Daily Advice Thread - All basic help or advice questions must be posted here. Investing |
- Daily Advice Thread - All basic help or advice questions must be posted here.
- 3M (NYSE: MMM) - A Dividend King - A quick look at a noteworthy portfolio inclusion.
- Investing in your future on a low-mid income.
- Bloomberg article anticipates the US stock market could be headed for a lost decade
- How do you do 401ks if you're self-employed?
- Quarantine orders in England. How long before we get the same orders? March Dip v2.0 incoming?
- The case for why ARKK ETFs are NOT an exceptional investment.
- Investing in Angellist syndicates?
- Do REIT indexes make sense in a post-COVID world?
- Effect of brokerage charges on intraday trading.
- How can I invest into “remote work”
- What are some ways to earn income (passive or active) on shares of stock you already own?
- looking for UK sites that do VTI?
- A warning to those who watch financial YouTube and/or hold CNSX:VERY
- Russell 2000 & IWM performance, anyone?
- ATVI after Q3 '20: What is going on here?!?!
- Unpopular opinion time: people under 30 should not invest in vtsax
- Moving average drawdown protection in place of TMF - Hedgefundie's strategy
| Daily Advice Thread - All basic help or advice questions must be posted here. Posted: 31 Oct 2020 05:09 AM PDT If your question is "I have $10,000, what do I do?" or other "advice for my personal situation" questions. If you are going to ask how to invest you should include relevant information, such as the following:
Please consider consulting our FAQ first - https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/faq Be aware that these answers are just opinions of Redditors and should be used as a starting point for your research. You should strongly consider seeing a registered financial rep before making any financial decisions! [link] [comments]  |
| 3M (NYSE: MMM) - A Dividend King - A quick look at a noteworthy portfolio inclusion. Posted: 31 Oct 2020 11:47 PM PDT Introduction:3M (way before it was called the Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing) might not be the most iconic corporation, however it is one of the largest in the US, in fact they are one of the few companies actually in the DOW Jones. 3M has been an incredibly innovative company since its humble beginnings, currently it holds over 118,000 patents. They are involved extensively in industry, worker safety, US health care, and consumer goods, producing over 60,000 different products, and operating in over 70 countries. So why own the stock?This is going to come down to your investing preference. If you prefer dividend growth investing, that is, investing into companies that have continuously increased their dividend payout to more quickly compound your dividend reinvestments, then this will definitely be up your alley. If you more prefer growth stocks, well MMM is unfortunately well past its years for growth, especially when compared to the tech companies. So for investors looking to add this dividend stock, what makes MMM a dividend king? Well...
Takeaway/Final Thoughts:This was just a quick post to get the brain juices going, so please do your research to supplement the brisk points mentioned above. This post is probs going to come more down to individual investing philosophy, but those comment are always interesting to read so they are more than welcome! Each different type of investor can learn from the other, dividend vs index vs growth or otherwise. Anyways, have a good day everyone! [link] [comments]  |
| Investing in your future on a low-mid income. Posted: 01 Nov 2020 02:10 AM PST I've been having some deep moments lately and need to share! There will be a TL:DR at the bottom. I'm 31 now and discovered that I only really need 3 major objectives in life.
