Start 30 days free, no card. Full Pro access for a month, then decide. Start free

Back to analysts list

Analyst

Mark Lipacis

Evercore ISI · covers Technology

Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2024 Q4 – 2026 Q3 (8 quarters; questions recorded in 7).

Questions
17on tracked calls
Challenge rate
12%2 of 17 questions
Companies
8questioned at least once
Reporting periods
7with questions

These figures cover the whole profile: every tracked question, all reporting periods.

How to read these numbers

Challenge rate is the share of questions that pushed back, pressed for specifics or questioned management’s assumptions. It describes how questions were asked on the calls tracked here; it does not measure whether any view turned out to be right.

Rounding. Rates are rounded to whole percentages, so a small share can show as 0% even when some questions were challenging. The count beside each rate is exact; “none of N questions” means no question was challenging.

No questions recorded. “—” means there is nothing to calculate: no questions were recorded for that period on the calls tracked here. It does not mean there was no activity.

Fewer than 3 questions. A company-level rate is withheld when fewer than 3 questions were recorded for that company; the questions are still counted everywhere else.

Small samples. Profiles with fewer than 10 questions are marked Limited sample.

Reporting periods. Questions are grouped by the calendar quarter each company’s fiscal reporting period maps to, not by the date of the call. Periods without a calendar mapping are listed separately under their fiscal label.

Questions asked

Grouped by company, most questions first. Open a company to read its questions, newest reporting period first.

Showing 17 of 17 questions from 8 companies

ARMArm Holdings4 questions · 3 reporting periods · 0 of 4 challenging
ARM company page →

Calendar 2025 Q2

Does your share asymptote somewhere below 100% at some point in time?

Cloud & AICompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

Rene expressed high confidence in growing beyond 50%, citing customization advantages and the benefit of standardizing on a single CPU architecture and software stack across data centers.

How much is FX expected to impact EPS for next quarter?

Show response

Jason quantified ~$0.01/quarter FX headwind for the year (~$0.04 total). Two-thirds of OpEx in euros and pounds, with some unhedged exposure from increased R&D spending.

Calendar 2025 Q1

there's no real impact on the cost side and any impact on the revenue side would be indirect

Trade TariffsRevenue GrowthTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Jason clearly explained no direct tariff impact on services. Indirect risk limited to 10-20% of royalties from US-destined shipments, with potential couple percent royalty impact at most.

Calendar 2024 Q4

Jason, the CSS license activity, is that mostly data center or is it balanced between data center and handsets?

Innovation & R&DCloud & AITranscript · FY2025 Q3 →
Show response

Jason confirmed ~50-50 CSS split between infrastructure and client. Rene added that chiplet architecture will be pervasive across nearly every SoC, creating a major CSS opportunity.

MRVLMarvell Technology3 questions · 3 reporting periods · 1 of 3 challenging
MRVL company page →

Calendar 2026 Q1

what's the argument for, why not shift your process or resources to focus more on connectivity

ChallengingCompetitive DynamicsMarginCloud & AITranscript · FY2026 Q4 →
Show response

Murphy gave forceful defense of custom business. Not compromising interconnect investment to fund custom. Custom provides strategic advantage as bleeding-edge technology driver across nodes, packaging, IP. Customers fund NRE reducing Marvell's own investment burden. Dismissed competitive noise from past year as demonstrably wrong, analysts retracting notes, inaccurate articles. Business grew from zero to $1.5B and will continue scaling.

Calendar 2025 Q1

you seem to express confidence in the visibility as you go through this year. And I wonder if you can help us understand

DemandMacroeconomicTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Murphy described triangulation process for forecasting, citing sole-source positioning and joint supply chain planning with customers. Sees strong setup for FY26 and FY27 across custom, connectivity, and storage.

Calendar 2024 Q4

How many companies can do what you guys do on the custom side?

Cloud & AICompetitive DynamicsInnovation & R&DTranscript · FY2025 Q3 →
Show response

Confirmed $40B custom TAM out of $75B data center. Described competitive moat as combination of IP roadmap, A0-quality execution on 100B+ transistor designs, manufacturing capacity, and field support. TCO advantage drives custom adoption alongside merchant solutions.

QBTSD-Wave Quantum Inc.3 questions · 3 reporting periods · 0 of 3 challenging
QBTS company page →

Calendar 2026 Q2

How should we think about like revenues associated with any of these milestones

Revenue GrowthInnovation & R&DTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Baratz said gate-model revenue starts with government contracts, then likely system sales to research institutions; significant QCaaS revenue is not expected until around 2032.

Calendar 2026 Q1

talk through kind of the appetite for on-prem systems for kind of governments and kind of academic research versus commercial

DemandRevenue GrowthTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

Joe McCormick of Evercore asked, covering for Mark Lipacis. Baratz expects system sales mostly research/academic near term, with possible commercial sales tied to blockchain and AI.

Calendar 2025 Q4

how it is playing into that sales pipeline increase that you are talking to.

Show response

Joe McCormick stood in for Mark Lipacis. Markovich said QCI contributes professional-services, QCaaS and government revenue this year, with a system-sales pipeline building.

AMATApplied Materials2 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 2 challenging
AMAT company page →

Calendar 2026 Q1

is 15% -- is that still the right way to think about WFE intensity in your view?

