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

Back to analysts list

Analyst

Sebastien Naji

William Blair · covers Technology

Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2024 Q3 – 2026 Q3 (9 quarters).

Questions
24on tracked calls
Challenge rate
8%2 of 24 questions
Companies
7questioned at least once
Reporting periods
9with 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 24 of 24 questions from 7 companies

ARMArm Holdings5 questions · 5 reporting periods · 1 of 5 challenging
ARM company page →

Calendar 2026 Q2

can you maybe just talk a little bit about what you're seeing in terms of unit demand and mix

DemandCost PressureTranscript · FY2027 Q1 →
Show response

Rene answered directly that V9 and CSS migration insulates Arm, then handed to Jason who conceded incremental slowdown versus start-of-year expectations.

Calendar 2026 Q1

how the shift in your business model is impacting some of your existing IP customers who also sell Arm-based CPUs in some form

ChallengingCompetitive DynamicsProduct LaunchTranscript · FY2026 Q4 →
Show response

Rene said every partner asked endorsed the strategy. Over 50 partners provided quotes, references, or videos. Emphasized the silicon strategy was driven by customer demand.

Calendar 2025 Q3

How do you feel about Arm's strategic positioning with respect to these AI deals?

Cloud & AICapex InvestmentTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Rene emphasized power efficiency as the key differentiator driving hyperscaler adoption. All incremental compute announced has been Arm-based, driving Neoverse royalties more than doubling YoY.

Calendar 2025 Q2

whether some of the loosen GPU export controls we've seen here over the last month could drive a more meaningful contribution from Arm China

Regulation PolicyGeographic ExpansionTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

Rene said Arm China tracks global trends with consistent growth. H20 export control changes have minimal impact. China was 21% of Q1 revenue, up from 15% last quarter and 14% a year ago.

Calendar 2025 Q1

could you help us maybe understand the structure of this deal and whether this was more of a one-off

Geographic ExpansionCloud & AITranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Rene explained the deal gives Malaysian startups CSS-level access for chip design. Would not forecast new deals but sees potential knock-on effect from other governments.

ALABAstera Labs, Inc. Common Stock4 questions · 4 reporting periods · 0 of 4 challenging
ALAB company page →

Calendar 2026 Q1

how should we be thinking about ASPs for the higher radix solutions?

PricingRevenue GrowthTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

Management said bigger switches carry higher ASP, but AI-fabric features beyond lanes drive content past $1,000 per accelerator.

Calendar 2025 Q4

is it right to think that your average ASP for the solution or the content opportunity should go up meaningfully

PricingRevenue GrowthTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Management said custom solutions have higher attach (one per accelerator) offsetting lower ASP, and content per XPU keeps growing each generation.

Calendar 2025 Q3

the willingness for Chinese hyperscalers to maybe use more open technologies like PCIe or UALink

DemandGeographic ExpansionTranscript · FY2025 Q3 →
Show response

Management said IP constraints drive China toward PCIe Gen 5 scale-up with more GPUs per cluster, a larger per-cluster opportunity for Astera.

Calendar 2025 Q2

which you might be seeing on Gen 5 PCIe adoption and general-purpose servers

DemandProduct LaunchTranscript · FY2025 Q2 →
Show response

Management said general compute is a tracked transition with new Aries, Taurus and Leo design opportunities from PCIe Gen 6 and CXL CPUs.

CRDOCredo Technology Group Holding Ltd4 questions · 4 reporting periods · 0 of 4 challenging
CRDO company page →

Calendar 2026 Q3

are you accumulating enough link level telemetry that the data itself has become a bit of a competitive advantage

Innovation & R&DCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2027 Q1 →
Show response

Bill gave rich detail on the Pilot telemetry platform (per-link sensing, ESD/dust detection) and confirmed the growing dataset feeds better next-gen solutions.

Calendar 2026 Q2

Could they represent 10 or even 20% of total revenue over the next few years, or is that too aggressive

DemandRevenue GrowthTranscript · FY2026 Q4 →
Show response

CEO called Neoclouds one of the biggest trends and agreed the group collectively could be on the order of 20% of revenue over coming years.

Calendar 2026 Q1

I guess what type of supply chain risks are you seeing for Credo, if any?

Show response

Bill said Credo secured wafer and packaging supply across 12/7/5/3nm, and flagged industry-wide memory as a concern that Weaver's DDR-over-HBM approach can help address.

Calendar 2025 Q4

how much of your business is tied to ASIC versus merchant silicon deployments today

DemandCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Bill said Credo doesn't track ASIC versus merchant GPU mix and is agnostic to GPU type; he believes customers order connectivity alongside GPUs, limiting inventory risk.

ANETArista Networks3 questions · 3 reporting periods · 0 of 3 challenging
ANET company page →

Calendar 2025 Q3

Where do you think you make the most progress as we go into 2026? Is it geographic expansion

Geographic ExpansionDemandTranscript · FY2025 Q3 →
Show response

Todd outlined three priorities: campus expansion with VeloCloud, geographic acceleration (strong Asia numbers), and new logo acquisition through channel investment.

Calendar 2025 Q1

could you maybe comment on what you're seeing on more of that traditional cloud titan demand and whether that's trending ahead of expectations

Show response

Jayshree noted balanced spend between AI and traditional cloud in 2025 vs the sharp AI pivot of 2023, with environment much more balanced.

