ROE

HolidayTangerine2753

Thanks, "ideas to look at, not gospel" is exactly the intent. \> Have you run this several times? How long? Only one, the first ran this past Sunday. Every scan gets published with a date and stays unchanged, so the archive builds from here. \> Did you notice the same stocks popping up every time, or was there decent variety? Don't know yet. It's the most interesting open question, and the public archive will answer it over the next weeks, anyone will be able to compare scan to scan. \> I see 8 stocks flagged, is this typical? Low? High? No baseline yet. The count should swing with the market: in frothy stretches almost nothing quality dips 15%+, and the screen is allowed to come back nearly empty. When fewer than five names pass, the grid pads with companies that cleared the quality bar but aren't on sale, badged as such, so it's visible which is which. \> You might consider adding a few drop downs, where a user could set ROE, drawdown, and revenue growth to higher/lower levels A selectivity filter layered on top of the published results, without changing them, could work. Noted.

HolidayTangerine2753

An example response from Hermes:  **Top opportunities (quality + on sale + stable)** **INTU — Intuit @ $296.76** \- ROE: 22.5% | Margin: 21.9% | Debt/Eq: 33% \- Rev growth: 10.4% | P/E: 18.1 \- **Down 63% from 52-week high**, -27% in 30 days \-  QoQ numbers look distorted: revenue +84%, income +342%, margin +21%. This smells like acquisition accounting (Mailchimp/ProConnect) or a one-time tax benefit. Don't trust the acceleration signal here without reading the latest 10-Q. **NFLX — Netflix @ $82.18** \- ROE: 48.5% | Margin: 28.5% | Debt/Eq: 54% \- Rev growth: 16.2% | P/E: 26.5 \- Down 38.7% from high, -6.9% in 30 days \- QoQ: income +118%, margin +23%. Fundamentals accelerating while price drops. Still a strong compounder; the drop may reflect subscriber saturation fears or competitive pressure. **NEM — Newmont @ $99.71** \- ROE: 25.8% | Margin: 33.9% | Debt/Eq: 16% \- Rev growth: 45.8% | P/E: 12.9 \- Down 25.8% from high \-  Gold miner = cyclical. That 45% revenue growth and 33% margin could be peak-of-cycle. Low P/E in mining is often a trap, not a bargain. Treat as a commodity bet, not a durable compounder. **RMD — ResMed @ $196.04** \- ROE: 25.2% | Margin: 27.4% | Debt/Eq: 13% \- Rev growth: 10.8% | P/E: 18.9 \- Down 32.8% from high \- QoQ is flat (rev +0.6%, income +1.6%). Stable but not accelerating. Medical devices moat is solid; GLP-1/weight-loss drug overhang may be pressuring sleep-apnea sentiment. **MKC — McCormick @ $47.24** \- ROE: 25.3% | Margin: 23.1% | Debt/Eq: 65% \- Rev growth: 16.7% | P/E: 7.7 \- Down 37.8% from high \-  That P/E 7.7 and QoQ income +351% / margin +42% scream one-time gain or restructuring benefit. Do not trust the screen alone here. **PODD — Insulet @ $153.22** \- ROE: 23% | Margin: 10.4% | Debt/Eq: 78% \- Rev growth: 33.9% | P/E: 35.8 \- Down 57% from high \- QoQ revenue -2.8%, income -10%, margin -1%. Slight deterioration — watch closely. Omnipod competition heating up? **ROL — Rollins @ $47.10** \- ROE: 38.7% | Margin: 13.8% | Debt/Eq: 77% \- Rev growth: 10.2% | P/E: 43.2 \- Down 28% from high \- QoQ revenue -0.7%, income -7.4%. Pest control is recession-resistant but not immune. High P/E means expectations are still priced in.

RealHornblower

I think a tool like this is a great idea for generating ideas of companies to look at. Obviously, if someone took this as gospel and just bought every company the tool flagged, that would probably not work out for them (or maybe it would, there have been crazier strats). But as a tool that present possibilities, I like it a lot. It's a good landing page that presents the information well without being too cluttered. You might consider adding a few drop downs, where a user could set ROE, drawdown, and revenue growth to higher/lower levels, if they wanted to be more/less selective. Some questions: 1. Have you run this several times? How long? 2. If yes, did you notice the same stocks popping up every time, or was there decent variety? 3. I see 8 stocks flagged by the screener, is this typical? Low? High? Personally I think a weekly scanner giving <10 ideas is right in the sweet spot, but that depends on if it's the same companies each time or if there's at least a bit of turnover. Overall I definitely think it's a great way to generate ideas for someone who wants to buy individual companies "on sale", with the obvious caveat that they should investigate things for themselves before buying anything. Mostly it seems like a good way to explore ideas outside the same 10-20 stocks that dominate social media and financial reporting.

c-u-in-da-ballpit

Is it possible to have a diversified portfolio that isn’t just a collection of names? I disagree with Euro rearmament being a bad trade. It’s significantly de-rated this year, but the structural forces are still well intact. Rheinmetall is 40% of its high with a record backlog and procurement visibility into 2030. Naval expansion (F126 frigate program), drone/loitering ammunition (€2B FV014 award pending), satellite/space (SPOCK1 program), Ukraine reconstruction contracts etc. They have a lot going on in a Europe with realigned priorities that favor them. Safran has ROIC of 23%, ROE of 55%, trailing P/E \~17, forward P/E \~27 with no debt. Not a bargain but also not inflated. Just a well discipline and well positioned company at a fair price. Kongsburg Q1 revenue grew 26% and EBIT grew 55% year-on-year with a 16.6% margin. Same story as Safran. Airbus is a duopoly, maybe doesn’t belong under this theme. Rolls Royce is more an SMR bet than a defense one. So probably also doesn’t belong under this theme. The 90s peace dividend era is over. None of these trades seem like a bad bet to me. No interest in owning UNH. Novo is undervalued. I know that’s been said for months and sentiment is in the toilet, but the fundamentals are just not aligned with the price. Idk what makes the AI tilt “questionable”. Broadcom is a dominant chip maker. Arista is the market leader in networking infrastructure. It’s just a small position in two quality companies. I’m 30. Idk my target retirement rate. Best laid plans of mice and men

robotpoet

**Www.alphaunderpressure.com Xerox pressure test** **CENTRAL THESIS ANSWER** Xerox's bullish long-term thesis is not actionable based on current evidence. Despite a recent stock price rebound and increased insider ownership, the company exhibits severe profitability issues (ROA -11.53%, ROE -117.30%) and high short interest (26.07%), indicating market skepticism. The balance sheet shows pressure with no clear improvement in cash flow quality or leverage metrics. Governance actions include a significant equity plan share increase, potentially dilutive. Catalyst clarity is weak, with no definitive near-term events to drive re-rating. News sentiment is neutral to mildly bearish, reflecting uncertainty. Overall, fundamental deterioration and valuation risks outweigh positive positioning signals, failing to support a confident bullish stance. **THESIS SCORE** **2.42** **/ 5**

