OT: Stock and Investment Thread

[T2Kplus20]

I believe from T2 K postings, that he might have started investing a few years before the 2008 crash. I don’t think he accumulated a significant amount in his 401k at that point. He continued to contribute into his 401k into mutual funds up to 2021 and with interest rates falling throughout the period has only seen positive returns during this period. That’s great.

My younger brother invested in S&P options right after 2008 and after 10 years accumulated a million trading options. At the time, I thought he knew what he was doing but later was thinking it might have been perfect timing( luck) that he invested in options when interest rates were dropping.

Completed my RU MBA in spring of 2002. Started with retirement investing in 2003/2004, but really cranked it up in 2005 when I moved in house (from consulting to my first pharma company). So I experienced the 2008/2009 crash and kept investing. Great returns by sticking to the plan, which is why I never wavered in 2020. Both times it paid off big!

BTW, I researched the **** out of 1999-2004 to see what worked and what didn't. I tweaked my allocation to hedge a bit more (small/mid cap value and HC).

 

[T2Kplus20]

I wonder if the COIN IPO got people onto the Coin site, and has them buying the cyrpto direct.

Thankfully, I'm still up nicely with my 3 miners, but COIN definitely ruffled up the market. Makes sense that more people at buying coins directly.....look at ETH and DOGE. Does this change back? Not sure. Just waiting and seeing for now.

 

[tom1944]

Morningstar is best for this - scroll to the bottom of the pages:

https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/vti/portfolio

https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/voo/portfolio

Thank you

 

[phs73rc77gsm83]

Morningstar is best for this - scroll to the bottom of the pages:

https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/vti/portfolio

https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/voo/portfolio

I agree, Morningstar provides good summary data. If you really want to get into detail and see more than 25 or 50 securities per type, Part C of SEC file form N-PORT provides more detail (as does the fund or ETF annual report, but N-PORT is filed more frequently as annual and semi annual Schedules of investments are twice a year.)

 

[RUDead]

ARKK has dropped 33% from its peak. During that same timeframe, the NASDAQ is down 4.7%, the S&P is up 5.2% and the DOW is up 8.9%. Not saying that it is a bad investment, it was just grossly overvalued in February, and there is no debating that.

Agree and it most of it's overvaluation came from ARK getting that huge influx of additions and pushing up their own stocks. We are seeing that reversing itself right now. If redemptions continue their own selling could push this ETF much lower.

 

[RUAldo]

Agree and it most of it's overvaluation came from ARK getting that huge influx of additions and pushing up their own stocks. We are seeing that reversing itself right now. If redemptions continue their own selling could push this ETF much lower.

CW was a master of creating her own market by setting the floor via the media every time her ARKK holdings showed weakness. Now, I suspect she is keeping a lower profile because she doesn’t want to highlight ARKK’s free-fall by continuing to push her own agenda in the face of head-winds. I don’t see ARKK recovering any time soon unless spec tech makes a run.

 

[T2Kplus20]

CW was a master of creating her own market by setting the floor via the media every time her ARKK holdings showed weakness. Now, I suspect she is keeping a lower profile because she doesn’t want to highlight ARKK’s free-fall by continuing to push her own agenda in the face of head-winds. I don’t see ARKK recovering any time soon unless spec tech makes a run.

Stupid comment. The media came running to her in mid/late 2020. She rocked the gains from 2017 onwards without any atypical attention. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your hate.

 

[RUAldo]

Stupid comment. The media came running to her in mid/late 2020. She rocked the gains from 2017 onwards without any atypical attention. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your hate.

Yes, the “media came running to her” - sounds like a great “fact”. Thanks for sharing. CW’s PR team had nothing to do with her public appearances or the ARKK t-shirts they were peddling on CW’s website. As others have expressed, every time someone doesn’t drink your Kool-Aid or has a different perspective you immediately brand them a “hater”. I don’t “hate” anyone - fund manager or otherwise. But I do think CW is/was the Paris Hilton of Wall Street and it won’t be long before she fades back into obscurity especially if her fund continues to decline.

