← pool

📈 FTX's cap table is a who's-who of no diligence

Chamath's verdict on the published FTX investor list eight days after the collapse: it is not a who's who of VC, it is a who's who of firms that did no diligence whatsoever. His receipt is his own process - his firm was verbally walked through the business and never received financials - and Sacks' is that FTX's auditor was a firm advertising an address in the metaverse. The read-through is a second confidence hit on the venture-funded cohort on top of the mark reset, with more of these surfacing as capital stays expensive. Friedberg takes the other side on the merits: investors and LPs relied on audited financials that were fraudulently conveyed, so this is fraud rather than a failure of diligence.

0 CONVICTION
peaked 56.0 WATCH
EMBER
band
▼ SHORT IPO
expression · bearish equities
MISS
outcome · R -27.1% · α -43.1%
2023-11-19
window closed
⚠ CONFLICTING IDEA ON THE SAME TICKER — the board is arguing with itself; net it before trading (ticker view →)
IPO · 2026 is the year of mega-IPOs LONG DORMANT 6.3

⚖ Why this verdict

fully deterministic — evaluate.py replays this from daily closes; nothing below is editable or hand-set

  1. Window: 2022-11-19 → 2023-11-19 — first mention + 12-month horizon, then the window locks.
  2. The call: ▼ SHORT IPO (primary play). IPO rose 27.1% over the window → direction-adjusted R = -27.1% (the call lost money).
  3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +16.0%α = -27.1 − (+16.0) = -43.1% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the verdict uses.
    Stock-selection read: -11.1% — did IPO move the predicted way relative to the market. The two only differ on a SHORT: this call was right about direction relative to the index but still cost money versus holding it.
  4. Rule fired:
    · HIT — R ≥ +10% AND α ≥ +5
    · PARTIAL — R ≥ +5% OR α ≥ 0
    ▶ MISS — everything else
  5. Credit: supporters of a MISS earn 0 each, opposers the inverse — this feeds the scoreboard weights. supported: Chamath, Friedberg, Jason, Sacks

Conviction timeline

bands: green ≥ 65 · watch ≥ 45 · ember ≥ 15

Plays vs SPY · % since first mention (2022-11-19)

Plays

expressionsymbolkindrelevancerationale
▼ SHORT IPOetf PRIMARY Renaissance IPO ETF is the listed basket of the venture-funded cohort whose diligence standard is the argument; FTX and Alameda are private and bankrupt and have no instrument
▼ SHORT COINstock adjacent the only liquid listed proxy for crypto counterparty and confidence risk after the FTX failure

Mention log

Chamath
Chamath equities w=0.84 · n=160 · E105 (2022-11-19) · explicit_prediction · strength 3 ▶ 1:36:08 SUPPORT
“And the article headline was, it's a who's who of VC. And my comment is, actually, no, this list is a who's who of people who did no diligence whatsoever.”
Friedberg
Friedberg equities w=0.87 · n=120 · E105 (2022-11-19) · explicit_prediction · strength 2 ▶ 1:37:36 OPPOSE
“And so I don't think this is just fundamentally like a failure of diligence.”
Sacks
Sacks equities w=0.89 · n=96 · E105 (2022-11-19) · sentiment · strength 2 ▶ 1:37:12 SUPPORT
“Did you guys see who FTX's auditing firm was? It's called Prager Metis and it says it's based in the metaverse.”
Friedberg
Friedberg equities w=0.87 · n=120 · E109 (2022-12-24) · sentiment · strength 3 ▶ 31:47 SUPPORT
“And investors failed to do relevant amounts of due diligence or form a board and have proper governance over him because they wanted to be part of the hot new thing and everyone had capital to deploy.”
Jason
Jason equities w=0.97 · n=105 · E109 (2022-12-24) · sentiment · strength 2 ▶ 1:46:59 SUPPORT
“There's a generation of investors who raised their funds in the last five years and didn't do diligence, didn't demand board seats, didn't demand boards.”
Chamath
Chamath equities w=0.84 · n=160 · E135 (2023-07-01) · sentiment · strength 3 ▶ 1:10:53 SUPPORT
“they approached us for financing, and when we asked for a data room, we got a Google Doc link to a spreadsheet.”
Jason
Jason equities w=0.97 · n=105 · E135 (2023-07-01) · sentiment · strength 3 ▶ 1:14:21 SUPPORT
“The fact that SoftBank did this, that incredible evaluation, and the person who did this deal never checked that the customers were real makes you unfit to serve in the job.”

