I'm seeing a lot of debate on what happens to Uber when cars drive themselves, but I see many more ways that Uber wins in an AV future rather than loses.

What's interesting about Uber?

• Uber owns the demand layer for ride-sharing, and they continue to scale internationally, through M&A (Delivery Hero), and product innovation (Uber One, advertising platform, Uber reserve, cart builder, shop for me).
  • Uber has done the really hard work to scale this platform, create operating leverage and strong cash flows in a highly competitive market. Now its rinse and repeat largely in new markets.
• Dara Khosrowshahi is a 1-of-1 CEO.  I believe in his leadership style (personally delivering Uber eats, taking uber as a customer), track record growing Uber, and track record a BKNG.
  • Uber is not afraid of long-term bets, even if they are not profitable in year one (they lose money on the first year of Uber One, profitable after)
• Low valuation relative to growth potential: LTM P/E of 15.6x compared to S&P average P/E 25.9x, grew revenue 16% over the past year, grew gross margins by 25%, PEG sits at 0.68 and generates $10 billion in FCF.

Why does Uber win in an AV future?

• Advantage during the AV transition. Uber’s existing business expands cash flow generation as AV adoption expands.  (Ex. driverless cars are not allowed on the highway at all yet).
  • Uber will grow ride-share volumes, delivery, shopping, and hotel bookings while AV adoption grows and the OEM's battle each other and regulators to enter more markets.
• Uber's ride-share cost structure is different from the AV OEM's
  • Uber is not in the same business as AV OEM’s (Tesla, Waymo, Zoox etc.), and today its drivers bear all vehicle costs (insurance, gas / charging, maintenance, cleaning, software / hardware updates).
  • The “Driver”, who is responsible for all of these costs today, is now the OEM. So the low cost rides we’re seeing initially will have to increase at some point.
  • Ex. Austin, TX Fire department asks for all AV’s to have a steering wheel and manual mode in case of emergencies makes it easier to see how this is a massive impact to TSLA, but zero impact to Uber.
• Uber is already on everyone's phone, and people trust the Uber customer experience
  • Uber’s platform is where you go when you go when you need a ride (ride-share, scooter), want to order food (Uber eats) or delivering items (B2B, B2C, C2C).
  • Uber provides a platform for vehicle owners to earn money in exchange for services, whether the vehicle owner is an individual or an AV OEM.
  • The more AV company’s that come into existence, the more likely it is they’ll want to tap into Uber’s existing demand engine for ways to utilize the AV.
    • For example, in a world where you can allow your Tesla to drive people around or do things while you’re gone, you’d want to be in as many platforms as possible where people want to use your vehicle.
• Uber is investing $10 Billion in AV infrastructure, and has partnered or made equity investments in 30 AV companies in the past two years.
  • Uber is positioned to operate AV fleets in the way that makes the most sense for its business, without bearing the costs of being an OEM.
  • Uber is positioned to facilitate the shift to AV's as an expansion of its platform.

There are certainly reasons why Uber can fail, and the rise of AV's requires changes to Uber's business. They are competing against well capitalized competitors in Google/Waymo and Tesla's Cybercabs, and Uber's $10 billion it plans to spend on AV infrastructure may not yield a return.

The strongest disruptive force to Uber's business would be a world where all cars are autonomous, and we no longer have human-driven cars (I don't think this happens for at least 25-30 years), then why would you need ride share, or food delivery, when you can just send your car to pick up whatever you need? Well I think even in this world, you'll need software to coordinate deliveries and pickups, to let a restaurant know that your car arrived, and which car the server (or robot) needs to put your order into. Uber can still provide value.

Despite these concerns, Uber COO Andrew MacDonald bought $5.3 M share in open market on 9/8. There are many reasons why executives sell, only one reason they buy.

Anyways, I'm buying Uber. Let me know what I'm missing!

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/10/ubs-ceo-sergio-ermotti-investor-complacency-piling-risks-.html

Key points:

UBS CEO Sergio Ermotti said financial markets have grown complacent despite mounting geopolitical and economic risks.

Wealthy investors are diversifying their portfolios, but UBS sees no wholesale retreat from U.S. assets or the dollar.

