Stocks - r/Stocks Daily Thread on Meme Stocks Monday - Mar 01, 2021 |
- r/Stocks Daily Thread on Meme Stocks Monday - Mar 01, 2021
- r/Stocks Daily Discussion Monday - Mar 01, 2021
- Chinese Nio electric cars on sale in Europe this year
- Investors beware: $ARKK is a liquidity disaster waiting to happen
- Staples officially announced partnership with Nerds On Site.
- Why is trading so unpopular in Europe?
- GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 6
- Why are so many people shorting Rocket Mortgage RKT? 35+% short?
- Here is a Market Recap for today Monday, March 1 , 2021. Please enjoy!
- Why Apple's iPhone 13 Could Be A 'Game Changer' With 1TB Storage Option, Lidar 12-month price target of $175, with the bull-case $225
- So what's with all the cultish behaviour ?
- Price Isn't Everything- Look at Market Cap
- Apple Investors Are Looking Ahead to iPhone 13. The Buzz Is Beginning.
- Hyliion - Finally in the News
- What 3 stocks would you pick if you had to pick 3 and throw the password away for 10 years?
- Sharing my Portfolio and Stock Tracker Spreadsheets
- Nio Earnings 01/03/2021
- I analyzed 3 legit stocks that I found using different tools that track social mentions and sentiment data
- Robinhood to file for IPO in March
- Costco earnings this week. What's yalls thoughts?
- Increased Institutional Ownership of $AMC in Q4 2020 and likely additional increase in Q1 2021
- All you need to know about JNJ’s vaccine
- What strategy has been the most successful to you?
- Weekly Stock Market News | NVDA / DASH / PLTR / ARKK & other stock market news [03-01]
- Buying stocks and selling Calls
- CRMD flash sale
- Workhorse to meet USPS on March 3 to discuss unfavorable contract decision
| r/Stocks Daily Thread on Meme Stocks Monday - Mar 01, 2021 Posted: 01 Mar 2021 02:30 AM PST The familiar "Rate My Portfolio" sticky can be found here. Welcome traders who just can't help them selves discuss the same exact stock that's been discussed 100s of times a day. I get it, you want to talk about what's popular, what's hot, and that 1.. single.. stock you like.. well here you go! Some helpful links just for you:
An important message from our mod u/TCGYT regarding meme stocks. Lastly if you need professional help: [link] [comments]  |
| r/Stocks Daily Discussion Monday - Mar 01, 2021 Posted: 01 Mar 2021 02:30 AM PST These daily discussions run from Monday to Friday including during our themed posts. Some helpful links:
If you have a basic question, for example "what is EPS," then google "investopedia EPS" and click the investopedia article on it; do this for everything until you have a more in depth question or just want to share what you learned. Please discuss your portfolios in the Rate My Portfolio sticky.. See our past daily discussions here. Also links for: Technicals Tuesday, Options Trading Thursday, and Fundamentals Friday. [link] [comments]  |
| Chinese Nio electric cars on sale in Europe this year Posted: 01 Mar 2021 07:59 AM PST Article from last Saturday 27th " Chinese electric car maker Nio plans to enter European markets from the second half of 2021, CEO William Li said at an online conference on Thursday. He also announced the company's intention to enter other international markets from 2022. Analysts suggest that Norway may be the first European market for Nio. The company is quoted on the NYSE, and its stock price is currently at about $43. Nomura analysts predict that it will jump to over $80 within the next few months, if it continues to meet delivery targets." https://cyprus-mail.com/2021/02/27/chinese-nio-electric-cars-europe/ [link] [comments]  |
| Investors beware: $ARKK is a liquidity disaster waiting to happen Posted: 28 Feb 2021 10:12 PM PST I recently got back on Reddit after a long hiatus - the volatility in Gamestop and other names brought me back to r/wallstreetbets and r/stocks. Lately I have been doing some research on Cathie Wood's Ark ETFs and am quite alarmed by what I am seeing. I am by no means an expert in finance, but I work in finance professionally. I spent 2 years on a long-short equity hedge fund in NYC right after college, and have worked in M&A for an asset management firm for the last 5.5 years. I am intimately aware of how active and passive (ETF) investment products function and acutely aware of the impact that investor fund flows can have on price and performance of an ETF. In the case of $ARKK and the family of ETFs, it is glaringly apparent to me that all of these ETFs in the last 12-14 months have become victims of their own success. What do I mean by this? We'll use $ARKK as an example. In the last 14 months, investors (and many of you) plowed money into $ARKK at a stunning rate - $10 billion in 2020, and another $5 billion in just the first two months of 2021. In conjunction with those investor flows, the Ark ETFs have developed what by any industry standard represent HUGE holdings in many of the portfolio companies, as high as 25-30% in dozens of cases. Many of these holdings are illiquid companies that don't trade significant volume on any given day. The combination of low liquidity, huge investor inflows into the ETF, and now enormous ownership stakes in the portfolio companies has had the effect of driving share prices higher. Much of the ETF's performance over the last 12-14 months is not a function of fundamental improvement of the portfolio companies, but a function of the ETF having to buy illiquid equity securities when inflows are positive. This may not be readily apparent to the untrained eye, but it is crystal clear for those with access to industry flow data. I ran an analysis on the weekly net flows into ARKK over the last 60 weeks, and found that portfolio performance of the ETF was highly correlated with ETF inflows. Correlation of 70% R-squared of 0.49 That is to say, the tail is wagging the dog! ARKK has created its own good performance, but not because the companies have grown or fundamentally improved. Nearly entirely the result of the ETF buying. What happens next? Last week was a taste of the trouble ahead. When investors sell the ETF instead of buy, in order to cash out the investors the ETF must sell some of the stock in its portfolio companies, except that liquidity or lack of liquidity becomes a much bigger problem when investors are selling and when the broad equity/tech markets have a correction. The ARKK ETF price has appreciated nearly 350% in a very short time. Now that Cathie Wood represents a big chunk of the outstanding shares within companies that have become overvalued by almost all measures, and trade with very thin liquidity, any meaningful reversal in investor flows (out instead of in) will result in a cascading collapse of the Ark ETFs. If the fund can generate returns of 350% in roughly a year, just imagine what may happen if investors move toward the exits in a much shorter period of time. As someone who takes pride in my analytical work, and who is concerned about the limited investor knowledge of many people who own Cathie Wood's funds, I would strongly encourage you to do more research. Learn about the companies held by the ETFs. Try to educate yourselves on valuation methods. And please understand that unless you are willing to lose every dollar that you have invested with Ark, you should take some time to reflect on the risks you are taking. After spending a very short amount of time on this subreddit and others, I am concerned that many people may not be aware of these risks, and unfortunately the small investors in Cathie's funds will be the ones who bear the brunt of any crisis. As usual with Wall Street, the insiders like Cathie Wood will get huge payouts and the little guys will get to hold the bag. It is not widely known, but good food for thought that Cathie has sold a chunk of her company to American Beacon. In recent months there were changes to these ownership arrangements that are not publicly known. Whatever happens, Cathie Wood will be just fine, but the small investors may not be. Good luck and I hope I am wrong. Edit - for inquiring minds, the link below is a detailed and succinct overview of some of these concerns from a Fintwit personality. https://twitter.com/BradMunchen/status/1366028953828270082 Edit - some have pushed back on the analysis and I appreciate the discussion, for additional thoughts on how some of these ETF products (and ETF's in general) can create distortions in the market, there are a few podcasts below that I found pretty worthwhile. https://www.zer0es.tv/interviews-and-analysis/the-perversion-of-passive-investment/ https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-end-game-ep-3-mike-green/id1508585135?i=1000483139066 Edit - some have suggested I re-create the analysis above on a number of more typical ETF products (great idea) to see if outcomes are similar. Some have also pushed back on the statistical significance of 70%/0.49. In finance if you can explain 49% of the variation using just one variable, it is pretty darn good. Not so good in physics or hard sciences. In any case, here goes... Background on methods and sources: Data comes from simfund, and the analysis is simple. We build a "roll forward" of the assets under management (AUM) for weekly flow data sets. An AUM roll forward is commonly found in the earnings presentations of all asset managers and is useful for understanding the sources of AUM growth in any given period. In this case: A: Beginning of period AUM <--- Sourced from Simfund B: +/- Net New Investor Flows <--- Sourced from Simfund C: +/- Market Performance <--- Implied by D less B less A D: End of Period AUM <--- Sourced from Simfund In this way we can see how many