Does Palantir have a Durable Growth Moat? Making sense of the valuation of an AI champion through AGI lenses

Palantir is a poster child of an AI stock champion, but its valuation merits scrutiny. With $2.6 billion in revenues based on the last twelve months (LTM) as of September 2024, and an enterprise value (EV) of $152 billion, Palantir’s EV/sales multiple is approximately 57. This valuation is extremely high compared to its revenue and is twice as much as other SaaS champions like Samsara, Crowdstrike, CloudFlare, or ServiceNow, the only four companies still trading above 20X EV/LTM sales.

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Subscribe to my newsletter for insights into the impact of GenAI and other disruptive technologies on business models.

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Given the challenging growth conditions and AI disruption in recent years, it’s important to understand what underpins this massive valuation and to what extent it rests on the company’s fundamentals versus its AI story. To analyze this, I applied our proprietary Advanced Growth Intelligence (AGI) methodology to test the company’s Durable Growth Moat. This preliminary assessment, based solely on publicly available information, may change with additional disclosures but provides a strong sense of the weight of the AI narrative in a SaaS company’s valuation today.

Our AGI framework analysis reveals that Palantir has significant moats and emerging network effects. However, its current trading multiple implies an expectation of flawless execution. The comprehensive assessment yields an AGI score of 4.15/5 (post consideration of AI impact), supporting a revenue multiple range of 20–30x. This range is based on a 10–15x base multiple for the company’s core business and an additional 10–15x for the optionality provided by its AI platform. In contrast, based on LTM revenue as of September 2024, Palantir’s current revenue multiple is 57x (as of 11/29). This gap suggests a material downside risk to the stock, even while acknowledging the substantial value of the company’s AI optionality.

Below is a detailed AGI analysis of Palantir:

1. Revenue Quality (3.5/5 initial — 4/5 post genAI)

Palantir’s revenue quality is first based on its compelling 82% software mix, materially below MongoDB’s 97% and Snowflake’s 95% as of FY24. While multi-year contracts exist, the lack of quantification and the presence of termination clauses introduce uncertainty.

Our view on the “technological nature” of Palantir’s revenue is incomplete. The 81% gross margin validates the software model. However, the absence of gross retention metrics creates a material gap in assessing revenue durability, particularly as peers provide detailed cohort analytics that support their valuations (often on a Net Revenue Retention basis though).

Customer concentration metrics reveal that 45% of Palantir’s revenue comes from its top 20 clients. This initially appears high compared to Datadog’s <10% concentration. However, the composition of this concentration — heavily weighted toward government relationships — provides more stability than typical enterprise concentration. The 51% year-over-year growth in commercial customers demonstrates the successful leverage of government credentials into enterprise expansion, a unique go-to-market advantage that validates the company’s expansion strategy.

Palantir’s government relationships create a unique and powerful moat that enhances revenue durability. Security clearances and deep integration within defense and intelligence infrastructure establish barriers to entry that strengthen with rising geopolitical tensions. This government foundation provides stability and a development environment for AI capabilities that commercial peers cannot easily replicate. It allows Palantir to refine its offerings in a high-stakes, high-security context before bringing them to the commercial market, a significant competitive advantage.

Quality of Revenue Score: 3.5/5

• Strengths: Strong software mix, robust commercial traction, government focus providing a foundation for AI capabilities.
• Concerns: Lack of clarity on gross retention metrics, and risk of customer concentration.
• Rationale: Above-average business fundamentals but room for improvement in key metrics

Adjusted Score: 4/5

Why Adjusted: The government relationships and the unique AI development environment they provide significantly enhance Palantir’s revenue quality and durability in the context of the generative AI revolution. The company’s ability to leverage its government-tested AI capabilities into the commercial market gives it a substantial advantage over peers, warranting an upward adjustment to the revenue quality score.

2. Quality of Growth (4/5 initial — 4.5/5 post genAI)

Palantir’s growth trajectory reveals a complex story of robust new logo acquisition but concerning gaps in expansion metrics. The core LTM 25% growth rate appears to rank among the highest compared to peers, though some perform better. Samsara is an exception with 40% LTM growth, while few enjoy LTM growth rates above 30%. ServiceTitan, which just filed its S-1, is growing at a similar 31% LTM rate, and Klaviyo enjoyed a 35% LTM growth rate reflected in its high valuation.

Palantir reported significant commercial momentum with customers growing 51% YoY, reaching over 498 in customer count as of Sep 2024. Their reported new contract wins show promising scale, with total contract values frequently exceeding $100M, including recent wins such as a $178M Department of Defense contract and a $115M Department of Energy engagement.

The company reports a net revenue retention rate (NRR) of 118% in their latest quarter, slightly below best-in-class peers like Snowflake at 127% as of July 2024, but clearly among the best. Few companies can boast of an NRR above 110% today. Despite their enterprise focus and high-touch model, this retention rate demonstrates room for improvement. The lack of disclosure around gross retention or cohort behavior makes it difficult to determine true NRR dynamics, notably how expansion balances potential churn and contraction.

