$0.21 (0.12%) Today
52 Week High
52 Week Low
7 Days Mentions
When you buy and sell through Robinhood, but never actually transfer any funds back to your bank account. Are you still paying taxes? Or is that all factored in the original purchase? When do you pay for the gains?
1k to 1M challenge is off to a huge success. Here are the trades I took today $AAPL 180c 01/7 @ 2.00 > 2.65 (32%) $NVDA 310c 01/7 @ 3.45 > 4.4 (28%) $ABNB 170c 01/7 @ 2.34 > 2.37 SL triggered $AMZN 3450c 01/7 @ 11.15 > 14.95 (34%) $SQ 170c 01/07 @ 0.95 > 1.10 (15%)
Decided to HODL instead of tax loss harvest to offset my AMZN+AAPL long term gains, then found out about margin so I bought more crack. Fortunately for me Fidelity is making "House Calls" during the holidays to check on customers well being. I hope they accept Walmart gift cards as payment.
SPX would be the actual index you can trade. SPY does track SPX but also for net inflows, shares of the SPY companies will actually be purchased. Likewise for outflows, shares of AAPL and all of the SPY companies will be dumped proportionate to their weight. This is to have the price of the ETF be what it should be to track the index, aka rebalancing. Sometimes during a day it can get a very tiny bit disconnected. But they rebalance daily if not more. So for the most part you can rely on the fact it will track the index with the error being a very small range. 'Wouldn't it be more relevant to look at the portfolio-weighted trading volume of the underlying symbols that make up the index?' Yes but you still want to check it against the index. Maybe certain sectors are selling off while others are flying, like tech and energy the last two weeks; or just look at the volume for the index, but it will be similar in SPY. I don't see the volume get disconnected when I am looking at them. But yes
> Stop using the "appeal to authority" fallacy. The video isn't them saying 'EBITDA IS DUMB' over and over, it's explaining why it's dumb. It's not an appeal to authority, it's referring to an argument made by someone who happens to have a lot of authority (because their arguments tend to be right). Argue with their argument if you like. Refusing to do and pretending I'm referring to a mere claim - not an argument - made by someone authoritative - is not an argument. > They focus on value companies Well your understanding of Buffett is at least 50 years out of date. > and have absolutely missed the boat on all tech growth ... > other than AAPL. you mean they don't invest in Amazon or Snowflake or IBM? Or that Apple, as the largest tech growth company in the world, **and by far their largest holding at 50% of their stock portfolio**, doesn't count as them being invested in tech? "Other than apple" when it's fully 50% of their stock portfolio seems profoundly dishonest as arguments go. They're probably more highly invested in tech growth in their portfolio than most people on /r/investing. > please tell me... Please tell me.... why? what do I have to do with anything? how about: go away? > I know you think highly of yourself and your knowledge why are you doing this? > Ask yourself, at your age, why arent you 1,2,3,5+ million deep as a NW? (I know for a fact you don't have anywhere near those amounts, call it intuition..). report time
This is a great question! Futures are a type of "Forward contract" which means that you are putting down a small deposit today, in order to take delivery of a product at a specified price, at the specified date and time in the future. In reality, what this does for a trader, is allow them to post a very small amount of capital, in order to be exposed to a much higher amount of price movement. There are two main entities who set and control the margin required for you to purchase, and maintain a position in a futures contract, these two parties are your broker, and the CME or other commodity exchange group you are trading over. All commodities that are traded over a formalized exchange have a "spec sheet" or other formal explanation of all the details relating to the contract. The /MES futures contract you are referring to has a spec sheet located here: [https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/equities/sp/micro-e-mini-sandp-500.contractSpecs.html](https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/equities/sp/micro-e-mini-sandp-500.contractSpecs.html) What is important to note, is that futures require a set amount of margin that is largely independent from the underlying assets price. So for example, to purchase am /ES contract through TD Ameritrade, it currently requires $12,650 which is an amount that is not really related to the fact that /ES is currently trading at 4660.00 right now. The /MES contract, which is 1/10th of the size of the /ES contract, currently require $1,265 to take a position in. Note that going long one /MES at 4660 does not mean you could lose, $4,660 instead, it means that you could lose a maximum of 23,300. This is because futures are inherently leveraged financial products. The /ES contract means that your maximum loss would be 233,000 if /ES went to 0. As for calculating how much margin you would need to continue posting as the position moved, that varies broker to broker, but generally, at the end of each day, any profits or losses will be added or subtracted to your account balance, and if your balance becomes negative, you will be margin called. So for example: If you had $5,000 in your account and purchased one /MES contract, your total available money to spend on other stuff in your account such as stocks, would decrease by $1,265. So at this point you have $3,735 left to spend in your account. Now lets say that /MES goes up, and you make $500. Your account balance would now show $4,235 to spend on other stuff such as stocks. This is because the value of the contract went up by $500, so you will have that $500 profit credited to your account, even though you have not sold the contract. This is a form of that "Mark to Market" accounting you ay have heard of before. Your account has been marked up or down for your profits and losses, even though you have not actually sold and realized your profits yet. Keep in mind that you still only have $4,235 in your account even though you started with $5,000 and made $500. This is because it still require $1,265 to hold the contract. The reverse of this situation would mean that as the price goes down, your account value keeps going down very similar to owning a stock, except remember, you are using a lot of leverage, so you can potentially lose more than you actually have in your account. As for calculating the profit or loss of your contract, you need to know a few things including the minimum tick size, the contract multiplier, and the tick value. The minimum tick size is the minimum price fluctuation that a contract can change by. For most stocks such as AAPL, this would be $0.01, meaning that AAPL stock could go from $170.62 to $170.63, however, for /MES, the minimum tick size 0.25. This means that if /MES is trading at 4650.00 it can go up to 4650.25 or down to 4649.75. This is the minimum price fluctuation for /MES. The tick value is the actual dollar amount of profit or loss that your account will experience for a move of 1 tick in the contract. For /MES, this is $1.25, so in our previous example, if you bought one /MES at 4650, and it went to 4650.25, you would make $1.25. If instead, you had bought /MES at 4650 and it went down 3 ticks to 4649.25, you would lose $3.75 The contract multiplier is exactly what it sounds like. It is a multiplier that tells you how many times to multiply the minimum tick size by, in order to determine the tick value. for /MES the contract multiplier is 5, so we can tell that if /MES moved from 4650.00 to 4651.00 we would be looking at a move of 1.00 for /MES, yet we know that the multiplier is 5, so we would have made $5 on the move, and not $1. Keep in mind that some contracts such as /CL (Light Sweet Crude Oil) have much larger contract multipliers such as 1,000, meaning that a fluctuation of a single penny would mean a change of $10 for our account value. Hopefully that answers some of your questions. Best of luck!
They aren't wrong, but they dont invest into growth companies that are addressing a new TAM or aren't yet profitable because of the growth cycle. Stop using the "appeal to authority" fallacy. They focus on value companies and have absolutely missed the boat on all tech growth other than AAPL. Completely missing the boat on FAANG. Like, please tell me you have a finance degree with accounting knowledge. Please tell me you also have researched other amazing investors and their strategies and atleast understand how hedge fund analysts also analyze companies. Expand your understanding. I get that you're a market bear. So just allocate towards those cheap companies and lets see how it stacks out. I know you think highly of yourself and your knowledge, but holy shit man. Ask yourself, at your age, why arent you 1,2,3,5+ million deep as a NW? (I know for a fact you don't have anywhere near those amounts, call it intuition..). Can you be so right about your "knowledge" after watching some youtube videos, but yet having nothing to show and are so wrong when it matters. huh, consider that.
"What Does it Mean to Roll Options? Rolling options is the practice of moving from one call or put on a certain stock to a different call or put on the same stock. It involves exiting the current position and immediately entering a similar position. The underlying stock or exchange-traded fund (ETF) remains the same. Say an investor owns the January 120 calls on Apple (AAPL). He or she could sell the existing position and purchase the February 130 calls. This would be an example of rolling long calls." -tradestation
> but you never know. Agreed. AAPL/MSFT are "safer" but you never know. > The big question for individual stocks is will you be able to exit if they no longer match your investing goals (aka will you know they stop being safe?), if not might be good to stay with index funds and forget it. I am leaning towards this and to get a bigger bite at the tech action may do 5-10% QQQ.
