In certain sector-specific bubbles driven by excessive speculation, a pattern has emerged from historical analysis:
Companies building speculative infrastructure tend to fail first, equipment providers (suppliers) fail second, and narrative leaders (the core story) fail last.
This framework is based on TWO historical examples:
Important Limitations: This pattern did NOT appear in 2022 (macro-driven), 2020 (COVID), 1987 (Black Monday), or other crashes. This is EXPERIMENTAL with limited data (n=2). May not predict future outcomes.
Who: Companies building speculative infrastructure
Why they often fail first: High debt, concentrated customers, no moat. When demand softens, they collapse quickly.
Signal: Composite of infrastructure stocks declining from peaks
Why Composite Approach:
We track FOUR components (CRWV 30%, DLR 25%, EQIX 25%, GLW 20%) instead of just CoreWeave to reduce single-stock risk, smooth IPO volatility, and provide broader confirmation.
Who: Companies selling picks and shovels
Why they often fail second: When Tier 1 stops buying, their revenue disappears.
Signal: Sustained underperformance vs broad market (4-week relative to SPY)
Why 4-week measurement: Balances responsiveness vs noise. Requires 4 consecutive weeks at -10% to confirm sustained weakness.
Who: Companies at center of bubble story
Why they often fail last: They ARE the bubble narrative. When they break, the story itself is dead.
Signal: Sustained underperformance vs market (equal-weight composite)
Why equal-weight: Prevents NVDA/AAPL from dominating. All 7 equally important to AI narrative.
Infrastructure (Feb-Mar 2000) → Equipment/Cisco (Apr 2000) → Narrative/MSFT (Sep 2000)
Result: 6-12 month warning window. Signal triggered at SPY -11%, avoided additional -37% decline.
Drawback: 3-5 false positives during 1998-1999 melt-up.
Mortgage originators (Early 2007) → Banks (May 2007, 5 months before SPY) → Financial sector
Result: Exceptional early warning. Signal at SPY -7%, avoided -51% decline. ZERO false positives.
No cascade observed. All sectors fell together.
Why: Macro-driven (Fed rate hikes), not sector-specific bubble. System not designed for this.
Lesson: Framework has clear boundaries. Works for sector bubbles, NOT macro corrections.
The tier system has worked for SECTOR-SPECIFIC bubbles (2000 tech, 2008 housing finance).
It has NOT worked for MACRO-DRIVEN corrections (2022, 2020).
The 2025 AI situation appears sector-specific, suggesting framework may apply. However, with only 2 confirmed examples, confidence should be limited.
This is ONE framework among many. Use multiple sources. Maintain diversification. Understand this is experimental with limited validation.