 

[mdk02]

Yes, the “media came running to her” - sounds like a great “fact”. Thanks for sharing. CW’s PR team had nothing to do with her public appearances or the ARKK t-shirts they were peddling on CW’s website. As others have expressed, every time someone doesn’t drink your Kool-Aid or has a different perspective you immediately brand them a “hater”. I don’t “hate” anyone - fund manager or otherwise. But I do think CW is/was the Paris Hilton of Wall Street and it won’t be long before she fades back into obscurity especially if her fund continues to decline.

"Paris Hilton" is unfair. Elaine Garzarelli is much closer.

 

[RUAldo]

"Paris Hilton" is unfair. Elaine Garzarelli is much closer.

Haha - totally forgot about Garzarelli - that’s a blast from the past.

 

[T2Kplus20]

Yes, the “media came running to her” - sounds like a great “fact”. Thanks for sharing. CW’s PR team had nothing to do with her public appearances or the ARKK t-shirts they were peddling on CW’s website. As others have expressed, every time someone doesn’t drink your Kool-Aid or has a different perspective you immediately brand them a “hater”. I don’t “hate” anyone - fund manager or otherwise. But I do think CW is/was the Paris Hilton of Wall Street and it won’t be long before she fades back into obscurity especially if her fund continues to decline.

The ARKK t-shirts were for a charity drive. D'uh. Another stupid post.

 

[Frida's Boss]

I think a good “blast from the past” comparison would be Gerald Tsai’s Manhattan Fund.

 

[T2Kplus20]

I think a good “blast from the past” comparison would be Gerald Tsai’s Manhattan Fund.

A hedge fund that lost big shorting stocks? Apples and oranges.

 

[RUAldo]

The ARKK t-shirts were for a charity drive. D'uh. Another stupid post.

Yeah b/c CW really needs to sell t-shirts, hoodies, hats, baby onesies, etc. for charity. Plus, they only donated “profits” which is hilarious given how much CW and her staff are worth.

 

[Frida's Boss]

A hedge fund that lost big shorting stocks? Apples and oranges.

The Manhattan Fund was a mutual fund and, for a period of time, Tsai was a very successful long only investor.

 

[T2Kplus20]

The Manhattan Fund was a mutual fund and, for a period of time, Tsai was a very successful long only investor.

So he was successful long, then started a hedge fund, went short, and bottomed out. Thanks for the tangent info.

 

[Frida's Boss]

So he was successful long, then started a hedge fund, went short, and bottomed out. Thanks for the tangent info.

No. His Manhattan Fund was successful, capitalizing on a long only momentum strategy. As the bull market turned, his performance collapsed. The Manhattan Fund was not a hedge fund and had nothing to do with shorting stocks.

If I were a holder of ARKK, I’d welcome this downdraft provided I had strong conviction in her and her positions. Chance to add at more attractive levels. She seems to be doing what I’d want her to do - she’s adding to names she likes. That’s what she should do. Hopefully, she also uses this time to reassess her publicity. I suspect she’d be happier and a better investor with fewer superfluous calls on her time. Disclosure is good. Transparency is good. She can scale back significantly and still clear both categories with acceptable hurdles.

 

[T2Kplus20]

If I were a holder of ARKK, I’d welcome this downdraft provided I had strong conviction in her and her positions. Chance to add at more attractive levels. She seems to be doing what I’d want her to do - she’s adding to names she likes. That’s what she should do.

Agreed on this. I am happy that she is sticking with her high-conviction stocks and adding to them. By the way, curious to hear what your top plays would be over the next 3-6 months.

Other than a small allocation to ARKK, I cut back any funds with spec growth plays. Definitely not reducing traditional/value tech plays (like the big 5), but I have added to energy and value (across the board - large, mid, and small caps). Thoughts?

 

[Frida's Boss]

Agreed on this. I am happy that she is sticking with her high-conviction stocks and adding to them. By the way, curious to hear what your top plays would be over the next 3-6 months.