RNutt

P/E is not the best ratio for evaluating banks. I'd look at P/B, ROE, net interest margin(how much profit do they make on their core business), and credit quality. Then P/E if the other ratios made sense. A bank is a balance sheet business. The primary value of a bank is how efficiently it can borrow money from depositors and lenders, then turn that into profitable loans. Here's a few rules of thumb: ROE: 10% - 15% is good. Above 15% is excellent P/B: 1x is average. Less than that can be undervalued or just a weak bank. Above 1 usually mean stronger, but it could also mean you're paying a lot. Net interest margin: this is the profit margin you're making on the bank's money. For a big emerging market bank like NU, it should be at least 5%. 10-15% is strong. Above 15% nad you might be running too hot. For comparison purposes, a big U.S. bank would probably have a 2-3% net interest margin. Credit quality: If the percentage of credit losses/non-performing loans are steady or going down from quarter to quarter, that's good. For a big bank American bank, it should be no more than 4%, meaning $4 out of every $100 in loans is in real trouble. 1-2% is normal, and less than 1% is great. For a fast growing emerging market bank, more than 10% is probably dangerous. 3-6% might be normal. Less than that is really strong. P/E: under 10x is cheap. 10-15x is average. 15x is expensive. Since one of the most attractive things about NU is the growth, I'd look at PEG. Under 1: you're buying earnings cheaply. That's a good thing. 2-3: average 3+: expensive You could get more granular and look at trailing P/E versus forward P/E. You could look at Tier 1 capital and loan loss reserves. Interest rates of course(generally, the higher the better for a bank). All of these are rules of thumb. You have to know the context behind all the numbers. That's why you gotta read the filings. That's how you learn why something is happening. My simple analysis based on cursory research is that this is a good business given the tremendous growth. I would really watch the credit quality though because rapid expansion usually leads to worse quality.

HotDoor4125

on the WACC-ROIC spread, you’re right that the spread is what actually matters. even using more conservative ROIC estimates, TTD’s spread looks positive. ValueSense puts the current ROIC-WACC spread around 14.8% with a five year average of about 10.8%, not extraordinary but solidly value creating. on the ROIC figure, different sources use different methodologies and you get a wide range for TTD depending on how you calculate it. GuruFocus shows 44% annualized on the most recent quarter, 27% on TTM. StockAnalysis has 25%. The variation mostly comes down to how you treat goodwill in invested capital and how aggressive buybacks affect book equity. TTD has been repurchasing shares pretty heavily which compresses book equity and can inflate ROE-derived figures. My number reflected one specific methodology at one point in time. on the inflation concern for software specifically, fair in general but i think it’s less of an issue here than for something like Salesforce or Intuit where intangibles are a much bigger chunk of the asset base. tbh the numbers i feel most comfortable anchoring to are the ones that don’t move much based on methodology. 77.8% gross margins, 42.6% five year revenue CAGR, $569M FCF on roughly $3B revenue, and a stock down 67% from its high while the business is still growing 12% YoY. those aren’t really in dispute regardless of which ROIC variant you use.

Encripta

Q1 2026 Financial Highlights * **EPS:** Reported $0.18, missing the consensus estimate of $0.20. * **Revenue:** Reached a record $4.97 billion, surpassing the $5 billion milestone. * **Net Income:** $871 million, representing a 41% year-over-year increase. * **Credit Loss Allowances:** Jumped 33% quarter-over-quarter to $1.79 billion due to portfolio growth, product mix, and seasonality. * **Return on Equity (ROE):** Closed the quarter at 29%

_hiddenscout

Kind of an interesting name, but ATMU is looking interesting to me here. The company basically sold off since the thing was running hot and in the earnings report, they only said they are planning on hitting guidance, but not raising it. Also some slowness in the heavy trucking segment, which the management said was due to the war. At these levels, valuation is starting look decent. [https://finviz.com/stock?t=ATMU&p=d](https://finviz.com/stock?t=ATMU&p=d) PEG is 1.6, P/FCF is at 23, and Foward PE of 14. Also asset light company so the ROIC/ROE is pretty solid. Description of the business: >Atmus Filtration Technologies Inc. designs, manufactures, and sells filtration products under the Fleetguard brand in the United States and internationally. >It offers fuel filters, lube filters, air filters, crankcase ventilation, hydraulic filters and coolants and other chemicals for on-highway commercial vehicles and off-highway agriculture, construction, mining, and power generation vehicles and equipment. >The company also develops filtration technologies, including filtration media, filter element formation, filtration systems integration; and service-related solutions, such as remote digital diagnostic and prognostic platforms, and analytics. They spun off from cummings and recently bought Koch, which does the HVAC filters for data centers, which should be a good growth component of the company. Also some EPA rule changes around emissions is changing next year, so could see a lot more orders coming in early next year. Earnings Presentation: [https://s201.q4cdn.com/431306011/files/doc\_presentations/2026/May/v2/Atmus-First-Quarter-2026-Earnings-Presentation-vFinal\_1.pdf](https://s201.q4cdn.com/431306011/files/doc_presentations/2026/May/v2/Atmus-First-Quarter-2026-Earnings-Presentation-vFinal_1.pdf)

koyo4

Valuation isn't only tied to revenue. Everytime people throw out the revenue tied to valuation number I roll my eyes. Shows massive ignorance. Here's some examples of what analysts consider for stock valuation: P/E Ratio, Forward P/E, P/S Ratio, P/B Ratio, EV/EBITDA, PEG Ratio, EV/Sales, Dividend Yield, Price to Free Cash Flow (P/FCF), Return on Equity (ROE), Return on Assets (ROA), Debt-to-Equity, Current Ratio, Quick Ratio, Profit Margin, Operating Margin, Gross Margin, Earnings Per Share (EPS) Current revenue alone is never considered. People invest, they don't buy present value in a company not expecting it to grow. That would be retarded.

