidia and OpenAI, stock comp. The share count keeps ballooning. You're not just splitting upside with debt holders, you're splitting it with Nvidia, OpenAI, early backers, employees, and whoever comes next.
One more thing that bugs me: the CEO, Michael Intrator, isn't an engineer or infrastructure guy. He's a former hedge fund manager from natural gas trading. And you can feel it in how the company is run. Aggressive leverage, complex loan facilities, huge structured debt arrangements. This thing operates more like a leveraged financial vehicle that happens to own GPUs than a traditional infrastructure company.
**Where it sits today**
\~$97/share. Market cap high $40sBs. Enterprise value probably north of $50B when you include all the debt. Against \~$5.1B in expected 2025 revenue that's roughly 11x EV/sales. Not cheap but not absurd for the growth rate. The price basically says "we buy the dream but we see the risk."
**My scenarios through 2030**
||Revenue|EV/Sales|Price/Share|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Bear|\~$10B|3x|\~$25-40|
|Base|\~$18-20B|4-5x|\~$79|
|Bull|\~$30B+|6-7x|\~$138|
**Bear:** AI keeps growing but we hit overcapacity. Hyperscalers build their own GPU clouds. Pricing pressure kills margins. Market slaps a utility multiple on it. You subtract mid-teens billions in net debt from a $30B enterprise value, spread over a diluted share count, and you're at $25-40. That's a 45-60% haircut from here. And not because AI died. Because the capital structure was too aggressive.
**Base:** Demand stays solid, debt gets serviced, dilution stays manageable. \~30% growth, modest multiple. You end up roughly where you are now. Maybe small upside. Nothing exciting.
**Bull:** AI compute demand blows past expectations. Contracts keep stacking. Free cash flow materializes. Debt gets paid down. 40-50% growth, 6-7x multiple, \~$138/share. That's a 40% return.
**Where I land on this**
At $97 the base case barely moves the needle. You're really buying this for the bull case which means you need to be able to stomach the bear case. And that bear case isn't some catastrophic scenario where AI fails. It's just "things don't go perfectly and the leverage eats you alive."
The engine underneath is real. I'm not disputing that. But 60%+ customer concentration, $25B in debt, a thin moat, and aggressive dilution? That's a lot of risk to take on when the base case gets you back to roughly where you started.
I'm watching this closely but not buying at these levels. If it pulls back into the $70s on some macro scare or a contract renegotiation headline, that changes the math a lot. Until then I'm on the sidelines.
**TLDR:** Coreweave has monster growth, massive contracts, and Nvidia backing. But the customer concentration is dangerous, the debt load is enormous, the moat is thin, and dilution keeps coming. At $80 you need the bull case to play out almost perfectly to justify the risk. Not broken, but not cheap enough for the risk you're taking on.
If anyone wants to play with the model and stress test the assumptions just DM me.
How are others here thinking about this? Is the backlog enough to justify the leverage or is this one of those setups where AI wins but Coreweave equity holders still get a rough deal?