IBM

culturefan

I like MSFT, NVDA, and IBM. I don't know much about JPM. You could always keep them or sell half of them and start a ETF like VTI, VOO or whatever. Keep the ETF around 30% or more of your portfolio.

dvdmovie1

> Wondering whether to buy before they rocket up. MSFT is +65% over the last half decade and about 80% up from the 2022 bottom. Could have done better in more boring places. What's the catalyst for it to "rocket up"? Meanwhile, all the things mega cap tech is spending on continue higher. You could have done better over those time frames in IBM.

Parrot_1979

PYPL will comeback. They have to reinvent themselves just like IBM, GE and Cisco did. It will take awhile and gradually the negative sentiment will fade. Value investors and long holders will do quite well on the turnaround.

ElkQuiet1541

good entry point today for IBM?

EvolvingDior

The "dotcom" companies are the "AI companies" -- at least then you could trade them. No, the companies that were making money were the same ones making money today. Instead of NVidia, it was Cisco and Sun Microsystems. It was Global Crosing and L3 Communications. It was companies like Dell, IBM, and Compaq. It was storage firms like Maxtor and Seagate. Instead of data centers, it was companies making servers, network equipment, laying fiber optic cable, or providing software by the likes of Microsoft.

foopod

Absolutely, I can run small models on my phone. That will only continue to improve. It's like when crypto took off, all the big companies were looking for excuses to use Blockchain technology (IBM went hard). Now there are only a handful of genuine use cases for it and the cryptocurrency fans. I see LLMs in the same way, there will be some places where it makes sense to use it and it will fundamentally shift industries. It's naive to think it won't. But imo it is also a bubble and overrepresented currently, by how much? We don't knows

PatientHelicopter123

Recent Layoff Announcements: US Government: 307,000 employees UPS: 78,000 employees Amazon: 30,000 employees Intel: 25,000 employees Nissan: 20,000 employees Nestle: 16,000 employees Microsoft: 15,000 employees Bosch: 13,000 employees Dell: 12,000 employees Verizon: 13,000 employees Accenture: 11,000 employees Ford: 11,000 employees Novo Nordisk: 9,000 employees Microsoft: 7,000 employees 15 PwC: 5,600 employees Salesforce: 4,000 employees IBM: 2,700 employees American Airlines: 2,700 employees Paramount: 2,000 employees Target: 1,800 employees General Motors: 1,500 employees Applied Materials: 1,444 employees Kroger: 1,000 employees Meta: 1,000 employees AI is officially replacing jobs at mass scale in the US. Where will all of these people go? where is the best place to see aggregated numbers like this? US Bureau of Labor Statistics keeps a complete historical record here: [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSLDL](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSLDL)

te7037

Me too but it keeps signing up partnerships with companies for their platform? And $IBM is building a supercomputer for the company so it sounds legit. The CEO has been promoting the companies lately. They have contracts with universities to safeguard their data. That’s why I only added 1,500 shares recently. So far I have 6,000 shares avg $1. If it goes up to $10 this year, I am selling!

RocksAndSedum

IBM announced an increase in hiring juniors.

Ridiculous_Society

AI will definitely change the world, but there will be many more losers than winners in this AI race. They're fighting for it all - so the spending is the right choice - but if they're wrong, these companies become IBM.

polaritypictures

Eh, Couldn't Intel/IBM Pick up the slack? Wasn't they firing people, closing foundries up? What's so hard about making Mem modules compared to cpu's? Seems like if they seen the problem and have a solution they'd take it, a open market for products is a lifesaver for a company.

wrongrobertpatrick

Yeah via IBM, HON and MSFT

DanqueLeChay

IBM. Not the small time fake shit imo.

ahopye

Yeah you're right - but the quantum aspect is going to be more diluted with companies of that size. A successful quantum computing division within IBM would be a bigger slice of the company, and so would be a "purer" quantum play. So if you're looking for a quantum computing investment, IBM makes most sense to me. You'd invest in Microsoft and Google because they're Microsoft and Google.

ahopye

Yeah I agree. Which is why a "pure" quantum play (RGTI, QUBT, IONQ, etc) seems crazy to me. If you really wanted some sort of quantum exposure, you go with an IBM or a Google. A pure play is buying a lottery ticket where there's no guarantee the draw will even take place. Someone like IBM gives you exposure to the upside with significantly less chance of your entire investment disappearing overnight.

