Rambus (RMBS) ☆

chips (GPU/ASIC/CPU) · Industry Index 9 (rank #151) · $84.65 (-7.00%) · mkt cap $9.1B

ⓘ Data freshness

price: as of 2026-10-30 index: as of 2026-10-30 fundamentals: latest filing 2026-04-28 Reports quarterly (10-Q XBRL)

Rambus designs memory interface chips (DDR5 RCDs, CXL controllers) and licenses memory and security IP.

Industry exposure 0.6 (Memory interface chips and IP benefit from data-center DDR5/CXL and AI-server memory demand.)

Signal

signal: as of 2026-10-13

Short (~2 weeks)

Low-confidence · Neutral

Conviction 0

News— Recent sentiment 0.30 vs 120d baseline -0.60 across 1 story.[news]
Options positioning— Delayed per-contract options — call premium 84% / put 16% (net skew 0.67), unusualness 22/100. Context: Consumer Price Index in 1 day.[options]
Price momentum— Technical downtrend across short+medium horizon(s) — vote -0.38, confidence 0.53 from 11 indicator sub-signal(s).[price] · derived internally
Structural— Industry Index 8.3 (falling -7.3 over window) — structural headwind.[index] · derived internally

Medium (~3 months)

75%

Bearish

Conviction 75

Growth trend— Revenue 8% YoY (decelerating), net margin contracting.[filing]
Price momentum— Technical downtrend across short+medium horizon(s) — vote -0.38, confidence 0.53 from 11 indicator sub-signal(s).[price] · derived internally
Smart money— 0 filer(s) accumulating, 1 trimming in 2026Q2 (value-weighted net -1.00).[holding]
Structural— Industry Index 8.3 (falling -7.3 over window) — structural headwind.[index] · derived internally

Long (~6 months)

58%

Bearish

Conviction 58

Growth trend— Revenue 8% YoY (decelerating), net margin contracting.[filing]
moat— Editorial prior (subjective, NOT backtested): narrow moat / co_leader / moderate pricing ⇒ wider/leading long-horizon tilt 0.13. Bounded, low-confidence input.[moat: Editorial moat profile — rambus — narrow moat, co_leader, moderate pricing (as of 2026-02-18)]
Structural— Industry Index 8.3 (falling -7.3 over window) — structural headwind.[index] · derived internally

Show Details

Relationship network

Loading relationship graph…

Astera Labs — competitor
Montage Technology — competitor
TSMC — supplier

Key relationships

Astera Labs — competitor · Astera Labs and Rambus compete in CXL and memory-connectivity interface silicon. source: sec.gov
Montage Technology — competitor · Montage and Rambus (with Renesas) are the three suppliers that dominate the DDR5 DIMM memory-interface/RCD chipset market. source: yolegroup.com
TSMC — supplier · Rambus is fabless and depends on foundries such as TSMC to manufacture its memory interface chips. source: sec.gov

Options positioning

delayed · aggregate: as of 2026-10-30

Call vs put volume: 1,483 calls · 454 puts — tilt +53.1% toward calls
Vol/OI turnover: 0.10×
Premium ($ notional proxy): $721561 calls · $710647 puts — tilt +0.8% toward calls
OTM tilt: +81.8% toward OTM calls
IV skew (put − call): -3.7%

Delayed, end-of-day, aggregate per contract — not a live tape or trade-level flow. Buy/sell side is INFERRED from where each contract's last print sat in the bid/ask spread, not observed order flow. The company-wide side is withheld unless quoted contracts cover at least a quarter of the day's premium, so it can be blank while individual contracts below show a side. Call/put premium is measured across the chain we capture — the 6 nearest expiries within 45 days, not the full option chain — while the table below lists at most 20 flagged contracts, so summing those rows will not reproduce the percentage.

Call/put premium?

51% C / 49% P

Side (inferred)?buy-side

Active flags

Standout

$85 PUT · 1.8× vol/OI

Recent flags

Why flagged:earnings today

Date	Contract	Score	Side (inferred)?	OI Δ?	Volume	Vol/OI
2026-10-30	$47.5 CALL	21	—	0	79	79.0×
2026-10-28	$47.5 CALL	21	—	0	79	79.0×
2026-10-27	$95 CALL	33	sell-side	+76	359	1.9×
2026-10-27	$47.5 CALL	21	—	0	79	79.0×
2026-10-26	$85 PUT	36	mid-market · no side	+3	1,022	1.8×
2026-10-26	$100 CALL	34	mid-market · no side	+5	608	1.6×
2026-10-26	$70 PUT	30	mid-market · no side	+6	1,108	3.1×
2026-10-26	$110 CALL	23	mid-market · no side	+4	805	0.9×
2026-10-26	$47.5 CALL	21	—	0	79	79.0×

11 smaller flags (under $100000 premium) hidden.

