# Supply-chain research workflow

Use for a theme scan or a company challenge. The purpose is to decide what deserves the user's next research effort and explain why.

## Start with the actual question

Identify the market, theme or company, research date, and requested horizon. If the user means “now,” use current disclosures; do not confuse a 3–12 month research horizon with a promise about the timing of returns. Ask for clarification only when it materially changes the research.

For a company challenge, make the thesis testable. “CPO core supplier” could mean several different things:

- sells a component used in a CPO design;
- has completed customer qualification;
- delivers it in volume;
- is a named platform supplier;
- has meaningful CPO revenue or pricing power;
- is the only qualified supplier.

Evidence supporting one claim need not support the others. Research the claims implied by the user's question and return a clear verdict on each material one.

## Map the system before selecting companies

Translate the theme into demand, the system change, and the constrained input. For example, an optical-interconnect question can lead to lasers, coupling, packaging, testing, and materials; it does not predetermine which one is scarce or investable.

Compare the relevant layers: end demand, system integration, modules, chips/devices, process and packaging, equipment, materials, and infrastructure. Split companies whose economics differ. A compute designer, an equipment vendor, and a chemical supplier can all have AI exposure without sharing the same demand cycle.

Include obvious leaders, plausible upstream suppliers, and alternative technical routes. Look for concrete constraints such as qualification lead time, yield, expansion difficulty, supplier concentration, or capacity reservations. Check whether the proposed constraint is temporary, expanding, or already easing.

Use global supply-chain evidence even when the final candidates are A-share companies. A market preference changes which securities the user studies, not where demand or competition comes from.

## Trace the company to earnings

Work through the links that matter for this company:

| Question | Evidence that can help | Interpretation to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| What does it sell? | Product disclosures, segment information, technical documentation | Treating a theme label as a precise product |
| Can it supply customers? | Qualification, production, delivery or order disclosures | Turning a patent or sample into a volume order |
| Is the business material? | Product or segment revenue, disclosed order size | Assigning all company growth to the new theme |
| Does scarcity benefit shareholders? | Pricing, margin, utilization, cash flow, capex and financing | Assuming technical importance guarantees profit |
| Is the expectation already priced in? | Dated price/market cap and comparable earnings or sales | Calling a company cheap without a valuation basis |

Read the financial notes when headline profit growth changes the conclusion. Investment income, fair-value gains, grants, share-based compensation, acquisitions, and currency effects can make earnings growth differ from operating progress. Keep reported and adjusted measures labeled, and compare like periods.

For cash flow, inventory and receivables, explain the plausible cause and what needs follow-up. A single period's divergence is a question to investigate, not an automatic fraud claim or a reason to discard the business.

When a company does not disclose customer identity or theme-specific revenue, keep that field unknown. Distinguish ecosystem partners, direct sales customers and end users. A named partnership or a supplier list must be supported by a source that actually identifies the relationship. Several articles repeating one disclosure do not provide independent confirmation.

## Seek the best competing explanation

Test the thesis with the most relevant alternative:

- customers can qualify another supplier or redesign around the component;
- supply expands or yields improve enough to ease the bottleneck;
- orders reflect stockpiling rather than durable end demand;
- an important product contributes little to this company's earnings;
- revenue grows but customer bargaining power limits margins;
- the current valuation already assumes a successful ramp.

Follow evidence that supports the company as seriously as evidence that weakens it. Do not force an unpopular conclusion or downgrade a market leader merely to appear contrarian.

## Compare and close

Present the most relevant layers first, then explain the company priorities using the evidence rules in [evidence-ladder.md](evidence-ladder.md). Keep economic importance, evidence confidence, and stock valuation distinct.

If material evidence remains unavailable after checking the relevant disclosures, report what was checked, what remains unknown, and which future disclosure could resolve it. For a company challenge, distinguish a contradicted claim from a plausible but unverified one.

End with specific next checks. “Read more reports” is too vague; “check whether the next report separates this product's revenue and whether gross margin improves as output ramps” gives the user a useful research task.