Glittering_Water3645

Adobe is traded at about a forward 8% free cash flow yield adjusted for stock based compensation. Their RPO (contracted revenue to be realised within the next 12 month) is increasing by +12% YoY so they company isn´t "dying" in any sense in the next 12 months atleast. The question you should ask yourself. 1. Will their cost of revenue and SBC increase slower or faster than the revenue? 2. Will they be able to take a small margin on LLM usage within their ecosystem and will users prefer using LLMs within their ecosystem for a small extra cost in that case? 3. Do you believe adobe will be able to defend their market share going forward? I have a small position (3% bought at 234$/share) because of the high ROIC, ROE, market dominance (BTB), amount of share buybacks, forward guidance of 12-18% EPS growth, balance sheet, sticky products with long contracts and stable increasing revenue/earnings even in recessions. There´re real risks but also several good things in the numbers, specially relative to the valuation. That´s why it´s a small position for me. It´s the only SaaS company I own today.

MountainOpposite3199

Bro, 45% revenue growth is no joke, but 2000? That's a 20x from here, gonna need a lot more than that to justify. Trademates scores NU a BUY with that 45% growth and 29% ROE, but even they see the 31% pullback as overdone, not a moon shot. I'd say it's a solid hold for now, but temper those expectations lol.

ValueEquities

I was comparing them on vcp scanner recently. what surprised me was that LULU still has \~35% ROE and much lower leverage despite trading at roughly half Nike's multiple.... the market seems to be pricing in a much worse future than the current fundamentals suggest.

PancakeConnoisseur

People actually use that metric? They beat their self declared earnings? Meanwhile revenue growth is NEGATIVE, FCF Negative, ROE negative.

creemeeseason

I've never h ard if them before, so I did a surface check. Not too familiar with fire insurance. Generally with small insurers a big risk is concentration, so you might want to see how they are diversified. I know MCY got destroyed by the L.A. fires, as an example. P/B is decently cheap at 1.4. ROA at 3% and ROE at 14% are ok. It's probably cheaper than some other small P&C names. You might want to look into how much operational leverage they have to increase profitability. I see a share buyback authorized for about 7-8% of shares in the next two years. Not bad. My favorite niche insurance name (don't own it for some reason) is KINS. They do P&C in the NYC area. Decent company to check out if you want a comparison. Not much to add beyond that. There is almost nothing online about that stock. Pretty undiscovered?

MaxMillion888

it would be great if they could do a roe walk in an Investor Presentation that gets to NU bank's 29% ROE. Just the consumer side. they can leave galileo off to the side. That would go a long way in assuaging investor concerns.

stockerowl

Fair point and a better metric for bank valuation — hard to argue otherwise. The charitable read on the 6% ROE is that SoFi only crossed into full profitability in the last couple of years, so the equity base is still heavy relative to earnings. The path to a more respectable ROE (call it 10-12%) runs through reducing their non-interest expense ratio as they scale and better utilizing their deposit base to fund more of their own loan origination — both of which improve over time if the model works. The uncharitable read is that they raised a lot of equity at high prices and diluted their way to growth, which mechanically crushes ROE. If that's the pattern, it's a treadmill. Trajectory matters more than the snapshot here, but you're right that right now the number is just bad.

MaxMillion888

Just to add to this, fundamentally SOFi is a consumer bank with tech upside. Thus It should be valused as a consumer only bank with potential tech upside. Above and beyond products per customer, the real and better measure is ROE. Their ROE is terrible for a bank. 6%.

mrmrmrj

SOFI is a bank. It runs like a bank. It trades like a bank. P/B is 1.8 like a bank. The earnings will grow at the rate of ROE like a bank.

Personal_Repair_3579

Ran SOFI through a benchmarking tool I've been using; peer-benchamrks it against \~50 credit services companies. Some of it lines up with the OP, some of it doesn't. The cost efficiency story is legit. Efficiency ratio of 33.5%, operating margin in the 83rd percentile vs peers. Whatever they're doing on the cost side, it's working. Growth is also real - asset growth at the 97th percentile, NII up 29% YoY, top-20% on most growth metrics. Can't really argue with that. But here's the catch that trips me up: net income grew \~240% last year, yet EPS was actually down \~12%. That gap is dilution. Stock-based comp is running at nearly 50% of operating cash flow. So the bank is making more money, but shareholders are getting a smaller slice of a bigger pie. The ROE reflects it - 5.7%, sitting at the 19th percentile vs peers. Overall moat score came in at 52/100 - moderate. The "no moat" comments are a bit harsh, but the deposit franchise scoring developing (bottom third) does suggest the ecosystem stickiness thesis is more aspiration than reality right now. That's an nteresting setup, not a layup.

Ialsoreadtheonion

Bag holding then. Look at the all time chart for Eastman Kodak. Many companies have charts like this. The only reason to trade in individual stocks is potential excess returns so learn first from the people who have made them - read books like How To Trade In Stocks - Jesse Livermore. How to Make Money In Stocks - William J O’Neill, Market Wizard books - the recent ones are more useful. Use those as jumping boards to other successful stock operators. Notice the same themes, patterns and rules seem to appear in lots of successful trading methodologies from 1900 until now. Then start investing in stocks. There is no hurry, there are always companies emerging from a base into an uptrend, even in bear markets. Learn how to be wrong (which you will be, often) and not lose much money and feel good about it because you avoided the risk of a larger loss. None of it works unless you do and even then it might not. If screening and ranking by simple criteria worked then most funds would outperform. They don’t. Ratios like PE, PEG, ROE and ROCE can subtly mislead you. You need to be able to look at a summary of a companies financials and spot red flags quickly and understand the nature of the industry to correctly interpret them. You also need to learn how to spot the occasional situations where the red flags don’t matter. Managing small sums is a totally different game to managing huge sums and you should play a game that works for your sums. All this portfolio construction seems like large sums strategy. If you have large sums pay someone better than you to do it for you, hedge it and sacrifice some returns in exchange for lower risk. FOMO is a warning that you may be entering when there is more risk than reward. It’s a sign that at the very least if you do decide to buy that you should take extra care and monitor any position you open carefully. The stronger the FOMO feels the more likely it is that you are entering into a trade not an investment and you will not make money unless you sell at the right time. The only people surprised by a market crash or a stock tanking are the ones who weren’t paying attention.