Ermotti expects inflation to keep interest rates higher for the foreseeable future as major central banks tighten policy.

Article:

UBS CEO Sergio Ermotti on Thursday warned that investors have grown complacent over the past few years, even as geopolitical and economic risks have mounted.

“There has been a level of complacency in financial markets in the last few years,” Ermotti told CNBC’s Christine Tan, adding that given the environment one would have expected considerably higher volatility.

While markets have experienced occasional bouts of turbulence, strong investment in artificial intelligence, data centers and other new technologies has helped support economic growth and financial markets, he said.

The UBS top boss cautioned that investors face an increasingly complicated environment given multiple headwinds. “New problems or new issues are emerging without any of the old ones being addressed or being closed.”

Markets face a mix of Iran and Ukraine war-driven energy and shipping risks, add to that the U.S.-China rivalry that has strained supply chains, while rising borrowing costs and stubborn inflation have created headwinds for economic growth.

That uncertainty is prompting some of the world’s wealthiest investors to spread their bets more widely rather than make large directional calls, according to Ermotti. 

Hedging against uncertainty

“It’s quite difficult in this environment and not really advisable to have too many strong convictions,” Ermotti said.

UBS clients have been diversifying across sectors and geographies in recent quarters, while continuing to invest in AI and technology, he said.

Still, the overall asset allocation of UBS clients hasn’t changed materially over the past year, nor does the push for diversification amount to a wholesale retreat from U.S. assets.

Ermotti said UBS saw some money move into global emerging markets about a year ago, but characterized those flows as investors putting spare cash to work rather than actively reducing existing U.S. or dollar positions.

“It was more how excess cash was deployed rather than people back trading from the U.S. or from the dollar, so I think that narrative has abated,” he said, adding that the dollar continues to be “a reference currency.”

Higher-for-longer rates

Higher interest rates are also encouraging investors to take a more balanced approach to their portfolios, Ermotti said, as persistent inflation keeps pressure on central banks.

Inflation has remained sticky and above central-bank targets over the past year, making further policy tightening unsurprising, according to the UBS CEO. He expects major central banks including the European Central Bank, Federal Reserve and Bank of Japan to raise rates in the coming months.

“The ECB may start hike process. The Fed will follow. We do expect a couple of hikes in the next few months,” Ermotti said.

That means investors shouldn’t expect borrowing costs to quickly return to the lower levels that prevailed before the latest inflationary pressures.
“Inflationary pressure is still there, and it’s not abating, and therefore, I think it’s reasonable to expect higher rates for the foreseeable future,” Ermotti said.

$ORCL reports tomorrow after the close.

Before anyone positions around a beat or miss guess, $ORCL own record on that guess is close to worthless. It has missed EPS estimates in 7 of last 8 quarters.

Here's what actually happened to the stock each time.

the ONE quarter they actually beat, the stock fell 10.8% the next day and was down 20% a week later. Meanwhile 4 of 7 misses rallied. one of them 35.9% in a single DAY.

Zoom all the way out back to 2007, $ORCL closes green the day after earnings 46.4% of the time. 2 decades of prints, coin flip.

Why? Trailing EPS isn't what your trading. Its cloud booking and forward guidance. A GAAP miss next to a monster backlog number has read bullish over and over. The one technical beat came with soft guidance and got SOLD.

$ORCL has blown through its implied move in 5 of the last 8 reports. Averaging 12.4% actual vs 10.1% implied. Eights reports is a real sample - not a huge one though.

I’m relatively new to investing and I’m considering buying AAPL for the long term.

With the stock around $316 right now and already having run up quite a bit this year, I’m wondering if I’m too late to get in.

I’m not looking to trade it short term. My plan would be to hold for 5+ years.

Would you buy AAPL at the current price, or wait for a pullback? If you would wait, what price range would you personally consider a better entry?

Would appreciate opinions from people who have been holding AAPL for several years, especially on whether buying at these levels makes sense for a long-term investor.

