Controlled Dominance Test: Batteries vs Semiconductors
Mandatory head-to-head scorecard
Scoring: 0–5 where 5 is strongest.
| Criterion | Batteries | Semiconductors |
|---|---|---|
| Standardized Unit Clarity | 5 | 3 |
| Volatility Measurability | 5 | 4 |
| Risk Poolability | 4 | 2 |
| Regulatory Forcing Strength | 5 | 2 |
| Data Formation Speed | 5 | 2 |
| Benchmarkability | 4 | 3 |
| Data Rights Feasibility | 4 | 2 |
| Founder Penetration | 4 | 2 |
| ACV Potential | 5 | 3 |
| $100M ARR Path | 5 | 3 |
| Correlation Risk (lower better) | 3 | 1 |
| Incumbent Replication Risk (lower better) | 4 | 2 |
| Time-to-Irreversibility | 5 | 2 |
| Reference Centrality Potential | 5 | 3 |
Gate result: Semiconductors are not eliminated, but the only admissible segment is commodity memory (DRAM/NAND).
Batteries baseline unit: battery defined by unique identifier + capacity class + regulated passport attributes, with tradable upstream “grades” (battery materials) providing clean price legs.
EU battery passport requires open standards + interoperable format + transferability without vendor lock-in.
CME lithium hydroxide is financially settled against Fastmarkets assessments. ICE also offers cash-settled lithium hydroxide futures.
Semiconductors only pass in commodity-like memory where TrendForce/DRAMeXchange publishes spot and contract price tables. But DRAM is “not gasoline” and not perfectly fungible.
Source: Signal media file — Controlled_Dominance_Test__Batteries_vs_Semiconductors.pdf
asdklfjasldkfjas;ldkfj