dollars flow into a certain ETF over the period, and how many dollars of market gains in the underlying portfolio took place in the same period. Presumably these two values (B&C) would be more highly correlated when B is large and the underlying portfolio is less liquid - causing upward pressure on prices for structural reasons rather than fundamental reasons, i.e. driven by the ETF and not by growth or fundamental improvement in the portfolio companies, i.e. paying a higher multiple for the same stock for no good reason. I think my analysis stands... but open to more constructive criticism. Output for Ark ETF's and compared with a number of other popular ETF's - Ticker: (correlation / r-sq) n = 60 weeks of data, which we focus on here because Ark products have seen such outsized flows (and returns) over this period Ark ETFs ARKQ: (69%/0.48) ARKF: (64%/0.41) ARKG: (42%/0.18) ARKK: (70%/0.49) ARKW: (70%/0.49) Other Popular ETF's SPY: (11%, 0.01) QQQ: (27%, 0.07) IWM: (20%, 0.04) XLE: (27%, 0.07) JETS: (21%, 0.04) Edit - Criticism of this approach may be that I am using dollar changes in both flows and portfolio returns, rather than periodic percentage changes, however my view is that it is the magnitude of the dollar flows that matters more than percentages when trying to ascertain the impact of illiquidity and investor flows. Edit - Worthy correction from u/notredwan - I was under the impression that American Beacon was in process on exercising its option to acquire a majority position in Ark as was originally agreed in 2016. Evidently that option was extinguished in December 2020 in a deal where Ark took on debt (and likely warrants) to pay off American Beacon on the option value. Back of the envelope math would have put the option value in the $100-150mm range. Reading here: https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1pw88ldyr905m/The-ARK-Invest-Takeover-Battle-Is-Over Edit - An interesting easter egg in Ark's daily email update and associated disclosures. Quoting from the thread linked below. On Friday, February 26, ARK expanded its daily trade email disclaimer to 718 words compared to 163 words on Thursday, February 25. Two new disclaimers: "Additional risks of investing in ARK ETFs include market, management, concentration and non-diversification risks" "There can be no guarantee that an active trading market for ETF shares will develop or be maintained, or that their listing will continue.." [link] [comments]  |
| Staples officially announced partnership with Nerds On Site. Posted: 01 Mar 2021 09:17 AM PST Been reading several posts about the 'rumours' of a potential partnership between Staple and Nerds On Site. This is a great opportunity for Nerds On Site to capitalize on Staple's $2.5 Billion a year customer base. The new was officially confirmed with a release from Staples this morning. I think there's a huge runway here for this company.
[link] [comments]  |
| Why is trading so unpopular in Europe? Posted: 01 Mar 2021 08:40 AM PST Even when there are Europeans trading they only trade on NYSE and NASDAQ, rarely LSE. Majority of people I talk to are rather sceptical towards trading or call it gambling or a place where rich just steal from the poor and there is absolutely 0 trust towards stocks. There aren't any major news outlets like CNBC and news stations rarely even talk about European indexes like WIG, DAX or CAC. Why is Europe not investing? What causes it? [link] [comments]  |
| GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 6 Posted: 28 Feb 2021 11:28 AM PST **Warning: This is a very risky play, trade at your own risk** Hello, All! If you are not familiar with this saga, feel free to catch up: Short Squeeze Explanation and Initial Thoughts Timeline and Predictions Around Earnings GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 1 GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 2 GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 3 GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 4 (Micro Update) GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 4 GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 5 Has the Squeeze Been Sqoze? Absolutely not Will the squeeze be sqoze? Potentially Strap in. This is going to be exhaustively long, but I have a lot to say. Please see my other work. I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. I am not a shill, I am not here for confirmation bias, I am a pragmatic, neutral party. Anyone who calls me a shill in the comments certainly cannot read and did not do their proper DD on me. If you read my previous works dating back 3 months ago you will see how terrifyingly accurate I have been thus far. Even in Part 5 I nearly perfectly predicted all of Friday's entire movements. Note: That does not mean I will remain accurate for the entire duration of this saga. I also am not saying all of this to flex, it's because I am tired of being called a shill when I was the original predictors of this squeeze and have since provided logical thought that has been proven accurate. This doesn't mean you should take what I am saying as truth, but it does mean that if it doesn't align with your thoughts you should probably put down the kool-aid, loosen up the tin-foil hat, and listen to someone else's opinion so you can make the best decisions for yourself. I am not a financial advisor, in fact, this isn't even advice. It is simply my analysis of the situation as it has always been. One thing you will find different with my work than others is my research is changing as the landscape changes. If people are still screaming about the original tactic and not acknowledging the new landscape we are in, please be very cautious of making financial decisions based on what these people have to say. I also want to make it crystal clear that I think the squeeze has not been sqoze, however, the landscape is very different now. Finally, any PT's including support and resistance are beyond difficult to predict. Please do not take these as certain numbers. It's the guess right now and that very well could change as soon as the market opens Monday. So What Happened Friday?For the sake of this not being an entire novel, I encourage you to read Part 5 as I think that prediction is precisely what happened. To summarize, we saw a bulltrap open us up in the morning and we ran to the 135 resistant point, volume wasn't enough and we tested in twice before people realized we would not be able to break through, that's when selling and more shorting occurred. The price dipped down to around 88. Now, I didn't mention this in the DD but I did mention it in the comments section that I expect interesting price action around 2pm. Why? Because of the call options expiring ITM. I think these shares were already covered. I know we expect a higher price increase, but why? Where is the math to back that the price should go higher during these covering sessions? Total Options That Expired On 02/26 ITM: 22,713 Data from here This would equate to 2,271,300 shares At 13:02 the price fell to ~86, this was the bottom before the upswing at the end of the day. By 13:07 there was a volume of over 20,000,000 in the buying direction. Not 5 minutes after we found the bottom for the day there was nearly 9x the amount of volume required for every single one of these options to be covered. At 13:07 alone there was a positive net change in volume of 17,656,000 nearly 8x the amount of volume required for every single one of these options to be covered...within 1 minute. The rest of the day continued to uptrend where we saw the price rise back to ~121. Then it began falling off again, as did volume. Now, ask yourself...why would this be the case? Because none of the price increase at the end of the day was organic purchasing, this was the ITM calls being covered. At this point I'm sure you're ready to stop reading and call me a shill, but I encourage you to carry on so we may understand what comes next. This may not fit your narrative, and that's ok. A squeeze is possible, it might just be time to think that it won't be happening quite the way you imagined. Before we move on to what comes next, let's play with a few more numbers and talk about this idea of holding.For some reason, people still believe that holding your shares is preventing HF's from covering. I cannot express how untrue this sentiment is. Holding is a valid play, but it absolutely should not be an attempt from keeping your shares from being bought by shorts. A 5 second look at any chart could show you there is more than enough sell volume for shorts to get their shares elsewhere if you are not willing to part with them. Let's take the largest post on r/gme as an example. The top post of all time received 59,600 upvotes. According to the comments most people are actually holding only about 1-10 shares each. But for the sake of the argument let's get ridiculous and say every one of those upvotes has someone who owns 100 shares of GME. Let's also assume every single one of these shares have been restricted from being borrowed to really screw these guys. That's a total of 5,960,000 shares that are being tucked away so HF's can't get their grubby little paws on them. On Friday alone, 91,960,000 shares were exchanged. So even in the most ridiculous of circumstances there were plenty of other sellers for shorts to purchase their shares back from. Holding is certainly a valid play, but there are two things holding certainly does not do:
If you are holding solely because of these two reasons, then you are playing this wrong. There are three reasons to actually hold:
If you don't believe me, then please examine the evidence. When you purchase a stock the price goes up, when you sell a stock the price goes down. So what happened when RH restricted trading? The price plummeted. Why? Because holding and selling were the only options. Let's play another absurd game and pretend that 100% of shareholders held when trading was restricted. The price would have gone completely sideways, it would not have gone up or down. But let's be realistic, that will never happen. Even if retail traders decided to hold, institutions certainly are not running around screaming that they are diamond handed apes who would rather go bankrupt before giving their shares up. No, no. They are going to take their profits and they will do so at your expense. You call them allies which they are not, they are here for profits as we all are and they will gladly sell with 100% gains while everyone else is waiting for 10,000% gains. I want to pause for a moment in this DD and take a moment to point something out. Even though I'm not trying to convince anyone to sell, I have been called all sorts of names as though I'm evil for offering my opinion and analysis of the situation. But let's be absolutely clear. You are the ones peer pressuring people into holding. You are the ones trying to convince people of your narrative. You are the ones who will be responsible when someone takes their life if this does not go the way you hope. If you have made it this far, congratulations, I would love to have a discussion regarding the "hold" play and how people could argue this is a viable tactic for any of the reasons not outlined above. My ThesisMy thesis remains the same, the shorts want a short squeeze. Yes, this sounds absolutely absurd but they are already making a fortune off of this. They need to as most of them lost a lot of money on the first round. They are reporting their losses publicly...but they have not disclosed their gains. I think they are intentionally opening unfavorable short positions in order to trigger a squeeze. They open and immediately begin to cover creating the much needed buying pressure that triggers FOMO and market purchasing as well. This allows the price to soar and they absolutely do not intervene. Once it reaches a massive sell wall or what they think is the peak, they begin shorting on the way down, opening new, extremely favorable positions. The gains from these new positions offset their losses from the unfavorable ones...by a lot. Institutional traders are not stupid, they see this is happening and also capitalize on it adding to the buying pressure at the beginning of a squeeze. They ride it up and they are part of the massive sell walls. As I mentioned before they are more than happy with their 100% gains in a day and have no intent on diamond handing this into the Earth. So institutions ride it up, sell at the top, where shorts begin opening new positions on the way back down. They then short just enough positions at the bottom so that this could be triggered yet again. Rinse and repeat. I think the idea of the Interstellar Yo-Yo was very close to being accurate except it was missing one key component, "Snidely" in the story is intentionally doing this. A circumstance like GME will never happen again, when this is all over there will be new regulations in place that don't allow these kinds of things to happen. Institutions and HF's would be out of their mind to not profit on this for as long as they can. So my thesis is suggesting that there will not be one massive short squeeze but instead a series of squeezes before this thing finally runs out of gas or is regulated into the ground. Let's think about that for a moment. If your original PT on GME was $1000, you are already almost there. The first squeeze took the price from ~$12 to ~$500, ~$488 increase. The second squeeze took the price from ~$40 to $200, ~$160 increase. So, already GME has increased around $648. You are now only a $352 increase away from your $1000 PT. Is a massive short squeeze still possible? Yes. However, so much of the DD floating around is all talking about possibility but we as investors don't care about that. We care about probability. So what is the probability of a massive short squeeze? Well, there would need to be a significant catalyst like we had on the first go around such as Cohen joining the board. I think there are still several catalysts which I outline in GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 3. There could very well be new catalysts that I have not mentioned since that post, such as Cohen getting appointed CEO as I have learned many believe based on his Tweet. Let's talk numbers. There are two very important numbers that need to be broken for a massive squeeze to be possible. $170 - This is the upper limit of the downward channel and if this is broken not only does it indicate a trend reversal and potential massive bounce, but there is little to no resistance to take us to the next important number. $200 - This is a MASSIVE sell wall. Why? Well, I think this is where a significant amount of shorts are positioned. Probably not right at $200, they probably shorted ~$205 but absolutely do not want anyone to break through that wall. If this sell wall falls, it could prove to be an incredibly massive squeeze however it would need to rise a decent amount beyond the $200 wall and maintain that price point to force shorts under for a long enough time period. If this happens, it will begin a domino effect of the well positioned shorts chasing them all the way up to the shorts who entered over $400. At this point, FOMO + shorts covering could certainly drive the price well over $1000. But what is the probability that this will happen? Without a catalyst or an enormous amount of volume. Let's consider the first squeeze and volume for reference. Jan 22nd: This was the highest volume at 197,157,900, the high was 76.76 and the low was 42.32 Absolutely insane volume, but it didn't move the price all that much (I mean at least in comparison to other days) Jan 25th: Volume 177,874,000 H:159.18 L: 61.13 Jan 26th: Volume 178,588,000 H:150.00 L: 80.20 Jan 27th: Volume 93,396,700 H: 380.00 L: 249.00 Jan 28th: Volume 58,815,800 H: 483.00 L: 112.25 Jan 29th: Volume 50,259,200 H: 413.98 L: 250.00 See the pattern? 25th: 177M volume to nearly triple the price (160%) 26th: Even more volume to only double the price (87%) 27th: Half the volume for a 52% increase The volume decrease is directly proportionate the the price increasing/decreasing, with the exception of beyond the 28th as trading was restricted. These first two days were crucial to triggering the squeeze. The 28th and beyond trading was restricted, but if everyone could only sell or hold, why wouldn't the price immediately fall? How could there still be support? This was shorts covering. Between just those two days there was ~109,000,000 shares exchanged where nearly everyone could only sell. A perfect time for shorts to cover. But I thought when shorts cover the price is suppose to go up? Absolutely...if trading wasn't restricted. Because virtually everyone could only sell, this means that almost all of the shares that were exchanged during these days was purchased by shorts and sold by panic sellers escaping the trading restriction FUD. So, as strange as it seems, I think the price going up was some shorts covering but for the most part, I think they covered while the price was falling. I know this seems counter-intuitive, but regardless of the amount of shares that needed to be covered, the amount of selling was able to drive the price down while they covered. Again, think about how there possibly could have been any sort of support while trading was restricted, someone was buying massive amounts of shares as the price fell...and it wasn't us. So, Hooman, if you think they covered already then why do you think a squeeze is still possible? Because of my thesis, entirely new shorts opened entirely new positions. Perhaps some of the old HF's also did to try to recoup some losses. Last week we almost forced this to happen all over again, but a TON of new shorts opened positions and the sell wall at $200 prevented us from tipping that very important, very first domino. This isn't the same landscape we were in where shorts were poorly positioned at very low numbers and we were able to catch them with their pants down, this is a different situation entirely. That situation is still squeezable. The question is...how? Volume. Volume. Volume. We would need those first two very important days to happen again and push us past that $200 sell wall AND hold us there in order to force the well positioned shorts to close. We were so damn close but couldn't quite break it. This is precisely why my predictions for Friday were so accurate. A catalyst, a whale, large global sentiment again, FOMO; there are A LOT of different ways this is possible, but as I mentioned before; we as investors deal with probable. In one of my original posts, long before this became a meme stonk, I literally used the word imminent in the title, that's how sure I was that the data and catalysts were aligned to create this perfect storm. If you now notice, all of my titles are What Comes Next? That is because this is the honest truth: literally no one knows. Why? Because third part intervention is now required for this to be possible and global sentiment and FOMO has worn off, more than that a lot of people have been burned and all the people who are still willing to play this stock are already bagholding and no longer have the capital to help with momentum. This has gone from a sure thing, to a straight up gamble. If I had to give it a probability, which I really don't