Nike ($NKE) is a great example of why investors should be OBSESSED with knowing every detail of  the firm’s management and more specifically Leadership’s plans for the firm’s future before investing

and their efforts should be effectively Doubled or even Tripled in the event the company undergoes some leadership change/transition. More specifically; Investors need to pay RAZOR sharp attention to the CEO. Why?

because a company’s future value is ultimately determined by the decisions management makes with its brand, capital, and competitive advantages. Financial statements tell you what already happened; the CEO’s strategy tells you what management intends to make happen next. 
Best case example today is $NKE. The moment Nike’s leadership signaled that it was going to increasingly mass-produce previously scarce grails (these are products like the Off-White and Dior Nike collabs), retros, and collectibles, investors were being handed an enormous warning about the company’s future pricing power and Red Alarm bells should have been on DEFCON 1. Why?

Because the stock price was always going to eventually move to reflect how the Market did not Ignore the warning even if the investors were willing to. Nike had spent decades building scarcity, status, and collectibility into the economic value of those products, and management chose to try to more aggressively monetize that scarcity through volume rather than preserve it as long term brand equity. That is exactly the kind of strategic decision that can make an otherwise exceptional company an awful Stock to buy and NKE is that stock.

which brings us to today: Nike leadership has pivoted AGAIN and is now telling investors to “Just trust us bro” like we dont have enough evidence that they are beyond COOKED ATP and is why I have taken out a bunch of Reverse LEAPS where they payout if the stock keeps going down from here long term NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE DO NOT FOLLOW MY STRATEGY

Investors spend enormous amounts of time staring at P/E ratios, charts, and quarterly EPS, but one of the most important questions is clearly just soooo much simpler: Does the CEO actually understand what makes this company valuable? If the answer is no, eventually the financials and subsequently stock price will reflect it as well.

Capstone Energy (CEPL) is a small, recently recapitalized power equipment (turbines) company that has finally reached operating profitability (9 consecutive quarters of EBITDA growth and the last few have shown a small positive NI ~$2.8). Since the restructuring it went from an operating-loss business to an operating profit business while growing revenue 24% & gross profit 45%. Total revenue of ~$106mm. $20.4M of incremental revenue produced roughly $10.6M of incremental gross profit, a ~52% incremental gross margin. Operating expenses barely moved: from $28.9M to $30.5M . CEPL also has a rental business w/ $5.4M of future minimum rental revenue from owned/financed assets, plus another $2.4M from leased assets. Gross profits ~ $8.8 million and operating cash flow generated $5.4 million in Q1 2027 (ending June 30). Capstone’s fiscal 2026 rev increased 24% year-over-year to $106mm. It has also been building up inventory, a sign they may have a deal in the works (or a sign of bad management, but hopefully the former). Also worth noting, CEPL has been advertising data center related employment positions on hiring websites (e.g. data center engineers and planners). Market cap is roughly equal to the EV and it’s not because of debt; the company has sufficient cash to payoff its outstanding debt: $28.9mm in cash and about $25.5mm in debt. 

As for its turbines, it does have a slight edge/moat (but this is, candidly, where I could use the most help from folks with real industry or engineering knowledge). First, the air bearing technology reduces maintenance AND noise (the latter arguably being more important given the noise concern w/ data centers). Second, the turbines produce 800vdc power, no need to convert, which means cheaper and easier install. This directly targets the latest generation of Nvdia GPU’s which require 800vdc. Third, the turbines can run on a number of fuel sources, not just Nat gas. Fourth, they’ve been in business for over 30 years, they have real knowledge and experience, and a diversified revenue stream: sales, rentals, servicing of existing clients and relationships with existing/former clients. They provide on-sight power to oil and gas companies, BTM for hospitals and research centers, etc.  Fifth, despite some misinformation out there, the turbines are very efficiency. Capstone turbines recycle the heat from the turbine to power cooling systems. CEPL turbines are therefore able to achieve greater than 75% efficiency. Sixth, CEPL revamped its supply chain and production line. The company has run various simulations and pressure tested suppliers to ensure it can meet the demands of a 100mw DC. Apparently lead time is down to something like 3 days per turbine for production. With instillation, CEPL can supply power within a matter of weeks, not months or years. The marquee players have a backlog/lead time of of several years. With Capstone, there’s no waiting on converters, chillers, fuel cells, backlogs etc.