Daily options volume vs baseline

latest session: 0.9× its 13-day baseline

Call/put premium

51%

49%

51% calls / 49% puts (by premium)

See how this feeds the swarm's options vote →

Moat

moat: latest change 2026-02-18

Rambus makes the buffer and support chips on DDR5 server memory modules (registering clock drivers, multiplexed data buffers, power management ICs, SPD hubs and temperature sensors). It also licenses memory-controller and security IP to chip designers, and collects royalties on a patent portfolio licensed across the DRAM and processor industry. Chips are the growth engine. Product revenue was a record $347.8 million in 2025, up 41% from 2024 (results release, 2026-02-02, https://www.rambus.com/?p=66007), and a record $99.2 million in Q2 2026. The position rests on a market that Frost & Sullivan data show three suppliers holding, with Montage first. Rambus's claim of 'sustained leadership in DDR5 RCDs' is its own, not a tracker's.

Rating: narrow

Rambus sells into a market that an outside tracker shows held by three suppliers, and it earns well there, but nothing in the record stops the other two from competing on price. BigGo Finance (2026-07-16, https://finance.biggo.com/news/9dbf85c7-c887-4f5c-94ab-a86d984b880b), citing Frost & Sullivan, reports that 'only three companies—Montage Technology, Renesas Electronics, and Rambus—truly possess the capability to mass-produce DDR4/DDR5 memory interface chips' and that 'Based on 2024 revenue, these three manufacturers collectively hold over 93% of the market share.' The Q2 2026 results release (2026-07-27, https://www.rambus.com/second-quarter-2026-financial-results/) shows a GAAP operating margin of 35%, against 37% a year earlier. Against that, the FY2025 10-K calls the industry 'intensely competitive' with 'price erosion'. It says some license agreements require Rambus to give certain customers 'the lowest royalty rate that we provide to other customers', and that its top five customers were 'approximately 66% of our consolidated revenue' in 2025. On 2026-07-15 Seoul prosecutors raided the Korean offices of all three suppliers on suspicion that they colluded on prices (CBS NoCut News, https://en.nocutnews.co.kr/news/6548839); that is an allegation, not a finding. Narrow rather than wide, because the position is shared three ways among peers, and the 10-K warns that licenses can convert to 'fully paid-up' and that customers may adopt 'alternative technologies'.

Type: efficient scale

The protection is a small, concentrated market rather than a proprietary standard. Frost & Sullivan data reported by BigGo Finance (2026-07-16) put the global memory interface chip market at 'approximately $1.168 billion in 2024' and say only Montage, Renesas and Rambus can mass-produce DDR4/DDR5 memory interface chips, together holding 'over 93% of the market share'. CBS NoCut News (2026-07-15) calls the three 'major players that hold an oligopoly in the global MIC market' and says they supply Samsung Electronics, SK hynix and Micron. The FY2025 10-K adds an IP layer underneath: technology 'covered by 2,049 U.S. and foreign patents, with expiration dates ranging from 2026 to 2044', licensed to companies including Samsung, SK hynix, Micron, NVIDIA and Qualcomm.

Leadership: co leader

Frost & Sullivan data reported by BigGo Finance (2026-07-16) rank Montage 'first globally with a 36.8% share, followed by Renesas Electronics and Rambus' on 2024 memory interface chip revenue, with the three holding 'over 93%'. Rambus's 2026-02-02 results release claims 'sustained leadership in DDR5 RCDs', a narrower product than the whole chip market, and no third-party tracker consulted confirms it. Rambus is one of three suppliers that hold the market between them, and Montage leads on the only independent ranking found, so the band is co-leader, not leader.

Pricing power: moderate

The Q2 2026 release (2026-07-27) reports product revenue of $99.2 million against cost of product revenue of $39.6 million, and a GAAP operating margin of 35% (37% in Q2 2025). The FY2025 10-K limits the case for more. It lists 'price erosion' among the industry's traits, and says clauses giving some licensees 'the lowest royalty rate that we provide to other customers' 'may limit our ability to effectively price differently among our customers, to respond quickly to market forces or otherwise to compete on the basis of price.'