Other than a small allocation to ARKK, I cut back any funds with spec growth plays. Definitely not reducing traditional/value tech plays (like the big 5), but I have added to energy and value (across the board - large, mid, and small caps). Thoughts?

If you view the recent pickup in prices to have legs (and everything I’m hearing and seeing suggests that it does), I’d want to own businesses with some ability to increase prices. Stay away from any ruthlessly competitive industries where players cannot increase prices without losing market share. I’d also want low capital intensity. Minimal working capital and low capital expenditures. All of that should equal high ROIC, which should provide cushion against inflation. As a rule, tech names would fit those criteria. “Value” tech? Depends if they meet those criteria above,

 

[T2Kplus20]

If you view the recent pickup in prices to have legs (and everything I’m hearing and seeing suggests that it does), I’d want to own businesses with some ability to increase prices. Stay away from any ruthlessly competitive industries where players cannot increase prices without losing market share. I’d also want low capital intensity. Minimal working capital and low capital expenditures. All of that should equal high ROIC, which should provide cushion against inflation. As a rule, tech names would fit those criteria. “Value” tech? Depends if they meet those criteria above,

Interesting stuff, thanks. "Value" tech just means to me those tech companies that are below FMV via Morningstar (which uses traditional/conservative metrics for calculating intrinsic value). AMZN, GOOGL, FB, MSFT, CRM and a bunch of other prove tech plays with growing revenue and earnings.

 

[Scarletnut]

I was going to ask you and @ScarletNut about the same thing. BTC and ETH are up today, but the broader crypto market is down. Is the dust still settling or do we have a new normal with COIN around? Not sure.

I think the money pouring into the alt coins and Doge might be the reason. Things will settle down and IMO , the uptrend will continue.

 

[RUDead]

Could be a interesting day in the market. Huge miss on jobs combined with inflation and supply chain issues everywhere.

 

[T2Kplus20]

Could be a interesting day in the market. Huge miss on jobs combined with inflation and supply chain issues everywhere.

The market seems to be very confused over the past month or two.

 

[Scarletnut]

The market seems to be very confused over the past month or two.

It’s really not confused. It’s going through a sector rotation.

 

[RUDead]

It’s really not confused. It’s going through a sector rotation.

I think you are both right. It's a confusing time for sure. Sector rotation has been happening but this jobs numbers changes everyone's assumptions on what the fed will do.

Meanwhile Wawa is closing some stores because they can't find workers.

 

[Jtung230]

I think you are both right. It's a confusing time for sure. Sector rotation has been happening but this jobs numbers changes everyone's assumptions on what the fed will do.

Meanwhile Wawa is closing some stores because they can't find workers.

What is Wawa paying?

 

[Jtung230]

The market is telling us that it’s more scared of rising rates than economy.

 

[T2Kplus20]

The market is telling us that it’s more scared of rising rates than economy.

If the market just believed what Powell has been saying for months (no rate hikes for a long time), it wouldn't have so much confusion right now.

The market is booming due to unemployment ticking up.

 

[T2Kplus20]

I think you are both right. It's a confusing time for sure. Sector rotation has been happening but this jobs numbers changes everyone's assumptions on what the fed will do.

Meanwhile Wawa is closing some stores because they can't find workers.

The government is giving out too much money to too many people. That's a problem and it will be for the next 3-6 months. Looking into the data today, white unemployment went down, but black unemployment went up. So the gap is increasing. Powell has been clear about the Feds goal.....max employment (which means full employment for all main demos).

 

[Scarletnut]

@bob-loblaw , I have a question for you. Please hit me up at n[email protected]. Thanks in advance.

 

[T2Kplus20]

Jobs data proves the Fed is right:

 

[T2Kplus20]

Beautiful day for the market, everything up nicely - large, mid, small caps.....value, core, and growth:

https://www.morningstar.com/markets

 

[RUAldo]

I should have known this BS was coming. What’s interesting is that CW seems to completely ignore the impact rising interest rates will have on spec tech. I’m all for a 5-year time horizon but she’s making a lot of assumptions - and fails to recognize the obvious sector rotation.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/07/cat...=iosappshare|com.apple.UIKit.activity.Message

 

[RUschool]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/influencers-17-old-charlie-damelio-201935053.html

People just following blindly what their influencers tell them while the influencers are getting millions for endorsing the product. Hearing the news that cryptocurrencies keep on going up assured them they are making the right decision.

