Reddit Posts
Mentions
Don’t understand why ppl think it matters so much? 1) Even with that revenue, Solana is net inflationary and prints more token in USD term than any L1. So its revenue is not really doing meaningful supply control relative to its inflation. 2) If you look at it from a “productive asset” PoV, it has a horrible PE. If you are aiming for dividends, plenty of stocks give you a better bang for your buck.
When you bet on an AI stock, you're not just betting "AI will be big". You're betting that specific company will justify the likely huge PE ratios they are trading at even though the disruption risk for every company is huge. With bitcoin you get the safety of sound money with the returns of a growth stock. There is no second best.
Probably interest rates/money printing is mostly what people discuss. But in recent times, a lot of the gains in the S&P 500 have come from PE ratio expansion and not company growth. That is not likely to be long term sustained.
Using a historical PE on the whole S&P is not a good metric. It gets mentioned all the time in stock subreddits, and many users are always quick to explain why it’s not a relevant metric.
Yes, using the CPI data. You said housing has become significantly more expensive, and it has - using the CPI data. Compared to M2, stock markets are up and housing prices are flat. The average PE ratio 30 years ago was 20, but 28 years ago it was 33, 25 years ago it was 46, 13 years ago it was 15… We’re closer to the average since 1990 today than we were 30 years ago. The forward PE however is much less volatile over time and a more relevant indicator to look at.
Yes, if you use the CPI data. Try that again with M2 increase. Looks a lot hairier now, doesn't it? Alternatively if money creation doesn't flow your boat, look at PE ratios, they're climbing up. So companies cost more relative to their income. Average PE ratio 30 years ago was 20. Average PE ratio now is in the 30s. Meaning that every dollar you put into the company will take the company 30 years to earn that dollar. I'm also not arguing the stock market is completely flat either. We're just in a situation where the stock market isn't allowed to go down or political party 1 will get voted out and political party 2 will get voted in. So to do that you season it with a little monetary debasement while you pour in some price to earnings inflation. Number go up.
I put the odds of bitcoin having the same market cap as gold in the next decade at 80% which would give it a 10x from here. Not sure what other assets you will get that in over the next decade. At the same time, stocks have a PE ratio of 27 which is 80% higher than historical medians.
VSs and PE destroyed america a long time ago.
Lots of WS and PE guys have solana and want it to replace ETH as number two.
What I don't understand is why don't they focus on real ponzis like FIAT. They don't critique it at all. Furthermore, how the top 1% own more of the USD circulation (2/3) while the other 1/3 is left for all of us to fight over. So many flaws in the dumb current financial system. How about stocks that have PE ratios of 100 and over? Sigh
> ETH is like Amazon in 2000 Zoomers investing with meme narratives is exactly why you keep losing money. In 1999, Amazon had a PE ratio of like 160 at one point. It was an online startup that did sales of mostly books and was LOSING money. The entire stock market was in a huge bubble with a PE of 33 and things came crashing down. Through the next 15-20 years, Bezos and Jassy transformed Amazon to a retail giant which today has: - 40% market share of all ecommerce. 40% of all online sales goes to Amazon. - 30% market share of Cloud Computing, a massive cash cow where the world, business, governments, media, etc all run on AWS Cloud. - A massive global delivery infrastructure including 1.5 Million employees, 100,000+ vans, 99+ Airplanes, 175 massive fulfillment centers - 350 Data Centers across 20 countries, a massive global infrastructure of undersea transatlantic and transpacific cables bypassing the slow public internet for their content delivery networks ETH is no AMZN. Nothing is being built on it except Shitcoin Casinos. Sure it'll be used as rails for Stablecoins but as I've warned before it's just competing to be a cheap network with other networks and its own L2s. Just like the Meme ETH narratives of DAOs, ICOs, DeFI, Triple Halving, Ultra-Sound Monies....the RWA and "ETH is like AMZN" will continue to result in losses or at best missed opportunity in better investments. > ETHs value appreciation comes not from utility but like all Alts from capital and liquidity brought by BTC -- see point 1. Also, **in order to compete with other chains, Ethereum will have to scale and that has seen the rise of L2/sidechains which results in loss transaction fees and MEV tips essentially stealing value from ETH. This essentially turns Ethereum, Solana, BSC, Tron, L2/Sidechains, etc into competing networks for DeFi casinos and rails for StablecCoin transfers where they have to remain cheap or utility and users will move to competing chains.** BTC on the other hand has no competition. It doesn't have to scale, it doesn't have to become cheap, it doesn't have to keep advancing, it doesn't have to keep up with the competition because there is no competition. > *All this points are illustrated with ETH value is already being less than 1/3 BTC value from the summer of 2017 and continuing to trend lower over time. A short time frame of possible ETH out-performance if/when BTC goes on a big bullrun will draw short-sighted fools and their money who will over time watch with despair the falling ratio just as /r/ethfinance is doing so today.* https://np.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1f9ef5k/daily_general_discussion_september_5_2024/llmkgtm/
Yep... That right that's why it is it a bit down? Tarrifs? Tarrifs are the trigger of the underlying problem. Thing can and will eventually correct. For fucks sake, look a little bit further then 2 or 3 weeks. Zoom out a bit and look a the big picture. What you're describing is the price that is feedback loop, not the undelaying value. e.g. Buffet can describe that in great detail. You're right, S&P was completely overvalued with a P/E of over 30! That means without further growth (and now there will be non thanks to tarrifs) you'll get about 3% return. That is lower then the bond-yield. If it reverts to the mean of even a low 6% yield, we'll be looking at a P/E of 15. Meaning 50% lower and an S&P of 3000. All while the rest of the world sits around a PE of 8 to 10. FYI. If the price went up even further... what would be the point? There would be no value left in it. Nothing to support it. And if you bought something without value, it's your own fault. You'll be holding the bags. The stockmarket isn't connected to the dollar, it truly is connected to the underlying value and profit.