AspiringTrader_

LULU remains **fundamentally strong.** A business with zero debt, $1.8 billion in cash, a 14%+ net profit margin during a "bad year," and a 35% ROE is not in financial trouble. It's balance sheet is stronger than 95% of the retail sector. It is a classic **cyclical operational reset**, not a terminal structural collapse. Financially, Lululemon has all the capital it needs to weather this storm, re-engineer its products, and self-fund its global turnaround.

PenComfortable5269

If ai requires such heavy capex why would the hyperscalers even want to be involved in the race? It is going to turn their low capex-high-margin business with huge ROE into a high-capex-low margin industry like the auto industry. Just because it is a big business doesn’t mean it is a good business- The global auto industry has like 5 trillion in revenue and a collective market cap under 1 trillion (excluding tesla of course).

ap485860281

Has anyone looked into Broadridge ($BR)? I'm evaluating opening a position so still going in early DD stage. It appears to be pretty beaten down despite solid revenue and EPS growth. Decent ROE and rising FCF even if total debt's a little high. However, their recent $500M refinancing (out of$3.5B total) gets them through to 2035 so seems manageable. Revenue: $1.95B (+7.8% YoY) EPS: $2.72 (+11% YoY) Adjusted operating margin: 21.5%

SxeySteve

7,600x sales -750% ROE 650% debt/equity Holy shit I'm in!

Practical-Unit-984

The Wal͏lace investing a͏pp is awe͏some. I used it to get rid of Tesla from QQQ but it's easy to say "I want to invest in semiconductors, weigh by ROE". Lots of different strategy options, I think the website undersells it tbh.

Odd_Veterinarian4381

Morning sell-offs like this are usually a gift for fundamental investors who can separate legal noise from cash flow reality. I’m part of a small independent research team (XIPEN). We are three people: a researcher, a PhD in Process Modeling, and a PhD in Quantum Mathematics. We built a quantitative engine to treat financial statements as clinical data, removing the emotional "Magnificent 7" bias. We just ran $META through our **Hybrid DCF** stress test, and the discrepancy between the market and the math is one of the widest we’ve seen in the tech sector. **The XIPEN Metrics for Meta Platforms:** * **Intrinsic Value:** $1,047.93 (Current Price \~$670) * **Margin of Safety:** 56.4% * **Quality Score:** 78.75/100 (B+) You can check out our result in a friendly way in: [https://xipen.es/en/cards/?cromo=META](https://xipen.es/en/cards/?cromo=META) **Why our model sees $1k+ while the market panics:** * **The Capex "Fear":** Investors are worried about infrastructure spending. Our **Lifecycle Score (0.134)** uses sigmoidal convergence to model this. At 0.13, Meta is still in a prime "Growth Cycle" (4/4/3 year phases). Our engineering lead models their reinvestment not just as "spending," but as **Sales-to-Capital efficiency**. Even with massive Capex, their ability to convert that capital into future revenue is top-tier. * **Risk & Discounting:** We don't use a random 8% discount rate. We build a **bottom-up Beta (1.39)** specifically for Internet Content & Information and infer a **synthetic AA credit rating** from their Interest Coverage Ratio (71.4x). This provides a clinical, risk-adjusted WACC that accounts for the current 4.44% Risk-Free rate. * **Returns (Pillar 1):** Meta has a **100/100** score in Returns. Their ROIC and ROE are practically unbeatable in the sector. **Conclusion:** From a Process Modeling perspective, the layoffs and legal setbacks are friction, but they don't break the "Metabolic Rate" of Meta’s cash generation. Our math suggests that at $670, you are buying a world-class asset with a nearly 60% discount on its fundamental value. We are bullish, but we’d love to hear from you: Is the "Magnificent 7" pullback a structural shift in risk, or are we just seeing the market misprice Capex-heavy winners again? *Not financial advice. Just the output of our multidisciplinary research lab.*

KovyJackson

Right… because we want the same ROE and adherence to law as Israel and Russia

Alicyclobacillus

ROE = ROA + Leverage All the banks have high leverage, lower than 2008 by a lot but still high enough that a recession could trigger illiquidity and forced selling off assets by large institutions The US economy literally can not afford a recession right now

godoftax

1.Consistently Growing FCFF 2. Reducing Debt/ Leverage 3.Higer ROE/ROCE THATS IT

UndercoverOptions

This is a speculation trade. A stock that is -30% ROE and negative EPS doesn’t get my attention. There are way too many other choices out there.

ai-moderator

#TLDR --- Ticker: WEN Direction: Up 🚀 Prognosis: Buy $15 Jan 2028 Calls The Catalyst: 8x P/E, 87% ROE, and 67% short interest begging for a squeeze. Backup Plan: See you behind the dumpster.

Obvious-Ad-3171

Been looking at $KHC lately. Trading around $23 but DCF puts fair value north of $60. That's a massive gap. 6.97% dividend yield while you wait. Vanguard has been quietly building their position all year. The bear case is obvious — debt/equity at 8.9, negative ROE, revenue declining 3.5%. Not a growth story. But the planned business split + new CEO could be the catalyst. Anyone else watching this one or am I missing something obvious?