In exactly this order of priority. For these key things, I really like the idea of minimalism but I don't really identify with the Kondo approach because it deals heavily with what's in your past, where as I like to see that there's nothing I can do about my past except change my future habits. so throwing away or selling everything seems ridiculous to me. So I've been trying to achieve the same outcome but through a different means. By keeping my stuff, lol. I know I lose some 'opportunity cost' by not selling current possessions but I can and do still use my current possessions to achieve objective 3 above so I see the point as mute. I've pretty much given up on all expectations of career progression or being an entrepreneur. My job is entry-level. It's about $30AUD/hr working at 20hrs/week in a liquor store (including weekend rates). I really don't have the focus to achieve much more than than a general managerial position. I've held full time work before at low level management for 6 years and hated everything about it, while my entry level job right now is totally stress-free. So I've learnt that my personality type hates stressful jobs, they take their toll and extract energy from me in the form of $$, recreational drugs/alcohol and emotional outbursts. Not good for my mental/physical/financial health. So how am I supposed to achieve goal number 2? My lifestyle solves this problem. It doesn't appeal to the masses but I guarantee that if you're in the same situation it works. First of all I identify each and every expense that comes my way and decide if I actually need it. Going out and spending $100 on drinks is definitely out of the question. I did that in my 20's. It was fun at the time and I'm sure but I don't remember 99% of it. How much do I actually need to spend to achieve objective 1 above? $6 per meal. Australian. Shopping at Coles. You could probably get the same result at Woolworths or international equivalent if you look for value. This includes meat, vegetables and seasonings. You need to eat every day and this is by far the biggest and easiest expense to change. I can cook and make amazing food for really cheap. No way am I a chef, just some YouTube inspiration. I love Adam Ragusea's videos. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9_p50tH3WmMslWRWKnM7dQ I'm extremely careful about digital subscriptions services.. I donate $12USD to the humble bundle each month and that's about it. They provide me with a range of mostly terrible and sometimes great games to waste my afternoons on. No Netflix. No Stan. No World of Warcraft. My rent is cheap, I chose a very 'value' option living in a cheap suburb in Melbourne. I search for value with the only mandatory expenses I need; Gas, Water, Electricity, Phone, Internet. Every plan I have I evaluate carefully.. no 24 month contracts please! Only options I can leave if there's a better offer with no expense, which I frequently take advantage of. I've solved objective 1. Objective 2 takes more discipline, what do I do now with all the extra $$ that I'm not spending on cupcakes or the latest marvel game? Invest everything. Emergency cash fund, the ASX, vanguard ETF's, cryptocurrency, property market (brickX). Every week I devote a certain % to each of these projects, some can go in straight away while others require a bit of savings first. So I plan ahead and decide weeks or months before what that particular paycheck is going to be spent on. My emergency fund takes care of uncertainty and I can top it up anytime. I even rent my car out to a car sharing platform because I hate paying for insurance and fuel. My customers do that for me. So now I've achieved objective 1 and 2. What about objective 3, entertaining my present self while maintaining objective 2? Most of the time, you can do this for FREE Thanks to my wasteful 20's, I have a steam collection of over 500 games and a great home entertainment setup. TV and movies are free if you know where to look and hanging out with my friends or dog doesn't have to involve money. Objective 3 is easily achievable. If you are 20 and reading this, you should take away from this that you only need to spend money on things that are semi-permanent. No subscriptions! Game keys that last forever! Thanks to my lifestyle choices I've believe that I've actually managed to achieve a reasonable future on an entry level position if i can maintain for 10-15 years. Early retirement is actually possible. After 2-3 years on this plan I've already managed to go from a savings account of $2,000 to an investment portfolio of about $60,000. This is mostly through dumping as much of my income as possible into investment opportunities every single paycheck. I have some 'safe' fixed income options available to me that earn about 6.5%. So If i hold about 400-500k of capital, I can easily maintain the lifestyle I'm living right now without working a single hour. Obviously that's not the plan but it's really uplifting to see the possibility and I hope that I can inspire anyone reading this that it's very achievable. You don't need a lambo to be successful, you just need to be happy with what you can actually achieve and work on that. Kudos to the 1% of you that can be ahead of the curve or get lucky and make a million bucks on one idea. But that is definitely not the majority of us. PS. I don't ever want marriage or kids in my future. Sorry if you don't feel the same. I'm lucky enough to have a partner that feels the same way (and to live in Australia where I get the above opportunities). TL;DR I found out that I don't need to make 80k+ a year to be financially free. I've changed my spending habits to fit my financial goals and so far it appears to be working. I'm now stress-free and living a very easy and satisfying life on a 35-45k/year position with no worries for my future. Change your spending habits! [link] [comments]  |