Catch_ME

It was during the times IBM kept chopping off prices of itself.  I'm so happy Lenovo kept the Thinkpad line up. They have the best laptop keyboards imo. Better than the MacBook pro.....yes I know those are fighting words. 

SlummiPorvari

Lol. I bet most people here are too young to remember those times. So, IBM made a HDD line called Deskstar. Oh boy, were they poop cannons. They all blew up. Yes, I know, I had a few. They gained nickname Deathstar, not kidding, you can Google it. So, IBM sold their crap - yes, it was just a pile of cow dung - to Hitachi which was later acquired by WD.

superbit415

> Think if IBM didn't sell it's hard drive manufacturing division. Western Digital eventually bought it.  > > Or if Intel didn't sell off its SSD products. It finalized its SSD business to SK Hynex in March last year for a measly $9 billion. Its thinking like that that gets you from a 100k to 10k.

purplemagecat

Yep that's what I was thinking. IBM does software and data centres and it's big money. Getting out of manufacturing makes sense

BarryBurkman

I was roasted for this a year ago. IBM and Google. I’m up significant on both buying in 18 months ago. Also…. BANKING. Some bans are using quantum to improve efficiencies and forecast better. I’m up 40 percent on HSBC!

FlyingBishop

WD's annual revenue is $10B. IBM's annual revenue is $67B. Google's annual revenue is $400B. AWS annual revenue is $128B. These shifts seem really seismic but there's a reason the hardware companies are getting pushed around, even if their revenue doubled it would still be dwarfed by the hyperscalers.

trulystupidinvestor

I invested in IBM as my "quantum play" about 10 years ago. I haven't owned IBM in about 7 years. I don't think any of this tech is particularly close or scalable for the foreseeable future.

Catch_ME

Clayton Christensen wrote a book in 97 called the innovator's dilemma. There's an entire school of thought that we shouldn't get rid of low margin, high volume business. TSMC and Samsung were taking everyone's low margin business that Intel and IBM voluntarily gave.  They end up giving marketshare to their competitors. 

New_Performer8966

IBM is interesting. They were the old legacy but managed to slowly reassert themselves in enterprise hardware solutions, services which allow them to ride the AI wave, and are one of the largest players in quantum. Also worthwhile is they aren't part of the openAI Nvidia circular financing knot. That dip is a buying opportunity.

Catch_ME

Think if IBM didn't sell it's hard drive manufacturing division. Western Digital eventually bought it.  Or if Intel didn't sell off its SSD products. It finalized its SSD business to SK Hynex in March last year for a measly $9 billion. These companies would be swimming in cash today if they just tried to hire less MBAs and consultants. They wouldn't have been told to sell their high volume, low margin businesses. 

ahopye

I mean IBM probably comes under "big tech whose focus is elsewhere". It's a fairly small segment of the overall business. But yeah, if you're looking for a quantum play it's probably IBM. They're probably the leader in the space by a decent distance, and you've got the rest of their business as a hedge. I wouldn't touch a pure quantum play any time soon

Downtown-Map6378

IBM

CriticismTop

In all seriousness, medicine is one of the earliest applications of machine learning. Remember Watson that won Jeopardy? IBM's primary market for that was actually medical research. Winning game a gameshow was more a skunk works project that the marketing team got hold of.

DanglePotRanger

Quantum is much much more realized than fusion. products are being developed and used, algos are being developed on simulators… Quantum at scale is only a matter of time. A safe-ish net might be the QTUM ETF because it has some of the big-iron holdings like Google, IBM, but the small co’s too

Oddisredit

I have you a list. Not all of them are cloud. IBM still makes money from consulting. Cisco does routing. 