Curated moat judgment grounded in the cited source. source: sec.gov

Compare with…

Value-chain position

Layer: chips (GPU/ASIC/CPU)

Upstream (suppliers): TSMC
Downstream (customers): —
Competitors: Astera Labs, Montage Technology

Layer-4 memory-subsystem supplier: it sells buffer and power chips for DDR5 modules to module makers, OEMs and hyperscalers, and licenses controller IP used in AI accelerators.

Derived from this company's mapped supply-chain edges and its industry layer.

Signal contribution editorial prior

The moat prior voted +0.13 on the long (~6-month) horizon at weight 0.20 — the swarm call there is bearish (score -0.42, conviction 58).

Editorial prior — subjective, not backtested. It is bounded (±0.6), low-confidence, and never votes on short/medium. See exactly how it voted →

Product lineup

Products & services with an editorial market-share band and technical barrier band — qualitative judgments tied to a cited basis, never invented figures.

Product	Market share	Technical barrier
DDR5 memory interface chips (RCD, MRCD, MDB and module chipset) · Memory interface chips Registering clock drivers, multiplexed data buffers, PMICs, SPD hubs and temperature sensors for DDR5 RDIMM/MRDIMM server modules, plus a client chipset.	Top 3 Frost & Sullivan data reported by BigGo Finance (2026-07-16): on 2024 revenue Montage, Renesas and Rambus 'collectively hold over 93% of the market share', Montage first at 36.8%, 'followed by Renesas Electronics and Rambus'. The FY2025 10-K also names Monolithic Power Systems and Texas Instruments among its competitors in this market. Rambus's own claim of DDR5 RCD leadership is not independently confirmed.	Deep Per the same Frost & Sullivan data, only these three companies 'truly possess the capability to mass-produce DDR4/DDR5 memory interface chips'. The barrier protects all three of them, not Rambus alone.
Patent licenses · Patent licensing Licenses to a portfolio covering memory architecture, high-speed serial links and security, on fixed, variable or hybrid royalties over terms of up to ten years.	Unknown The FY2025 10-K lists licensees including AMD, Broadcom, Micron, Nanya, NVIDIA, Qualcomm, Samsung, SK hynix and Winbond, but states no share.	Moderate The technology is 'covered by 2,049 U.S. and foreign patents, with expiration dates ranging from 2026 to 2044' (FY2025 10-K). The same filing warns that some licenses 'may convert from royalty generating to fully paid-up licenses', and that customers may adopt 'alternative technologies' perceived to require 'no or lower fees'.
Silicon IP (HBM, GDDR, PCIe and CXL controllers; security IP) · Semiconductor design IP Memory and chip-to-chip digital controller cores and hardware security IP licensed to chip makers for custom silicon, ASSPs and FPGAs.	Niche SemiWiki's IPnest-based review of the interface IP market (Kalar Rajendiran, 2026-07-09) says 'Synopsys remains the undisputed leader with a 57% market share' and Cadence is 'the primary challenger' at 17%. It says 'specialized players like Credo and Rambus continue to carve out niches in high-speed SerDes and security IP'.	Moderate The FY2025 10-K says Rambus competes with 'the in-house design teams at our potential customers' and with third-party suppliers 'such as Cadence and Synopsys', and that 'Many of our competitors are larger'.

What you're looking at

These charts plot Rambus's reported income statement, cash flow, and balance sheet from its SEC filings through 2026-04-28. Every figure is as-filed XBRL — none of it is an estimate.

Over the reported window, net income at $230.5M in FY2025.

Analyst consensus — third-party estimates from Yahoo Finance, as of 2026-10-26. Not SEC filings and not a TradingPilot forecast. source: finance.yahoo.com

Period	EPS (est.)	Revenue (est.)	YoY
Q/E Sep 2026	USD 0.79 (USD 0.78–USD 0.79) · 6	USD 213000000.00 (USD 213000000.00–USD 213000000.00) · 6	+19%
FY 2026	USD 3.04 (USD 3.00–USD 3.08) · 8	USD 828272120.00 (USD 821700000.00–USD 843930000.00) · 8	+17%

Each figure shows the consensus mean, its (low–high) range where available, and · the number of analysts behind that estimate.

Next report ~2026-10-26.

Our model leans Bearish on the stock over the medium horizon — a market-direction call, not an earnings forecast. See the Signal tab.

Income statement

Cash flow & liquidity

Balance sheet

Filings

2025Q4 · filed 2026-04-28 source: sec.gov
2026Q1 · filed 2026-04-28 source: sec.gov
2025Q1 · filed 2026-04-28 source: sec.gov
2025Q2 · filed 2026-04-28 source: sec.gov
FY2024 · filed 2026-02-18 source: sec.gov

Show 205 older filings

FY2025 · filed 2026-02-18 source: sec.gov
FY2023 · filed 2026-02-18 source: sec.gov
2024Q4 · filed 2025-10-28 source: sec.gov
2025Q3 · filed 2025-10-28 source: sec.gov
2024Q3 · filed 2025-10-28 source: sec.gov
2025Q2 · filed 2025-07-29 source: sec.gov
2024Q2 · filed 2025-07-29 source: sec.gov
2025Q1 · filed 2025-04-29 source: sec.gov
2024Q1 · filed 2025-04-29 source: sec.gov
FY2023 · filed 2025-02-24 source: sec.gov
FY2022 · filed 2025-02-24 source: sec.gov
2023Q4 · filed 2024-10-30 source: sec.gov
2024Q3 · filed 2024-10-30 source: sec.gov
2023Q3 · filed 2024-10-30 source: sec.gov
2024Q2 · filed 2024-07-31 source: sec.gov
2023Q2 · filed 2024-07-31 source: sec.gov
2024Q1 · filed 2024-05-02 source: sec.gov
2023Q1 · filed 2024-05-02 source: sec.gov
FY2022 · filed 2024-02-23 source: sec.gov
FY2021 · filed 2024-02-23 source: sec.gov
2022Q4 · filed 2023-11-03 source: sec.gov
2023Q3 · filed 2023-11-03 source: sec.gov
2022Q3 · filed 2023-11-03 source: sec.gov
2023Q2 · filed 2023-08-04 source: sec.gov
2022Q2 · filed 2023-08-04 source: sec.gov
2023Q1 · filed 2023-05-05 source: sec.gov
2022Q1 · filed 2023-05-05 source: sec.gov
FY2020 · filed 2023-02-24 source: sec.gov
FY2021 · filed 2023-02-24 source: sec.gov
2021Q4 · filed 2022-11-04 source: sec.gov
2022Q3 · filed 2022-11-04 source: sec.gov
2021Q3 · filed 2022-11-04 source: sec.gov
2022Q2 · filed 2022-08-05 source: sec.gov
2021Q2 · filed 2022-08-05 source: sec.gov
2022Q1 · filed 2022-05-06 source: sec.gov
2021Q1 · filed 2022-05-06 source: sec.gov
FY2019 · filed 2022-02-28 source: sec.gov
FY2020 · filed 2022-02-28 source: sec.gov
2020Q4 · filed 2021-11-05 source: sec.gov
2021Q3 · filed 2021-11-05 source: sec.gov
2020Q3 · filed 2021-11-05 source: sec.gov
2021Q2 · filed 2021-08-06 source: sec.gov
2020Q2 · filed 2021-08-06 source: sec.gov
2021Q1 · filed 2021-05-07 source: sec.gov
2020Q1 · filed 2021-05-07 source: sec.gov
FY2019 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
2019Q1 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
2019Q2 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
2019Q3 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
2019Q4 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
2020Q4 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
FY2018 · filed 2021-03-29 source: sec.gov
2019Q4 · filed 2020-11-06 source: sec.gov
2020Q3 · filed 2020-11-06 source: sec.gov
2020Q2 · filed 2020-08-07 source: sec.gov
2019Q2 · filed 2020-08-07 source: sec.gov
2020Q1 · filed 2020-05-08 source: sec.gov
2019Q1 · filed 2020-05-08 source: sec.gov
FY2018 · filed 2020-02-26 source: sec.gov
2018Q1 · filed 2020-02-26 source: sec.gov
2018Q2 · filed 2020-02-26 source: sec.gov
2018Q3 · filed 2020-02-26 source: sec.gov
2018Q4 · filed 2020-02-26 source: sec.gov
FY2017 · filed 2020-02-26 source: sec.gov
2018Q4 · filed 2019-11-08 source: sec.gov
2019Q3 · filed 2019-11-08 source: sec.gov
2019Q2 · filed 2019-08-02 source: sec.gov
2018Q2 · filed 2019-08-02 source: sec.gov
2018Q3 · filed 2019-08-02 source: sec.gov
2019Q1 · filed 2019-05-03 source: sec.gov
2018Q1 · filed 2019-05-03 source: sec.gov
FY2015 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
FY2016 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
FY2017 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
2017Q1 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
2017Q2 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
2017Q3 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
2017Q4 · filed 2019-02-22 source: sec.gov
2016Q4 · filed 2018-11-02 source: sec.gov
2017Q3 · filed 2018-11-02 source: sec.gov
2017Q4 · filed 2018-11-02 source: sec.gov
2018Q3 · filed 2018-11-02 source: sec.gov
2017Q2 · filed 2018-08-03 source: sec.gov
2018Q2 · filed 2018-08-03 source: sec.gov
2017Q1 · filed 2018-05-10 source: sec.gov
2018Q1 · filed 2018-05-10 source: sec.gov
FY2014 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2016Q1 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2016Q2 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2016Q3 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2016Q4 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
FY2015 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2017Q3 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2017Q4 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
FY2016 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
FY2017 · filed 2018-02-23 source: sec.gov
2015Q4 · filed 2017-10-27 source: sec.gov
2016Q3 · filed 2017-10-27 source: sec.gov
2016Q4 · filed 2017-10-27 source: sec.gov
2017Q3 · filed 2017-10-27 source: sec.gov
2016Q2 · filed 2017-07-28 source: sec.gov
2017Q2 · filed 2017-07-28 source: sec.gov
2016Q1 · filed 2017-04-28 source: sec.gov
2017Q1 · filed 2017-04-28 source: sec.gov
FY2013 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
2015Q1 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
2015Q2 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
2015Q3 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
2015Q4 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
FY2014 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
FY2015 · filed 2017-02-17 source: sec.gov
2014Q4 · filed 2016-10-28 source: sec.gov
2015Q3 · filed 2016-10-28 source: sec.gov
2015Q4 · filed 2016-10-28 source: sec.gov
2016Q3 · filed 2016-10-28 source: sec.gov
2015Q2 · filed 2016-07-22 source: sec.gov
2016Q2 · filed 2016-07-22 source: sec.gov
2015Q1 · filed 2016-04-22 source: sec.gov
2016Q1 · filed 2016-04-22 source: sec.gov
FY2012 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
2014Q1 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
2014Q2 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
2014Q3 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
2014Q4 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
FY2013 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
FY2014 · filed 2016-02-19 source: sec.gov
2013Q4 · filed 2015-10-23 source: sec.gov
2014Q3 · filed 2015-10-23 source: sec.gov
2014Q4 · filed 2015-10-23 source: sec.gov
2015Q3 · filed 2015-10-23 source: sec.gov
2014Q2 · filed 2015-07-23 source: sec.gov
2015Q2 · filed 2015-07-23 source: sec.gov
2014Q1 · filed 2015-04-24 source: sec.gov
2015Q1 · filed 2015-04-24 source: sec.gov
FY2011 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
2013Q1 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
2013Q2 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
2013Q3 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
2013Q4 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
FY2012 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
FY2013 · filed 2015-02-20 source: sec.gov
2012Q4 · filed 2014-10-24 source: sec.gov
2013Q3 · filed 2014-10-24 source: sec.gov
2013Q4 · filed 2014-10-24 source: sec.gov
2014Q3 · filed 2014-10-24 source: sec.gov
2013Q2 · filed 2014-07-25 source: sec.gov
2014Q2 · filed 2014-07-25 source: sec.gov
2013Q1 · filed 2014-04-25 source: sec.gov
2014Q1 · filed 2014-04-25 source: sec.gov
FY2010 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
FY2011 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
2012Q1 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
2012Q2 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
2012Q3 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
2012Q4 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
FY2012 · filed 2014-02-21 source: sec.gov
2011Q4 · filed 2013-10-25 source: sec.gov
2012Q3 · filed 2013-10-25 source: sec.gov
2012Q4 · filed 2013-10-25 source: sec.gov
2013Q3 · filed 2013-10-25 source: sec.gov
2012Q2 · filed 2013-07-29 source: sec.gov
2013Q2 · filed 2013-07-29 source: sec.gov
2012Q1 · filed 2013-04-26 source: sec.gov
2013Q1 · filed 2013-04-26 source: sec.gov
FY2009 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
2011Q1 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
2011Q2 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
2011Q3 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
2011Q4 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
FY2010 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
FY2011 · filed 2013-02-22 source: sec.gov
2010Q4 · filed 2012-10-29 source: sec.gov
2011Q3 · filed 2012-10-29 source: sec.gov
2011Q4 · filed 2012-10-29 source: sec.gov
2012Q3 · filed 2012-10-29 source: sec.gov
2011Q2 · filed 2012-07-30 source: sec.gov
2012Q2 · filed 2012-07-30 source: sec.gov
2011Q1 · filed 2012-04-30 source: sec.gov
2012Q1 · filed 2012-04-30 source: sec.gov
FY2008 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
2010Q1 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
2010Q2 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
2010Q3 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
2010Q4 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
FY2009 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
FY2010 · filed 2012-02-24 source: sec.gov
2009Q4 · filed 2011-10-31 source: sec.gov
2010Q3 · filed 2011-10-31 source: sec.gov
2010Q4 · filed 2011-10-31 source: sec.gov
2011Q3 · filed 2011-10-31 source: sec.gov
2010Q2 · filed 2011-08-05 source: sec.gov
2011Q2 · filed 2011-08-05 source: sec.gov
2010Q3 · filed 2011-08-05 source: sec.gov
2010Q1 · filed 2011-04-29 source: sec.gov
2011Q1 · filed 2011-04-29 source: sec.gov
FY2007 · filed 2011-02-25 source: sec.gov
FY2008 · filed 2011-02-25 source: sec.gov
FY2009 · filed 2011-02-25 source: sec.gov
FY2010 · filed 2011-02-25 source: sec.gov
2008Q4 · filed 2010-10-29 source: sec.gov
2009Q3 · filed 2010-10-29 source: sec.gov
2010Q3 · filed 2010-10-29 source: sec.gov
2009Q4 · filed 2010-10-29 source: sec.gov
2009Q2 · filed 2010-07-30 source: sec.gov
2010Q2 · filed 2010-07-30 source: sec.gov

Key ratios vs peers

Comparing against peers…

Institutional holders (13F, 2026Q2)

1 tracked guru holds Rambus: 0 accumulating, 1 trimming — net position-size tilt -1.00. Passive index filers are excluded.

Institution	Shares	Value	Δ shares QoQ	% of 13F	% shares out
BlackRock Passive / index	13,964,477	$1.9B	-2,340,829	0.0%	13.04%
FMR (Fidelity) Passive / index	10,460,026	$1.4B	7,141,577	0.1%	9.77%
State Street Passive / index	3,915,113	$519.5M	-458,504	0.0%	3.66%
Bridgewater Associates (Ray Dalio (founder)) Guru	3,871	$513837	-47,983	0.0%	0.00%

TradingPilot-computed columns (% of 13F, % shares out) are derived from as-filed 13F values; only name, shares and value are as-filed.

What a 13F can’t show you

Delayed 45+ days. Positions are as-of the quarter-end shown, filed up to 45 days later.
Long-only, US-listed. No shorts, cash, bonds, FX, foreign, or private holdings; listed options are reported at notional and excluded from per-position equity value.
$100M threshold. Smaller managers never file.
“% of 13F” is not “% of AUM”. A 13F is a partial book.
“Sold out” means “no longer reported” — not necessarily sold.
One CIK can aggregate multiple sub-entities. Confidential treatment can omit positions.
Passive index filers are not gurus. Their 13F changes are index flows, and they are excluded from TradingPilot’s smart-money signal.
Quant caveat. A quant filer’s 13F (e.g. Renaissance) is a long-only quarter-end snapshot and does NOT reflect its actual high-turnover, short-horizon strategy.
Guru pages and holdings never feed a signal (weightless).

Impact = company-prominence tier (High/Medium auto-assigned by graph centrality/size; Low only on curated minor events), not a magnitude forecast.

Upcoming

Date	Type	Event	Impact
2027-01-25	earnings	Rambus earnings (estimated) — Date not yet announced — estimated from EDGAR filing cadence (last periodic filing + 91/365 days); confirm via IR. estimated	Medium

Past

Date	Event	Impact	Outcome
2026-10-26	Rambus earnings confirmed	Medium	EPS beat · -1.6%
2026-07-27	Rambus earnings confirmed	Medium	EPS beat · -9.0%
2026-04-27	Rambus earnings confirmed	Medium	EPS miss · -21.3%

See the full calendar →