| Bloomberg article anticipates the US stock market could be headed for a lost decade Posted: 31 Oct 2020 08:46 AM PDT This article is definitely concerning and brings up some good points. I don't know that you can bet on tripling your investment, but I feel safe assuming that it'll grow considerably given that many people's current cost basis is based on the fire sale that the COVID recession brought at the beginning. And really the market is doing so bad right now because COVID cases are rising because it's winter, but once it starts to heat up and COVID cases aren't spiking the way they currently are I'm sure the market will regain some territory - or at least not be pinned down the way it currently is. And it seems like his assessment was generally a response to the conventional advice that you can guarantee returns by investing in an index fund that follows the S&P 500 or investing in the big tech companies (and there is definitely a concern that they could be harmed by anti-trust suits). But I think it depends on what you're investing in. Like if you're in airlines they're directly affected, probably more than any other industry, by COVID restrictions. Their earnings have been shit because of it and once people aren't afraid to travel I just don't see how their earnings and then share value don't go up. If you wanted to hedge against the sort of losses he talks about I would probably sell once they start announcing vaccines coming out because I'd be surprised if the market didn't drive prices up with their optimism that that means everything is going back to normal. On top of that, when he says that the market in 2012 still wasn't above its 2000 peak it's a bit disingenuous because when you look at the S&P over the past 20 years he's right, but 2000 was a peak (at about 1491), then after a dip, the market went to a high of about 1535 in 2007, then the market crashed in 08 and started recovering and he just picked an arbitrary point in that recovery that proved his point but which became irrelevant the very next year, in 2013, when the market DID exceed 2000 levels and then boomed over the next 7 years to more than double what it was in 2000 or 2006. Regarding what he said about big tech companies, yeah I would probably stay out of tech. Those companies already have such a high share price that I've always been skeptical of jumping in anyway. He also says globalization is in retreat, and I think that's a bit of a hasty conclusion. I think we're definitely at a crossroads where we're trying to determine if we're going to dive headfirst into a more globalist orientation or retreat and be more isolationist, but I'm skeptical that in the longer term we aren't going to be more globalist in orientation. But I do think we're in for a bit of identity seeking as it pertains to whether we're going to be more globalist or isolationist, because if you recall TPP had pretty steep opposition on both sides of the aisle - but not so much that Obama wasn't willing to pursue it. And I think the luster of isolationism has probably been tarnished a bit by Trump. Though globalism is really one of those things, just like anti-racism and shit like that, where this election seems to sort of serve as a referendum on it. Trump is certainly not a fan of globalism, but Biden seems at least more globally oriented and has at least in some cases shown an inclination towards reviving Obama-era policies that Trump dismantled because Biden was part of the Obama era so his legacy is sorta tied up in that as well, and one of those policies was TPP. As far as workers demanding a fairer split of capitalism, that's fair. I do anticipate things like wage hikes, but that could also result in people spending more because they have more (i.e. Keynesianism). I also think it's a fair point about the aging demographics thing. It makes sense that boomers would want to divest themselves of riskier stocks and people just haven't been having kids as much as they used to, so the working-age population is surely going to feel that bite at some point (though I'm not sure when). However, the US has long been an exception to the rule of shitty population growth rates in the west. In general, we don't have a ton of kids, but where we have historically differed is that we attract a lot of immigrants so our population grows that way - and Biden has already stated that he's going to be reversing some of Trump's immigration policies. [link] [comments]  |
| How do you do 401ks if you're self-employed? Posted: 31 Oct 2020 08:46 PM PDT Thanks in advance for any replies. Planning to talk to an accountant about this but trying to get some of the obvious questions answered quickly so I can do some planning. I know someone moving from being employed with an employer-coordinated retirement account into private practice, where, as I understand it, the route is to set up a self-directed 401k(?), and in that case may even be able to contribute over 19.5 or whatever the annual max is? Wondering if anyone has any experience or any resources to point me at. [link] [comments]  |
