I keep a monthly ranking of companies where I think there is an interesting gap between business quality and current market pricing over roughly 3–5 years.
My August top 10 was:
1. Intuit
2. RELX
3. Adobe
4. Meta
5. Constellation Software
6. Experian
7. NVIDIA
8. Autodesk
9. Tencent
10. Microsoft
I wanted to apply a different lens to the same list: **where could China’s technological progress actually become material to the thesis?**
I don’t use this to mechanically change the valuation ranking. They are two different questions.
|Company|China technology exposure|
|:-|:-|
|NVIDIA|High|
|Tencent|High|
|Adobe|Medium|
|Meta|Medium|
|Microsoft|Medium|
I leave **Intuit, RELX, Constellation Software, Experian and Autodesk** below the materiality threshold.
That doesn’t mean China has zero relevance to them. It just means I don’t currently think Chinese technological progress is important enough to the thesis to classify it as a material exposure.
**NVIDIA and Tencent** stand out most to me. If Chinese competitors keep closing the technology gap, both theses could look quite different.
**Adobe, Meta and Microsoft** are less direct.
The other five fall below my materiality threshold for now.
I keep this separate from the valuation ranking because I don’t think **cheap** and **strategically exposed to China** should be collapsed into one score.
Curious where people disagree — especially Autodesk being below the threshold and Adobe/Meta/Microsoft only being Medium.
I update the valuation-dislocation framework monthly. I put the full version of this China overlay, including the visuals, here:
[**A China Lens on My August Valuation Dislocations**](https://michaelhillaert1.substack.com/p/a-china-lens-on-my-august-valuation?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
