Personal Investment Portfolio · Est. December 2025

Finding companies that create
entirely new categories
then own them.

Every major technology cycle produces a handful of companies that don't just build better products—they define entirely new markets. These category creators capture 76% of the value in any space they create, and hold it for decades. This portfolio exists to find those companies during the 3–7 year formation window, before the market fully understands what they are. Right now, that window is in AI infrastructure.

Inception
Dec 2025
Core Positions
1 Active
Framework Threshold
8.0 / 10
Rejection Rate
~87%
The Thesis

Category leaders. Every cycle. This one too.

The framework is durable. The arena changes.

The pattern repeats across every major technology cycle. The railroad era had companies that created the "integrated rail network" category before anyone had language for it. The oil era had Standard Oil. The PC era had Microsoft owning "operating system," Oracle owning "relational database." The internet era had Google owning "search," Salesforce owning "cloud CRM," AWS owning "cloud infrastructure." Each time, a small number of companies defined entirely new categories and captured 76% of the economic value. Everyone else competed for scraps.

The insight is not about AI. The insight is about category creation — finding companies in the 3–7 year formation phase, when institutional capital hasn't yet priced what they actually are, and holding long enough to let the compounding happen. AI infrastructure is simply where that pattern is most active right now. When this cycle matures, the framework travels to wherever the next category formation is occurring.

Current deployment: enterprise AI infrastructure — data security, observability, data platforms. The picks and shovels that every AI application requires, regardless of which AI models ultimately win. Domain advantage: 10+ years as a Software Product Manager in enterprise software, providing direct experience evaluating technical moats, category positioning, and authentic category creation versus marketing narrative.

Current Deployment — AI Infrastructure

Where category leaders are forming right now.

The enterprise AI stack has seven layers. Category creation is most active at L3 and L6—data foundation and security/observability—where new problems are being defined that didn't exist five years ago.

L7 — Apps
ServiceNow Salesforce Vertical AI SaaS Too large for 10x / monitoring
L6 — Security & Observability
RBRK DDOG CRWD NET
L5 — AI Orchestration
LangChain Weights & Biases Awaiting IPO < $3B
L4 — AI Models
OpenAI Anthropic Meta Llama Private / not investable
L3 — Data Foundation
Databricks Reserve Snowflake Awaiting IPO < $30B
L2 — Cloud Infrastructure
AWS Azure GCP Conglomerates / not pure play
L1 — Compute
NVIDIA AMD Commodity risk long-term
Active position On watchlist Capital reserved
Portfolio

Current positions.

Two time horizons. Different return targets. The same framework threshold of 8.0+ to qualify.

Goal: 10x return over 10 years. Requires starting market cap small enough for that math to be realistic. Maximum conviction, minimum activity.

RBRK
Rubrik, Inc.
Zero Trust Data Security
Why it qualifies: Created the "Zero Trust Data Security" category and owns the language around it. $10B market cap—10x to $100B is realistic; Palo Alto is already at $120B. AI makes the thesis stronger: every enterprise AI initiative creates more sensitive data to protect, and more regulatory scrutiny around that data.

Key signal: Growing faster than any comparable cybersecurity company at equivalent stage. Earnings Mar 12, 2026.
8.7 / 10
Active · ~$50
One position by design. The framework is intentionally restrictive—87% of evaluated companies are rejected. RBRK is the only company in the current universe where the category creation score, fundamentals, moat, and 10x math all align simultaneously. The next 10-year position will be added when another company clears 8.0 from a market cap where 10x is still possible.

Goal: 3–5x return over 5 years. These are proven category leaders with deep moats—already too large for 10x, but with clear compounding ahead. Framework score still required.

DDOG
Datadog, Inc.
Observability
Category position: Clear king of cloud observability. 84% of enterprise customers use 2+ products; 31% use 6+. Platform depth creates compounding switching costs.

AI angle: Every AI agent deployment requires monitoring. More AI workloads = more DDOG revenue. Reported 29% revenue growth in Feb 2026 earnings, beating expectations. Q4 2025 validated the thesis.
8.5 / 10
Active · ~$130
CRWD
CrowdStrike Holdings
AI-Native Cybersecurity
Status: Monitoring. Framework score 8.0 exactly—passes at minimum threshold. 97% gross retention rate post-outage is extraordinary evidence of moat depth. Complementary to RBRK: RBRK protects data, CRWD protects endpoints and identity.

Entry discipline: $108B market cap limits upside. Watching for a more favorable entry point where 5x math becomes cleaner.
8.0 / 10
Watching · $108B
NET (Cloudflare) and NOW (ServiceNow) were evaluated and rejected on the 10-year horizon due to market caps of $60B and $113B respectively—the 10x math doesn't work from those starting points. Both are exceptional businesses, not portfolio candidates at current valuations.