| Quarantine orders in England. How long before we get the same orders? March Dip v2.0 incoming? Posted: 31 Oct 2020 12:14 PM PDT Prime Minister Boris Johnson imposes stay-at-home order in England as coronavirus cases surge https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/31/prime-minister-boris-johnson-imposes-stay-at-home-order-in-england-as-coronavirus-cases-surge.html?__source=iosappshare%7Ccom.apple.UIKit.activity.CopyToPasteboard [link] [comments]  |
| The case for why ARKK ETFs are NOT an exceptional investment. Posted: 31 Oct 2020 08:30 AM PDT I would like to preface this by first saying I really don't care whether or not you personally invest in ARKK or whatever. If you believe in your investments more power to you and I'm not here to bash anyone's choices there's no guarantees in life. That said... ARKK is the concept of an actively managed mutual fund in the format of an ETF. Long term, study after study after study has shown (in the context of long term investing), an overwhelming majority of actively managed funds do not beat the regular stock market index. Furthermore, ARKK's high expense ratio has the potential to cause significant drag on your earnings if ARK fails to deliver on outperforming the market the next few years. So if you would not buy an actively managed mutual fund that sells itself by "outperforming the market" and "picking a collection of innovative stocks", why buy ARKK? It might seem revolutionary as an ETF. But when you view ARKK in it's mutual fund form, ADNPX, ARKK stops resembling some wonder ETF and starts to more accurately resemble what it really is - an active managed fund that's just attempting to rebrand itself. The REAL reason why Catherine Wood is a genius is that she has successfully identified and tapped into an new market of investors - young naive investors that follow hype with limited experience with active funds - and sold them on an old idea with trendy new branding. With her success with ARKK, you're starting to see a lot of other actively managed mutual funds release their own ETF versions to buy into this market as well and compete with ARKK. The only real way ARKK will prove me wrong and become a legitimate "exceptional" investment is if all of it's other holdings take off like Tesla did. Otherwise, Cathy more or less just got lucky at the right time and place. [link] [comments]  |
| Investing in Angellist syndicates? Posted: 01 Nov 2020 01:11 AM PST Please let me know what do you think of this: A founder exited his started for a small amount, and he wants to invest $100,000 in 100 different startups on Angellist syndicates, which usually has a minimum of $1,000 investment, assuming that he/she fully understands this is a very risky asset & he/she is the qualification for a professional investor ( barely meet the requirements ). But even if all $100,000 is gone, things are still fine. Here is what I think, and I could be wrong: - 10% will do ok -10% will do at least 10x. I think he/she will at least get their $100,000 back. Now, what is your thoughts about the above, is it a good idea for someone who potentially wants to become a full-time VC down the road? [link] [comments]  |
| Do REIT indexes make sense in a post-COVID world? Posted: 31 Oct 2020 11:11 AM PDT When I was building my portfolio, my advisor pointed out that REITs have historically been the best performing asset class, even more profitable than total-market stock indexes like VTSAX. Their only issue is tax inefficiency, which in a taxable account would make them less profitable net-of-tax than VTSAX. Therefore, I hold a combination of VGSLX and VGRLX in my tax advantaged account. As most of you know, REITs like VGSLX and VGRLX took a massive hit from COVID-19. They dipped over 40% during the COVID crash, and are still more than 20% below their pre-COVID price, while stock indexes like VTSAX are at their pre-COVID levels, in some cases higher. My concern though is about their long-term future prospects. VTSAX represents business in general, and as such, we have high degree of confidence in it recovering at some point in the post-COVID future. Indeed, this strong expectation is perhaps the chief reason it has already recovered. I'm wondering whether REIT index funds like VGSLX and VGRLX represent a much narrower - and therefore, less diverse and certain - economic hypothesis: that urban centers will enjoy ever-increasing economic growth, supporting ever-increasing real-estate prices. My understanding is that REIT indexes tend to hold real-estate assets in major, popular urban centers. Therefore, if those centers decline on long-term basis, REIT indexes are no longer a profitable investment. There are signs that this might indeed be happening. Jobs are becoming permanently remote, especially in the growing tech sector. The most desirable pre-COVID urban centers like NYC and San Francisco are undergoing a resident exodus, with rents dropping as much as 30% across the board. There's a massive relocation from urban centers to suburbs and sparser living. All of these would support a theory that REIT indexes are no longer a competitive investment. Even if residents move from expensive urban centers like San Francisco to less expensive urban centers like Austin TX, this will be long-term detrimental to the value of REITs, since it breaks the process REIT growth has previously relied upon: desirable urban centers becoming ever more desirable over time. Instead, we'll see a cyclical process, in which real-estate in certain urban centers appreciate for a while, until it reaches saturation, and then demand dies down as people set their sights on cheaper locations, which they can do as remote workers. This will happen because cities will no longer serve as pools of talented employees and the increasingly higher-paying jobs to employ them, fueling the real-estate price growth. For example, suppose you are a REIT that is heavily invested in an urban area that used to be hot before COVID, like San Francisco. You now notice an exodus, and your holdings are losing heavily. If you even still have the capital, you can check which cities are "the new hot", like maybe Austin TX, and you buy assets there. But then in a few years, instead of delivering substantial appreciation as they did pre-COVID, your assets stop appreciating because residents are now all moving to the next cheaper location, like Boise ID. This process will make consistent REIT growth impossible to sustain. If that's the case, why invest in REIT indexes in a post-COVID world? [link] [comments]  |