 

[Frida's Boss]

Something to think about over the weekend. Consider this statement, made in various forms, made by Warren Buffett regarding stock selection and transformative industries:

“There’s a lot more to picking stocks than figuring out what will be an incredible industry in the future,” Buffett said. “I just want to tell you that it’s not as easy as it sounds.”

To support this statement, he has described the evolution of the airline and automobile industries (along with the internet businesses of the late 90s). It’s not enough to identify an industry that will be transformative to society. The industries themselves will grow, but selecting the businesses that will succeed isn’t as easy. The aforementioned industries he cited are littered with businesses that didn’t make it. So, betting on disruptive industries isn’t enough; you also have to pick the businesses that will win to deliver long term returns to shareholders.

Let’s compare that to Cathie Wood’s comments.

From the ARKK website:

“ In the late nineteenth century, three innovation platforms evolved at the same time and changed the way the world worked. Thanks to the introduction of the telephone, automobile, and electricity, the world’s productivity exploded as costs dropped, unleashing demand across sectors. Today, we believe the global economy is undergoing the largest technological transformation in history thanks to five innovation platforms evolving at the same time.”

And further:

“ Aims to provide broad exposure to disruptive innovation. ARK believes innovations centered around artificial intelligence, robotics, energy storage, DNA sequencing, and blockchain technology will change the way the world works and deliver outsized growth as industries transform.”


Buffett would never say so publicly, but his statements would imply he doubts whether Wood can maintain a long term performance advantage unless she not only selects the appropriate industries (not out of the question) but also selects the businesses that will be the long term winners (tougher to do, but ultimately all that really matters to investors in her ETFs).

It is something to ponder. Will she be able to continue to select the winners in these transformative sectors? Because identifying promising industries alone is probably insufficient.

 

[RUBlackout]

I actually believe those areas she mentioned with be the next evolution in our world. They are already having profound impacts on every industry at the moment.
It’s also why I think a lot of the TSLA homers are looking at them more for energy than a car business.(I have a sizeable position on TSLA)

 

[RUAldo]

Something to think about over the weekend. Consider this statement, made in various forms, made by Warren Buffett regarding stock selection and transformative industries:

“There’s a lot more to picking stocks than figuring out what will be an incredible industry in the future,” Buffett said. “I just want to tell you that it’s not as easy as it sounds.”

To support this statement, he has described the evolution of the airline and automobile industries (along with the internet businesses of the late 90s). It’s not enough to identify an industry that will be transformative to society. The industries themselves will grow, but selecting the businesses that will succeed isn’t as easy. The aforementioned industries he cited are littered with businesses that didn’t make it. So, betting on disruptive industries isn’t enough; you also have to pick the businesses that will win to deliver long term returns to shareholders.

Let’s compare that to Cathie Wood’s comments.

From the ARKK website:

“ In the late nineteenth century, three innovation platforms evolved at the same time and changed the way the world worked. Thanks to the introduction of the telephone, automobile, and electricity, the world’s productivity exploded as costs dropped, unleashing demand across sectors. Today, we believe the global economy is undergoing the largest technological transformation in history thanks to five innovation platforms evolving at the same time.”

And further:

“ Aims to provide broad exposure to disruptive innovation. ARK believes innovations centered around artificial intelligence, robotics, energy storage, DNA sequencing, and blockchain technology will change the way the world works and deliver outsized growth as industries transform.”


Buffett would never say so publicly, but his statements would imply he doubts whether Wood can maintain a long term performance advantage unless she not only selects the appropriate industries (not out of the question) but also selects the businesses that will be the long term winners (tougher to do, but ultimately all that really matters to investors in her ETFs).

It is something to ponder. Will she be able to continue to select the winners in these transformative sectors? Because identifying promising industries alone is probably insufficient.