Rock_or_Rol

Agreeeed I really only see ionq as its competitor in the sensor space, but they’re a league behind. IBM and google have a lot more going for them on the actual logical qubit side though Sensor stuff is revolutionary in its own right and still in its infancy

Oddisredit

You know the tech boom has been an ongoing phenomenon? That it is not just the AI boom? Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia,, Cisco, IBM, Broadcom, Oracle and others are examples of this.    While Europe has very few counterparts to this list. And the few that it does have our far smaller in terms of scale, the beach, influence and profits

ceyx0001

That was not without a cost. It is true that IBM is hiring more entry level, but they are overseen by offshore seniors. Pay attention to where those new roles are opening.

Brilliant-Weekend-68

IBM might just not be paying attention

civil_politician

Is that why IBM is tripling their entry level hiring?

Direct-Bar-7392

IBM equates to dogwater

orangeyougladiator

Not a single study has said AI has been worth the cost/productivity increases even while it’s heavily subsidized, and IBM just said it’s no where near what’s promised and is opening entry level jobs (3x) again. If you think there’s a mag7 recovery this year you’re high as fuck.

Altruistic-Laugh-787

I think big established companies that serve enterprise will be fine. The software they sell is only partly the reason those companies get chosen, the other is the perceived safety and interoperability of their platform. Nobody ever got fired buying IBM. 

yatruthordare

at least IBM is still hiring

TernTheNumbers

Wow a whole 3 job openings at IBM, probably all fake.

orangeyougladiator

> IBM is tripling the number of Gen Z entry-level jobs after finding the limits of AI adoption And that’s the sound of the bubble deflating faster than you can blow air in to it

Yogi_DMT

They're a holding company they don't innovate anything and are hugely bloated. Basically just IBM but also half Berkshire Hathaway so they're not completely tanking.

DollarBillAxeCap

If that's the case then why is IBM hiring a boatload of entry level people (mostly devs) in the next few years? [Source](https://fortune.com/2026/02/13/tech-giant-ibm-tripling-gen-z-entry-level-hiring-according-to-chro-rewriting-jobs-ai-era/)

TheLegendTwoSeven

IBM released the first smartphone in 1994. Research in Motion released the BlackBerry in 1999, which gained popularity in the business world in the 00s. Apple released the iPhone in 2007, Samsung released the Galaxy in 2009, and by 2014 smartphones were everywhere. That’s 20 years from the first smartphone. If we want to pull back a bit further, the first commercially available cell phone was released by Motorola in 1983. So it took about 40 years from the first cell phones to smart phones being common and high quality.

Plus-Bookkeeper-8454

Part of the concern stems from ongoing fraud allegations and investigations tied to the company’s CEO, a former IBM CFO. Short seller Gotham City released a report claiming that key financial metrics were manipulated to conceal spending and overstate cash flow; if those claims prove accurate, they would imply serious criminal liability for CEO Martin Schroeter. The abrupt departures of both the CFO and general counsel shortly after the announcement of an SEC investigation focused on cash-flow reporting further intensify the appearance of potential governance and accounting issues, making the overall situation appear highly suspicious.

Plus-Bookkeeper-8454

Part of this is because of repeated fraud accusations and investigations involving their CEO, who used to be the CFO at IBM. Gotham City, the short seller, released a report alleging he manipulated metrics to hide spending. If they are right, the CEO Martin Schroeter is a criminal.

Vimes-NW

Long time ago, working in IT, we dealt with IBM global services - bodyshop of incompetent and useless offshore resources. They fucked up the project so bad, we had to redo most of their work, while paying them. So, for the next big project (millions of dollars) when our CIO said he wants to use them again, everyone in the room turned to him and gave him the "Are you a fucking regard?!" stare. Like that reporter did. And he said "what? They wouldn't fuck us twice." This just overshadowed it. (excluding politics)

Lopsided-Magician-36

Could happen last quarter $IBM earnings was a vicious dip then supercomputer news Friday to an 8%rip I saw calls go from $6 to $1300 in a day

IDrinkSulfuricAcid

Had hella SNDK calls and still did not save my anoos from getting gaped today. Thanks AAPL and IBM

Independent_Name_601

Grandpa needs to sell IBM and buy something with a little juice. 🥤

dtlabsa

Damn 100 year bonds, the exact cause of IBM "not being on top in any specific field".