| Effect of brokerage charges on intraday trading. Posted: 31 Oct 2020 07:55 PM PDT Hello, I created a simple model to see the effects of brokerage charges on intraday trading. My assumption was that the brokerage charges were 0.5% and the initial sum was 100 + 12 (the +12 is because we are assuming that the average trader's account grows by 12%). And we further assume that the average trader buys and sells assets worth their entire funds everyday. In this model, the average trader will lose all their money in 112 days. Even if we assume that this average intraday trader trades 33% of his fund's worth of money everyday, this will mean they will lose all of it in 300 days or 1 year's worth of working days. Now if we assume that the brokerage is 0.03%, then this capital will last us for upto 4.5 years! or 13.5 years if they keep divesting and reinvesting 33% everyday. What do you guys think? Is this in line with any of your observations? [link] [comments]  |
| How can I invest into “remote work” Posted: 31 Oct 2020 05:58 PM PDT Covid has changed a lot about businesses and how employees can work. In my opinion, as time goes on more and more companies will allow their employees to work from home. What are some companies that are focused around remote work and would benefit from these changes. Yes i know im late to this but as a long term investor, i still see alot of opportunity for growth. [link] [comments]  |
| What are some ways to earn income (passive or active) on shares of stock you already own? Posted: 31 Oct 2020 10:26 AM PDT How can I earn additional money with the shares of stock I already own? I am aware that all options have their own risk/reward. Some obvious options:
What other strategies can be deployed to earn income similar to the above mentioned? Edit: Assume there are no restrictions on the stock being "used" in this way. [link] [comments]  |
| looking for UK sites that do VTI? Posted: 31 Oct 2020 09:39 PM PDT looking for good uk sites/apps that do VTI been using trading212 with VOO but they dont have it and robinhood is not avialable in uk should i just stick with Trading212 and voo or any uk guys out there that know any decent sites to trade with? thanks in advance [link] [comments]  |
| A warning to those who watch financial YouTube and/or hold CNSX:VERY Posted: 31 Oct 2020 05:50 PM PDT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkl39ppvTGg&t=83s This is mainly a post for people who watch YouTube for financial analysis. I don't care if you own $VERY. I think it's a pure gamble and if you're okay with that then it's not for me to say what you should/shouldn't do with your money. First, for those watch YouTube videos for analysis, please watch the first 2 minutes of this video and read the email Sven (the YouTube creator) received. TLDR for those who don't have 2 minutes: A organization contacted Sven saying that broker deals with YouTubers and public companies who are looking to get "marketing" for their "business model." Then they listed a bunch of YouTubers and publicly traded companies they have worked with/promoted. Their goal is to get the YouTuber to interview with the CEO or get a "vlog like video" made about the company or a combination of both. I looked through a bunch of videos where the YouTuber is interviewing the CEO of a micro companies. Some don't provide any discourses, some provide a generic bullshit discourses that doesn't specify that they have received financial benefit(s) to cover that specific company. I guess this is a matter for the regulators to figure out, but a lot of shady things are happening in the backgrounds. Companies have realized they can pay YouTubers get a direct pipeline to retail invertors and create "awareness" about their low volume, low market cap companies. If I were you I would be very hesitant in taking anyone on YouTube seriously. Especially the ones listed in the email. Secondly, to the holders of $VERY. Please watch the video. If you are really bullish on the company, then the way Management is diluting your ownership of the company shouldn't be that concerning. Plus its always good to have different points of view on companies we own. Although most people are not going to heed this warning. There has never been another time in history where so much information was available to us. It has become increasing harder to sift through all the garbage to find actual analysis. Good luck to everybody. Disclosure: I didn't make this video, I don't know Sven, and I don't have a position in the company nor am I going to open one. I just found a few interesting pieces of information I thought I would share. [link] [comments]  |