Well objectively calling someone dense is an insult, but sure, call it an observation. Go off lol. I do sort of see where you're coming from that it's not totally timing the market, but if you're doing a lump sum on any given day - what happens if your buys just happen to be at every single peak? If you tell me "Well I avoid peaks and look for dips" - that is trying to time the market, no? [does dollar cost averaging reduce risk - Google Search](https://www.google.ca/search?q=does+dollar+cost+averaging+reduce+risk&sca_esv=bd155e7d16634e36&ei=jCsAaL_PE7yF0PEPi46X8As&ved=0ahUKEwi_xffDyd2MAxW8AjQIHQvHBb4Q4dUDCBE&uact=5&oq=does+dollar+cost+averaging+reduce+risk&gs_lp=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&sclient=gws-wiz-serp) Why are you on a crypto sub if you're just here to tell people it's gambling? Lol. Although if you're speaking about anything other than BTC - any shitcoin for example - yes, they're all gambling. Cope? Because I am happy with my life and I don't need to be obsessed with the markets? What the hell? Haha. So you're saying I am lying to myself about how much I love my life and I should be out here trying to maximize my profits in every single way possible? Get a grip man. Why are you telling them their decisions are stupid? You think you're some white knight out here trying to help people? People will adopt the strategy that they're most comfortable with, why do you feel like you need to tell them what they're doing is stupid? People might think you're a fucking idiot anyways lol. Not being dense, just asking you which seems riskier :)
To put in perspective. In current environment a PE of 24 on the sp500 equals a PE of 18 in 1987 If you take into account the current interest rates. Now if you compare the quality of the company’s in todays sp500 vs 40 years ago… i dont think its even comparable. You have juggernauts with monopolistic products. I know tariffs are bad. But sadly the degens that were paying 1600 for a new iphone will probably still pay 2300 for that new iphone. + they will probably move most production to countries that make deals for 10% tariffs like taiwan or india.
PE ratio is only for calculating a fair valuation for a *business*. Currencies are not businesses, they're tools first and foremost. You wouldn't calculate the PE ratio of a hammer. It would be 0 by the way, but only an idiot would think hammers can't be useful or a good purchase in a correct context, like construction.
I’m sorry are you a PE electrical engineer because that is who I’ve watched do a presentation on this very subject and have talked to several since it’s kinda my job. You refute but bring no evidence or rebuttal. You just try and shut the convo down on your side every time
I believe rather than PE, EV/EBITDA should be looked at because this industry is capex heavy. Capex outflow is in $ and earnings are in BTC, its clearly a leveraged play here. Plus capex can be utilised for AI HPC usecases so there are additional rev sources for MARA. I agree that the price is heavily manipulated to the downside. The enterprise value on 31 Dec was roughly $4 bn (net of debt). Yes, BTC has fallen so far and the avg trading volume of MARA has also dropped significantly
Welcome to capitalism. You can make the same arguments against any number of asset classes, Uber has posted a profit ONCE since inception and has a market cap of 150 billion (PE of 15 lol). It’s all speculative. Only a fraction of Gold’s market cap represents utility value, the rest is a shared belief system as an SoV based around scarcity. Bitcoin IS the dominant trustless and decentralised SoV. Its value comes from decentralisation and security (these are its utilities). There are no competitors. All monetary systems are inherently based on a belief system; the belief that the US maintains its place as the most stable political and military force on the planet (good luck with that) and the belief that putting a bar of gold under your bed that will offset the lost value of all other assets in a recession/depression. They might, they might not. You need to form your own opinion, I have mine- and many others share it- we’re all betting on something, because again- that’s capitalism. But if you think that Bitcoin isn’t going to maintain its dominance as the most important native digital asset over the next decade you’re putting your head in the sand imo.
To a degree yes. But with stocks have fundamentals. Fundamentals in investing are based on PE (Price to Earnings), revenues, future growth, return on equity, profit margins, the economy, interest rates and other financial data to determine the fair market value of a company. If the price tanks low enough, it will scream buy because PE will be low enough especially if it's a growing company. Crypto has no such fundamentals. It's based on speculation that the price will go up because of demand, macro conditions, hedge against inflation, etc. This is true for Bitcoin. This is also true for Gold. This is why Warren Buffet doesn't invest in Gold -- he does not touch speculative assets. The problem is crypto investors financially illiterate and think their shitcoins have utility and fundamentals. You will often hear illiterate crypto bros saying, the price keeps tanking but I am buying more because the fundamentals are still intact, the tech is great, etc. Technology, Scalability, TPS, Energy Efficiency, Network Security, Decentralization, Feelessness, etc all these attributes that crypto investors keep pointing to as fundamentals are NOT fundamentals. And yes, the mETH Head brain rot mantra of Triple Halving, Supply Crunch, RWA are all meme narratives and NOT fundamentals. If you try to value ETH in terms of PE ratio, it would have something 130+ PE ratio. For comparison, the S&P 500 has like a 25 PE ratio which is considered historically overvalued. High growth companies like Amazon and Apple have PE ratios in the 30s, NVDA an ultra high growth company right now has a PE in the 50s. Only meme stocks like GME have PE ratios in the 130s. **So ETH having fundamentals is a Meme.**
Just shows how limited PE is as a metric. You cant use PE for a company when their only revenue comes from the asset appreciation of their bitcoin.
Typical mara dilution. Price is heavily manipulated, but manipulated to the downside. Extremely low PE, extremely high profit margins and best of all extremely high bitcoin holdings. Good long term hold IMO.
I’m an engineer and so is my coworker. Has his MSEE, PE, etc. Tried explaining fractional shares to him and he’s like “but then I don’t make as much “. Explained that 50% gain is still 50% gain even if you don’t have a whole share or whole coin. I told him I know you make enough to invest more than $100 than his hypothetical example. “But most of it goes to taxes”. Asked him how much his tax return was and didn’t want to say so I asked if it’s over $5000, and he said yes. Told him he should look into updating his withholdings. “But I’m not very good at saving and it’s nice getting money back.” Tried explaining it’s a free loan to the government but guys clueless. Went back to investing and started talking about having money for his mortgage and hobbies. Asked if he had a budget and he said no. Tried explaining that’s why he doesn’t know how much he can invest. It’s amazing how clueless this guy is and I’m sure there’s many like him. But I’m also skeptical as hell about him. Feel like he acts dumb on purpose
> I like its focus on DeFi and its been steadily growing in app revenue and TVL. Feels promising for a coin that isnt even top 50 right now. Willing to hear counterarguments DeFi is a bullshit scam narrative promoted by ETH Maxis during the Summer of 2020. DeFi is ScamFi: - Essentially a Shitcoin Casino. Leveraged plays, trading shitcoin tokens, earning yield on shitcoin tokens, providing liquidity on shitcoin tokens - Nothing Decentralized about it. Every player like, MakerDAO, AAVE, LINK etc, is centralized - It's not Finance. There are NO real life financial products like life, home, health insurance, mortgages, home equity loans, car loans, personal loans without massive collateral, commercial loans, etc. - Then you slap some scamified metrics like TVL and make it seem like it's a bustling "ecosystem" with a lot of finance going on. > its been steadily growing in app revenue and TVL As stated, TVL is a scam shitcoin casino metric. Sonic a shitcoin with a $1.5 Billion marketcap. How much revenue does it generate? It will be funny. For example, mETH heads will argue to death of ETH fundamentals based on its fee revenue and low supply inflation as ultra-sound money making it undervalued. Using mETH Head Metrics, TRON is 5% of the marketcap of ETH and collects close to the same amount of fees as ETH and actually has a deflationary supply. Using valuation is based on mETH head metrics, it would mean TRON is 15X more undervalued then ETH. | Metric | ETH | TRON | |:-----------|------------:|:------------:| | Marketcap | $320 Billion| $20 Billion | Yearly Fees | $2.48 Billion| $2.15 Billion | Supply Inflation | 0.72% | -2.5% Using metrics such as Price-to-Earnings (P/E) Ratio in traditional finance to evaluate the value of companies, it would mean ETH has a PE of something like 110. The S&P 500 has a PE of like 25 is considered historically overvalued. Crypto does not have fundamentals. It's entirely speculative like gold.
