For my view: Burry’s move is a warning, not a signal to sell NVDA or PLTR. NVDA: Business growth is extremely strong. AI demand, data centers and chips remain powerful. But the valuation is very high, so even good results may not be enough if growth slows. PLTR: Revenue and profits are growing very fast, but its valuation is much more demanding. It needs excellent growth for years to justify the price. Burry: Closing the December puts does not mean he became bullish. It mainly looks like risk and time management. For me, the biggest risk is valuation, not AI demand. Bottom line: NVDA: Long-term story remains strong, but avoid chasing huge rallies. PLTR: Great company growth, but much higher valuation risk. Burry’s warning is worth watching, but not enough by itself to make an inves

I’m still bullish, but I think the key is earnings growth catching up with valuation. 👀 Burry may be right that PLTR and NVDA are priced for near-perfect execution, but skepticism alone doesn’t make the AI thesis wrong. Nvidia is still benefiting from massive AI infrastructure demand, while Palantir is showing strong commercial AI adoption. For me, the real warning sign would be AI spending slowing while valuations stay elevated. Until that happens, I’d rather own the leaders with real revenue growth than bet against the entire AI cycle. 📈🤖

For me, Burry closing his Dec 2026 NVDA puts is interesting, but I would not take it as a reason to turn bullish immediately. It suggests even a well-known bear is becoming more selective about the timing of the downside trade while Nvidia’s fundamentals remain strong. I am more focused on Jensen Huang’s US$3–4 trillion AI infrastructure opportunity through 2030. If AI spending keeps expanding across hyperscalers, enterprises, neoclouds and sovereign AI, Nvidia has multiple ways to capture that growth. Its move toward full rack-scale systems and higher-value platforms also increases its exposure to AI capex. That said, I would still watch valuation closely. Strong demand does not mean the stock is cheap. I remain cautiously bullish and would prefer accumulating on meaningful pullbacks rat

the market is going up no matter what anyone is doing. burry doesn't matter

D for me

Fantastic

My pick: D — Expectations are already high. I’m still bullish on Nvidia’s business, but at this stage, the biggest risk isn’t whether AI demand exists—it’s whether future growth can beat what the market has already priced in. The US$3–4 trillion AI infrastructure opportunity is enormous, and Nvidia’s move from GPUs toward full AI systems, networking, robotics and cybersecurity could expand its addressable market significantly. But a great company doesn’t automatically mean a great stock at any valuation. Rising competition, supply constraints, customer concentration and eventually slowing growth could all pressure the multiple. Burry closing his puts is interesting, but I wouldn’t treat it as a buy signal. For NVDA, execution must keep outrunning expectations.

Two very different signals around $NVIDIA(NVDA)$ emerged this week. Michael Burry, known for “The Big Short,” reportedly closed his December 2026 put options on $NVIDIA(NVDA)$ and $Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$, effectively narrowing his near-term bearish exposure. That does not necessarily mean he has turned bullish on AI stocks, but it does suggest he is shrinking his short front line. At nearly the same time, $NVIDIA(NVDA)$ CEO Jensen Huang used the $Goldman Sachs(GS)$ Communacopia + Technolog

Burry has a point, but I would separate $NVDA from $PLTR. Nvidia’s valuation looks far easier to grow into. AI demand remains powerful, while NVDA trades around 24x forward earnings. That is not obviously bubble territory if earnings continue compounding strongly. Palantir is the harder call. Q2 revenue surged 93% YoY and margins expanded impressively, but PLTR still trades around 87x forward earnings and ~65x sales. At that price, excellent execution is already expected. So I agree more with Burry on PLTR than NVDA. Great company does not automatically mean great stock at any price. My pick: NVDA can grow into its valuation; PLTR needs near-perfect execution to justify its own. I would not short either aggressively, but PLTR has much less room for disappointment.

This guy is causing trouble for many people. Zero credibility

I see Burry’s move as risk management, not a change of conviction. Closing the December puts reduces time-decay risk, while his longer-dated puts and short positions show he still has concerns about AI valuations. I remain bullish on AI, PLTR and NVDA, but I understand the valuation risk. Strong growth must continue to catch up with expectations, especially at such high multiples. Personally, I will not change my holdings just because Burry moved. I prefer to follow earnings, growth and guidance, while using pullbacks to accumulate gradually. I will stay patient and let the numbers, rather than headlines, guide my decisions. Even the best investors can be early, so I prefer to make my own plan and trade it. Consistency over noise. 🐯 @

Burry closing his NVDA and PLTR puts doesn’t convince me that the AI bubble thesis is dead. It actually highlights the biggest risk in this trade: timing. The AI fundamentals are still powerful. NVDA’s data-center growth and PLTR’s extraordinary revenue and margin expansion show that this isn’t simply another story stock. But great businesses can still become bad investments when expectations move faster than earnings. That’s why I see Burry’s move as risk management rather than surrender. Short-dated puts need a catalyst, while extreme valuations need near-perfect execution. If AI spending remains strong, bears can bleed slowly through time decay. If growth eventually disappoints, however, the downside could be brutal. For me, the smarter question isn’t “Is Burry right?” It’s whether fut