DemandCapex InvestmentTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

Gary acknowledged WFE intensity at ~15% but pivoted to argue the old 1/3 logic, 1/3 ICAPS, 1/3 memory framework is outdated given AI-driven divergence in segment growth rates.

does that necessarily put you in a position to, as you said, capture more value

Show response

Gary confirmed high confidence in sustained margin growth, citing years of investment in high-value solutions for AI-enabling segments where AMAT has strong positions.

NVDANVIDIA Corporation2 questions · 2 reporting periods · 0 of 2 challenging
NVDA company page →

Calendar 2026 Q1

hyperscalers were over 50% of revenues, but growth was led by the rest of your data center customers

Revenue GrowthDemandGeographic ExpansionTranscript · FY2026 Q4 →
Show response

Colette confirmed hyperscalers sit around 50% of revenue while AI model makers, enterprises, supercomputing, and sovereigns are growing faster, and Jensen framed CUDA ubiquity as the enabler.

Calendar 2025 Q1

hyperscalers are the biggest purchasers of your solutions

DemandRevenue GrowthCloud & AITranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Colette confirmed enterprise grew 2x year on year, similar to CSPs. Jensen argued enterprise will be 'by far larger' long term, citing three computers per industrial company, agentic AI for employees, AI factories for products, and robotic AI inside the product itself.

ADIAnalog Devices1 question · 1 reporting period · 1 of 1 challenging
ADI company page →

Calendar 2026 Q3

The last time ADI revenues were above that long-term 5% to 7% trend line was back in the late '90s, early 2000.

ChallengingCompetitive DynamicsDemandTranscript · FY2026 Q3 →
Show response

Roche argued concentration was higher then; the industry today is broader and deeper with a pervasive AI gravity field, unlike prior cycles.

Show 2 more companies
CRDOCredo Technology Group Holding Ltd1 question · 1 reporting period · 0 of 1 challenging
CRDO company page →

Calendar 2026 Q3

Can you contrast how you are prosecuting the optics market? Compared to how you prosecuted the AEC market?

Competitive DynamicsInnovation & R&DTranscript · FY2027 Q1 →
Show response

Bill contrasted the multi-year AEC category creation with ZF Optics ramping faster because AI networks make link-flap reliability an already-present pain point.

NXPINXP Semiconductors1 question · 1 reporting period · 0 of 1 challenging
NXPI company page →

Calendar 2025 Q1

what would you expect on a restocking cycle? Are you of the view that something has foundationally changed

InventorySupply ChainTranscript · FY2025 Q1 →
Show response

Kurt acknowledged that despite COVID lessons, the industry hasn't structurally changed inventory management. Working capital pressure prevents building safety stock. Better communication but same fundamental dynamics.

Challenge rate by company

Every company this analyst questioned, most questions first. A company-level rate is shown from 3 questions; below that it is withheld.

CompanyQuestionsChallenge rate
ARM Arm Holdings40%none of 4 questions
MRVL Marvell Technology333%1 of 3 questions
QBTS D-Wave Quantum Inc.30%none of 3 questions
AMAT Applied Materials2—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
NVDA NVIDIA Corporation2—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
ADI Analog Devices1—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
CRDO Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd1—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
NXPI NXP Semiconductors1—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
  • ARM
    Arm Holdings · 4 questions
    0%none of 4 questions
  • MRVL
    Marvell Technology · 3 questions
    33%1 of 3 questions
  • QBTS
    D-Wave Quantum Inc. · 3 questions
    0%none of 3 questions
  • AMAT
    Applied Materials · 2 questions
    —rate withheld: under 3 questions
  • NVDA
    NVIDIA Corporation · 2 questions
    —rate withheld: under 3 questions
  • ADI
    Analog Devices · 1 question
    —rate withheld: under 3 questions
  • CRDO
    Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd · 1 question
    —rate withheld: under 3 questions
  • NXPI
    NXP Semiconductors · 1 question
    —rate withheld: under 3 questions

Activity by reporting period

Questions recorded for each calendar quarter that companies’ reporting periods map to (not the call date), with the challenge rate for that period. Periods inside the range with no questions are shown as “No questions recorded”.

Questions by calendar reporting period
Calendar periodQuestionsChallenge rateCompanies
2024 Q420%none of 2 questions2
2025 Q140%none of 4 questions4
2025 Q220%none of 2 questions1
2025 Q3No questions recorded——
2025 Q410%none of 1 question1
2026 Q1520%1 of 5 questions4
2026 Q210%none of 1 question1
2026 Q3250%1 of 2 questions2
  1. 2024 Q42 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
  2. 2025 Q14 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 4 questions) · 4 companies
  3. 2025 Q22 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 1 company
  4. 2025 Q3No questions recorded
  5. 2025 Q41 question · challenge rate 0% (none of 1 question) · 1 company
  6. 2026 Q15 questions · challenge rate 20% (1 of 5 questions) · 4 companies
  7. 2026 Q21 question · challenge rate 0% (none of 1 question) · 1 company
  8. 2026 Q32 questions · challenge rate 50% (1 of 2 questions) · 2 companies

Topics

Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.

  • Revenue Growth6
  • Demand6
  • Competitive Dynamics5
  • Cloud & AI5
  • Innovation & R&D4
  • Margin2
  • Geographic Expansion1
  • Capex Investment1
  • Pricing1
  • Fx1
Show all 15 topics
  • Trade Tariffs1
  • Macroeconomic1
  • M&A1
  • Inventory1
  • Supply Chain1