> So all you can come up with is price action observations to give reason for why eth is a shitcoin? If you read, I pointed out that ETH has no fundamental value of its own besides the money and BTC brings to it. Looking at the correlation coefficient and the times when ETH hits tops and local tops, this is a fact. The mistake that mETH Heads make is listening to naive children like the scammers at Bankless who have promoted the narrative that ETH has fundamentals. That the fundamentals are great and intact, etc. These are memes and not fundamentals: - Triple Halving - Supply Cruunch - Burning Deflationary coin - Ultra-Sound Monies - Technology, Scalability, TPS, Energy Efficiency, Network Security, Decentralization - RWA eCrypto does not have fundamentals. In traditional markets, understanding value of companies comes from fundamental analysis. Fundamentals in investing are based on revenues, earnings, future growth, return on equity, profit margins, PE, the economy, interest rates and other financial data to determine the fair market value of a company. Technology, Scalability, TPS, Energy Efficiency, Network Security, Decentralization, Feelessness, etc all these attributes that crypto investors keep pointing to as fundamentals are NOT fundamentals. Crypto investors keep pointing to these attributes as fundamentals and either keep losing money on crypto projects or keep getting disappointed. BlackRock, WhiteRock, Sonyieum all that bullshit of companies doing small pilot programs to test crypto/blockchain that ETH maxis keep shilling are NOT fundamentals. Crypto does not have these sort of fundamentals. Crypto is based almost purely on speculation. And yes, Gold doesn't have fundamentals either. You are speculating on whether gold prices will go up or down based on supply/demand, macro conditions and investor sentiment. And yes, with BTC you are also speculating about *"price action"* about supply/demand and who the big buyers are accumulating BTC. Institutions and ETFs have accumulated over $150 Billion in BTC. Small Nation States are also starting. I can name billionaire after billionaire who have bought BTC. None of the big money players have interest in ETH.
No problem, these scammers are rife and they really are bottom feeding scrum - they are making absolute bank it's a great time to be a scummy fucker. People need to wise up - there is no free lunch. This new generation believes anything the phone tells them. Any 'investment' that claims these massive fast rates of return is either a scam or a Ponzi (like crypto). Stocks are only exempt from that if you take the time to value the company, and not just buy into the latest pump and dump (hype stock). Things like that idiot Saylor and his bullshit 'micro strategy' - it's a scam ! Tesla stock - just why?? PE of 180? More valuable than all the companies in the world? No.
I find myself just lost on these predictions. The sentiment on Bitcoin is nothing like it was in 2017-2020. I like to use charts to indicate price movement but ever since I’ve been paying attention to cryptocurrency I feel like it’s detached from basic technical analysis. Also just ridiculous to make a call of a multi year bear market or bull market. I’ve tried to equate crypto to stocks, although there are major overlaps, Bitcoin has no earnings report, PE ratios etc. it’s a different animal. I look at resistance levels to give myself an idea but still tread lightly even on that. I’ve been seeing 70k thrown out there and I hate to say it could see that happening. But tbh most people who haven’t bought bitcoin have waited for this. Fear is in all markets right now, that’s honestly a great sign bc it’s not independent to crypto. Crypto is literally like riding a bull, hang on tight bc it’s a very rough ride.
While my TA agrees this is likely a 'buy the dip' moment (and likely the last before we enter the banana zone) be careful with your assumption: "they are going to have to lower rates and start QE soon." \*They\* are the mf'ing PTB that run this mf'ing planet, son. \*They\* create bubbles to crash them to pick up assets for 50 cents on the dollar as often as they can. The fact they haven't since the GFC in order to lull the next generation of suckers in doesn't mean they aren't going to. The stock market is at's highest 10 year trailing PE since 1929 and 2000...buyer beware.
I hope so! I was down a fair bit initially, have bought some more several times on the way down and now still down on price but overall slightly up, after two quarterly dividends. Seems like some of the money leaving the American markets is starting to trickle in recently. It has been a tough few years for value investing, as money just seems to flood into obviously overvalued stocks like Tesla, and of course into crypto (I just can't do it as I see no intrinsic value at all). But I take a long term view. I did very well on Rolls Royce after the pandemic - sold at 570 as I thought it was getting a bit overvalued and it jumped 15% on Friday - just shows what momentum can do! Last year I bought a lot of UK banks, Lloyds, HSBC, Barclays and NatWest that were all down at PE of 6 and making a lot of cash. Still doing very well on those - funded all my losses so far on these investment trusts!
It's crypto. Nobody fucking knows. Breaking news: Crypto doesn't have any fundamentals. Crypto is based almost purely on speculation. And yes, Gold doesn't have fundamentals either. You are speculating on whether gold prices will go up or down based on supply/demand, macro conditions and investor sentiment. Fundamentals in investing are based on revenues, earnings, future growth, return on equity, profit margins, PE, the economy, interest rates and other financial data to determine the fair market value of a company. This is why a good stock will have an absolute bottom. People will look at APPL or MSFT and say, holy shit, it's way oversold based on fundamental analysis and the price will find support. You can't do that sort of analysis with crypto.
Doom scrolled post work all day today after I studied for the PE ME Machine Design and Materials exam.
This is the problem and why we need more progressive taxes on the rich. There is so much PE that Saylor and Co. are literally just buying money.
LOL. Check the OI. MMs gonna make sure those expire worthless before allowing price to go up. Strangely most crypto stocks actually have lower PE than big techs.
Stop looking at it as an investment and it all becomes really simple. PE and market cap are irrelevant. Market caps are especially stupid as the things in there aren't even the same class.
You can laugh podcasters and funds pushing this PE take. But the fact is, you even had Justin Drake publicly saying ETH can sell DA to get PE multiples competing with Apple - very skeptical of it happening because I just don’t see a world with a million rollups, maybe just a few major ones exploiting economies of scale. This idea of evaluating things by revenue isn’t something us small retail made up. It spread from the industry’s top influential and leadership positions. My innate suspicion is all these L1 tokens we end up buying will just end up as funding public goods. All the value comes from community’s intrinsic experience, very hard to explain to outsiders. It is really an uncharted territory.
>Pretty much every fund's pitch for "utility" has been about, "buy my utility bags because they generate revenue and memes don't." Be it Bitwise, VanEck, or whatever. What on earth do funds have to do with crypto? Answer, nothing. They are just trying to seel shit to make money. >The podcasters, like Bankless and Daily Gwei, made the revenue a thing for ppl to buy "utility" tokens Well if those chancers are your sources, no wonder you have the wrong end of the stick. >Then how do you price these assets? For all we know, all these prices are at their correct value Okay, the fiat price should be set by the coins exchange for goods and services. There was a research paper that hypothesized that each economic node in any system (not specifically crypto) valuates to approximately ~$2000 of economic potential, for real world value transfer. So each additional person, company, NGO etc. adds about $2000 to the value of the L1. Be aware value != price, but this gives you the valuation mechanism you are seeking. If course there is also the classic procurement value formula of Value = Features/Price. >To me, the tokenized community models make more sense than PE. We may be going in a similar direction here.
> LOL no it isn't. Pretty much every fund's pitch for "utility" has been about, "buy my utility bags because they generate revenue and memes don't." Be it Bitwise, VanEck, or whatever. Never mind the hedge funds. The podcasters, like Bankless and Daily Gwei, made the revenue a thing for ppl to buy tokens. > never was an investment scheme. Then how do you price these assets? For all we know, all these prices are at their correct value despite all cries about utility lacking a bid. > PE has no place in crypto, To me, the tokenized community models make more sense than PE. But it is a very nebulous term because it is very hard to quantify. It is all just people consistently buying a thing and "believing in something." The description is very consistent with most people buying crypto assets. But it is very hard to quantify "conviction" ahead of time besides seeing it post hoc from its long time series.
> Defi revenue to mcap is pretty on par with tech companies.. There is no revenue in the PE. It is price over earnings. And earnings=revenue - operational expenses. Now, let us take Aave for comparison. According to Defillama, Aave's annualized earnings are about $127M. At a $4.03B FDV, its PE is at 31. When it comes to DeFi, the corresponding comparison is the FinTech sector, not MAG 5. The established ones run around from 20 to 30. For example, PayPal's PE is around 20 and Capital One's PE is around 17. They are all much lower than Aave. > Alot of defi protocols function cross chain though. Uniswap, aave etc. It doesn't matter if you have a cross-chain function. It boils down to BD integration, new user acquisition, etc. If the protocol is more natively integrated within the ecosystem, it is much harder for other protocols to compete. For example, I have difficulty seeing Uniswap cracking into Raydium's business or Aave cracking into Kamino's business on Solana. The incentives are there. If I am building a new bludgeoning ecosystem/chain, I want to capture as many verticals as possible. So, I want to support locally grown DeFi protocols over foreign ones because I am early and have a bigger share of ownership of local ones. In particular, the locally grown ones would have proven more loyal to my ecosystem. Also, the new users growing with that ecosystem are more likely to be aligned with newer protocols because they got in at cheaper valuations. Never mind competing in different ecosystems, Aerodrome on Base is already eating into Uniswap's volume, and both are still within the ETH ecosystem. If an ecosystem is successful, you usually see it supporting its native brands. It is just more incentive-compatible for this to happen. > protocols survives shows it has tangible value. It is not just that. It is about users lacking loyalty when a new bull comes and a new protocol showers more airdrop incentives. Hyperliquid captured its trader base because the devs gave out a huge airdrop, making them rich and happy. But perp traders are an extremely mercenary base. What happens if they lose their shirts by longing into a bear market? They get rekted and are bound to search for new liquidity extraction. I bet many would migrate to a Hyperliquid copycat if they get an airdrop to get their shirts back. > base layer 1 chains have some premium added to the price of them that defi tokens don't get. Again, Layer 1 is upstream, and DeFi is downstream. The only reason DeFi's revenue can grow is because the L1 token prices grow. If all L1 token prices go to zero, so does all DeFi revenue. So in many ways, L1 premium is what helps DeFi to earn its current revenue.
LOL no it isn't. It's an argument made by people fooled by the L1 TPS nonsense which has permitted the space in the last 5 years, to justify their usually quite poor decentralization. Revenue (if you wish to use such an incorrect term) should be zero. If revenue is higher than zero, it means actual users are paying more than they should be to use the system. Fees are merely an anti spam mechanism, they should be as low as possible. The purpose of a crypto L1 is to allow anyone access to do financial transactions without intermediaries. The purpose is not to enrich a wealthy class at the expense of users. PE has no place in crypto, crypto is and never was an investment scheme. If you choose to invest in it, then you should be looking for the best balance of the trilemma, along with other attributes that give users power over the system, not that treat users as a product for value extraction.
> PE is total nonsense when discussing cryptocurrency. That is the argument behind the utility argument. "You should buy us because we have revenue." If you want to put up revenue as an argument, then you can't blame ppl wanting to look at PE.
PE is total nonsense when discussing cryptocurrency. There is no share, there is no earning, there is no company. You receive crypto through a transaction, you then wait until you wish to use it again, end of story. The problem with crypto is people using it as an investment and applying incorrect measures like PE.
> It's sustainable demand. This is the biggest lie you can push for "utility" coins. If they have sustainable demand, most of them wouldn't have their charts breaking down ALT one after another. > you haven't been paying attention. Oh boy, I have been paying attention for too long to realize the obvious: most have no organic demand for their "utility" to justify their current valuations. Most valuations come from speculation and tokenized ideas/community. If you go to TradFi world, there are no multi-billion-dollar valuation projects running PE multiple north of 100s. It is just completely unacceptable when you frame selling coins as "utility". If you want utility tokens to be taken seriously, then you have to come out honest about the entire situation of broken business models, unsustainable subsidies via token emission, have limited addressable market beyond native crypto token speculators, etc.. I haven't even got to the crazy FDV needing to be unlocked soon. Never mind that. That is just extra pain added to broken business models.
> Just so you understand how fucked XRP is, Ripple and 3 dudes who run it control 80% of the supply. That's 4 wallets controlling 80% of the supply Hello liar, I am here once again to point out you're lying. its a public blockchain, You were specifically told this isnt true 16 days ago. Also Ripples funds are locked in escrow I will once again be reminding you that I will always be around to call out ur bullshit. A quick recap for you because looking at a public blockchain to check wallets was too difficult for you to understand. Jed took 9% in 2012, he now owns 0%. Arthur took 2% in 2012, we dont know how much he still has Larsen took 9% in 2012 and has Sold ~4-5% of that since then. David took 0% Ripple was given 80% in 2012, they now have ~42.9% ish the majoirty of which is locked up in 55 month long escrow contracts which are Also publicly viewable on chain. here is some of them below https://xrpscan.com/account/r9NpyVfLfUG8hatuCCHKzosyDtKnBdsEN3 https://xrpscan.com/account/r9UUEXn3cx2seufBkDa8F86usfjWM6HiYp https://xrpscan.com/account/rB3WNZc45gxzW31zxfXdkx8HusAhoqscPn https://xrpscan.com/account/rp6aTJmW3nq1aKt3Jmuz4DPRxksT5PBjpH https://xrpscan.com/account/rsjFB8mPWqiZgPUaVh8XYqdfa59PE2d5LG https://xrpscan.com/account/rw2hzLZgiQ9q62KCuaTWuFHWfiX7JWg3wY https://xrpscan.com/account/rDqGA2GfveHypDguQ1KXrJzYymFZmKxEsF https://xrpscan.com/account/rGKHDyj4L6pc7DzRB6LWCR4YfZfzXj2Bdh https://xrpscan.com/account/rHGfmgv54kpc3QCZGRXEQKUhLPndbasbQr https://xrpscan.com/account/rMhkqz3DeU7GUUJKGZofusbrTwZe6bDyb1 - me 16 days ago telling you how much Ripple holds yet you are now claiming them and 3 dudes control 80%. https://old.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1id5giy/ripple_accused_of_lobbying_against_bitcoin_to/m9x7tqj/?context=3 If you're going to lie, Try not to lie about a public blockchain where anyone can just google the correct answer in 3 seconds.
> Bitcoin maxi always focuses on price action not the fundamentals. You might want to learn what fundamentals are. Crypto does not have fundamentals. In traditional markets, understanding value of companies comes from fundamental analysis. Fundamentals in investing are based on revenues, earnings, future growth, return on equity, profit margins, PE, the economy, interest rates and other financial data to determine the fair market value of a company. Technology, Scalability, TPS, Energy Efficiency, Network Security, Decentralization, Feelessness, etc all these attributes that crypto investors keep pointing to as fundamentals are NOT fundamentals. Crypto investors keep pointing to these attributes as fundamentals and either keep losing money on crypto projects or keep getting disappointed. BlackRock, WhiteRock, Sonyieum all that bullshit of companies doing small pilot programs to test crypto/blockchain that ETH maxis keep shilling are NOT fundamentals. Crypto does not have these sort of fundamentals. Crypto is based almost purely on speculation. And yes, Gold doesn't have fundamentals either. You are speculating on whether gold prices will go up or down based on supply/demand, macro conditions and investor sentiment.
Now devide that with the PE ratio for more constancy
Nobody cares about Warren Buffet anymore. PE ratios don't even make sense and value investing is dead due to stupid ass money printing and inflation. People have been forced into assets as there is no incentive to save.
The current rules require you to mark down the value of Bitcoin on your books at the lowest price it has seen since you purchased. This means Saylor is carrying around a bunch of $16k Bitcoin on his books, while the actual value is 100k. The new rules change how companies can mark their books down. Much like Berkshire Hathaway marks their earnings as the increase in value of their holdings, MSTR will be able to mark the increase in value of their Bitcoin as quarterly earnings. While it won’t matter much to the investors who already understand this, those who don’t get it are gonna see PE ratios they haven’t seen since the 70s, and will probably ape in blindly. TLDR; bullish
Assume that we are working towards hyper bitcoin. A few things will happen: 1. Bankruptcies: companies will either have a lot less debt on their books or they will go bankrupt. 2. I predict PE ratios will drop. Right now it seems like 30 is standard. My guess is that in a bitcoin world 10 will make more sense as prices regularly drop. 3. Interest rates will be much higher.
Because the stock market is currently super overvalued if you look at the Shiller PE ratio, and I’d rather DCA into something that seems more likely to go down in the short term. And I’d rather lump sum into something that seems likely to go up sooner rather than later. I don’t know what is going to happen though, that’s why I diversify.
P/E ratio is an easy indicator to see where investors think a company is going to go. They are speculating that Nvidia will be worth more in the future. I am one of them, that's why I still hold. You can also use CAPE, but it has the letters PE in it, so maybe you also got an issue with that.
Still using PE ratios as the sole value indicator? Grandpa wants his metrics back. If you're going off pe alone you're not buying anything in the sp500
Good! Should be PE on everything else too.
It impacts the PE ratio. The current NVIDIA prices reflect an estimated worth 56x current revenues because, theoretically, investors expect it to grow to that level at least. Inflated PE ratios are normal in tech. But if you suddenly change the amount of projected demand, the PE ratio goes down so the stock goes down. 90% of a stocks value is its estimated growth. It shouldn’t be confusing that if the growth projections lower, the price goes down to reflect that.
Wait til the accounting rules change in February earnings to truly value their PE
If you want to study tech and spend months researching, do it for an actual company with a publicly traded stock. No one cares about tech in crypto because it’s not quantifiable. If you were studying tech for AI years ago you might have had an epitome and said “wow, if AI builds up then NVDA is going to sell a shitload of product and have massive increases in revenue and net income”. Then you could watch the financial statements to see it play out. You can’t do that in crypto because the companies aren’t profiting in the coin, it’s a utility and you can’t assign a ratio value to that like PE or PS. Long way of saying if you want to study tech and find winners, do it with stocks. Crypto is nothing but luck and riding the FOMO and hype.
It could take the monetary premium off gold and real estate and reset PE ratios which is hundreds of trillions. We’ve never had a truly scarce asset so other low flow assets have gained monetary premium. Bitcoin could make housing affordable again
Not at all as I know Bitcoin has had multiple drops over 80%... And can have five to six drops of 20 to 40% or so during a bull market. My comments are based on the current state of affairs and technical analysis and markets currently. American Bitcoin reserves are already a spreading idea to other countries and individual states in the United States... It won't be trivial when Trump gets going... There is talk of $80,000... And a 70k something low... Technically in major markets, 20% drop over at least 3 months is a bear market.. . You are talking double that which may be appropriate for Bitcoin as to some baseline of defining what a Bitcoin bear Market would be but it is so capitalized now at 2 trillion plus that we should more than likely have lengthening cycles, less severe drops and slower upward momentum. What you are talking about is actually a depression. A recession is 2 consecutive negative GDP quarters... Double that for a depression or even a Great recession that we had about 16 years ago... I believe that best support for your argument, like it's even possible in the next year, would be the Schiller PE ratio... And it will require overall markets to fail badly for a long time for a possibility as you explain it, because Bitcoin doesn't have the nasty baggage of Fiat and the everything bubble. Once Bitcoin is seen as the safe haven asset that may not only replace gold but act more like gold is supposed to act! Then crisis and stock market crashes will increasingly see assets flee to bitcoin ... Gold, Look how stupidly it dropped during the pandemic fears then finally did its job... The point here would be that this knee-jerk reaction to put your assets into government Fiat is not only insane but will stop happening... All Fiat fails in history... Bitcoin is the counter antidote to this... Bitcoin May operate in tandem with gold during bad times but eventually will replace it... Largely... And proof is showing a lot of gold money has gone into Bitcoin already and I've done it... El Salvador, indeed!
> Utility with real world use Speculation and accumulating wealth is a use case. It is the most successful use case, e.g. Bitcoin/ETH. > projects actually making revenue One of the hardest "utility" coin pumping right now is ChainLink. Its annualized revenue is $1.15M - just the exact amount the Trump's project brought. While its market cap right now is close to $18B. That puts a PE of 15,584 multiple. Source: [https://defillama.com/protocol/chainlink](https://defillama.com/protocol/chainlink) Even outside the top 100, there are numerous DeFI projects with PE multiples less than 100 with much more growth potential. And their tokens look dead for months. Revenue means jack shit even if you compare within "utility" tokens. > adoption and partnerships Plenty of alts did that and got no long-term activity. Most partners just fucked off during the bear market. > developer and ecosystem development A lot of GitHub and development are just copy and pasta. Spinning up a hundred same general purpose L2s doesn't really change things.
XRP, PE, B+ and McKennai
Google saying they take in ~$480m, 3.5 shares out there, PE is 137…
Well Ripples PE is probably freaking incredible lol their stocks are currently priced based on their last fundraising round.
It is ok if you want to evaluate it like a stock. But do you really want to? What is Ripple's PE? Be careful about what you wish for.
I would put it like this. If you have been born in the late 80s onwards, you've basically completely missed the boat with most investments. Most folk in their 20s to 40s will never own a house, won't do well from bonds (like our parents could have done) and if they want to go with stocks are entering a VERY saturated market where PE ratios are completely out of whack and they'll inevitably correct at some point. So really, if you are young, and you want to try and have some financial freedom, what is left? Bitcoin is pretty much the only remaining asymmetric bet. No point buying Apple or Google stock, those market caps are, at best, going to do a 2x in a decade. Can't buy a house. Buying bonds is pointless. Bitcoin is basically a last chance for our generations to have a financial future at this point. Just my take on it.
Nasdaq PE ratio is already 40. We haven't been this high since right before the 2021 bubble burst and 2007
It's a utility coin that allows upfront yield through "Portals" Basically, portals allow users to deposit assets, which are invested in high-yield strategies on Abitrum, providing upfront yield in PSM tokens. Users earn Portal Energy (PE) based on their deposit, which can be sold for PSM, representing the time value of their investment. Portals are self-sustaining through an internal liquidity pool, using PE and PSM without needing continuous external funding. Initial funding comes from volunteers who receive bTokens, redeemable for a portion of the Portal's pool, and arbitrage opportunities allow users to profit by exchanging PSM for the Portal’s internal assets. They are working on a Dex called "Nexus" where PSM works like a basket token for token pair selections and they also have NFTs to incentives governance
It's a utility coin that allows upfront yield through "Portals" Basically, portals allow users to deposit assets, which are invested in high-yield strategies on Abitrum, providing upfront yield in PSM tokens. Users earn Portal Energy (PE) based on their deposit, which can be sold for PSM, representing the time value of their investment. Portals are self-sustaining through an internal liquidity pool, using PE and PSM without needing continuous external funding. Initial funding comes from volunteers who receive bTokens, redeemable for a portion of the Portal's pool, and arbitrage opportunities allow users to profit by exchanging PSM for the Portal’s internal assets. They are working on a Dex called "Nexus" where PSM works like a basket token for token pair selections and they also have NFTs to incentives governance
Ok, so I read your entire post... and I agree with your logic. Some of what you said are things I will legitimately look into because they are new to me. I can tell you're well versed on the tech side of things. **That being said:** None of what you said matters with respect to actually making money. Your post reminds me of Value Investors who read Benjamin Graham, pick all their stocks based on sound fundamentals, and then can't understand why they're lagging way behind the big tech stocks with PE multiples crazier than Ted Bundy. Financial markets are irrational. They are narrative driven and often fueled by a mix of hype and unadulterated bullshit. There is rampant manipulation, and psychological mind games galore. Picking a winning investment has a lot more to do with trying to guess what other people are going to do and how they see things play out than how things actually are. Just my opinion. Again, I agree with you, but I would still choose to hold Bitcoin over other cryptocurrencies because *I think people will continue to buy it more than they will sell it*... and that's all that matters to my bank account.
Well, stocks in the Nasdaq with a 50 P/E should be growing, so you're paying for the expected growth. Look at NVDA. It was at like 100x, but then it doubled income and it dropped to 50x, and now it will go to 30x next year or whatever. Sure, you're speculating that income will grow based on whatever your fundamental analysis is. You could be wrong, but the fact is that they *can* grow income because they have actual businesses that generated income and have products road maps that show how business *may* grow. You can see NVDA's revenue growing, you can see AI growing, you can see their new products. You have to do your own homework, but the PE should reflect that growth. This is known as Forward PE. It's the expected PE based on next years earnings etc. MSTR does not have a business. It doesn't really generate income. Bitcoin also doesn't generate income. So if they have 1 BTC, they will always have 1 BTC. It can never turn into 2 BTC, whereas NVDA can grow their income from 1 to 2.
Basically nothing. There is nothing you can say or do. For whatever it works out in there brain that that’s what it is. Anything you say they will look for confirmation of the opposite. I frequently see them argue that stocks have value because they are producing something and there is a PE and crypto doesn’t have anything. The humor for me in this is there is a completely different subsection of people who would argue stocks are worthless. Either way I love crypto, it’s made me and continues to make me a lot of money all while they insist it’s worthless. When I see their posts I genuinely smile and laugh at the nonsense.
PE is not how you value microstrategy.
Well yes, an 80% retracement right now would not be great. The floor for the next bear cycle is probably 60k if history repeats. Also, look at the PE ratio or NAV on other tech companies and you’ll see that we’re in another stock bubble that will burst… MSTR is the only stock holding real assets while the rest only have fiat debt and future earnings.
corrrect - in fact if you look at their PE ratio prior to bitcoin it was hovering around 60'ish which is similar to their recent pe ratio, so in some way its slightly under value relatively speaking to prior as crazy as that may sound.
> You need to think of it more as a growth company. Anytime someone says this, they are trying to sell you some overpriced nonsense. >You have large companies like the mag7 currently trading double-digits with respect to their PE ratios. Why is that reasonable? It is not. It only seems reasonable to people living in US dollarland >Similarly investors expect MSTR to continue with their strategy in acquiring more BTC. With the recent announcement of a 21+21 billion dollar further allocation how can you possibly assign a lower multiple? Their cost of capital is increasing. Of course I am not talking only of the interest rate they pay, but also the "upside" they must surrender to entice the convertible buyers. AND at any moment competition can appear that will offer the debt market a better deal. Let me try a different argument. Suppose there are two buckets- Bucket A has 330,000 bitcoin, MSTR's core operating business, and -4.25 billion (debt obligations) Bucket B has 830,000 Bitcoin. The buckets are the SAME PRICE. Which bucket do you think is worth more?
What is the forward PE? And what is model you used to calculate forward PE?
Bloody streets incoming..longer metrics and stats show the PE on btc is way over extended and a 20-40% drop will happen within the next 65 days from the initial spike that occured on Nov. 5th. All signs point to this being a bear trap and crypto will see a huge drop by end of Dec. to early Jan. next year. Mark my words, this is going to be a blind side that takes out a chunk of the market...you've been warned..
PE isn’t a great metric, forward PE is a much better metric. Guidance drives a stock price not current PE.
Your posted chart shows a revenue of $5.5 million. With a $500 M MC, that is a PE of 90. Now tell me how a 90 PE is undervalued?
I see where you're coming from. You believe MSTR should probably trade closer to a BTC ETF at 1xmNAV. That is not the proper thinking for this company. If all it did was hold BTC and did nothing else then I would agree with you. You need to think of it more as a growth company. It's more likely somewhere in the middle but wallstreet hasn't yet figured out where that value should be. You have large companies like the mag7 currently trading double-digits with respect to their PE ratios. Why is that reasonable? Because investors expect that to grow. Similarly investors expect MSTR to continue with their strategy in acquiring more BTC. With the recent announcement of a 21+21 billion dollar further allocation how can you possibly assign a lower multiple? Speaking of which they had planned on going through that 42b in the next 3 years yet here we are in Nov and they've already tapped into more than 10% of that. If you think this is absurd wait til you see where MSTR is at when BTC hits 100k or even 200k ;) It'll melt faces and people still won't understand.
Uh... Why do you think a PE ratio of 1 is fairly priced? There's obviously a case by case basis affecting what a reasonable ratio for each stock, but a PE of 1 means the company has a net income that would return your entire investment in exactly 1 year. Almost anyone would gladly make investments with a high likelihood of 100% ROI annually.
Price earnings ratio of 1.0 or lower suggests a stock is fairly priced or even undervalued. A PE ratio above 1.0 suggests a stock is overvalued. Teslas PE ratio is 85 for example. General Motors is 5.
Unless the asset is bitcoin and it goes to infinity (exaggeration) as it absorbs all the excess wealth from other market caps (which it’s doing). PE ratios will one day be 1-2 instead of 50x
I mean what you’re describing is capitalism. Lowest cost goods mass produced for consumption. This is literally how capitalists operate (see PE and VC). And I don’t think large scale cryptocurrency adoption will change that tbh. Consumer goods will always be needed and in fact blockchain may speed up certain efficiencies lowering costs of goods even further. There’s no chance anyone will try to compete by payment higher wages just to bring production of those consumer goods to a first world country. If you want to raise the wages for the slave class whether domestically or abroad - what’s the solution to that besides governmental regulation?
He's not all bad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cob6wDLW-PE&t=252s
Schiller PE says no, money printer says yes. Buy Bitcoin and EDV to protect your downside.
People asking "why" don't understand the landscape for this asset class. BTC is an institutional asset now. As fears of economic constriction rise, the capital available for risky assets dries up. We just heard from Wall St's biggest tech giants that they are struggling with their AI spend. While it's producing great revenue, the spend to upkeep their current growth rates is rising, while revenue plateaus. This means extra capital which overflows into PE investments dries up. Temporarily this dampens the current trajectory. This is exacerbated by potential tariffs under a Trump presidency, as many of the necessary spends are imports (Taiwan). I don't think it will stop a bull run, but forward looking assets projecting a steep glide path will get hit hard. Think BITX, MSTR, BITO, etc. All those products will take a beating. Expecting to go lower until spending fears are lessened. Most likely 60k before 80k, although I still see BTC trending up long term (forever). Position: 40k MSTR Puts expiring EOM @ 250 strike
Well, it can’t be bad for BTC in the short term. Saylor’s strategy can’t be defeated until BTC growth is viewed as flat or higher risk than the S&P or until the MSTR stock price hits a PE multiple that can’t be maintained. It’s not an infinite money glitch but BTC currently has a much higher upside than all the stocks that are bloated with debt and fiat inflation. 10x, 50x, 100x?
I'm not so sure about the narrative of issuing new shares being at odds with tradition. The traditional narrative as my smooth brain understands it, is that growth stocks tend to raise capital to support things like investment and other business activities, while established corporations tend to buy back shares as part of their responsibilities to maintain a favorable PE ratio, and let's face it, compete in the stock market. MSTR are effectively a growth stock raising capital for their business (of buying more BTC). How is this any different to other growth companies raising capital, did I miss something here? To be honest, this extremely long timeframe of three years, coupled with the massive amount of capital raising, seems to me more like a manipulation method for the company to prevent the stock from going parabolic. I just hope they don't put the breaks on too hard. It's no secret that traders are eyeing up MSTR on the short side, waiting for the inevitable parabolic short opportunity.
Diversification is for the know nothing investor -Munger Not sure how value investors could buy anything today when the measuring stick is constantly changing, usually it’s know nothing etf buyers who don’t understand PE or book values Make value investing great again
It's an interesting point, makes me think of the quote, “In the short run, the market is a voting machine but in the long run, it is a weighing machine". So for the short run it's true but ultimately the price of the stock should tend toward the value of the assets combined with some premium for the PE/future PE.
If you are after something that has potential for 200,000% increase, try this: Stock market minnow Challenger Energy (CEG) have the rights to two oil fields off the coast of Uruguay - AREA OFF-1 and AREA OFF-3 (https://cegplc.com/operations/uruguay/) Current share price = $0.07 A farm out for AREA OFF-1 was agreed with Chevron in March 2024 (https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CEG/farm-out-of-60-of-area-off-1-block-to-chevron-50hhuuyepmhyh3t.html) ESTIMATED RECOVERABLE RESOURCE, AREA-OFF-1 = 2,000,000,000 barrels of oil (https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CEG/uruguay-area-off-1-update-7o2w5ynswab1ww0.html) CEG retains 40% ownership of the block while Chevron finances the 3D seismic and any drilling. The value of the oil in the ground is about $150 billion, using WTI at $75 per barrel. Obviously we cannot get it all out of the ground in a year - lets assume it will take 20 years to extract all of the oil. Now, we'll calculate the annual extraction rate: Total value of oil in the ground = $150 billion Years to extract = 20 Annual extraction = Total oil / Years to extract = $150 billion / 20 = $7.5 billion per year Of which CEG gets 40% = $3 billion per year Next, we divide the annual value of the oil extracted by the number of shares to find the value per share: Number of shares = 210,000,000 Value per share = Annual extraction / Number of shares = $3 billion / 210,000,000 = $14.28 per share Assuming PE ration of 10 - then share price, once production gets going = $142.80 per share So potential percentage increase from present share price of $0.07 = 204,000% If all goes well, then drilling will start 2027 - so now is your chance to get in on the ground floor! Crude calculations, but it gives you an idea of the potential.
Same here. Did you have Coach Gibson in middle school PE too?
>It is a leverage bet when you include premium price I dont know why you're saying that. The premium is specifically what makes it \*not\* a leveraged bet. >Go research p/e of mag 7 and lmk how those mnavs compare. What does PE have to do with this? Microstrategy's earnings are exclusively from bitcoin price appreciation. The PE seems low because bitcoin has increased in price. If you were to calculate a PE for GBTC, you'd see that it's also very low. Meanwhile, Microstrategy's operations actually lose money. You cant compare them, nor their NAVs, to the MAG 7. You should compare them to (financial) asset heavy firms, like insurance companies or banks, since the assets of Microstrategy (bitcoin) have a well defined market value. >You shouldn't crap on ppl cause you don't understand the trade I'm a professional (maybe even an expert at this point) in the field. I have done extensive studies, and I've researched that trade specifically. It's also fairly basic stuff. I promise you I understand. If you're genuinely interested in hearing the argument against your thesis, Kerrisdale Capital wrote a [report ](https://www.kerrisdalecap.com/investments/microstrategy/)on this when they shorted the stock and bought bitcoin. It's fairly well explained.
TSLA: maybe good an investment, but an absolute turd when you look at the premiums. 1% growth this year with a 50x PE…. Good luck
People would still invest in traditional stock markets, they just wouldn't use it as a store of value. Owning company equities should be a thoughtful exercise. Selecting companies with asymmetric opportunities so that you can benefit from their profits. Stocks shouldn't be the vehicle that non-technical people use to store their generational wealth. That causes overvaluation and the enormous PE ratios that have become common. People just pump money into passively-managed index funds, and those companies lose incentive to do good work. They can just sit on appreciating assets and have their stock price supported by structured buying from 401ks/pensions. Money should be used to store value. Good money. Bitcoin.
Sky high PE values prove you wrong.
I think that Alts experiencing a decent larger amount pain in the last few months while BTC only flirted with the low 50s shows another story. BTC showed extreme resistance to dipping below 50k during a bear season. Macro market conditions and confidence has improved a lot in the past few months. I feel like if BTC didn't go to 40s then it really shouldn't now. I think PE money coming back into crypto / start ups right now after being completely dry since late May also indicates this.
You’re echoing sentiments that are age old and without due diligence research. The intrinsic value of Bitcoin is based on a combination of the cost to mine a bitcoin (including electricity and computing equipment), and the demand from another buyer. To argue that stocks have an intrinsic value is flawed because PE ratios are higher than they ever are in comparison to its book value or cash flows. Can’t really argue intrinsic value if nobody ever goes off that metric when they determine a stocks floor or ceiling anyway. You’re correct in that market cap doesn’t translate to price directly, but the higher the market cap the more the demand and subsequently the higher the price. The buyers alone do not determine the value. It’s called supply and demand for a reason - the price is correlated by both someone who decides to sell at a certain price and someone who decides to buy at a certain price. I suggest you look further into economics and monetary issuances to understand the economy further before making baseless arguments. Thanks.
Ya but we’re approaching October 2007 level PE/Market overhype. Crypto and bitcoin will be the first ones sold unfortunately. It’s bulllshit because we’re primed to rip past 100k; but not to be.