Capital held in money market instruments, earning yield while waiting for specific deployment opportunities. Cash is a position, not laziness.

FDRXX / SPAXX
General reserve · Fidelity money market funds. Deployed opportunistically on RBRK dips or new 8.0+ qualifying opportunities.
~3.69% yield
Databricks Reserve
Earmarked for Databricks IPO if valuation ≤ $30B. Data lakehouse infrastructure + Unity Catalog = Layer 3 category king. Framework pre-score: 8.8/10. No action until public markets.
Awaiting IPO
Why not buy DDOG instead of holding cash? Rotating capital from cash into a placeholder position creates tax friction on gains when rotating out, and emotional attachment to positions that weren't core convictions to begin with. Cash at 3.69% with full optionality is a better risk-adjusted position than a stock held while waiting for something better.
Track Record

Performance since inception.

Documented publicly for accountability. Cannot be revised with hindsight.

Portfolio (Since Dec 23)
−19.3%
RBRK: $67.51 → ~$50
S&P 500 (Same Period)
+1.4%
SPY total return
Track Record Length
~2mo
Meaningful at 3–5 years
Month Portfolio S&P 500 Notes
Jan 2026 −19.3% +1.4% First full month · Thesis unchanged
Dec 2025 * +11.8% +2.4% Partial (Dec 23–31)
Context on early volatility: Newly public category-creating companies in the $10–30B range are volatile by definition—the market is still discovering fair value. A −19% month on a 10-year thesis is noise. What matters: is the category still forming? Is the company still the leader? Is the moat intact? Answer to all three is yes. Full methodology at track-record.html. Next update: March 7, 2026.
The Framework

How investments are evaluated.

A four-filter system. All filters must score 7.0+, and the weighted total must reach 8.0. The average evaluated company scores 5–6. Most are rejected.

All framework scores shown on this site are the author's personal subjective evaluations using this four-filter system. They are not professional ratings, not third-party assessments, and not a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The same company evaluated by a different person using the same framework may produce different scores.
01 —
Category Creator / Leader
30% weight · Minimum 7.0
Does the company own the language of a new category? Are competitors positioning against them, not the other way around? Is the category in its 3–7 year maturity window—past "too early," before commoditization?
02 —
Strong Fundamentals
25% weight · Minimum 7.0
30%+ revenue growth, 60%+ gross margins, Rule of 40 score above 40, clear path to profitability. Net revenue retention 110%+. Would this company survive if public markets closed for 5 years?
03 —
Durable Moat
25% weight · Minimum 7.0
Network effects, switching costs, data advantages, or regulatory barriers—preferably compounding with scale. Could a well-funded competitor replicate this in 3 years? If yes: pass.
04 —
Long Runway
20% weight · Minimum 7.0
$50B+ TAM, under 10% penetration, multiple expansion paths. And critically: is the starting market cap small enough that 10x (10-year) or 5x (5-year) is mathematically realistic?
Philosophy

The principles behind every decision.

Category creation is the signal. Everything else is noise.

Companies that define new categories capture 76% of category economics and hold it for decades. A company with a better product competing in an existing category is interesting. A company that makes the old category obsolete is investable. The framework exists to tell the difference.

The framework travels. The arena changes.

This is not an AI portfolio. It is a category leader portfolio currently deployed in AI infrastructure because that is where the formation phase is most active. When this cycle matures, the same framework evaluates the next one — biotech infrastructure, energy tech, whatever category creation looks like in 2030.

3–7 years in is the window. Before or after is a different bet.

Too early (0–2 years): the category doesn't exist yet, risk is existential. The window (3–7 years): category is forming, the leader is emerging, but institutional capital hasn't fully priced it. Too late (8+ years): commoditization begins, margin compression follows. The framework targets only the window.

Valuation math must work. Great companies at wrong prices are bad investments.

For every position, the arithmetic is verified before entry: what market cap does this company need to reach for 10x (or 5x), and is that realistic? ServiceNow and Cloudflare are exceptional businesses. At $113B and $60B respectively, the 10x math doesn't work. Framework score is necessary but not sufficient — valuation runway is the final gate.

Personal investment portfolio documented for educational purposes only. Not investment advice. Not a fund. Not a solicitation. The author is not a registered investment advisor. All framework scores are personal subjective evaluations, not professional ratings. The author has a financial interest in securities mentioned and may buy or sell at any time without notice. Performance data is self-reported from personal brokerage statements and has not been independently verified. All positions represent personal opinions that may be incorrect. Past performance does not predict future results. All investing involves risk of total loss. Consult a licensed financial professional before making investment decisions.