Max_Danger_Power

AMZN, DIS, FPI, IBM, INTC (money printer backed), KMB, PG, LAND, MSFT, SONY

aaron_dresden

That doesn’t mean they’re not a sizeable tech company involved in lots of different companies. Even today every company I’ve worked in has had some product or service from IBM. With the purchase of Hashicorp they are a big player in orchestration for example.

aaron_dresden

Your narrative matches as poorly as Burry’s as the poster you’re replying to is point out. IBM the company that started in 1911, a very long running businesses. With long established revenue streams, still selling and maintaining old tech that companies and governments keep using. A company that is also in the race for new tech like quantum computing. YouTube, a service that started in 2005 and was bought quickly by Alphabet in 2006 for $1.65 billion and is now worth an estimated $550 billion. While TikTok was only able to be partially sold after unusual government intervention, it’s a different beast being Chinese owned, it also hasn’t replaced YouTube, it’s carved a different niche, that YouTube has since tried to expand into. Large IT companies buy competitors all the time to avoid competition and make themselves stronger. It’s often easier for them than to start from the ground and try to catch up. Alphabet has 256 acquisitions alone. At least 217 acquisitions for IBM. Over 225 acquisitions for Microsoft.

Nefarious_AI_Agent

Look what they did to grandpa IBM, disrespectful

Just_Butterfly4052

Thank you IBM, very cool.

mohelgamal

There is a difference though. Disney and Coca-Cola are long running businesses with established revenue streams that aren’t easy to replace especially that they can just buy up competitors easily when said competitors are very small and have a long time frame to scale up grow their customer base to be a serious problem. Motorola and IBM are tech companies, and in tech things play differently because when a competitor come with new better tech, the adoption is very fast and by the time you notice they exist, they are already too expensive to gobble up. Basically like TikTok and YouTube, if Alphabet had enough warning, they could have just bought it early, but by the time TikTok showed to be a success, it was already too big to buy without forking out many billions. Whereas Disney can simply buy any kids show that gains some fans if they want

mohelgamal

IBM used to be the number one name in both the PC market and the server market. They built all the DOD supercomputers, they made the computers that helped NASA do the first space and moon missions. They were to all of tech what Google is to search engines. Now they aren’t even on top in any specific field

tika_dengu

5Y - MSFT (65%) v IBM (143%)

TheSixthNonsense

*How* they stayed relevant is beside the point. The point is out of the few companies who issued 100-year bonds in the 90s (Coca-Cola, Disney, IBM, Motorola), dude is cherry picking the only one that fits his narrative.

H3rbert_K0rnfeld

IBM almost fell out of relevance. IBM outperformed some MAG7 because of obnoxious government spending. Why do you think Nvidia is so high? If you guessed something other than obnoxious government spending then you would be wrong. IBM carrying an awfully large debt load. Things that make ya go hmmm.

Facebook_Lawyer_Gym

According to Google, the IBM bond was 7%

TheSixthNonsense

I mean IBM issued 100-year bonds in 1996 and it didn't exactly fell out of relevance. It's still around and worth hundreds of billions. Its stock has outperformed some of MAG7 in the past few years, too.

YakResident_3069

Western auto companies were de linked from the tech revolution. BYD came from batteries and mobile phone market. This is a classic case of IBM or NOKIA or Motorola not understanding new tech ie software at the time and losing entire markets. Us auto giants are dinos that reaped what they sowed. Americans talking free market and competition only when it suits them.