Uh, why? If I bought AAPL at 100 and sold at 150, and you bought my shares at 150 and sold at 180, which one of us lost? Make it more complicated and add in shorters like Bob who sold to open at 180 and covered at 170, and people operating on vastly different time frames than you. Day trading is the same concepts just, usually, shorter time frames.
Can't believe no one here has said Jeff Green of The Trade Desk (TTD) yet. Guy is an absolute baller. Originally worked for a different silicon valley company and left to start The Trade Desk. He's said things in earnings calls like "We're having our iPhone moment." But the thing is... his words aren't as much hyperbole as they seem. The guy delivers. Time and again. I've been saying for a while that I think TTD will be up in the ranks of AAPL, GOOGL, FB & AMZN one day. I still stand by that statement. Solid ROE. Solid Growth. Solid up-side. Almost zero LT debt (can use this later to lever/multiple returns). What's not to love? The reason: the AI they are building for programmatic buy-side advertising is only getting stronger each day. Because they started so early, their AI continues to learn and get stronger, leaving competitors in the dust. When Google and others started talking about doing away with third-party cookies, Jeff Green said "EFF it, we'll create our own tracking technology." And so Unified ID 2.0 was born. The real kicker... China hasn't even been tapped yet. Can you imagine what Jeff Green is going to do with a $150 billion programmatic advertising market?
I don’t mean to sound like a jerk, but it’s true. The same went for me last year. I had some meme stocks that I bought because they were hyped up a lot. I was down on nearly all of those but I was up on my smarter picks, such as MSFT, AAPL, VTI, etc. Best advice I can give you is if you don’t know much about a company, don’t invest in it until you do. I don’t know much about how to do a technical analysis of a company or what all the financials mean just yet, so I stick with an ETF and companies that have a proven track record that is innovative. I took a loss on some of my others but I’ve also recouped a lot by transitioning into blue chips for the most part. Good luck out there!
It was different in a lot of ways, but kinda similar in sentiment I guess. Back then valuations were more reasonable with most large-cap tech stocks selling at about a 30-50% discount to today's valuations. During the sell-off growth tech stocks mostly fell with the rest of the market (although slightly more aggressively) where as today investors seem to think only small-cap growth stocks should be significantly impacted by interest rates and that high PE stocks like MSFT, AAPL and NVDA are safe, which hasn't been true historically. Even bank stocks fell in 2018 where as today they're trading at their highest valuations ever. The sentiment was very similar though, at least here on Reddit. I remember people selling out of stuff that was down and creating posts about how they had made a huge mistake trying to pick stocks. Back then though people were leaving the market entirely because like I say everything was down and people didn't know where to turn. Many thought a recession was practically guaranteed and some were hoping they would be able to get back in after the recession was over, but this obviously didn't happen. Today people are less worried about a recession so perhaps this partly explains why the market overall hasn't been hit so bad. The other thing that was different was inflation and the FEDs messaging regarding hikes. I think a lot of the fear back then came from the FED suggesting that tightening would be on auto-pilot going forward. People felt the FED basically didn't care about the market and would raise rates regardless of what happens. This isn't true today, people generally think the FED is too supportive of the market if anything. We also weren't dealing with record high inflation so there was less urgency to hike back then. Today if markets throw a fit the FED has less room to back down if inflation remains high. The thing that continues to confuse me about today vs 2018 is how strong the overall market is. Given valuations I would have expected the entire market to be down more. Admittedly there has been some weakness in these names over the last couple of weeks, but I'd have thought stocks like NVDA and MSFT would be down more at this point.
I second this. Majority ETFs, a few growth picks. Add what you can comfortably afford EVERY month. Trim your losing picks annually and let the winners run. 60% VOO, 10% ZIM, 10% GOOG, 10% MSFT, 10% AAPL. Wouldnt be a bad distribution for a small account.
Clearly history has shown that he is definitely missing something from his valuation model since he has been so grossly off the mark on the stock. It’s the same case study as AAPL, AMZN, and many other disruptive megacaps. How else would you explain why he was so off the mark all of these years?
The problem with this is Dotcom didn't end in 01, it was near the end of 02 and down 80% at the low. Many companies, ipos or even existing ones went bankrupt totally disappeared. In the Financial crisis, it didn't end in 08 it bottomed March 09. Again companies went bankrupt or were bought for pennies on the dollar and merged into another. Look at Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns. When the next event occurs for whatever reason. There's no way to know with certainty who survives or who doesn't, or how long that recovery takes on an individual sock basis. To your point the broad indexes will continue higher after such sell offs. Companies not leading anymore are replaced by new market leaders whose revenues and earnings are growing vs ones that are stagnating or declining. Think GE or ATT vs AAPL or MSFT. Money has time value if you sit on large losses it takes multiples of returns to get back to even vs lower digit multiples only taking lower percentage returns to do so. A 10% decline takes just 11%, a 50% decline 100%, an 80% decline 500%. This is the fallacy and reality of holding large losses. The exception of course is dollar cost averaging continually in any number of etfs or index funds. They most like won't go away unless the whole economic system collapses.
Two separate things. Like I said, the *premise* is standard [expected value](http://www.selectoptions.com/Edu-Expected-Result), and that applies to any holding time or strategy. So you are right about that part. It's the *assumptions about probability of gain/loss* that don't apply to longer holding times. The 1 week or 1 month price trend of AAPL doesn't look like a 50/50 random distribution. When those assumptions change, the strategies for risk management have to change also.
If your going to stock pick, look around, big companies who have good products that you support/use in your everyday life is a fine way to go about it, I have an iPhone so I own AAPL, I drive a Volkswagen so I own VW, etc. If your swinging for a home run every time you going to strike out more often than not my friend!
Got assigned 300 shares of AAPL in 2017. Freaked out and took a 6k loss and sold the shares. Was up 20k on GME and ended up cashing out for a 3k gain. Best play: crypto. Held from like 2015 till now. Sold a little, got a nice watch and some ETFs, and playing with about 60k of house money now.
The big question for individual stocks is will you be able to exit if they no longer match your investing goals (aka will you know they stop being safe?), if not might be good to stay with index funds and forget it. I invest in AAPL, GOOG, MSFT, and AMZN. I am in tech so my job forces me to pay attention to what everyone is doing, if you can’t monitor there is a risk something happens…. They are old enough and have been stable for a long time, so risk is low… but you never know. There is an old advice on investing where you know the sector or business
Times are different now though. Everything is bouncing back way quicker and technology is 100x what it was in 2008 when the iPhone was on its third revision. Innovation and growth companies are rampant and companies that are ubiquitous to society aren’t going to not make money hand over fist and disappear over night like they might have almost fifteen years ago. AAPL, MSFT, GOOGL will be here and thriving as long as the world has an internet connection and at 20-30% discount, shares will get piled into like no other, especially with the heavy increase in options we’ve seen in the last couple of years.
I sold $10000 of AAPL in about 2001-2002. That I had owned for about 10 years. Would be worth about $5 million right now. I wasn’t even and active trader either. I probably only made 3 trades in that decade and that was one. It had been languishing for a long time and I just gave up on them. Oh well.
The way I trade is a bit different, 5DTE or less on mostly SPY, AAPL, NVDA, and some other caps of that size, intraday only. I prepare a bull and bear scenario for each with support and resistance marked and play breakouts or breakdowns either way
This is really good stuff!! I'll take a look at those you've pointed out and start from there. I really feel like i sucked at doing my own research on these companies (except Cenn and AMC which are both meme stocks). I initially wanted to get into some of the blue chips like AAPL but saw they were at their ATHs which I was afraid of risking a drop. In hindsight, I think id be up by now if i had put my money into the more stable ones.
Yea fuck it, hedge it all with MSFT, GOOG, AMZN. I already hold AAPL via $VTI, so not looking to get into more concentrated position. Undecided with NFLX, maybe I can get them for $450 or less in the future, who knows.
Ciena Corporation. Woke up one morning and lost $100,000 at the opening bell. That was the crash of 2000. That's my biggest "active" mistake. My biggest missed opportunity would be that I sold 3000 shares of AAPL six months before the iPod came out. Now, this wouldn't be that big of a deal because hindsight is always 20/20 but I'm the guy who wrote his senior thesis on internet distribution of music. That said, I'm doing very well, wealthier than I've ever been... and I did it without touching tech stocks for twenty years.
I was born in 1978. My parents put $100/year in a bank account for me until I graduated high school in 1996. My regret is that I didn’t start investing in AAPL when I turned three. If I did that for the next 15 years, we would’ve been state champs. Bet you I can throw a football over them mountains! Also, pharmaceuticals. I know understand trials.
Not going to identify what company I am with but I can tell you with 100% confidence that AAPL AMD AMZN INTC MSFT NVDA do not operate this way across the majority of each company. I have a deep network of college friends that span these companies. Sure there's woke bullshit subcultures in some parts but it is not normal. WFH burnout among single people is real though. Many of us want to get back in there because it is a large part of our social lives. New people in my part of the tech stack are mostly doing fine work, even college grads that need mentorship. I do feel that the hardware side validation is slipping and there might be a major GUH ship to the public in the next few years. Hardware products designed entirely post-Covid will begin shipping this year. But also, I could be as full of shit as the twitter person. Don't trust anything you read on the internet.
Completely agree and I've watched his videos about company valuations. The one I did more so agree with was Uber. He believed it had a fair value of only $40, and look where it's trading now. Also for his TSLA analysis, you're completely right. His model considers very basic traditional car manufacturing stats like "number of cars sold". How about FSD, premium data connectivity subscriptions, their solar business? I could go on and on. And times are changing. There very clearly is a premium for "cult-like companies" or ones with massive brand loyalty. AAPL, TSLA, NVDA. He doesn't include that either. So many people think fundamental valuation is some fancy concept and learning it will make you a good investor. It's just basic maths and it's not very good at explanaining a lot of stock movement.
Sorry for the serious response and I have exactly zero knowledge and you shouldn't listen to me, but the answer will depend on your goals and how much you have to invest and how soon you could need access to that money, and how much risk you are willing to tolerate, how much you can lose, etc. Easiest answer are things like (research options first) selling long term covered calls, buying put options on stocks you have researched to be particularly vulnerable, and if you own long term value stocks (think $HD, $AAPL, etc),hold and "buy the dip" I am stupid and lost money before I did my DD. It makes a difference. I again apologize deeply for using 2 syllable+ words. This is not financial advice because this whole thing is a casino run by billionaires
There will always be someone in the red with every play… plenty of bag holders were created recently from buying into AAPL at 180. The point is that the group does an outstanding job reminding folks not to fomo, to position reasonably, to take profit and secure cost basis at the very minimum, etc… Your crusade to dismiss ESSC as a play and Valhalla as a group has really turned into you embarrassing yourself.
> This 6k is in addition to your maxed out retirement accounts? Yes, we max out our 401Ks + Roth IRAs. That ends up being close to 70K/year combined (including employer contributions to 401K). > It sounds like you’re looking to save for retirement rather than make income. In a way, yes. We started out late on retirement planning and trying to play somewhat of a catch-up now. > you need to determine what your retirement nest egg needs to be in order to carry out the life style you desire. This is where I am struggling and trying to read up more on. > What’s your reasoning behind choosing such large companies as your individual stock picks? Most funds are heavy in large companies like this already. True. Last year I had a bad FOMO was the growth stocks went on a run in 1st quarter. I was too timid to invest BUT i did a backtest on my hypothetical portfolio and I would have lost like 40% by now. Now I am trying to stay as passive as possible and looked at AAPL and MSFT as examples of stocks that can't really go down (relatively speaking as i know that technically anything can go down).
How is he going to have any answer on why a stock he bought goes up or down lol…that’s a useless and short term focused strategy….just buy the companies that are a part of your everyday life and forget about it….GM, TGT, WMT, AAPL, V and so on…
Yea SPY closed and is up over 465 after hours. Can’t believe how big these swings are, to me the volatility indicates a nervous market and downward pressure. The big stocks AAPL etc have been holding up SPY I don’t know how long that can keep holding it up? Lots of market uncertainty too and this administration seems lost and incompetent. Wouldn’t be surprised if market really gets scared and tanks with some Russia Ukraine news but that’s all just noise. Guess we will see how Tuesday plays out. Thanks for your insight.
Every company I invest in now follows this principal. I am an Architect. Designer. Programmer. Engineer. Stocks: AMD, XLNX, AA, COP, LOW, AAPL, MSFT ETF's: SMH, XLE, SCHD I would be willing to hold those companies for many years, no matter the short-term vacillation. I have found holding what you trust and can live with resolves a lot of anxiety that can rattle ones positions.
Look at 3 potential outcomes of a sold call option. 1) Expires OTM worthless - Ideal Option 2) Nears Expires ITM by less than the credit. Close out for a gain, although not max gain 3) Nears Expire deep ITM and close the spread (anything more than the credit+strike is relatively equal as the Long call would move at the same rate and equal my max gain) Even 3 is OK for me, as it hit my price target which I would be OK selling for anyways. The "hedge" is if the stock goes down from 173 to 165 say... Now selling a call closer to my target is much less premium. Again.. NOT A FREE MONEY HACK. This is just a different way to play it vs. short term. If the stock really tanks... My long term outlook on AAPL hasn't changed and I still have another 16 months for the stock to rebound... Ideally.
But, there are investors I have seen benefited by both aapl and tsla. One investor bought high numbers of aapl shares during 1998-2001 holding still. He gets appx 400k dividend from AAPL! Another, almost bought $half million worth of tsla shares ( 3350 ) pre split holding 20+ M now, not sold any stock.
Great picks. BRK is slow and steady. I'm doing a slow CSP acquisition strategy. If it expires OTM, great. If it assigns, great. I sleep great at night with BRK as the backbone of my portfolio. I also have a small direction AAPL position, but BRK gives good indirect exposure given their significant investment in apple.
The world's best valuation model couldn't predict in 2011 when Steve Jobs died, AAPL would increase to 3 trillion dollar market cap from 300 billion. Anyone who told you AAPL would go up 1000% in 10 years would be laughed on as an idiot. And despite Apple's most innovate product in the last decade is wireless headset, AAPL managed to 10x. The best model also couldn't predict Amazon to be over 1.5 trillion and Googl over 2 trillion market cap. Valuation model works great on static and stable companies. They can't and won't be able to predict the true disruptors.
A lot of large cap stocks are in ETFs and index funds that get auto-bought every paycheck and so they have a steady stream of buyers and get propped up by all that money. Most investors have no clue what's even in their funds and the ignorance continues to inflate returns. I don't think fundamentals have as much to do with it directly although usually to be in the most widely bought funds you need to have them. When things get bad economically people tend to sell their winners last to take profit and run to safety. When the big ones like AAPL start to go down you're looking at a near term top in my opinion
NVDA...3-4 years ago TSLA....just after COVID initially hit the market /a few months before the split CRM....3-4 years ago SQ....3-4 years ago FB....is my longest held (probably over 10 years ago?). I used to own 100 shares, but panicked when it was first revealed they sold their users information. MSFT & AAPL just over a year ago My losers were bought about a year ago (during last year's meme craze). Those returns are just luck. I just so happened to accidently buy the right stock at the right time. It is as easy as finding a good company that generates a positive net income and is growing. (there are many out there). Then buy them and hold forever. My losers are just as incredible. I need to learn how to get rid of my losers way sooner.
The year is 2027 Cathie's ARKs have finally roared back and beaten SPY by 0.5% which she triumphs on the business morning shows AAPL is up 10,000% over the same timeline TSLA has gone through 8 more stock splits, it's currently anticipating a 9th as it sits at $1243 a share
I have 100 MSFT, 100 NVDA, 100 VOO, 100 XLK, and 300 AAPL. I’m slightly OCD and like to have everything even. This obsession started after I acquired 300 AAPL and this imbalance bothers me. The reinvesting of dividends also has been throwing off my balance as now I have fractional shares, like 100.25, 100.63, etc. I try to ignore it.
I understand that the contract is still open and would be negative value if it rises. I would close the whole spread (still for a gain) and I would miss out on more upside. I more than likely wouldn't buy it back at a loss, I'd be happy if AAPL broke 200 and I made a gain that I was happy with. Again, no free money hack. Just a different way of thinking about it I'm kicking around. Definitely theta not on my side this early, but IF my thoughts are right, then I'm just hedging in case it keeps dropping and I can only sell calls in the 170 range that I would NOT be ok if went ITM.