Network effects in Palantir’s model manifest in three distinct ways, though quantification remains challenging:

1. Data network effects emerge from cross-customer learning, where each customer’s usage improves the underlying models.
2. Product network effects develop through their AIP platform, where models developed for one customer can be repurposed for others.
3. Implementation network effects accumulate as each complex deployment enhances Palantir’s ability to serve similar use cases.

The efficiency of customer acquisition stands out as superior. Achieving 30% growth with only 29% S&M spend (1.07x efficiency) leads all peers and suggests a strong product-market fit. For comparison, Snowflake requires 47% S&M spend (LTM as of Jul 2024) for its 30% growth (0.64x efficiency), while MongoDB’s 46% S&M investment yields 35% growth (0.76x efficiency).

The early traction of Palantir’s AIP suggests an acceleration of these network effects, with the company reporting “hundreds of deployments,” though lacking specific success metrics or revenue contribution data. While metrics remain limited, the potential for model reuse and cross-customer learning could drive a feedback loop similar to Snowflake’s data exchange but with potentially higher barriers to replication. This has the opportunity to unlock new avenues for growth.

Quality of Growth Score: 4/5

• Strengths: Strong new logo acquisition, leading sales efficiency, emerging network effects.
• Concerns: Gaps in expansion metrics disclosure.
• Rationale: Robust growth fundamentals with potential for AI-driven acceleration, but more transparency is needed.

Adjusted Score: 4.5/5
Why Adjusted: The early traction of Palantir’s AI platform and the potential for AI-driven network effects suggest a substantial growth opportunity in the generative AI era. The company’s unique positioning at the intersection of government and commercial AI applications could drive outsized growth as the technology matures, including use cases in other verticals, warranting an upward adjustment to the growth quality score.

3. Quality of Margins (3/5 initial — 4/5 post genAI)

The margin profile presents clear opportunities for improvement. The 81% gross margin demonstrates strong software economics, but the $1.95B AWS commitment, representing approximately 8% of revenue annually, should be factored into the analysis. The latter should be viewed in the context of the company’s AI platform ambitions and the infrastructure investment necessary to support AI capabilities.

It’s important to note that the AWS commitment is a long-term investment in Palantir’s AI capabilities and should be evaluated in that context. However, from a near-term financial perspective, the commitment does introduce some risks — notably scalability and opportunity cost — and uncertainties that could impact gross margins. As such, investors should monitor how Palantir manages and optimizes its cloud infrastructure within the constraints of the AWS commitment.

Operational spending raises questions about efficiency and investment adequacy. R&D investment at 17% appears very light compared to Datadog’s 43% (LTM as of Sep 2024) and Snowflake’s 48% (LTM as of Jul 2024), particularly concerning given the intensive AI investment requirements in the current competitive landscape. Within the 10X club, only Palantir and Shopify have R&D representing less than 20% of LTM sales. This appears even more surprising given how advanced the Company claims to be on the generative AI front.

Part of the explanation can be found in how Palantir leverages existing technology. Its Foundry, Gotham, and Apollo platforms were developed over many years. Together, they provide a robust infrastructure for deploying and integrating new AI capabilities. Instead of creating new products, Palantir likely integrates generative AI capabilities into existing systems (e.g., AIP platform), thus reducing the need for R&D spending. Additionally, Palantir’s platforms are designed to serve multiple industries and use cases, enabling economies of scale. Still, a gap remains, and we view R&D as non-normative, given growth projections.

The 20% G&A expense materially exceeds that of best-in-class companies (i.e., below 10%), suggesting a significant operational efficiency opportunity. A G&A spend of that level may result from the high share of government contracts, requiring substantial administrative support.

Quality of Margins Score: 3/5

• Strengths: Strong gross margins, leveraging existing technology for AI integration
• Concerns: High AWS commitment, low R&D investment, high G&A expense
• Rationale: While gross margins are robust, operational spending raises efficiency concerns and questions about adequate AI investment

Adjusted Score: 4/5

Why Adjusted: Despite the concerns about R&D investment, Palantir’s ability to integrate generative AI capabilities into its existing, proven platforms suggests a more efficient path to AI value capture than peers. The company’s experience serving government and commercial clients with complex AI solutions could enable it to achieve strong margins even with lower R&D spending. However, the high G&A expense remains a challenge, tempering the upward adjustment to the margins quality score.

4. Balance Sheet Strength (4/5 initial — 4/5 post genAI)

The balance sheet demonstrates fundamental strength while carrying out strategic commitments. The $3.6B cash position ($4.6B as of Sep 2024) and absence of debt provide significant strategic flexibility for continued investment and expansion. However, the $1.95B AWS commitment represents a material future obligation that requires careful consideration. This commitment should be viewed in the context of peers’ cloud obligations — even Snowflake, a company with a strong financial profile, maintains significant cloud provider commitments.

The key difference lies in diversification. While Datadog successfully maintains multi-cloud flexibility, Palantir’s AWS concentration creates both opportunities and risks for optimization. On one hand, the AWS commitment ensures Palantir has access to the necessary infrastructure to support its AI ambitions and enables the company to build deep expertise and efficiencies within the AWS ecosystem. This could lead to better performance, tighter integration, and faster time-to-market for new AI solutions.