Astronaut100

The clueless, snarky commenters in this thread seem to have forgotten that Google brings in 400 billion per year at 32% operating margins. GCP just recorded a growth of 48% and backlogs grew 55% from **last quarter**. The entire company, a 4 trillion behemoth, is growing at 18%. Google is not Motorola or IBM. They have their hands in every future industry you can think of, and they hire the smartest people.

spy_bunny

ummm IBM was a power 5 stock.... its nowhere near that now. it doesnt matter what it does now. Its got out of all the profitable industries i.e. hardware and chips, and is mostly software now. Go back and look at the stock market history by market cap..... from the 1990s... then find out when they did there 100 year bond.... 1996 lets say , because you knew and lived it. Then see what happened over the next 10 years.... do the same for 1860s railways and you'll start to notice a pattern, and what it says about the state of the market. its like having to talk very slowly to a child about history i lived and traded back then. Its not often i'm like this but well clearly you dont remember big blues dominance.

groceriesN1trip

IBM hit all time highs a few months ago, driven by their AI investments and software. 

Badmoodsbear

A lot of these are a mix of AI resilient and Human based SAAS. Personally would not want to own those as a large part of their market cap is the latter and has quite a bit of transitional risk. Also, large companies tend to be less adaptive. Just my 02. My personal list is: MDB, NET, DDOG, SNOW, S, ESTC. Too bad Confluent is getting acquired by IBM or I would have them on their too.

elpresidentedeljunta

There is no denying that the chinese are stealing ip, but just as 1989 indicated: We don´t need to pretend western companies don´t do the same. There is literally a movie about apple stealing from IBM and Microsoft stealing from apple. However the attiude of thinking the chinese weren´t able to develop themselves by now is exactly the arrogance (which I know I presented a lot of myself today) which allowed the japanese to become better car producers than the US. And recently the chinese. Those new EVs weren´t stolen by anybody. Western companies partner with chinese companies right now in order to get that ip. And the sheer numbers are turning against the west. Until recently the US made up for having less of a human reservoir than China by attracting foreign talent and enabling young people from lower wealth background to go to college. It could pick the very top of talent from 7 billion people and easily outcompete China. Those talent pipelines are just now being shut down. Within a couple of years the US will have the top pick of 100 million americans who can afford to go to college and compete against one and a half billion chinese whose education is fostered by their government. And while the US has some advantage left, techologically China is closing in.

daviddjg0033

A year with no jobs and no recession? -Claudia Sahm https://stayathomemacro.substack.com/p/a-year-with-no-jobsbut-no-recession I remember 10y/2y was a signal but it has not led to a recession and read college graduates are facing a 2003 like market. "Summer and fall of 2024 revised will show notably more weakness in payroll employment. July 2024 was also when the rise in the unemployment rate triggered the Sahm rule recession indicator. At the time, the unemployment rate appeared out of step with payrolls, but that gap largely reflected the long lags in measuring employment. The unemployment rate remains a critical indicator of labor market conditions and will not be revised in the January report. Labor demand has not kept pace with labor supply: the unemployment rate is rising, but at a much slower rate than the deceleration in job creation - 3% to 5%." What part of this time is different do we not understand? IBM hired 500,000 and NVDA has 50,000 because you do more with less. Coalie the cartoon? We extract more coal but with a fraction of the labor. How do cities cope with large white collar job losses?

ATypingDog

I briefly looked at tech companies from 20 years ago. The data that I found said these were the biggest then, and here is their 20-year CAGR since: Microsoft - 11.8% Intel - 3.9% Cisco - 5.6% IBM - 4.7% Oracle - 10.4% The average CAGR if I held the 5 biggest tech stocks for 20 years was 7.33%. SP500 - 8.4% QQQ - 9.8% So back then, you needed to pick Microsoft and Oracle to benefit. 3 out of the other 5 choices lost, holding all 5 lost. If we as humans were more stressed from holding the individual stocks for 20 years, that adds to the loss. I think it's much easier to hold the market for 20 years for most people than it is to hold individual stocks and have periods where they feel stressed or have doubts or tinker with portfolio more. It allows them to say "well that's just the market" instead of "I made a mistake, why did I pick these", etc.

spy_bunny

one word... motorola. and an acronym ... IBM. because 100 year bonds have always worked out well right? right? I considered google a potential long time future top 10 company until they did this. Now the kiss of death has been applied, i fully expect them to go the way of IBM, impossible though it may seem right now. too bad i cant put a banbet in for 2050 on this. in the crazy event they can make the bond work, then its calls on the stock for the next 20 years... steam trains though... steam trains. in the 1860s railway companies decided 100 year bonds were a good idea.... then came 1873.... I have a personal belief in 2035-2040 as a cyclical crash hopefully AI/ private equity debt driven, and this is good news to me another nail in the coffin of this bull market. Isnt history great... we get to repeat all the regarded things from 150 years ago.

IDrinkSulfuricAcid

IBM 6 month chart is giving me an air embolism

Realistic-Tank809

Confluent was bought by IBM.....

FarrisAT

Exxon Mobil and IBM have higher PE ratios than Microsoft and Alphabet, respectively. Both reported flat revenue in Q4 2025.

DigitalAquarius

“When deep space exploration ramps up, it'll be the corporations that name everything, the IBM Stellar Sphere, the Microsoft Galaxy, Planet Starbucks.”

bigmeatbag

Why they need to sell $20 Billion in 100 year bonds when they have all that cash? Something isn't adding up, when IBM did that it's when they started to go to shit and marked the start of their decline.

itsatrashaccount

IBM generates $20bn a year consulting on problems their legacy infrastructure creates. If you buy IBM new without legacy systems you deserve to be fired, lol. Cybersecurity is slightly more nuanced than Betamax vs VHS. CrowdStrike won't work for a lot of users, either due do connectivity or policy issues. Not every company wants to rearchitect everything to implement endpoint protection. The idea CrowdStrike will achieve market consolidation is untrue. S1 has great potential and isn't disappearing soon, but catching the knife is hard.

Unusual_Onion_983

Nowhere in my post did I mention quality. At the end of the day F500 CISOs don’t give a shit about low level features like auto-quarantining or whether CS should move from kernel mode to user mode, they want to shake hands with George at F1 and be told that he’s protecting them. When shit hits the fan they want a CS TAM to be on the phone. Leave this Betamax vs VHS shit to the engineers. Nobody ever got fired for buying CrowdStrike, Microsoft, or IBM.

Vimes-NW

You may have not yet been a swimmer in your dad's testicles yet, but once upon a time there was this company called Novell. And they were everywhere your business had networks. And there were blackberries. And IBM computers. And Bell Networks. And Xerox. And countless other "forever" dinosaurs with valuations higher than your hot air balloon take

Aggravating_Path206

Understand this HISTORICAL FACT. Every single company that issued ultra long corporate bonds in history started declinig immediately, money invested in them became dead money for 5-10 years at least. Motorola, IBM, Coca-Cola, Disney, JCPenney, Ford. Every single one of them, there is literally not a single exception in history, for GOOGL to not decline or flatline for the next 5-10 years, it needs to be a case of "this time it's different".

bobber18

Seems unlikely in tech, yet IBM was founded in 1911 and still going strong.

tnguyen5057

Holy shit IBM

IDFCommitsGenocide

isn't that how it happens everywhere? bill gates said he had his OS ready and sold it to IBM, but it didn't actually exist and had it created in time for the contract delivery elizabeth holmes wasn't as lucky

HashMapsData2Value

I mean IBM stretches back into the 19th century, so well over 100 years old. Who knows, with how powerful some of these private enterprises have become maybe Alphabet will have its own moon colony one day.