| Russell 2000 & IWM performance, anyone? Posted: 31 Oct 2020 10:12 AM PDT I noticed the Russell 2000 has performed quite well the last month, and even the last 3 months, despite being a serious laggard YTD. IWM 25.50% in 3 months vs. 9.04% for SPY and 12.38% for QQQ. This last month it's in the green while the rest are in the red. I don't own the fund as I have total market ETFs and I choose individual small caps. However, I couldn't help but notice on my radar. Russell 2000 growth has even better performance than the blend. Thoughts as to why the big switch here? Especially with these more domestic/smaller plays in the current environment? Do you think more or less risk going forward the next few months for small caps? Since it is so behind YTD, is it possible we might see further pulling away before the end of the year? I'm starting to wonder if it's not worth tilting a little here. [link] [comments]  |
| ATVI after Q3 '20: What is going on here?!?! Posted: 31 Oct 2020 04:57 PM PDT Minor negatives from the report:
Big positives from the report:
Other thoughts as we head into Q4 '20: COVID infections back up, new consoles on the way, and ATVI is about to release a new COD to their largest & most engaged community ever. So many analysts raised their price targets to $95 - $100, but the stock drops to ~$75. What a joke. I'm averaging cost my shares throughout Q4 regardless of the election and vaccine announcement... these guys are hitting on all cylinders right now. [link] [comments]  |
| Unpopular opinion time: people under 30 should not invest in vtsax Posted: 31 Oct 2020 11:45 PM PDT First of all, before voting or commenting, please read the following article - https://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1982327,00.html For everyone that is going to ignore the article, here's one quote that helps sum things up "Question: You are advocating that people in their 20s and early 30s take all their retirement savings and buy stocks on margin. Can you explain why that's not as crazy as it sounds? Answer: It's not as crazy as it sounds because it helps people better diversify risk across time. It would be really crazy if you only invested in the stock market one year of your life, because that could be a really bad year. That could be 2008. People do have the right intuition — that it's better to spread exposure to the stock market over time. The problem is, having just a few thousand dollars in the market in your 20s doesn't give you very much diversification across time when you have hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in the stock market in your late 50s and 60s. Another way of saying it is, we believe in stocks for the long run, but most people, when they have lots of stocks, don't have the long run, and when they have the long run, don't have lots of stocks. People seriously underinvest in the market for the first 25 years of their working life." I think that the default non-thinking reflex on this sub to tell people under 30 to invest in vtsax needs to be challenged So, what do you all think? Personally, as someone under 30 I'm heavily invested in TQQQ and UPRO (I'd rather have leveraged ETFs than invest on margin, there's a similar effect of increasing market exposure early) [link] [comments]  |
| Moving average drawdown protection in place of TMF - Hedgefundie's strategy Posted: 31 Oct 2020 10:03 AM PDT To start with, I contribute approximately 15% of my gross income to my union defined contribution pension plan, so I'm fairly well covered for retirement through that alone. However, being a DINK with 200k combined income, I still have substantial funds for investing (with lots of room in tax-free accounts) and would like to invest aggressively in those tax-free accounts. Age 33. That said, I have to say I'm interested in the Hedgefundie strategy and the principles of Lifecycle Investing. The former has certainly worked well in backtests, when equities have been rather steadily rising and interest rates steadily falling. I'm comfortable with assuming equities will continue rising but not as comfortable assuming interest rates will continue falling. And with interest rates being as low as they are, I see little value in holding Treasuries (or almost any bond other than high-yield ones, for that matter) other than as cheap insurance (in an asset that has historically been negatively correlated with equities). I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on using moving average crosses mostly as sell signals to prevent the significant drawdowns that can seriously harm leveraged ETFs (i.e. using moving average crosses as the cheap insurance). I've been considering a strategy of liquidating all leveraged holdings when the S&P500 crosses below its 350EMA and re-entering when it crosses back over the 50EMA, as a way of staying out during significant drawdowns and the accompanying increase in volatility. And perhaps holding TMF during those times, rather than all the time as per the Hedgefundie strategy. I feel like, going forward, TMF will underperform UPRO/TQQQ and thus will have an opportunity cost to it that makes it no longer cheap insurance. I understand that moving average strategies offer little protection for black swan events that cause significant gap downs, and I know there's the potential for false negatives when the market whipsaws (which would lead to unnecessary selling and buying - thus transaction costs), but I feel like the pros>cons. Please criticize. (Long UPRO/TQQQ/VWO/REET/PGHY/GDX) [link] [comments]  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Lose money with friends!. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment