👨⚕️ Founder of Hypothesis Lab 🩺 Quantitative TA 👑Divergences 1D and 1W 📌 DYOR. Not financial, legal, or tax advice.
Joined September 2024
- Tweets6.3K
- Following57
- Followers656
- Likes6.5K
Pinned Tweet
Something that isn't being talked about nearly enough is uranium.
I’m going to be honest: it reminds me a lot of semiconductors in the 2010s.
Cycles of extreme booms and busts over many years. I got into semis back in the 2010s because I believed that green energy was going to be solved with chips. I was ultimately wrong on the specific mechanism of the thesis, but regardless, I got the core macro theory right.
Semis were wildly undervalued for the compute revolution that was coming.
I now feel the exact same way about uranium.
Look at where the world is heading. How do you believe we power all the AI models, space exploration, blockchains, industrial automation, and an ever-increasing human population over the next 20 to 30 years?
Are we going to do this through coal, oil, or wind turbines?
Probably not. But why?
Both coal and oil are non-renewable, heavily polluting resources. Beyond the carbon footprint, tech companies committed to net-zero pledges literally cannot use fossil fuels to run their hyper-scale infrastructure without destroying their own corporate mandates.
So what about wind and solar? They’re great technologies, but they carry a fatal structural flaw for high-tech compute: intermittency.
You cannot tell a cluster of tens of thousands of GPUs running multi-billion-dollar LLM training runs to pause because the wind stopped blowing or the sun set. Data centers need continuous power.
Battery storage is scaling, but using chemical batteries to back up multi-gigawatt compute loads continuously is neither economically nor physically feasible at scale yet.
Geothermal and hydro are clean, but geographically locked. You can't just build a massive hydro dam anywhere you choose to locate a data center campus.
Which leaves us with nuclear energy.
Nuclear is the only energy source on the planet that delivers zero-carbon, high-density, 90%+ capacity factor power.
The math behind the uranium thesis comes down to three main catalysts:
Energy density: A single uranium fuel pellet—the size of a gummy bear—contains the energy equivalent of 1 ton of coal, 120 gallons of oil, or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas.
The new bottleneck is energy: In the 2010s, the bottleneck was building chip architecture. Today, the bottleneck isn't the chips themselves—it’s the gigawatts required to plug them in. Hyperscalers like Microsoft, Amazon, and Google are signing multi-decade power purchase agreements (PPAs) directly with nuclear plants and funding small modular reactor (SMR) development just to secure their electricity supply.
Supply-demand deficit: Mining and enriching uranium takes years of capital expenditure, permitting, and massive lead times. You cannot just turn a valve to double uranium production when demand spikes. Meanwhile, utilities around the world face massive unfilled long-term requirements while global reactor buildouts accelerate.
Just like semis in the 2010s, the broader market is still treating uranium as a volatile, cyclical commodity play rather than the foundational, non-negotiable infrastructure layer of the AI and tech age.
The world is drastically underpriced on the raw material that makes the future run.
Uranium isn't just an energy commodity anymore. It's a technology play in disguise.
Dr.Chartwell retweeted
I just had a warning call from a non crypto friend.
He told me to watch out with my crypto because of the Iran situation and that $Btc is getting ready for new lows.
Perfect confirmation that my bias is right.
Does it really matter which wave we are in?
To be honest all that matters right now is there was a weekly divergence a few months ago. Everything between today and the next move is noise. Fear doesn’t win, patience does.
Perhaps I'm mistaken and will miss this opportunity on $UBER.
However, I still stand by this.
I believe UBER will get this divergence to play out this week.
Buying shares I wouldn't be too worried about this divergence. However, this would offer a very clear invalidation on this play and maximum buy.
Additionally, I am trying to get LEAPs so this matters more imo.
Dr.Chartwell retweeted
I would exercise caution here. I am in no interest of buying $SOXX at the moment.
Energy is coiled and in agreement.
p<0
If this direction stays look out below. I'm stacking cash until my SOXX master engine fires.
I guess we don't like weekly divergences on $NFLX.
Dr.Chartwell retweeted
$CIFR (November 7, 2026-Weekly Chart)
I didn’t expect $CIFR to fall this low. Let’s see if it can continue to hold above the $6.1 momentum bar in the coming weeks and start building momentum from here.
@cantonmeow
BE CAREFUL - I JUST ADDED A FEW NEW CHARTS IN TV AND I WAS ADDING FIBS TO THE CHART.
THEY WERE NOT IN LOG BY DEFAULT.
I COULD TELL RIGHT AWAY JUST AN FYI.
I HAVE UPDATED IT TO BE LOG BY DEFAULT.
@tradingview please look into this.
Wow I saved myself a ton on $GEV
This hasn't changed. In fact it has gotten worse since we last talked about it.
Earnings for $HIMS on Monday will likely decide whether or not the weekly divergence will play out.
I'm not saying $HIMS can't break out from here but I am recommending caution but why?
1) There is alot of curl being measured. Currently at .30 means that the price has moved over the moving average in the last 30 bars 30% of the time. Clearly this is range price action.
2) Histogram is still red (bearish) p<0
However, there was one week where there was a value add.
Given the curl, I think it's possible to come down and retest this area. If so, I will keep my eyes peeled for value add.
If this takes off congratulations to those who bought it.
For now I sit on my hands.
Do what you wish with this information on $COIN.
I watched this one for weeks after price rejected the .382.
If this isn't grounds for a reversal then I don't know what is.
Please note that this can technically go lower.
However, the RSI shouldn't lose 29.90.
I place odds at 20-30% that this divergence fails. Which places the odds at 70-80% this divergence marks the bottom on COIN.
The invalidation is simple lose 29.90 and it's not valid.
This will be my last post on COIN altering you of the epic divergence.
$ORCL is quietly sitting as one of the biggest valuation disconnects in mega-cap tech.
The Financials:
Net Income: $18.9 Billion (~26% net margin)
Revenue: $71.8 Billion
With cloud revenue making up over 50% of the top line
Theres a massive disconnect imo. Now let's dive into the TA.
On the weekly ORCL is experiencing it's 2nd worse correction in its history (down 66%) while maintaining very solid fundamentals.
At this point I am monitoring the potential for the weekly divergence to be confirmed in the coming weeks.
Additionally, the Hypothesis Lab system is reading the following:
1) Dying bearish momentum
2) Dying teal vector
Both of these are signals that confirm the developing divergences that are being seen.
As we come closer to getting this confirmation I will begin to monitor the LTF to ensure the best entry possible.
Given the massive disconnect and likelihood to spring out of here once the undervaluation is discovered I will be purchasing both shares and likely 1 LEAP to maximum potential of the next 2.5 years as well as the potential to hold as a long term position.
Once my purchases are made I will monitor PA to ensure the weekly divergence holds. Once held that's it. Just let PA do its thing.
Have a lovely weekend!
Be cautious when someone calls an out the money option with an expiry for late 2028/early 2029 a LEAP.
In my eyes a LEAP should be in the money or deep in the money. (Sometimes at the money is okay)
DIVERGENCE CONFIRMED!!!!!!
@chad_ventures
Heck to the Yeah
For the love of god...Just get the 1W bullish divergence on $COIN
so we can be done with this once and for all.