On the other hand, the concentration with AWS exposes Palantir to vendor lock-in risks and potential pricing pressure. If AWS were to change its pricing structure or if a competing cloud provider were to offer significantly better terms, Palantir might find itself at a disadvantage. Additionally, the AWS concentration could limit Palantir’s ability to adapt to evolving customer preferences, particularly if certain customers have strong preferences for other cloud providers.

To mitigate these risks, Palantir could explore ways to build more flexibility into its AWS commitment, such as negotiating the ability to shift some workloads to other cloud providers or securing more favorable pricing terms in exchange for the large commitment. The company could also invest in cloud-agnostic technologies and architectures to make it easier to port its AI solutions to other platforms if needed.

Overall, while the AWS commitment does introduce some concentration risk, it also reflects Palantir’s strong partnership with a leading cloud provider and its confidence in the AWS platform as a foundation for its AI strategy. As long as Palantir manages this commitment proactively and maintains financial discipline, the benefits of the AWS relationship likely outweigh the risks.

Balance Sheet Score: 4/5

• Strengths: Strong cash position, no debt, strategic flexibility for investment and expansion
• Concerns: Material future obligation with AWS commitment, concentration risk with a single cloud provider
• Rationale: Solid financial foundation but need to manage cloud commitment and diversification proactively

Adjusted Score: 4/5

Why Adjusted: The AWS commitment, while introducing concentration risk, also reflects Palantir’s strong positioning to capitalize on the generative AI opportunity. The company’s deep partnership with AWS and the scale of the commitment suggest Palantir is well-equipped to deliver powerful AI solutions and drive value creation in the AI era. However, the lack of diversification tempers the upward adjustment, resulting in an unchanged score post-genAI impact.

The scoring section provides a balanced assessment of Palantir’s balance sheet, considering both the strengths of its financial position and the risks associated with its AWS commitment. The 4/5 score reflects the company’s solid foundation, while the adjusted score acknowledges the potential benefits and drawbacks of the AWS concentration in the context of the generative AI landscape.

*

Based on our AGI framework analysis, Palantir initially scores a composite 3.55 out of 5. This score reflects the company’s strong fundamentals, unique government relationships, and emerging AI platform potential. However, it also takes into account some of the challenges and uncertainties facing Palantir, such as:

1. The need for greater transparency in key metrics like gross retention and cohort behavior.
2. Questions around the adequacy of R&D investment given the competitive intensity in AI.
3. The concentration risk associated with the large AWS commitment.
4. The operational efficiency concerns are highlighted by the high G&A expenses.

After adjusting for the generative AI impact, the composite score is revised up to 4.15 out of 5. This upward adjustment acknowledges the significant opportunities Palantir has to capitalize on the generative AI wave, including:

1. The potential for its government relationships to drive premium value in an AI arms race
2. The possibility of powerful network effects emerging from its Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP)
3. The strong product-market fit suggested by its industry-leading sales efficiency ratio

The adjusted score suggests that Palantir’s unique positioning and AI platform potential could justify a premium valuation in the context of the generative AI revolution.

Implied Valuation vs. AGI Assessment

The current 57x revenue multiple implies a level of perfection that our AGI framework suggests is not yet evident in Palantir’s operating metrics. However, the market appears to be pricing in several factors that warrant careful consideration.

First, the government relationship moat likely carries premium value in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment. The classified nature of many deployments suggests our visibility into this value may be limited, and the market may be pricing in option value from potential AI arms race acceleration and international government expansion.

Second, the network effect potential from Palantir’s Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP) may be more powerful than current metrics indicate. Similar to early assessments of Snowflake’s data exchange network, the true value of cross-industry AI deployment may only become visible at scale. Palantir’s unique position spanning classified and commercial implementations could create data advantages that compound more rapidly than traditional SaaS platforms.

The sales efficiency ratio of 1.07x, leading all peers, might be signaling a stronger product-market fit than immediately apparent. This efficiency, combined with high Annual Contract Values (ACVs), suggests pricing power and value proposition clarity that could accelerate as AI capabilities expand.

However, even acknowledging these factors, the current multiple appears difficult to justify based on Palantir’s current operating metrics and execution risk. To fully capitalize on the generative AI opportunity and grow into its premium valuation, Palantir would need to demonstrate:

1. Acceleration of commercial growth
2. Improvement in retention metrics
3. Successful AI deployment at scale
4. Enhanced operational efficiency
5. Validation of network effects

Conclusion

Our AGI analysis reveals substantial fundamental moats at Palantir, highlighted by unique government relationships, emerging network effects, and AI platform potential. The combination of these factors creates substantial option value that justifies a premium to pure software peers. However, even generously valuing these factors suggests a 20–30x multiple range is appropriate.

The path to justifying the current multiple would require:

• Acceleration of commercial growth above 40%
• Clear retention metrics exceeding peer levels
• Demonstrated AI deployment success
• Operational efficiency improvements
• Network effect validation

Until these metrics materialize and are actually implemented, the risk/reward appears negatively skewed at current levels. However, the presence of substantial hidden value suggests careful position management and openness to rapid reassessment as new data emerges.