AluminiumCaffeine

"Microsoft now trades at a lower forward multiple than IBM, for the first time in 10+ years. Forward P/E: $MSFT: 22.9x $IBM: 24.1x" Crazy times lol

asdf_lord

IBM is the only real example of a tech company lasting over 100 years and they've done it by the skin of their teeth. Will Google be around in 100 years? I actually don't believe so. I think apple will buy them one day.

birdman1972

Kyndryl Stock Crashes After Former IBM Unit Discloses Accounting Review -- WSJ

Dal-Thrax

Depends. The original 1929 crash was about 30%. If that happens, the sun rises and we continue on. The problem was that the original crash caused a meltdown of the system that had been circulating gold around the world. That caused the US currency to melt up (deflation) and a number of banks to fail. The follow on lead to stocks being down about 85%. Full recovery if the index did not happen until the 1950s (though actual recovery might have been earlier, IBM hit itself kicked out of the DOW for a number of reasons, including selling early databasing systems to the Nazis to round up Jews). If Great Depression round 2 happens the only thing that does not die is sovereign bonds and even some of those sovereigns might not be around at the end of it. In this situation gold is not a certain safe haven. During the depression the price of gold DROPPED when the US went off the gold standard, as the US was providing price supports. Nothing does well. Paid off house and investment in TIPS might cause the least day to day disruption (though TIPs in the depression would have suffered major losses due to deflation). That said there were some Germans who had their currency crash, there homes burned out, then the Soviets take anything that was left. At that point the question becomes who in the family died, not how the investments did.

Real-City-251

Already have IBM

Hamataru

I got burned so hard on my CCCX play this last week. I still think they’re the best value in the market. They had some rotten fucking luck, and me too by extension. A government shutdown each time they started to get momentum. Other quantum companies shitting the bed with dilution or whatever this last go around. The narrative of quantum going from revolutionary to “highly speculative and overbought penny stocks” in October as well. I see quantum in two separate ways, there’s the revolutionary logical qubit super computers and then there are deployable applications. IBM and google are a league above everyone else on the logical qubit side last I checked. INFQ is the front runner for deployable applications. It’s like comparing data centers to laptops imo. There’s always the breakthrough chance though for any of these companies. If I was responsible and a believer in quantum, I’d go in CCCX/INFQ, IBM and a quantum ETF. I’m a degenerate though and see CCCX as having the largest upside in the next 6 months though FYI, I believe INFQ shares are locked post merger. So only CCCX buyers will be taking losses if it falls below $10.

Cinq_A_Sept

Try IBM..

No-Reflection5141

“Permabuy.” That’s what was said about IBM and GE once.

silentstorm2008

Their platform looks like it was developed in the 90s and never updated. Only legacy companies will use them until they become like IBM. Newer companies will use platforms developed for the .modern workplace and don't have a high barrier to integrate and maintain. Our workforce has a SNOW team of about 10 and they are in 6 month backlog of requests for maintenance, fixes, and enhancements.

someguy-79

100%. It reminds me when I worked at IBM and they tried so hard to ban Excel and use their Lotus product. Huge flop and everyone went back to Excel pretty quickly. Huge moat and huge pricing power.

krossPlains

I felt this way about IBM when it was at 160.

RD_006

Seeking an exposure to the US grid through a solid company with strong fundamentals, I've picked GEV. Expensive, yes but the US electrical infrastructure requires complete turnaround upgrade and expansion to keep up capacity for growing power demand. GEV was sort of IBM. Has it all, but needed major restructure and restart. From getting rid of dead weight to changing company mentality. Got a first hand experience with its machinery. God tier quality. Besides, they have some renewables branches if memory serves. As for Chinese vendors, Huawei, SunGrow and Trina Im most familiar with. Huawei offers best integrated solutions. Every year a new upgrade. SunGrow provides Switzerland level quality and manufactures everything from PV panels to transformers. Trina. Welp, Trina is just like Ford. Bear in mind, renewable stocks boomed after Covid just like SaaS, AI and semi companies did, so Im not entirely sure if they go parabolic again. Also, high competition and low level entry barrier on Chinese market.

BaconSarnie2025

NVDA TSM ASML . MSFT GOOG TSLA and META will go sideways due to capex impinged earnings. In 2001 after the crash in internet stocks, there were only three or so winners at the top of the S&P 100. CSCO IBM MSFT AOL etc went sideways.

Potential_Try_2193

Adding to Alphabet and Boeing...already bought some more crowdstrike and snowflake...looking at IBM and Cisco...

MannerProfessional24

IBM