Culass31

C'est une excellente approche. Ton passage chez un conseiller financier t'a donné le meilleur des enseignements : le "stock picking" de long terme n'est pas un pari, c'est une discipline mathématique. Le danger que tu décris, ces jeunes qui achètent sans recherche, c'est précisément ce qui transforme la Bourse en casino pour les uns et en machine à richesse pour les autres. La réussite sur 10 ou 20 ans ne repose pas sur la chance, mais sur la capacité à filtrer systématiquement la **Qualité**, la **Valeur** et la **Solvabilité**. C'est pour automatiser cette rigueur (celle de ton ancien patron) que j'ai créé **ValorysTrader**. L'idée est de passer du "je pense que..." au "les chiffres disent que..." en 30 secondes. Voici comment cette approche quantitative permet de sécuriser un portefeuille de long terme : **1. Ne plus confondre "Notoriété" et "Solidité"** C'est l'erreur numéro 1 des débutants. On achète ce qu'on connaît, sans regarder le bilan. * **L'exemple Boeing ($BA) :** C'est une marque iconique, mais l'analyse quantitative révèle un **Altman Z-Score de 1,27**. Ce chiffre place l'entreprise en "zone de détresse financière" réelle. Avec une dette de **52,8 Md$**, ce n'est plus un investissement serein de long terme, c'est un dossier à haut risque. **2. Identifier les vrais "Compounders" (Machines à intérêts composés)** Pour le long terme, on cherche des boîtes qui dominent leur marché et génèrent des retours sur capitaux massifs. * **L'exemple Ferrari ($RACE) :** Au-delà du prestige, l'outil confirme un score de qualité exceptionnel de **97/100**. Pourquoi ? Parce qu'elle affiche un **ROE (Rentabilité des capitaux propres) de 43,22 %** et un avantage concurrentiel (Moat) quasi imprenable. C'est ce genre de data qui permet de dormir tranquille. **3. Patienter pour le bon prix** Même la meilleure entreprise du monde peut être un mauvais investissement si on la paie trop cher. * **L'exemple IBM :** Les fondamentaux sont solides (dividendes depuis **30 ans**), mais l'analyse technique montrait récemment un score de seulement **15/100**. L'IA suggère alors d'attendre une zone d'entrée optimale (autour de **234 $ - 238 $**) plutôt que d'acheter dans l'euphorie. Le but de Valorys n'est pas de choisir à ta place, mais d'agir comme un assistant de recherche qui aura déjà lu les 200 pages du rapport annuel pour toi. Si tu veux tester tes premières idées d'actions avec cette méthode, tu peux générer **3 analyses gratuitement** sur le site. J'en offre **7 de plus** à ceux qui veulent rejoindre la communauté pour structurer leur apprentissage : [**valorystrader.vercel.app**](http://valorystrader.vercel.app) D'ailleurs, dans les portefeuilles que tu as vus chez ton ancien conseiller, y avait-il un critère financier (le cash-flow, la dette...) qui revenait plus souvent que les autres pour valider un achat ?

Culass31

Bienvenue dans le grand bain ! C'est tout à fait normal de se sentir submergé au début. Passer de la simplicité des ETF à la "mer" des actions individuelles, c'est un peu comme passer de passager d'un paquebot à capitaine de son propre voilier : c'est plus gratifiant, mais il faut savoir lire la boussole. Pour ne pas "couler" sous le poids des options, voici quelques pistes basées sur mon expérience et sur l'outil que j'ai développé, **ValorysTrader**, pour justement simplifier ce processus de décision. **1. Par quoi commencer : Secteurs ou Chiffres ?** L'approche idéale est souvent un mélange des deux. Commencer par ce que tu connais (ton "cercle de compétence") est rassurant, mais attention au piège de l'affect : aimer un produit ne signifie pas que l'action est un bon investissement. C’est là que le filtrage financier intervient. Pour réduire les options, j'utilise systématiquement trois piliers : * **La Qualité (Buffett) :** On cherche une rentabilité élevée (ROE > 15 %) et des marges solides. * **La Valeur (Graham) :** On vérifie si l'on ne paie pas trop cher par rapport aux actifs réels. * **La Croissance (Lynch) :** On s'assure que la croissance des bénéfices justifie le prix (le fameux ratio PEG). **2. Le poids des chiffres vs La "qualité" du business** C'est le grand débat. Les états financiers sont les fondations, mais l'avantage concurrentiel (le "Moat") est le mur qui protège la maison. * **L'exemple de Ferrari ($RACE) :** Tu peux adorer la marque, mais c'est le **ROE de 43,22 %** et les **marges brutes de 61,68 %** qui prouvent mathématiquement que leur avantage concurrentiel est réel et massif. * **L'exemple de Boeing ($BA) :** À l'inverse, une marque ultra-connue peut cacher un bilan fragile. L'outil calcule un **Altman Z-Score de 1,27**, ce qui signale une zone de détresse financière malgré la notoriété. **3. Gérer le risque : Le "Safety First"** Pour ne pas se brûler, la règle d'or est de ne jamais investir sans un plan de sortie. Dans mes rapports, j'intègre toujours : * **Une Zone d'Entrée :** Ne pas courir après le prix, mais attendre que l'action revienne sur un support technique. * **Un Stop Loss :** Un niveau de prix où l'on admet que notre thèse était fausse pour protéger notre capital. * **Une Diversification Raisonnée :** Garder 80 % en ETF et s'amuser avec 20 % sur des "convictions" fortes est une excellente stratégie pour débuter sans risquer sa retraite. L'idée de **ValorysTrader** est justement de faire ce "sale boulot" d'analyse de 200 pages de rapports financiers pour toi en 30 secondes, pour te redonner de la clarté. 👉 Si tu veux tester tes premières idées d'actions, tu peux générer **3 analyses gratuitement** sur le site. J'en offre **7 de plus** à ceux qui veulent rejoindre la communauté : [**valorystrader.vercel.app**](http://valorystrader.vercel.app) Parmi les secteurs que tu côtoies au quotidien, y en a-t-il un qui t'attire plus particulièrement pour tes premiers pas en dehors des ETF ?

Culass31

Super intéressant de voir les différentes approches entre le suivi du 'Smart Money', le momentum pur et le screening fondamental. Perso, j'ai fini par fusionner ces mondes dans un process **quantitatif automatisé** pour éviter de 'voter avec mon cœur'. Le vrai défi, c'est de savoir quand une 'belle histoire' devient un gouffre financier. Ma méthode consiste à passer chaque idée au scanner via un triple filtre (Buffett pour la qualité, Graham pour la valeur, Lynch pour la croissance) couplé à une analyse de solvabilité et de momentum. Ça permet de séparer le grain de l'ivraie en 30 secondes. **Deux exemples concrets pour illustrer l'utilité du quantitatif :** * **Ferrari ($RACE) :** Tout le monde adore la boîte, mais d'un point de vue quantitatif, c'est fascinant. Elle affiche un score de qualité quasi parfait (**97/100**) avec un ROE de **43,22 %**. Mais malgré ces fondamentaux de 'compounder', l'analyse montre une faiblesse technique récente (prix sous les SMA 50/200) avec un RSI en zone de survente (**28.47**). C’est typiquement le genre de config où le quantitatif te dit : 'La boîte est géniale, mais attends que le couteau arrête de tomber'. * **Aston Martin ($AML) :** À l'inverse, là où certains voient un pari spéculatif sur le luxe, les chiffres sont impitoyables. Un **Altman Z-Score de 1,5** indique une zone de détresse financière réelle. Avec des fonds propres négatifs et des pertes constantes (marge nette de **-18,8 %**), l'outil classe le dossier en 'purement spéculatif'. Ça calme instantanément le FOMO. Le but n'est pas de deviner le futur, mais de s'assurer que les probabilités sont de notre côté avant de cliquer sur 'Acheter'. Pour ceux que ça intéresse, j'ai automatisé ce flux de travail sur **valorystrader.vercel.app**. On peut tester 3 analyses gratuitement et téléchargé les analyses en pdf (en français par contre désolé...) pour voir si nos convictions résistent à la data (et j'en offre 7 de plus si vous vous inscrivez par mail). C'est quoi votre indicateur 'éliminatoire' (celui qui vous fait dire NON direct à une action) ?