Who built this conviction

each voice's total force on the score — supports and opposes from every mention, weighted exactly as the replay applied them · share = % of all mention-driven movement

Chamath
Chamath w=0.84
2 scoring events · 45% of moves
+46.9 → net +46.9
Jason
Jason w=0.97
2 scoring events · 23% of moves
+23.9 → net +23.9
Friedberg
Friedberg w=0.87
2 scoring events · 20% of moves
+10.4 / -10.4 → net -0.0
Sacks
Sacks w=0.89
1 scoring event · 12% of moves
+12.9 → net +12.9

⏳ decay drained -59.2 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one

Score events

episodekindΔafternote
E105 2022-11-19 init +35.2 35.2 E105 born by Chamath (explicit_prediction x3) [w=0.84]
E105 2022-11-19 reinforce +12.9 48.1 E105 Sacks support x2 (new voice) [w=0.89]
E105 2022-11-19 oppose -10.4 37.7 E105 Friedberg opposes x2 [w=0.87]
E106 2022-12-03 decay -1.5 36.2 E106 silent
E107 2022-12-10 decay -1.4 34.7 E107 silent
E108 2022-12-16 decay -1.4 33.3 E108 silent
E109 2022-12-24 reinforce +10.4 43.7 E109 Friedberg support x3 (flipped from oppose) [w=0.87]
E109 2022-12-24 reinforce +12.3 56.0 E109 Jason support x2 (new voice) [w=0.97]
E110 2023-01-06 decay -2.2 53.8 E110 silent
E111 2023-01-13 decay -2.2 51.6 E111 silent
E112 2023-01-20 decay -2.1 49.6 E112 silent
E113 2023-01-27 decay -2.0 47.6 E113 silent
E114 2023-02-04 decay -1.9 45.7 E114 silent
E115 2023-02-11 decay -1.8 43.9 E115 silent
E116 2023-02-17 decay -1.8 42.1 E116 silent
E118 2023-03-03 decay -1.7 40.4 E118 silent
E119 2023-03-11 decay -1.6 38.8 E119 silent
E120 2023-03-17 decay -1.6 37.3 E120 silent
E121 2023-03-24 decay -1.5 35.8 E121 silent
E122 2023-03-31 decay -1.4 34.3 E122 silent
E123 2023-04-07 decay -1.4 33.0 E123 silent
E124 2023-04-14 decay -1.3 31.6 E124 silent
E125 2023-04-21 decay -1.3 30.4 E125 silent
E126 2023-04-28 decay -1.2 29.2 E126 silent
E128 2023-05-12 decay -1.2 28.0 E128 silent
E129 2023-05-19 decay -1.1 26.9 E129 silent
E130 2023-05-26 decay -1.1 25.8 E130 silent
E131 2023-06-02 decay -1.0 24.8 E131 silent
E132 2023-06-10 decay -1.0 23.8 E132 silent
E133 2023-06-16 decay -1.0 22.8 E133 silent
E134 2023-06-24 decay -0.9 21.9 E134 silent
E135 2023-07-01 reinforce +11.8 33.7 E135 Chamath support x3 [w=0.84]
E135 2023-07-01 reinforce +11.6 45.3 E135 Jason support x3 [w=0.97]
E136 2023-07-09 decay -1.8 43.5 E136 silent
E137 2023-07-14 decay -1.7 41.7 E137 silent
E139 2023-07-27 decay -1.7 40.1 E139 silent
E140 2023-08-04 decay -1.6 38.5 E140 silent
E141 2023-08-11 decay -1.5 36.9 E141 silent
E142 2023-08-18 decay -1.5 35.4 E142 silent
E143 2023-08-25 decay -1.4 34.0 E143 silent
E144 2023-09-01 decay -1.4 32.7 E144 silent
E146 2023-09-22 decay -1.3 31.4 E146 silent
E147 2023-09-29 decay -1.3 30.1 E147 silent
E148 2023-10-07 decay -1.2 28.9 E148 silent
E149 2023-10-13 decay -1.2 27.7 E149 silent
E150 2023-10-20 decay -1.1 26.6 E150 silent
E151 2023-10-27 decay -1.1 25.6 E151 silent
E152 2023-11-03 decay -1.0 24.5 E152 silent