want to do I would have to say 50/50. There is nothing significant pointing to anything that could get us past $200, but it is still possible with catalysts and other factors. What appears more likely is that this will be a series of squeezes up until it is regulated to death, people get bored, or a catalyst pops the MOASS's. But you can be certain of one thing: this will end. It does NOT have to end with a MOASS, but it might. My guess is that if there is no significant catalyst that ignites the MOASS by April, then this will be on pause. The interesting thing is that the possibility of a MOASS might never go away, but as time passes the probability lessens. The reason for my April guess is that is the end of all of my upcoming catalysts that could act as triggers. It is very possible that this thing cools down after that, shorts enter unfavorable positions, and then Cohen makes huge changes that starts this thing all over again a few months later. That being said, I think the most probable outcome is a series of squeezes that quite frankly, we are just along the ride for. There is no where near enough retail buying power anymore to force anything to happen, we are at the whim of institutions and big players who are deciding what comes next. How are they getting away with this? You. So long as the world things that Redditor's are the reason this is happening, they can continue playing. I've Been Asked By Many of You to Examine the DD posted by u/HeyItsPixeLDisclaimer: Both myself and this author are completely guessing as is everyone else. You should be reading everyones take and drawing your own conclusions. Overall Impression: Well done DD. There was a lot of work and effort put into this and the assumptions were data driven. I will say, there is a hint of biased mentality here using the data to fit the author's narrative. From a more objective point of view, this simply could have been shorts shorting. From a less objective point of view, it could fit support my thesis of shorts wanting these microsqueezes. Let't go as chronologically as possible. "On February 23rd GME opened at $44.97. Within the first few seconds GME reached its Day High of $46,23. GME also reached its Day Low at 9:50AM. So within 20 minutes after the market opened, GME reached its high and its low for the whole day!" "Conclusion: Someone got the price down by 10 % within a couple of minutes but the same someone got it instantly back up after that, making it seem, that their solely goal was to get GME on the SSR for the next day while trying to avoid a panic sell off by dropping the price too low. And that is really important now!" My take: I actually find this quite compelling. Either this was an institution attempting to bait out shorts while preventing a panic sell, or it fits my theory that this was actually a short who wanted a short squeeze. Both ideas are equally nuts, but we live in crazy times. "TL;DR: Hedgies vs. unknown Institutions (UI). UI set everything up for a gamma squeeze and need the price to close above $50. HF know and don't want that to happen and keep shorting the shit out of GME to keep it below $50. Both sides waiting for the other one to do something. Battle will start shortly before the market closes. Just a theory, no advice, ape hoping for banana 🍌💎🤲" My Take: I agree. Large institutions are in this and want a squeeze as much as we do. Either that or a whale buyer like Chamath. I also agree with the $50 assumption, as that was a clear battle ground. Where we disagree is I think that last week was in fact, the gamma squeeze. However, we did not have enough volume to continue off of the gamma squeeze and tip the next, more important domino at $200+. "On February 25th, there was a short volume of AT LEAST 33,000,000 to 51,000,000 Shares (highest report). " My Take: Well, first of all I really wish there was a link to this data. But let's go with Fintel's data that shows 33 million short volume on 02/25. If you look at the chart for 02/25 there are two very clear moments where this volume occurred. My guess would be these shorts are positioned between 140-180. This is one of the reasons I have been saying that the 135 resistance is a key point. If this domino can be tipped it will drive us up to the 170 and 200 point, but will we have the volume to break through those gates when we get there? I'm not sure. I mean, I hope so! But I'm not sure. Anything about naked shorting or what the actual short interest is or where the shorts are actually hiding, I'm not even going to touch. Why? Because it doesn't matter. This goes back to my original point, everyone is running around trying to answer the wrong question and prove that the squeeze has not been squozen. But who cares? I think 5 minutes of research can show you there is still an immense amount of short interest in this stock. What we need to be asking is WILL the squeeze be squozen and if so HOW? March 19th: Including the options chain, XRT data, FTD's, etc. I think this date could in fact act as a catalyst. But that's about it. To me I would just add this to my list of potential catalysts and not think much of it. There is a lot of good information backing this theory, but there is a whole lot more theory backing this theory. In my opinion, this date should just be added to list of potential catalysts that could either A: spark the MOASS or B: It could be the date of another microsqueeze. "MY Conclusion: The squeeze is inevitable." My take: Absolutely not inevitable. Certainly possible. Monday PredictionsAgain, this is not including any unforeseen catalysts that could kick this thing off. I can't express that enough. That is why holding is gamble that could really go either way. If something happens whether we see it or not it could send this thing skyrocketing. My predictions for Monday are based on no new catalysts. Virtually, I am expecting a repeat of Friday that could end differently. Open: I am expecting a sharp price increase at open, volume again will a key indicator as to which direction this is going to go. I imagine we will struggle at 115 resistance but we can hopefully blow through that, the real test will come at 135 resistance. If we reach 135 and blow through it, then this gets very interesting. I see the next resistance points at 150, 155, and then the really important ones of 170 and 200. I already explained that if we surpass these limits we are setting up nicely for a MOASS. If we reach 135 but volume is too low (if you're not sure how to gauge the volume keep an eye on how many times we retest it). If it takes more than two attempts, without a significant volume boost I can't imagine us being able to handle the more difficult resistance points. Shortly after Open: My guess right now is still before 10:00 (but it could go later in the day if I'm wrong about people covering on Friday) if we have not broken through those early resistance points, I think the slow bleed will begin. My bottom PT is somewhere between 60-80. Once we hit this mark, it gets difficult to predict. No one understands at all how the market fairly values this stock. The closest I would say would be 40-50 since thats where the greatest support we had was. It is entirely possible we see a bounce from the 60-80 price if shorts use this opportunity to cover, the market see's it as a good point to enter and ride the wave, or if GME is now simply valued at this price due to the management changes that helped kickstart this second wave to begin with. After that, it's a blur. This truly is a day to day stock to analyze and sadly I cannot provide this kind of DD every single day. I don't have work Monday so I'm considering live streaming this. So What's Your Play Hooman?Now, some of you will call me a shill_or_whatever but I simply have a different tactic. You might believe in the MOASS, but I'm not certain I think it's probable. So I will be playing these mircosqueezes instead. I mentioned in my last post, I have a really nasty wash sale. From what I understand, this is simply for tax purposes but my cost basis is still being increased by $100. IE if I purchase the stock for $80 my cost basis will be adjusted to $180. I'm still unclear on how this works, if someone could clarify in the comments section I would absolutely love to continue playing this stock. I will be spending the rest of today attempting to find this answer on my own time as well, so if I'm not responsive to the comments like I usually am, please understand I am attempting to prepare for this week. So...as long as the wash sale isn't an actual reflection of my real price, then I will buy as soon as the market opens. I will wait until we see how we handle resistance and if it looks like we have a shot at winning, I will buy more there to fight the good fight. If it looks like there is nowhere near enough volume and my purchase won't make a difference, then that will be my indicator to sell. This part is vital: If you are SELLING at the resistance points, you are hurting the cause. BUYING at these points is what will break through the wall. But if we make multiple attempts and cannot break through and it starts falling, then you might as well profit. You holding won't change the fact that we couldn't break resistance. I can't stress this enough. If you simply sell when we hit resistance, you will be part of the reason the squeeze doesn't happen. So either holding or buying will help push the price up at these targets, but if it is lost no matter what you do, then sell and prepare for another attempt. Once it gets below 90 I will start scooping up shares again, averaging down with the price (I do this instead of going all in trying to predict the bottom). From there I will wait to see if that second bounce does in fact happen again. If it does, I will sell at whatever I think the top is and then will re-enter just before close. Again, if there is enough volume and it appears there is a chance to break through then I will not sell, I will buy to try to push through that resistance. Why would I re-enter just before close? Three reasons:
If the same pattern continues Tuesday, I will repeat this play until the pattern stops and I am sitting on A LOT more shares at a MUCH BETTER cost basis. TL;DR: The squeeze has not been squoze, but it has become closer to 50/50 odds that it will occur. I think its more probable that a series of microsqueezes occur and I will play accordingly. Simply holding does not increase a price, buying does. My play will not only net me profits, but it will increase my buying power significantly. There is no TLDR to justify this post, if you don't feel like reading then you aren't playing with enough money to be concerned and none of this applies to you anyways. Just remember, this will all come to an end at some point and that end is not guaranteed with a squeeze. Happy trading! Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor, none of this is advice at all. It is my analysis of the situation that I have been following and my interpretation of the data at hand. The only direct advice I have for anyone is you should do what's best for you. I am bullish on GME long term which makes this a lot less risky for me because if I end up with bags (as long as they aren't too heavy) that's perfectly fine with me. Anyone who tries to convince you I am a shill or bot is almost certainly an uneducated investor, I am not even a bear on this situation, but you should always examine the bear case, not blatantly ignore it in search of confirmation bias. [link] [comments]  |
| Why are so many people shorting Rocket Mortgage RKT? 35+% short? Posted: 01 Mar 2021 08:34 AM PST The market loves disruptive fintech companies. Rocket is projected to grow moving forward and the valuation seems pretty fair compared to other similar stocks. I do own RKT and I'm happy to finally see some movement today. [link] [comments]  |
| Here is a Market Recap for today Monday, March 1 , 2021. Please enjoy! Posted: 01 Mar 2021 01:38 PM PST PsychoMarket Recap - Monday, March 1, 2021 Stocks staged a remarkable rally Monday as the market celebrated another effective coronavirus vaccine and Treasury yields stabilized. Each of the major indexes gained more than 2% today after suffering one of the worst weeks since October. The yield on the 10-year Treasury yield retreated to hover below 1.45% after spiking to a one-year high of 1.61% last week. The swift rise in interest rates last week spooked equity investors last week, with rates reflecting inflationary fears and impacting both corporate and consumer borrowing costs. Last week, during his testimony to Congress, Chair of the Federal Reserve Jerome Powell tried to temper fears over higher rates and inflationary pressures. He said, rising Treasury yields are a statement of confidence on the part of markets that we'll have a robust and ultimately complete [economic] recovery." Central Bank officials from the United Kingdom and Australia echoed Powell's sentiments and committed to maintaining accommodative fiscal policies. Over the weekend, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted emergency use authorization to Johnson & Johnson's (JNJ) single-dose coronavirus vaccine, making it the third vaccine approved in the US. The company has already begun shipping its COVID-19 vaccine and expects to deliver more than 100 million doses of the single-shot vaccines during the first half of 2021, including more than 20 million by the end of March. In Washington DC, over the weekend, the House of Representatives advanced the $1.9 trillion coronavirus stimulus package without any Republican support. The bill includes an additional payment of $1,400 to Americans, $400 per week in augmented Federal unemployment benefits, and $350 billion in State, local, and tribal aid. The bill now heads to the Senate, with lawmakers aiming to pass the bill before the mid-March deadline when current Federal unemployment benefits are set to expire. The Democrats are employing a process called reconciliation in order to get the stimulus bill passed without Republican support. Through reconciliation, Congress can enact legislation on taxes, spending, and the debt limit with only a majority (51 votes, or 50 if the vice president breaks a tie) in the Senate, avoiding the threat of a filibuster, which requires a 60 vote supermajority to overcome. As a reminder, there is a 50/50 split in the Senate, but Kamala Harris, as the Democratic Vice-President, has the power to break a tie. Highlights
The four most dangerous words in investing are: this time it's different." - Sir John Templeton (Last week was nothing more than a normal market mechanic, always important to stay calm and keep things in perspective) [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 01 Mar 2021 12:31 PM PST The iPhone supercycle that kickstarted with the launch of Apple Inc's AAPL 5.08% iPhone 12 will likely continue well into 2022, according to analysts at Wedbush Securities. The Apple Analyst: Daniel Ives has an Outperform rating on Apple and a 12-month price target of $175, with the bull-case price target at $225. The Apple Thesis: The next iPhone iteration, namely the iPhone 13, will likely be launched around September, Ives said. Initial Asia supply chain builds for iPhone 13 are in the 100-million-unit range compared to the firm's initial iPhone 12 reads of 80 million, he added. "While this number will clearly move around over the coming months, we believe this speaks to an increased confidence with Cook & Co. that this 5G driven product cycle will extend well into 2022 and should also benefit from a post-vaccine consumer "reopening environment," Ives wrote in the note. The iPhone 13 will likely have a 1 terabyte storage option, double that of the current highest Pro storage capacity, the analyst said. It will also include a number of enhancements, with Lidar across all iPhone 13 models. Therefore, the iPhone 13 could be a "game changer" indicating the supercycle party in Cupertino is going well in 2022. AAPL Price Action: At last check, Apple shares were rising 5.22% to $127.59. Latest Ratings for AAPLDateFirmActionFromTo Feb 2021RBC Capital Assumes Outperform Jan 2021DA Davidson Maintains Buy Jan 2021 Deutsche Bank Maintains Buy Shanthi Rexaline , Benzinga Staff Writer [link] [comments]  |
| So what's with all the cultish behaviour ? Posted: 01 Mar 2021 03:24 AM PST So i have notuced in the past few weeks ever since the so called $GME short squeeze has gained momentum, there has been a large influx of new subreddits being created which to me seem like echo chambers. People folowing a cult like mentality to hold the line, pumping the stock and never selling, discussing all kinds of 'battles' with hedge funds which are taking place ? Can anyone provide me with a sane overview of these so called 'battles' and what they mean by 'holding the line' What is their end game ? Are they really so emotionally invested in this stuff ? Are they simply bag holders who bought at the peak and are now suffering from cognitive dissonance ? To a normal everyday investor this seems quite strange and cringeworthy. People buy stocks, people sell stocks, people make money, people loose money. No one is out to get you, no one is fighting battles on the order book. /rant over [link] [comments]  |
| Price Isn't Everything- Look at Market Cap Posted: 28 Feb 2021 06:44 PM PST I have seen many people not buy stocks due to the price being too high or vice versa. I have also seen many people think that stocks will go up a lot because the price is "relatively" cheap and has room to grow. For example, I recently read a Reddit Post where the author said that they believe TSM will easily go to a price of $500-600. However, the market cap is already 591 billion meaning they expect they will be more valuable than Amazon or Apple. I am not saying this is not true, but market cap is extremely important to take into consideration. Apple's current price is $121.26 and Enphase's price is $176.06. Does this mean Enphase is the more valuable company? No. A company with a smaller cap has more room to grow than companies with bigger market caps regardless of the price they trade at. For example, it is more feasible that a 1 billion dollar company grows 10X than a company with a market cap of 50 billion to grow to 500 billion. If you think a stock is a good buy, don't become too fixated on the price and buy it. On the other hand, don' think a stock is a good deal because it is a low price. There could have been massive dilution. Good luck in picking your next winners! [link] [comments]  |
| Apple Investors Are Looking Ahead to iPhone 13. The Buzz Is Beginning. Posted: 01 Mar 2021 09:50 AM PST Eric J. Savitz•📷Last Updated March 1, 2021, 10:36 AM Investors are looking ahead to Apple iPhone 13. It's only been a few months since the arrival of the iPhone 12 lineup, the first Apple (ticker: AAPL) phones designed for 5G wireless networks. But Apple has a long history of annual updates to the iPhone. Aside from last year's slightly delayed launch, Apple has announced new phones every September since 2012. And the speculation on what to expect is beginning to unfold. Wedbush analyst Dan Ives this morning writes that the initial Apple supply-chain orders for the iPhone 13 are in the 100 million-unit range -- which he says compares with an initial build of 80 million iPhone 12 units. "While this number will clearly move around over the coming months, we believe this speaks to an increased confidence with [CEO Tim] Cook & Co. that this 5G-driven product cycle will extend well into 2022 and should also benefit from a post-vaccine consumer-reopening environment," he writes. Ives says he has "increased confidence" that iPhone 13 will have a 1-terabyte storage option, double the highest storage capacity in current models. He says the new phones will include "a number of enhancements," including Lidar across all iPhone 13 models. Meanwhile, Ives continues to think Street consensus iPhone forecasts for the September 2021 fiscal year are too conservative, at around 220 million units. He says that the company still has the potential to reach 240 million to even 250 million units -- and notes that Apple could be on track to beat its best ever year for iPhone units, the 231 million sold in fiscal 2015. That said, Ives writes that March quarter iPhone builds now appear to be in the range of 56 million to 62 million units, down from a previous estimate of 60 million to 70 million units -- he contends that recent softness in Apple stock reflects growing expectations that March quarter demand will be down a little from robust December quarter levels. Apple doesn't actually report unit sales, but the company had December quarter iPhone revenue of $65.5 billion, up 17% from a year earlier, ahead of previous Street consensus estimates of $59.6 billion. For the June quarter, Ives says it still looks the supply chain is building in the mid-40 million units, consistent with previous checks. "Geographically speaking, demand in China looks strong coming out of the Chinese New Year and remains a linchpin to our Apple bull thesis," Ives adds. "We also believe [average selling prices] are continuing to trend higher on a positive mix of iPhone Pro versions and Pro Max shipped, which bodes well for the next few quarters with this top-line tailwind." Apple stock on Monday is up 3.1% to $124.97. Write to Eric J. Savitz at eric.savitz@barrons.com © 2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 01 Mar 2021 09:52 AM PST https://money.yahoo.com/hyliion-ceo-bringing-electrified-solutions-165330102.html He really did well on this interview and it's incredible news for the company, it's stock price, and the planet. I needed this. To anyone interested, they're providing a fully EV semi and it's recharged onboard via renewable sourced natural gas. It's got a longer range, better cost efficiency, and higher payload tolerance than diesel and all other EVs currently on the market. The battery charges in less than 8 mins. Production starts this year for early adopters and full production next year. Unit is cost competitive with current diesel models. Look into it, let me know what you think. Always love feedback, DD. I've been holding for a while now, been pretty flat for me but I had the company valued at $220 in 10 years with a EV of 30B in the same time with a market share of 20% and a EBITDA multiplier of 15x (common in this market). Conservative estimates in my opinion. [link] [comments]  |
| What 3 stocks would you pick if you had to pick 3 and throw the password away for 10 years? Posted: 01 Mar 2021 10:40 AM PST My picks would be : NVDA, SQ, and STPK as my long shot. I think there could be some smaller stocks that obviously grow more but as far as established investments I think Nvidia will be in basically every single sector using some sort of tech and AI. SQ could be the future of our entire finance, and STPK is a green tech pick that has huge potential in a up and coming industry. I like genomics too but not sure which one I'd pick Honorable mentions for me : CRSP, TDOC, and BEAM. [link] [comments]  |
| Sharing my Portfolio and Stock Tracker Spreadsheets Posted: 28 Feb 2021 11:03 PM PST https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WLRBtpjPHTDjl6HcTK-dVZ8KRz3QOaUk/edit#gid=490356019 I wrote a little explanation on every sheet on how to fill the trackers with your Data. Had to make it myself because I couldn't find what i needed anywhere, at least not without paying. Turned to be quite useful, especially on keeping an eye on the stocks on my watchlist. Bonus content, latest Top stock recommendations from Alpha Seeker and Motley Fool. Edit: Make a copy of the document and save to your drive, no need to ask for permission to edit it. Hopefully link works, i never shared sheets before. Have fun. [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 01 Mar 2021 02:46 PM PST " Per-share loss of 14 cents on revenue of $1.02 billion. Nio has already disclosed that Q4 2020 deliveries leapt 111% to 17,353 vehicles, growing for the third straight quarter after the pandemic hit in early 2020. Gross margin improved to 17.2% in Q4 from 8.9% a year ago and 12.9% in Q3. Vehicle margin improved t0 17.2% from 6% a year ago and 14.5% in Q3. Nio's cash balance climbed to $6.5 billion at the end of the quarter vs.$3.3 billion in Q3. Outlook: Nio sees Q1 deliveries of 20,000-20,500 vehicles, up 421%-434% from a year ago and up 15%-18% from Q4. Revenue is seen at $1.13 billion-$1.16 billion." As seen in the link below https://www.investors.com/news/nio-earnings-q4-2020-nio-stock/ [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 28 Feb 2021 10:48 PM PST I've been seeing a lot of people build different tools in stocks and wsb that track social mentions and sentiment analysis for different stocks. Some of the good ones I've used include marketstream, quiverquant, unbiastock, gambiste etc None of them are perfect though. You still need to filter through the pump & dump/meme stocks to find companies that are actually worth paying attention to. So I spent most of the past week doing DD on a handful of stocks that these tools found that I thought were interesting. Here's what I found: P.S. Stonks don't always go up P.P.S. Always DYOR P.P.P.S. If you find this useful I write similar reports every week at [tickernerd.com](tickernerd.com) Mohawk Group Holdings ($MWK) Summary:
What they do: Mohawk Group taps into 2 major trends that aren't going away anytime soon: e-commerce and artificial intelligence. Their Artificial Intelligence Mohawk E-commerce Engine (AIMEE), Mohawk uses huge amounts of data and machine learning to research and identify which consumer products sell online then either launch or acquire brands in these niches. This has allowed Mohawk to build a mini-conglomerate of consumer packaged goods (CPG) brands that sell mainly through Amazon. Why they're getting hype: According to Unbiastock.com total Reddit mentions of Mohawk Group increased by more than 2500% from 02/19/21 to 02/21/21. This was most likely due to Mohawk's strategic acquisition of Healing Solutions, a leading online seller of essential oils. The acquisition is expected to bump MWK's revenue upwards to around $340 million to $370 million, as indicated by Mohawk's adjusted outlook for the 2021 financial year. Why MWK could be valuable: Mohawk has already made a number of acquisitions and plans to continue making more in the future. Mohawk's management never explained exactly why they acquired these brands but you can bet it was because AIMEE identified something in the company or the market that made Mohawk pull the trigger. Mohawk's acquisitions can become profitable fairly quickly too. For example they acquired Healing Solutions at 3.8 times operating income, a surprisingly cheap multiple, but one that is normal when dealing with smaller CPG companies. If profits stay at these levels or grow, Mohawk will recoup all of its acquisition cost in just a few years. Once they acquire these brands Mohawk also uses AIMEE to optimize sales and marketing in a more efficient manner to hit bigger revenue targets than what the company would do on its own. Mohawk is able to rinse and repeat this strategy to keep boosting their net income. Mohawk also sells its AIMEE software to other online sellers through a software-as-a-service (SaaS) model. Revenue from the segment is currently only a tiny portion of Mohawk's overall business, but it has high margins and a huge market opportunity. For reference, there are over 2.5 million active sellers on Amazon alone that Mohawk can target with this software. What the risks are: Mohawk's model relies heavily on Amazon's platform to reach their customers. For now this isn't an issue but there can be risks relying on one main source of traffic to their stores. If Amazon decides to make major changes to their algorithm or seller rules this could hurt Mohawk's brands. Their market cap is around $840 million and the stock has a price-to-sales ratio of 3.9, making the valuation a bit rich, but not overblown when considering what management believes long-term profit margins can get to. If you believe in the growth of third-party sellers on Amazon and other e-commerce platforms and want to put your money behind it, Mohawk Group could be the best way to do that. The stock might be up over 400% in the past three months, but it is still early innings for this tech-enabled CPG conglomerate. Hims & Hers Health ($HIMS) Summary:
What they do: Hims is an internet pharmacy and telemedicine startup that went public via a S.P.AC in late January 2021.I analyzed 3 legit stocks that I found using different tools that track social mentions and sentiment data The company aims to help men (and women, thanks to a new expansion) save time, money, and the potential embarrassment of a doctor's appointment by delivering health products to customers' doorsteps, with no shipping costs. These include prescriptions for erectile dysfunction, hair loss, skincare and anti-aging solutions, mental health services and even COVID-19 testing kits. Why they're getting hype: According to Unbiastock.com, Reddit interest in Hims increased by 7244% when comparing February 2021 to the previous month. This spike happened around the same time Cathie Wood's ARK Investment Management disclosed an ownership position in the company adding ~461k shares to their portfolio. For those who don't know Cathie Wood a.k.a Aunt Cathie grew ARK's assets by 11x in 2020 to $34.5b with their focus on innovative, high growth tech stocks. Her investment in Hims is a huge vote of confidence in the long term prospects of the company. Why HIMS could be valuable: The rise of the telehealth industry is one of the biggest megatrends that benefited from the global pandemic. That's not the only thing Hims has going for them. Their primary target market is millennials. They're well positioned to continue building up their market share in this still-young demographic, with the oldest millennials turning 40 this year and the youngest ones at 25 years old. As millennials get older, they aren't going to be satisfied with the "old school" healthcare model. So, Hims has the potential to capture the market now and hold onto it in the coming decades. They're also growing fast. After starting in 2017 they managed to hit $27 million in sales in their first year. They're now projected to generate $179 million this year and $233 million in 2022. Hims estimates that the telehealth industry could reach a $500 billion total addressable market. They also have plans to expand into other "telehealth friendly" markets with international expansion on the table as well. What the risks are: Healthcare startups including Hims and their competitor Roman have been criticized for making getting a prescription for hair loss treatments, ED pills, and beta blockers a little too cool — and possibly too easy. They have been the subject of reports from Bloomberg, The New York Times, and other outlets questioning the ethics and legal implications of pushing prescription medication with very little (or no) oversight. It's possible Hims could find themselves in a regulatory battle similar to Uber or Airbnb as they continue to grow. Vuzix ($VUZI) Summary:
What they do: Vuzix Corp is a supplier of smart glasses, AR technologies, and products for consumer and enterprise markets. Founded in 1997, Vuzix is one of the pioneers of AR, wearable computing, optics, and display engines. While AR—alongside virtual reality (VR)—only became buzzwords in recent years, Vuzix has been delivering tech solutions to customers for more than 20 years. Why they're getting hype: Reddit interest in Vuzix has surged by more than 17000% in February alone according to Unbiastock.com. Vuzix was also recently snapped up by ARK who added 292k shares to their ARK Autonomous Technology & Robotics ETF ($ARKQ) on 02/19/21. Even though they've already surged over 500% in the past 12 months, analysts are bullish Vuzix still has more room to run as the adoption of AR technology becomes more mainstream. Why VUZI could be valuable: AR and VR are usually associated with gaming. But you won't find a Vuzix-branded gaming headset. Instead, the company is mostly known for providing AR head-mounted displays in the form of smart glasses. These products have enjoyed increasing adoption in the enterprise and health-care world. For example, smart glasses can help with barcode scanning, order picking, and fulfillment in warehouses. In the manufacturing industry, they can facilitate work instructions, step confirmation, and quality assurance. For field services, smart glasses enable remote support. Thanks to their lightweight design and flexible hardware, Vuzix's smart glasses are ideal for use in health care and telemedicine. Although Vuzix is not a big-name company, they already have many big-name customers. Some notable examples include Verizon ($VZ) who are working with Vuzix to co-develop a 5G-enabled smart glasses emergency medical service (EMS) solution and Clorox Co ($CLX) have started using "Vuzix M400" smart glasses to address the operational challenges brought upon by COVID-19. What the risks are: It's still early days for Vuzix. Their current share price has already priced in big expectations on their future profits. Five-star rated Wall Street analyst Jack Vander Aarde still thinks they have a lot of room to run "we believe it would be reasonable for VUZI to trade at a premium to peers, based on our view that VUZI is well-positioned for multi-year revenue growth of 100%+ (which we consider rare)." "We believe its commercially ready technology and product portfolio is ahead of competitors, which we expect to result in VUZI having a dominant share of the nascent and rapidly expanding AR/VR wearables market." If you want to bet on the future of AR and VR technology Vuzix could be a great opp. Let me know what you think :) [link] [comments]  |
| Robinhood to file for IPO in March Posted: 01 Mar 2021 02:19 PM PST http://digesttime.com/2021/03/01/robinhood-to-file-for-ipo-in-march/ US brokerage Robinhood plans to file a confidential file to conduct an initial public offering (IPO) in March. This information was released by the Bloomberg news agency, which heard sources familiar with the matter. The broker last week held talks with subscribers about the progress of the process. According to the sources, Robinhood has not yet made a final decision on going public, so interest may change. Last year, Reuters reported that the broker had chosen Goldman Sachs to lead preparations for the IPO that could be valued at more than $ 20 billion. Earlier last month, Robinhood said it raised $ 3.4 billion, including the $ 1 billion contribution announced on February 29. The capital injection comes at a time when Robinhood is rushing to strengthen the business in the face of the strong increase in the number of customers and negotiations on its platform after the events of the GameStop case.
[link] [comments]  |
| Costco earnings this week. What's yalls thoughts? Posted: 01 Mar 2021 09:44 AM PST New to trading and haven't been through an earnings cycle yet. Is there any sort of general rule/strategy when it comes to placing trades close to earnings calls? Costco had a sizeable dip over the last month, and it is not a cheap stock by any means, but I see this as having a good quarter and an even better spring and summer as stimulus rolls out and people turn back to retail amidst greater vaccine roll out. Thoughts on this? I think this recent Costco dip might've provided a good entry point on it....and to jump in around the 330 price point. [link] [comments]  |
| Increased Institutional Ownership of $AMC in Q4 2020 and likely additional increase in Q1 2021 Posted: 01 Mar 2021 11:54 AM PST Earlier today I saw a post that mentioned an increase in institutional ownership of AMC in the fourth Quarter of 2020. From what I can see this is likely to further increase. It's a good thing overall! But I think it's important for people to understand why this happens and I just to add a small bit of value to that observation. Apparently, Institutional Ownership is up 65%. Institutions held 40.9 million shares at the end of the quarter ended Dec 31 and increased by 16,151,852 shares. Just to explain to my fellow investors that when institutions purchase a security, there are many reasons other than speculation or simply loving the stock! Sometimes they are obligated to buy/sell depending on their mandate. The main reason institutional ownership in AMC increased, is that ETF and Index funds have to periodically purchase or sell the constituents of the indexes in order to remain properly balanced. When a stock drops in price they sell in order to buy stocks that increased in price and vice versa. So if say a stock's market cap doubles between December and March, (assuming nothing else changes in the index) then that stock's weight will double meaning indexers need to own twice as many shares to remain properly weighed. This creates buying pressure on the date of the rebalance. Most indices are cap weighted. The chart below illustrates this more clearly in the case of AMC AMC Institutional Ownership Increase/Decrease by Quarter Index funds, a very passive discipline. They simply try to replicate the underlying index they track and outperform it by a minimal of margins. It's very difficult to do because inherent transaction costs eat away at you. Fund managers oftentimes get compensated by how much they outperform their benchmark in basis points as in "adding alpha". (1 basis point = 0.01%) As an example look what happened to Tesla when it was announced they would be added to the S&P 500. Institutional ownership went through the roof overnight because there every S&P 500 manager was now forced to buy the shares in order to remain properly weighed. To give you an idea of the magnitude effect this has, if you look no further than the S&P 500 index funds and the SPY ETF combined command roughly $1 TRILLION dollars of money that needs to replicate the index accordingly. The higher the market cap of the stock the more shares they need to buy. In the case of AMC, it is currently in the Russell 2000 index and in several ETF's. Given that the price has changed 100% since December, there is a good chance that it is looking like a Buy in many managers list. The big event being the Russell Reconstitution that occurs in June. However, in the meantime ETF's that rebalance once a month and the potential inclusion of AMC into one of the S&P Indices could help increase the exposure to institutions and provide some level of support. Hope this helps someone! [link] [comments]  |
| All you need to know about JNJ’s vaccine Posted: 01 Mar 2021 08:17 AM PST While you were debating blueberry smoothie vs. greasy b/e/c on Saturday, the FDA authorized Johnson & Johnson's vaccine for emergency use. Game = changed. The federal government expects to distribute 100 million doses of the J&J vaccine by the end of June, starting with 4 million this week. On top of the doses provided by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech, that means a vaccine will be available to every American adult who wants one by the end of July. J&J's vaccine is only one dose and can be stored at normal refrigeration temperatures, so it's ideal for use at drive-thru vaccination sites and with "transient population groups," such as those on college campuses. It's the Covid era, so you know there's a "but." The US is still dealing with new Covid-19 variants, particularly B1351, and the decline in case numbers looks like it's plateaued. Plus, the J&J vaccine's effectiveness rate is a bit lower than the other two, so public health authorities are worried about people dismissing it as a second-rate option. Bottom line: The vaccine works really well and health leaders encourage everyone who's eligible to get it. [link] [comments]  |
| What strategy has been the most successful to you? Posted: 01 Mar 2021 11:05 AM PST I've been trying different strategies recently and some have worked while others haven't. I'm curious to know what have been done. Focusing on a few stocks for a week and making money? Investing long term? [link] [comments]  |
| Weekly Stock Market News | NVDA / DASH / PLTR / ARKK & other stock market news [03-01] Posted: 01 Mar 2021 12:56 PM PST The stock market cools of as technology drops after the treasury yields spike. Roku, Deere & Twilio smash earnings expectations while Walmart disappoints. Palantir sells off on mixed results, so let's talk about this and other stock market news Hello everyone! So, let's start with the recap of last week, as we saw the broad stock market selling off, with the SP500 losing 2.4%, the Dow Jones dropping 1.8% and the Nasdaq Composite shedding almost 5% in what was the worst week since October for the index, with high flying ETFs like the ARK Invest ones, also suffering big last week, though this didn't stop Cathie Wood from going on and buying the dip in names they believe in like Tesla & Palantir despite the record outflows of the ARK Innovation ETF 10 of the 11 SECTORS finished the week in the red, as only Energy managed to somehow outperform, finishing the week with a solid gain of over 4%. The rise in yields had a big inverse effect on the volatility INDEX, as the VIX spiked over 25% to finish the week just under the 28 level. HERE is the HEAT MAP from last week and as you can see, it's very hard to find bright sports outside the energy sector, as most of the other sectors were bleeding, but a couple of entertainment stocks alongside the more value heavy sectors like financials & industrials had some companies posting positive weeks. We also saw some interesting economic data last week, with the consumer confidence coming in higher than expected in February as consumers have started to feel that the present situations are improving, while on the Jobs front, we saw initial jobless claims plummeting over 100K with the continuing jobless claims also coming down to just over 4.4M, which might have helped push the sell-off in the stock market from last week, as unemployment fears maybe just ticked down for the moment, as the personal income and spending increased by 10% M/M with the stimulus checks being a big reason we saw such a big spike. This week we get some more economic data, with the unemployment, jobs & jobless numbers taking center stage yet again, while on the EARNINGS front, we are finishing the earnings season with interesting names like NIO, Zoom, Snowflake, Costco & many others reporting this upcoming week. In some other stock market news, we saw Palantir take a big dive last week, being hit with extra bad news on the top of the broad market pullback, as 3 insiders filed to sale shares of the company, but on the other hand the stock did receive some better news on an expansion of their deal with 3M. We also saw the biggest company in the world, Apple, taking a big hit last week, dropping over 10% despite planning to increase their annual dividend and dismissing the antitrust concerns regarding their App Store policies. On the earnings front, we saw DoorDash missing expectations on the bottom-line earnings by $2 as they only modestly impressed on revenues and I believe face a though challenge ahead as the stay-at-home stocks will slowly but surely start to see a significant slowdown of their massive growth. Doordash also disappointed on gross & EBITDA margins while also giving shaky outlook for the future of the company given the huge expectations demanded by their insanely high valuation. NVIDIA also reported last week and smashed expectation in what was the biggest quarter in the company's history, as they brought in revenues of $5B and beat the bottom line with an EPS of $3.10. They also offered impressive guidance, around $800M better than analysts expected, which in my opinion is insane. The biggest revenue segment that helped Nvidia crush the numbers was again their Gaming & Data Center stream, as this continues to grow again 10% Q/Q and came in 67% better than the previous year. So yeah folks, let's hope for a better week in the stock market, as we might start the month with new inflows from cash on the sideline that might get added on the dip to the stock market, as I think we will see a major dip in the investor sentiment INDEX, which last week still came in with a bullish sentiment of over 45%, which combined with the previous 2 weeks in which we saw huge bullish sentiment, might have warned investors of the potential correction or pullback in the stock market, as this has been a good contrarian indicator many times in the past! Thank you everyone for reading🙏 Hope you enjoyed the content! Be sure to leave a comment down below with your opinion on the stock market! Have a great day and see you next time❗ [link] [comments]  |
| Buying stocks and selling Calls Posted: 01 Mar 2021 09:13 AM PST So from the title you can see this is a post on trading and not an investing. Say you have a company you buy in at $10. You see hype and the stock is going up, it's now at $12. You think the hype will push it higher maybe to $13 but not quite to the moon like the hype seems to be talking about. Is this a situation where if you bought 100 shares at $10 you could then sell a call option of say $15 to also lock in gains from the premium? Is this also then the essential idea of ever buying a call option? A hope for upward moves but still a plan to sell because you honestly don't even believe it will be 'in the money'?? Of course if you sell that means someone bought believing it would be or even higher of course. Just wondering about this type of trade strategy. Buying enough shares at a price you like and selling options at a higher price to gain a premium on top of any gains you've made (by having the shares already I'm assuming this means you removed all risk of the stock skyrocketing but of course you lost all those extra unrealized gains by being forced to sell your tendies) Anything I'm missing here? In this situation also can you repeatedly keep selling call options forever if the price never hits?? Should we all then have a goal of 100 shares of any stock we like? To be protected but always locking in profits with selling Calls? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 01 Mar 2021 02:13 PM PST Hey there, So CRMD was expected to get FDA approval for its Defencath product (basically a catheter valve solution that severely limits the chance of infections) However, it didn't. FDA declined it, and it's stock fell from $15 to the mid-high $8 as of writing. Did this absolutely screw my March 19th 15c yes. Did I sell them for a massive loss, yes. But, there is a massive upside for people interested in getting in now (and I still have September 17c, lots). See, the FDA did not decline the product because it is a bad product, it is clinically proven and the FDA doesn't want anything else in that regard (it's also already approved and in sale in the EU) The FDA had an (undisclosed as of now) issue with the 3rd party manufacturer. So in my eyes, all the same value in the company is there, it's just the dates that got pushed back. And they have funding to last then into 2022 without diluting. The earliest the FDA can have a meeting (due to covid backlog) is April. I think now is a great time to buy shares because once they get approval this thing is worth $30+ easy. Positions: 300 shares @8.03 16 x September 17c Formerly 9x March 15c (RIP) [link] [comments]  |
| Workhorse to meet USPS on March 3 to discuss unfavorable contract decision Posted: 01 Mar 2021 02:06 PM PST Many people had high hopes for Workhorse (WKHS) to win the multibillion dollar contract with the USPS to renovate their entire mail carrier fleet, specially after Biden signed an executive order that would force all government vehicles to become hybrid/electrical. However, the stock plummeted over 40% after Workhorse lost the bid. Others are confused as to why the contract was awarded to Oshkosh, meaning the new mail trucks would use gasoline. Is there any chance the decision is changed? [link] [comments]  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Stocks - Investing and trading for all. 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