Culass31

C'est une sélection audacieuse pour 2026. Tes thèses sont très axées sur le "récit" (storytelling) et les catalyseurs industriels. Pour équilibrer ta confiance, j'ai passé tes choix au crible de mes analyses quantitatives **ValorysTrader**. Voici un retour sans détour, confrontant tes arguments aux chiffres froids du marché en ce début avril 2026. **1. Amaroq Minerals ($AMRQ)** * **Ta thèse :** Transition réussie vers la production, catalyseur Phase 2 au T2 2026. * **Mon avis :** L'outil confirme le virage stratégique et l'optimisme des analystes pour 2026 (+96% de revenus prévus). Techniquement, le titre montre des signes de **survente (RSI 30,62)**, ce qui appuie ton point d'entrée. * **Le bémol :** C'est un dossier **hautement spéculatif**. Les fondamentaux actuels sont encore dans le rouge vif avec une marge nette de **-127,83 %** et des flux de trésorerie négatifs. La "machine à cash" est une projection, pas encore une réalité comptable. **2. Ferrari ($RACE)** * **Ta thèse :** "Hermès de l'automobile", pouvoir de prix imbattable, immunisée contre les taux. * **Mona avis :** C'est le seul **"Quality Compounder" exceptionnel** de ta liste. Les scores de qualité sont au plafond (**97/100**) avec un ROE stratosphérique de **43,22 %**. * **L'opportunité :** Tu as raison de ne pas regarder que le P/E. L'action est actuellement proche de son plus bas sur 52 semaines avec un **RSI de 28,47**. Ce repli technique est une opportunité rare pour une boîte de cette trempe. **3. Aston Martin ($AML)** * **Ta thèse :** Pari de redressement (turnaround), livraison de la Valhalla, valorisation plancher. +1 * **Mon avis :** C'est pile ou face. Si l'aspect spéculatif est là, la santé financière est critique. L'**Altman Z-Score est à 1,5**, ce qui indique une zone de détresse financière. * **Le risque :** Avec des capitaux propres négatifs et une dette élevée, le marché attend plus que des promesses de supercars. L'IA reste **neutre (40/100)** en attendant des preuves de stabilisation du bilan. **4. Fluor ($FLR)** * **Ta thèse :** Contrats dérisqués, acteur du nucléaire/SMR et des centres de données. * **Mon avis :** Le carnet de commandes est solide ($15,5 Md de revenus), mais la rentabilité GAAP peine à suivre (marge nette de **-0,33 %**). * **Le signal :** La situation de trésorerie est saine ($3,77 Md), ce qui valide ta thèse sur le rachat d'actions. C'est un dossier pour les investisseurs "Value" patients, mais attention à l'**incertitude technique à court terme**. **5. L3Harris ($LHX)** * **Ta thèse :** Défense technologique, scission d'actifs pour libérer de la valeur. * **Mon avis :** C'est une valeur mature et fiable (25 ans de hausse du dividende). Cependant, l'outil suggère que tu paies peut-être trop cher aujourd'hui : le **P/E de 41,54** est élevé par rapport aux standards historiques. * **Le conseil IA :** Le momentum s'essouffle avec un **signal de vente MACD**. L'IA recommande d'attendre un repli vers la zone des **310$ - 340$** pour optimiser le ratio risque/rendement. **6. Capital One ($COF)** * **Ta thèse :** Acquisition de Discover, synergies massives, sous-évaluation. * **Mon avis :** Gros potentiel de valeur. Si l'on normalise les bénéfices (en ignorant le creux cyclique actuel), l'action est **fortement sous-évaluée**. * **La solidité :** Contrairement à beaucoup de banques, COF affiche un ratio **Dette/Equity très bas (0,44)**. Malgré un momentum technique baissier, c'est un excellent candidat "Value" pour 2026. **7. NextEra Energy ($NEE)** * **Ta thèse :** Combo gagnant Utility + IA/Data Centers, 10 % de croissance du dividende. * **Mon avis :** Thèse validée par les chiffres. C'est une entreprise de haute qualité avec un **sentiment Bullish (75/100)**. * **La force technique :** C'est l'un des rares titres de ta liste avec un **momentum haussier solide** (prix au-dessus de la SMA 200). Attention toutefois à la sensibilité aux taux d'intérêt vu l'endettement inhérent au secteur. Tes convictions sur **Ferrari** et **NextEra** sont solidement épaulées par la data. Sur **Amaroq** et **Aston Martin**, tu es en plein territoire spéculatif : le timing technique sera tout aussi crucial que la livraison de tes catalyseurs. Si tu veux confronter tes prochaines thèses à ces scores factoriels, tu peux générer **3 analyses gratuitement**. J'en offre **7 supplémentaires** à ceux qui veulent suivre leurs positions de près en laissant leur mail : [**valorystrader.vercel.app**](http://valorystrader.vercel.app)