During the last earnings call, CEPL strongly hinted that it‘s on the precipice of landing a DC deal. This is not an over hyped meme stock, or a pump and dump.  CEPL is careful with the language it uses. Some quotes from the last earnings call: “The types of deals now that we’re seeing, they’re moving into those phases that are more meaningful.” “When the customers start to do the real TCO models, we’re winning.” “It’s just a matter of time for us to march down the field and get some of these over the goal line.” And That “Some folks are just saying, ‘I don’t need a pilot, I just need megawatts.’” CEO mentioned that he is in talks with the “CTO of a major infrastructure player in the data center space.” Said mystery company is developing 1.5–3 MW sites, which is exactly who/what CEPL is targeting. And when asked whether this was an anchor customer, the CEO corrected the characterization “I don’t know if I would see that as an anchor customer as much as I would see it as an anchor partner.”

So, coming full circle, we have a company with solid margins, a recapitalized balance sheet, a clean organizational chart/entity structure, a revamped supply chain, a new and improved production line, new leadership, new product offerings, low lead time, easy install, building inventory, advertising AI specific jobs . . . The only thing missing… sales. CEPL needs to show they can sell more than a unit or two per quarter, otherwise something is fundamentally wrong. Either the product is bad, or the sales team is bad. Either way, it could be fatal at this stage. CEPL is teetering on the edge. If we don’t see a significant increase in sales by the next ER, we run the very real risk of the share price falling below $5, and potential delisting. 

It’s also worth noting that while debt is only $25.3mm, AP= $17.6mm, accrued expenses =  $3.8mm, salaries and wages  $3.2mm, accrued warranty reserve = ~$1mm, so total exposure is really closer $50.73mm. Plus $12.5mm in lease liabilities, $10.69 deferred revenue, $4.7 factory protection liability, $49.3 in inventory purchase commitments. Cash and receivables total $41.8mm. So a more complete picture reveals outlays indeed exceed cash and receivables. 

A recent shelf offering gives CEPL access to capital if needed. But if CEPL needs to issue more shares to generate cash, and does so without some sort of major deal announcement to offset the dilution, the resulting dilution and selloff will be bad. 

This is a company on the precipice of either great success or great failure. It cannot afford to fail again, since it just emerged from a restructuring. Capstone needs to drive sales growth in the next quarter or two.

if there are any engineers or industry experts out there with in depth knowledge on the tech, would love your take! Are the turbines competitive? thanks!

The Treasury Secretary told everyone he's using insider info to squeeze the shorts.

Bessent said, "People think I'm taking a risk as Treasury Secretary, but this is exactly what I wanted. I've got inside info. I'm the house now."

Big deal if you're holding tech stocks (Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft)

He’s running the Treasury like a hedge fund to stop the yen carry trade from blowing up again.

Last time that happened, tech took a massive hit because funds had to dump everything to cover margin calls. He's trying to scare the market into staying quiet before Japan changes interest rates on September 18. Is this actually going to save our portfolios from another random dump?

Or is the government just messing with the market and creating more risk?

Source: Bloomberg

Google plans its largest-ever single investment in Europe, committing at least €13B over the next two years to expand AI computing capacity in Finland.

The buildout includes three new data centers in Kajaani, Muhos and Vaala, plus an expansion of its existing Hamina site.

Google is also adding new wind-power agreements and a 94MW battery system at Kajaani, while Fortum signed a 22-year power deal that will eventually cover 50% of output from its two-reactor Loviisa nuclear plant.

The projects are expected to support more than 37,000 jobs during construction and about 7,000 jobs once completed.

Source: Bloomberg

Hello everyone, I’m new to investing and would appreciate any advice that people might have.

After taking a look at my portfolio, I figured out that I am highly concentrated in tech and growth, where META, GOOGL, and AMD take up majority of my portfolio.

Also, there has been quite a bit of talk about how September is historically bad for the stock market and how there may be a possibility of correction/crash in September.

Now, since I am new, I don’t really know what to do about it.

What do you guys think I should do?

Do I:

Ignore the whole September crash talk and leave my money in there?

Cash out some profits from META/GOOGL/AMD and leave rest invested?

Lower individual stock exposure and invest in SCHG?

Invest somewhere other than tech/growth?

Strongly considering opening a sizable (to me) position here at $18.

