Memory allocation is becoming a key topic, and we will likely continue to see many different combinations and architectures emerge. From an investment perspective, that may actually make this a period that requires extra caution. Even with a player as dominant as NVIDIA, smaller companies with more unconventional architectures may continue to prove highly effective for certain applications. Still, a technology win does not necessarily translate into an economic win. It is still unclear whether today’s divergence is simply a path toward convergence around one dominant architecture, or the beginning of a more fragmented market shaped by different workloads. But for memory makers, the implication seems relatively clear. Rather than going all-in on HBM, it may be safer to maintain a broad lineup and optionality across HBM, DDR, LPDDR, NAND, CXL, and other parts of the memory hierarchy. At this stage, the key may be less about picking the final winner and more about identifying who has the most options as the architecture continues to evolve.