Culass31

On est tous passés par là. C’est le "biais de confirmation" à son apogée : on voit un commentaire bien écrit sur Reddit, notre cerveau fait un raccourci et on se convainc qu'on a trouvé la pépite du siècle. Le problème, c'est qu'entre l'enthousiasme d'un inconnu et la réalité d'un bilan comptable, il y a souvent un gouffre. C'est exactement pour arrêter de "parier" sur des commentaires Reddit que j'ai automatisé mon propre processus avec **ValorysTrader**. L'idée, c'est de transformer ce "process sur papier" que personne n'a le temps de faire en une analyse de 30 secondes pour vérifier si l'idée tient la route. **Le "Sanity Check" en 3 étapes (pour éviter le FOMO)** Plutôt que de faire défiler des rapports d'analystes souvent biaisés, l'outil passe l'action au scanner via une approche quantitative pure : * **Le Diagnostic Factoriel** : Je croise les critères de **Buffett** (qualité), **Graham** (valeur) et **Lynch** (croissance). Par exemple, une action peut avoir une super "story" sur Reddit, mais si son **Piotroski F-Score** est bas ou son **Altman Z-Score** indique un risque de détresse financière, le signal passe au rouge direct. * **La Vérité des Chiffres** : Je regarde des metrics impitoyables comme le **ROE** (Rentabilité des capitaux propres) ou la croissance réelle des bénéfices (**EPS CAGR**) sur 5 ou 10 ans. Si le "gars sur Reddit" dit que ça explose mais que les chiffres montrent une érosion des marges, tu sais à quoi t'en tenir. * **Le Timing Technique** : Même si la boîte est géniale, l'IA regarde le momentum (RSI, MACD, Moyennes mobiles) pour te dire si tu achètes en plein sommet ou sur un support solide. **Un exemple concret : IBM vs Boeing** Prends **IBM** : les fondamentaux sont hyper solides (score Lynch de **70/100**, ROE de **32,3 %**), mais la technique était très faible récemment (score de **15/100**). L'outil te dit "Attends" au lieu de foncer. À l'inverse, un dossier comme **Boeing** montre des signaux de détresse financière (**Z-Score de 1,27**) et une dette massive (**52,8 Md$**) que l'on ne voit pas forcément sur un simple graphique de broker. Bref, l'objectif est de garder le côté "fun" de découvrir des idées sur Reddit, mais d'avoir un garde-fou mathématique pour ne pas transformer son portefeuille en champ de mines. Si tu veux passer tes prochaines "pépites Reddit" au scanner, tu peux faire **3 analyses gratuitement** sur le site. Et si tu veux automatiser ça sur le long terme, j'en offre **7 supplémentaires** à ceux qui rejoignent la communauté avec leur mail : [**valorystrader.vercel.app**](http://valorystrader.vercel.app)

lmaccaro

I’m only worried because US leadership is spectacularly incompetent. The US military is more than capable of thumping Iran and China at the same time if given open ROE and with competent leadership.

JR-FlowCapGroup

Wait, so financial metrics like ROIC and ROE are based on past historical data? I think this is never future based because we have to wait for the quarterly filings. Or do I get your reply wrong?

-LabApprehensive-

Ok so we agree lots of bases have schools attached. Good. Now who’s responsibility is it to make sure those kids don’t get blown up? Is it the guy who designs the ROE? Is it the sec def who decides any ROE is woke? Somebody killed those kids in my country’s name. I love my country so I have a major problem with that.

Business_Raisin_541

Not really. Mining sector is simple unlike software indsutry. Just look at their ROE, PE ratio. If the commodity they sell is the same, the company inner working does differ much from each other. It is a simple boring company

Mhonero

A lot of people treat technical and fundamental analysis as opposites, but they actually solve different problems: Fundamental analysis = what to buy   Technical analysis = when to buy   Fundamentals help you find strong companies (ROE, earnings growth, margins, manageable debt), but they don’t tell you when to enter. You can buy a great company and still be down short term. Technicals help with timing (RSI, trends, support/resistance), but they say nothing about the quality of the business. You can time a perfect entry on a bad company. The approach that’s worked best for me is combining both: - Use fundamentals to build a watchlist of quality companies   - Then use technicals to improve entry (avoid overbought levels, wait for pullbacks, etc.)   Curious how others here combine both approaches? I wrote a more detailed breakdown on this if anyone’s interested DM  No spam here 🫡

RetardNerd

JFIN, because: (EPS) for the most recent quarter was 4.71, and its price-to-earnings (PE) ratio was 1.33. Jiayin Group Inc. has shown consistent financial performance, with margins of 26% and an ROE of 48%. Debt-to-assets ratio? 0.01. Basically zero. Growth? China’s 1.4 BILLION people are the starter course. Indonesia (280M+ borrowers, +200% growth) and Mexico (130M more), with loan volumes surpassing the 2025 guidance. JFIN is rapidly expanding its presence in significant population centers. MMS keep screaming “CHINA RECESSION!!!” every time growth “slows” to a "pathetic" 5% (from the old 10%). Ignorant people hear that and think the whole country’s been circling the drain for a decade. Reality check, everyone: China’s economy still adds TRILLIONS in GDP yearly — more than most nations’ entire output! That mass delusion is exactly why JFIN trades at a brain-dead PE. One day the fog lifts… PE explodes… and JFIN’s price goes full vertical.

Hefty_Vermicelli_802

For sure. The score is mainly dragged down by three categories (11 metrics in total): \- Quality (3/10): Net margin \~-70%, negative ROE, no profitability yet \- Financial Strength (3/10): Negative operating cash flow, not excessive debt but limited balance sheet history \- Dilution Risk (2/10): Share count increased significantly post-SPAC, continued capital needs to scale operations For what it's worth, regarding the reports I used as sources: CFRA is a NEUTRAL/NEGATIVE, while LESG is a BUY (6 analyst).

dubsinouche

Interesting dilemma. Most people forget that in Real Estate, you're not comparing 7% stock growth vs 3% house growth. You're comparing 7% on your cash vs. 3% on the bank's money. If you get a 90% mortgage, your ROE (Return on Equity) can easily crush index funds, but only if the rental market in your Spanish city covers the mortgage + taxes. Since you're in Spain, the Ley de Vivienda 2024 is your best friend or your worst enemy depending on the numbers. Don't guess. I built a tool for this exact situation (www.buy2rent.io). You can plug in any Idealista link, and it’ll show you the net cash-flow after Spanish taxes and mortgage. Run the numbers for a few apartments. If the net yield is higher than your mortgage interest + safe withdrawal rate from stocks, then 'owning' is actually a leveraged investment that beats DCA. If not, stay in your index funds. Data > Intuition.