People can say what they want about Buffett, but he has proven that you don’t have to be a genius to succeed in the stock market as long as you buy good companies/funds with a long-term view in mind. And, let’s face it - EVERYONE looks like an investment genius from April 2020-current. As long as you didn’t panic last March, you were rewarded for the intestinal fortitude. The real test is where you end up in the next 5-10 years. The past 12 months has been unprecedented so anyone patting themselves on the back should stop. The market doesn’t go straight up so there will be turmoil ahead (most likely due to inflation data or a crypto crash). That’s why you need to tune out the noise, buy companies based on solid fundamentals, and remove all emotions from the investing equation. Anyone that jumps for joy after a 300 point day or is down in the dumps after a 5% correction needs to find a new hobby. None of it matters as long as you believe in the financial markets and US economy. Plus, once I realized a long time ago that the politicians, CEOs, world leaders, etc. all have their fortunes tied up in the market/economy I finally understood that they will never let the market fail. It’s really that simple - they all have way more to lose than most or all of us.

 

[Jtung230]

I actually believe those areas she mentioned with be the next evolution in our world. They are already having profound impacts on every industry at the moment.
It’s also why I think a lot of the TSLA homers are looking at them more for energy than a car business.(I have a sizeable position on TSLA)

What makes it an energy company? Please don’t say solar.

 

[RUAldo]

What makes it an energy company? Please don’t say solar.

Haha - I’m counting the minutes until the flood of “Tesla hater” responses. BTW, if anyone thinks Musk’s appearance on SNL is a typical PR opportunity they are delusional. It’s the 2nd sign of desperation, the first was buying BTC and then selling it to prop up the latest quarter. Musk knows he needs to solidify his retailer investor base quickly and sell more cars, especially when Farley and Barra would never get that kind of publicity for GM and Ford. The timing of the SNL appearance is so blatantly obvious as to what Musk is really doing.

 

[Scarletnut]

Something to think about over the weekend. Consider this statement, made in various forms, made by Warren Buffett regarding stock selection and transformative industries:

“There’s a lot more to picking stocks than figuring out what will be an incredible industry in the future,” Buffett said. “I just want to tell you that it’s not as easy as it sounds.”

To support this statement, he has described the evolution of the airline and automobile industries (along with the internet businesses of the late 90s). It’s not enough to identify an industry that will be transformative to society. The industries themselves will grow, but selecting the businesses that will succeed isn’t as easy. The aforementioned industries he cited are littered with businesses that didn’t make it. So, betting on disruptive industries isn’t enough; you also have to pick the businesses that will win to deliver long term returns to shareholders.

Let’s compare that to Cathie Wood’s comments.

From the ARKK website:

“ In the late nineteenth century, three innovation platforms evolved at the same time and changed the way the world worked. Thanks to the introduction of the telephone, automobile, and electricity, the world’s productivity exploded as costs dropped, unleashing demand across sectors. Today, we believe the global economy is undergoing the largest technological transformation in history thanks to five innovation platforms evolving at the same time.”

And further:

“ Aims to provide broad exposure to disruptive innovation. ARK believes innovations centered around artificial intelligence, robotics, energy storage, DNA sequencing, and blockchain technology will change the way the world works and deliver outsized growth as industries transform.”


Buffett would never say so publicly, but his statements would imply he doubts whether Wood can maintain a long term performance advantage unless she not only selects the appropriate industries (not out of the question) but also selects the businesses that will be the long term winners (tougher to do, but ultimately all that really matters to investors in her ETFs).

It is something to ponder. Will she be able to continue to select the winners in these transformative sectors? Because identifying promising industries alone is probably insufficient.

I totally agree with this post. The industries mentioned are/were transformative. Picking the right company from the multitude of companies within that industry is the tricky part. However, performance is based on the whole portfolio, not just one or 2 stocks. Its not unusual for example, to have a portfolio of, say, 10 stocks (using baseball analogies) with 5 being strikeouts, 3 or 4 singles, and a homerun in there that makes the portfolio have an overall good to great performance over a period of time.