Calendar 2024 Q4

does Arista's opportunity differ across these two chip types? And is there one approach that would maybe pull in more Arista versus the other

Cloud & AICompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2024 Q4 →
Show response

Jayshree sees NVIDIA's 80-90% GPU share potentially falling to 50-50 in 2-3 years, positioning Arista as GPU-agnostic scale-out networking provider.

CSCOCisco Systems, Inc.3 questions · 2 reporting periods · 0 of 3 challenging
CSCO company page →

Calendar 2025 Q3

could we see, for example, outside strength in Meraki and slower demand for Catalyst or vice versa

Product LaunchDemandTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Robbins expects unified platform to benefit Catalyst adoption by adding cloud management. With 35 million devices cloud-managed, customers get choice of on-prem or cloud-managed operation.

what your expectations are for Ethernet and scale-up going forward. And if we should expect new Silicon One announcements

Cloud & AIInnovation & R&DTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

Robbins said current hyperscaler clusters mostly use native connectivity within clusters. Scale-up Ethernet opportunity could emerge over time, Cisco has unannounced road maps to address it.

Calendar 2025 Q2

Can you maybe just comment on whether you see white box eating up a big part of the spending pie

Competitive DynamicsCloud & AITranscript · FY2025 Q3 →
Show response

Robbins said no meaningful shift to white box, noted Cisco can integrate silicon into white box when customers prefer it. Herren added two-thirds of $600M+ orders were systems vs optics.

FFIVF5, Inc.3 questions · 2 reporting periods · 1 of 3 challenging
FFIV company page →

Calendar 2024 Q4

Could you perhaps update us on your CDN product that came out of the Lilac Cloud acquisition

Product LaunchCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2025 Q1 →
Show response

Francois clarified F5 isn't competing directly in CDN against players like Akamai. Instead, CDN is bundled with security capabilities. A number of the 1,000+ DCS customers took the full bundle including CDN.

Calendar 2024 Q3

can you give us a sense for how much of your growth each quarter is coming from new customers?

Subscriber GrowthCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2024 Q4 →
Show response

Francois noted new customer wins occur across all product families, with distributed cloud services growing from 500 to 800+ customers. However, majority of growth comes from existing customer expansion and cross-selling.

What are you serving as an alternative to here? Are you replacing a native NVIDIA load balancer?

ChallengingCompetitive DynamicsCloud & AITranscript · FY2024 Q4 →
Show response

Francois acknowledged competition will emerge but emphasized F5's two decades of Layer 4-7 traffic management expertise is unique and directly applicable to AI workloads. Noted remaining work is in go-to-market and commercial models.

Show 1 more company
MPWRMonolithic Power Systems2 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 2 challenging
MPWR company page →

Calendar 2026 Q2

you are looking at data center exposure that is approaching roughly 50%. I mean, is that the right way to think about it

DemandRevenue GrowthTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Validated the components of the calculation and walked through the storage sub-buckets, without confirming the 50% figure outright.

Is any of that on newer node processes, like 40-nanometer, or is that mostly on existing 65-nanometer solutions?

Capex InvestmentSupply ChainTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Answered directly that it is mostly existing nodes and redirected to system-level and back end qualification as the real complexity.

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 Holdings520%1 of 5 questions
ALAB Astera Labs, Inc. Common Stock40%none of 4 questions
CRDO Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd40%none of 4 questions
ANET Arista Networks30%none of 3 questions
CSCO Cisco Systems, Inc.30%none of 3 questions
FFIV F5, Inc.333%1 of 3 questions
MPWR Monolithic Power Systems2—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
  • ARM
    Arm Holdings · 5 questions
    20%1 of 5 questions
  • ALAB
    Astera Labs, Inc. Common Stock · 4 questions
    0%none of 4 questions
  • CRDO
    Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd · 4 questions
    0%none of 4 questions
  • ANET
    Arista Networks · 3 questions
    0%none of 3 questions
  • CSCO
    Cisco Systems, Inc. · 3 questions
    0%none of 3 questions
  • FFIV
    F5, Inc. · 3 questions
    33%1 of 3 questions
  • MPWR
    Monolithic Power Systems · 2 questions
    —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 Q3250%1 of 2 questions1
2024 Q420%none of 2 questions2
2025 Q120%none of 2 questions2
2025 Q230%none of 3 questions3
2025 Q350%none of 5 questions4
2025 Q420%none of 2 questions2
2026 Q1333%1 of 3 questions3
2026 Q240%none of 4 questions3
2026 Q310%none of 1 question1
  1. 2024 Q32 questions · challenge rate 50% (1 of 2 questions) · 1 company
  2. 2024 Q42 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
  3. 2025 Q12 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
  4. 2025 Q23 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 3 questions) · 3 companies
  5. 2025 Q35 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 5 questions) · 4 companies
  6. 2025 Q42 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
  7. 2026 Q13 questions · challenge rate 33% (1 of 3 questions) · 3 companies
  8. 2026 Q24 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 4 questions) · 3 companies
  9. 2026 Q31 question · challenge rate 0% (none of 1 question) · 1 company

Topics

Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.

  • Demand9
  • Competitive Dynamics8
  • Cloud & AI7
  • Product Launch4
  • Revenue Growth4
  • Geographic Expansion4
  • Innovation & R&D2
  • Supply Chain2
  • Capex Investment2
  • Pricing2
Show all 13 topics
  • Cost Pressure1
  • Regulation Policy1
  • Subscriber Growth1