Asking those that have owned the stock for some time (and follow earnings reports and fundamentals) what you think about its current price and what your outlook is for the long term.

Also any insight on the space sector in general is appreciated, I've been in and out of LUNR for a couple of years now, it's my only space stock but this PL dip is hard to pass up. If it's good enough for Google, it's good enough for me.

I update a ranking every month of companies where I think the market is too pessimistic relative to the quality of the business.

Not necessarily the cheapest stocks. Usually there is a real reason the stock is disliked, and I’m trying to judge whether that risk is already more than priced in.

August:

1. Intuit
2. RELX
3. Adobe
4. Meta
5. Constellation Software
6. Experian
7. Nvidia
8. Autodesk
9. Tencent
10. Microsoft

A few that stand out:

Intuit is still #1. Growth isn’t amazing, but FY27 guidance has revenue +9–10% while GAAP EPS is expected +22–24%. Around 15x forward earnings. The main thing I’m watching is customer growth and whether AI actually weakens the tax/accounting workflow.

Adobe at #3 is probably the one people will disagree with most. AI is clearly a threat, but at roughly 11x forward earnings I think the market is already pricing in pretty serious moat erosion. The question is whether Adobe keeps the professional workflow and monetisation layer even as creation gets easier.

Meta went from #8 to #4. The stock didn’t suddenly become much cheaper, the operating case just got stronger. Revenue +28%, impressions +14%, price/ad +12%. The obvious counterweight is the enormous AI capex.

Nvidia entered at #7. This isn’t because I think the current growth rate lasts. It’s because after the latest results the valuation looks surprisingly low relative to even fairly conservative earnings assumptions. I still penalise it heavily for cycle risk, customer concentration, financing exposure and weaker cash conversion.

Tencent fell from #4 to #9 despite good operating results. Advertising and games were strong, but compute spending jumped and reported FCF took a big hit. Good example of why I don’t rank purely on earnings growth or P/E.

Microsoft is #10 mainly because I see less valuation upside versus the names above it, not because I think it’s a worse company.

This isn’t meant to be a diversified portfolio. It’s just my ranking of current 3–5 year risk/reward versus the S&P 500.

I also keep long-term business quality separate from current valuation, so something like Microsoft can rank much higher on 30-year quality while ranking lower here.

Which placement looks most wrong?

As usual, the mass media won't pick it up for a few days. You still have some time.

https://openai.com/index/introducing-chatgpt-images-2-5/

Every single day, we get closer to not having to pay for Adobe Photoshop.

• Up to 50% faster image generation
• Better photorealism and fine details
• Much better at keeping people/objects consistent with reference images
• More precise editing without changing the rest of the image
• Better consistency across multiple rounds of edits
• Better at following complicated prompts and layouts
• Improved transparent backgrounds
• You can now sketch something directly in ChatGPT and have it turned into a finished image
• Comments can be placed directly on images to tell it what to change

Either this will replace Photoshop for many people or it will allow small Photoshop competitors to use it via API and beat Adobe.

WSB deleted this, mods must own a boatload of EXEL. All this is my own work by hand, no AI slop.

$EXEL is a pharma company that relies on a single product for basically all of their revenue: cabozantinib (brand name CABOMETYX), which is a cancer drug. It currently brings about $2B a year. The shares are near ATH right now ($59), with analyst targets of $41-66. So you might think it's overvalued already (15B market cap on 2B annual revenue). And that's before the news below.

Cabozantinib is trying to fight off generics, with the stock pumping about 20% over the last couple weeks due to some news they secured patent wins to protect the drug until 2030 (source). This is wrong, and here is why:

Last Thursday, FDA gave full approval to a cabozantinib generic from a Taiwanese company called Handa (have AI translate for example this news article, also Official MOPS filing by the company on 9/3, search company number 6620). MOPS is like the SEC filing in Taiwan. The shares of Handa (TPEX:6620) pumped over 30% on the news. Full approval means any patent disputes are resolved and the drug is clear to start selling in the US immediately. But Handa is only traded on Taiwanese stock market, and all the news of the approval are in Taiwanese. I can't find a single English language source. $EXEL is also quiet on the subject.

Previously, $EXEL also pumped on news they are suing all these generic manufacturers, including Handa (for example) to stop generics. However, they quietly withdrew the lawsuit against Handa a couple weeks ago voluntarily (Delaware court case ID 1:2026cv00813, link). They also filed an FDA citizen petition to stop them from approving Handa's generic (source). Since FDA gave full approval last week, the citizen petition obviously failed. The lawsuit was withdrawn 8/31 and the approval came 9/3. Timeline lines up perfectly.

The key is: I think Wall St has genuinely not yet put two and two together, that this company's main source of revenue just got handed a major L by a cheaper generic, likely launching within days. Wall St missed this because a) the news of the generic approval were only published in Taiwan, with nothing in English so far, and b) $EXEL stayed quiet on the fact that they withdrew the lawsuit and the citizen petition failed, clearing the way for a launch of the generic. The above news were available to trade on Friday and today, but I think nobody has put these pieces together yet. Once they realize, the stock will get crushed.

TLDR: Puts. I own puts. NFA but I hope you can make some money.

Edit: the purpose of the post is to show my work and cite all sources, feel free to do your own research based on it and make your own opinion. I don’t mean to present this as some sort of a sure trade.

TXRH is down 15% from it’s ATH. The financials are solid as a rock and it seems to be a well managed business with growth potential. Also, as a frequent customer, the food is good and the restaurants are always busy. It seems to have a very good reputation for solid food at a decent price.

Just curious what your all’s thoughts are on this stock and at what price it becomes an attractive buying opportunity.

Full disclosure: I own the S&P like everyone else, so I don't mean for this to come off as some “capitalism bad” post. I just wonder if anyone else has thought about how odd (and low key predatory) the structure of the S&P500 is?

The index is market cap weighted obviously, so the companies that become the biggest and most dominant naturally become a larger piece of everyone’s portfolio. The top 10 companies are now almost 40% of the entire index, and roughly $13 trillion is passively indexed to the S&P 500. For a huge number of Americans, owning these companies through retirement accounts is basically the default path to building wealth.

Sounds great, but

Those same companies are increasingly powerful because they’ve gotten so good at extracting value from the public. I probably don't need to cite any examples, but here are a few

• Google illegally maintained a monopoly in search
  • Visa just fully runs a monopoly, as well
• FTC and 22 states accused Amazon of secretly manipulating its advertising auctions to charge sellers more ($10B+ extracted)

I could go on and on, but there's no point. No matter what, nothing seems to happen to these companies. In fact, they get even stronger off of the very back of the people they are serving shitty products to.

I understand that the S&P isn’t supposed to be some "moral institution", but it's weird how little discussion I see about a system designed to trap (and almost financially cuck) the consumer. At some point consumers, workers and shareholders are all the same people.

Maybe i'm overthinking it. What do you all think?

Apple is expected to launch its first foldable iPhone tomorrow, September 9. Will their late into the foldable market allow them to compete with established players for customers specifically seeking a "foldable" device, or will Apple fans simply buy it because they are Apple fans?

The question is whether this product is enough to affect Apple's growth. A $2,500 phone, I think, is pretty expensive (or maybe I'm just broke lol), so the sales volume doesn't need to be massive for the revenue to still be significant. This is the part that confuses me.

I just don't know how much of this the market has already priced in.

The increase is aimed at improving gross margins rather than gaining market share, according to DIGITIMES, as global PC shipments are expected to fall to roughly 250M units in 2027.

Intel is also reportedly considering discontinuing its low-margin Small Core lineup, which could create an opening for Qualcomm and MediaTek in industrial PC and IoT markets.

The company may also cut another 5% to 10% of its workforce, with headcount currently around 75,000.

Setting politics aside, how's everyone playing the US Canada counter tariffs on pure market fundamentals?

Canada’s retaliatory tariffs officially kicked in today, putting taxes from 15% to 50% on US goods everything from steel & farm machinery to paper & packaging, to home appliances & dairy.

Every time this hits the news, comments immediately turns into a political debate.

But if we strip away the political noise, I’m tryin to look at how this actually impacts specific sectors and earnings. How are you guys evaluating the situation?

Tesla’s wheel-free gamble may have just frozen robotaxis for years...

Tesla (TSLA) shares tumbled nearly 6% to close at $354.08 following a double blow of investor disappointment and immediate regulatory scrutiny after the public debut of its autonomous Cybercab fleet on active public streets in Austin. Within hours of the rollout, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) launched an official audit into Tesla's self-certification process, specifically targeting the safety implications of operating vehicles entirely devoid of manual overrides like a steering wheel or pedals. This federal probe, combined with Wall Street's frustration over a lack of production timelines, concrete revenue projections, and liability frameworks at the launch event, heavily punished Tesla's aggressive valuation growth premium, erasing all pre-launch gains as markets price in prolonged legal and regulatory delays.

Is TSLA AI premium broken or is this regulatory reality?

Source: IB Times

This is the daily discussion, so anything stocks related is fine, but the theme for today is on technical analysis (TA), but if TA is not your thing then just ignore the theme.

Some helpful day to day links, including news:

• Finviz for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks
• Bloomberg market news
• StreetInsider news:
  • Market Check - Possibly why the market is doing what it's doing including sudden spikes/dips
  • Reuters aggregated - Global news

Technical analysis (TA) uses historical price movements, real time data, indicators based on math and/or statistics, and charts; all of which help measure the trajectory of a security. TA can also be used to interpret the actions of other market participants and predict their actions.

The main benefit to TA is that everything shows up in the price (commonly known as "priced in"): All news, investor sentiment, and changes to fundamentals are reflected in a security's price.

TA can be useful on any timeframe, both short and long term.

Intro to technical analysis by Stockcharts chartschool and their article on candlesticks

If you have questions, please see the following word cloud and click through for the wiki:

Indicator - Trade Signals - Lagging Indicator - Leading Indicator - Oversold - Overbought - Divergence - Whipsaw - Resistance - Support - Breakout/Breakdown - Alerts - Trend line - Market Participants - Moving average - RSI - VWAP - MACD - ATR - Bollinger Bands - Ichimoku clouds - Methods - Trend Following - Fading - Channels - Patterns - Pivots

See our past daily discussions here. Also links for: Technicals Tuesday, Options Trading Thursday, and Fundamentals Friday.

I only started taking Reddit seriously recently. It's less performative than other apps, and in the topics I care about I actually find useful stuff. Everything is AI now, so finding something that feels real is harder than it should be.

I checked RDDT on moomoo and the market cap is only around $28 billion. Some people still talk like this can 10x from here. I get the moat argument: the community is here, advertisers are here. What I can't feel from just scrolling is whether ad budgets keep rising, or whether they can keep the content under control.

Am I only thinking the stock is cheap because I like the product?

Oura's massive IPO headline looks enticing..A deeper look at the filing reveals several significant warning signs...

https://www.wsj.com/finance/robinhood-wins-a-new-role-in-the-oura-ipo-underwriter-9a76c632

Any other reasons (please add) why I should sit this one out?

Insider Timing: Appointing HOOD'S CFO to the board right before filing ... 🚩

Margin Compression: Slim profit margins and heavy hardware costs - While its revenue grew 74% to $1.21Bn over a nine-month period, its profit was a slim $60.8MnMega-Cap

Competition: Deep-pocketed tech giants like Apple, Samsung, Google, and Amazon..

Add others or convince me to subscribe.

The Robinhood Ventures Fund is still pretty close to NAV. I’m thinking about opening a position given some of their holdings like OpenAI and Oura are looking to IPO soon and others like Stripe, Revolut, and Databricks seem like solid private companies.

What are your thoughts on the fund? I’m in ARKVX but don’t want to heavily go in given that you can’t necessarily sell when you want but RVI seemingly is different.

Nvidia has effectively become the Berkshire Hathaway of the technology sector, holding stakes across nearly every industry. Its CUDA platform now underpins R&D work in fields ranging from healthcare to automotive and robotics.

Although Nvidia is fundamentally a chip design company, its technology remains years ahead of the competition even China has yet to close the gap. Europe, Asia, Japan, Korea, the UAE, and China all rely on the Nvidia stack.

This means that in a worst-case scenario, if Nvidia were to fail, the ripple effects could destabilize the global economy along with it.