UndercoverOptions

I have “loaded up” on a stock more times than I can count going for the Grand Slam just to have the account blow up on me. I became successful once I held the rule of no more than 5% of my portfolio in any one stock. Just curious on why you like this stock. I know nothing about it but a quick look at the fundamentals would make me pass. To determine if a company is worth my limited research time I look at 3 things at a quick glance: PE in mid 20’s or less, ROE 15% or higher, and D/E<0.5. This stock fails all 3. Why are you loading up?

creemeeseason

ABX earnings: Total revenue for the fourth quarter grew 116% to $71.9 million, compared to $33.2 million in the prior-year period. The increase was driven by a $32.9 million increase in Life Solutions revenue, a $5.6 million increase in Asset Management revenue, and a $235 thousand increase in Technology Services revenue. Origination capital deployment continued to expand, increasing by 82% for the quarter to $230.7 million, compared to $126.5 million in the prior-year period. GAAP net income attributable to shareholders was $7.2 million, compared to GAAP net loss of $18.3 million in the prior-year period. The increase was primarily driven by an increase in Life Solutions and Asset Management revenue and a decrease in operating expenses, partially offset by an increase in interest expenses and depreciation and amortization expenses. Adjusted net income (a non-GAAP financial measure) increased 71% year-over-year to $23.0 million compared to $13.4 million in the prior year period. Adjusted diluted earnings per share for the fourth quarter of 2025 was $0.23, compared to $0.16 in the prior-year period. Adjusted EBITDA (a non-GAAP financial measure) for the fourth quarter of 2025 increased 132% to $38.6 million, compared to $16.6 million in the prior-year period. Adjusted EBITDA margin (a non-GAAP financial measure) for the fourth quarter of 2025 was 54%, compared to 50.0% in the prior-year period. Annualized return on invested capital (ROIC) (a non-GAAP financial measure) for the fourth quarter of 2025 was 21%, compared to 11% in the prior year period. Annualized Return on equity (ROE) (a non-GAAP financial measure) for the fourth quarter of 2025 was 22%, compared to 13% in the prior year period.

Full_Pear449

NO... BUT , did he ever run a PROP DESK, actually did he ever TRADE a $20bln sheet. Does he have an ROE of 20+ for 10 yrs straight? Know and has used his Option Model quite a few times. We do share a degree from the same University.

MissingHedgie

Couldn’t disagree more. Investors pile into high ROC and ROE stocks because of the quality of business, currently the tech/AI large caps continue to fit this. They are also largely immune from Middle Eastern geopolitics because they are tech, not industrials, so high oil prices doesn’t matter. We’re in a classic scenario that we’ve seen time and time again over the last 5+ years, that large tech is both growth AND defensive. I would also argue that valuations aren’t even particularly stretched given underlying business performance. Anthropic’s growth in ARR to me justifies a lot of the AI buildout and confirms there is real demand. I don’t believe we’re seeing euphoria in market. I’m sure this trade is will become a bubble, it has all the makings of how bubbles start, I just don’t think we’re anywhere near there yet. Sure, we’ll see investors pour money into rubbish companies without doing proper due diligence and they’ll lose their money. But rubbish companies and rubbish investors exist always, bubble or not. I’ll tell you what war is good for… money printing. I’ll tell you what money printing is good for… stocks. I’ll tell you what money printing is NOT good for… bonds.

BattleSensitive3467

Hey kid, it's called ROE. Read about it dumbass

tomz17

\> If Iran wants to close the straight it will be difficult to stop them With conventional ROE yes, absolutely... \#1 If you are willing to go scorched earth and absolutely glass everything on the Iranian side of the straight without any regard for collateral whatsoever, then it is doable. \#2 If you are willing to put boots on the ground then the US could establish + hold a beachhead the length of the straight.

ExciteSeek4Ever

Dude…if you are new to investing stocks, then penny stocks are NOT where you should start. And you are asking for the thing everyone wants…”good penny stocks…pretty good turn around”…seriously? Invest in profitable, established companies at first while you learn to understand how to read a company’s financial statements, good vs bad financial ratios (P/E, P/S, ROE, etc.), how to compare companies by market cap, EPS, trading volumes, etc. and various hot industries to build a knowledge base on (e.g., space industry or quantum). Get down the research basics and do NOT just invest in some penny stocks because anonymous Reddit posters pump it and wow you with a “10-bagger” claim. Guard your monies…good luck.

fdaeborp

You guys play too much call of duty or are disillusioned about how difficult it is finance and logistically prepare for a war The only way it ends in a few weeks is if the US prepared to give a lot of scope with the ROE and allow mass collateral ie. Commit heinous war crimes Because unless they do that they will be fighting an insurgency in a more unforgiving environment than Afghanistan and Iraq

BlessedViral

Are revenues growing? Are margins stable and/or improving? Compare ROIC and ROE to competitors. Do they have a moat/scalability? How much cash and debt? How much Equity? Compare cash, debt and equity? Look at operating and free cash flow. Calculate owner earnings to get a better look at the core of the business. Read annual, quarterly sec filings and earnings call. By now you should have a great understanding about the business and if it's worth or not.  This is how I do it. If I like it, I calculate if it's undervalued to take a position. If not I put it on the watchlist

LoaD1nG33

ROE1L.VS, APG1L.VS, this is lithuanian stocks 👍

Low_Selection2815

Sorry, you're right. I don't touch real estate because my capital doesn't allow me to (especially since I don't take on debt). I don't know much of how it works. The bottom line is that I think you should try minimizing debt while maximizing monthly cash flow. Your debt obligations never leave regardless of how bad business is going. If the properties you're financing unexpectedly lose value, you still pay the pre-determined amount + interest, which is essentially just tossing away money. I'm no landlord (I think my lack of knowledge makes that clear) but, from what I understand, landlording is heavily regulated and even the most trivial violations can result in serious consequences that can disturb business. If you stretch yourself too thin, vacancies, repairs, and other BS can cripple you (keep some cash in reserve for this). If you put $100,000 down total for a $500,000 loan, that's $400,000 in debt obligations + interest. If any of the disturbances I mentioned happen, your net operating income (NOI) will not sustain those debt obligations. Admittedly, most of that is the bear case, but it's not impossible. You mentioned that Tennessee is landlord-friendly, and it seems you know the realm of Section 8 well. I know that conventional real estate wisdom says high leverage = high ROE = money, and anything else is "leaving money at the table." And that could be correct. You know your situation better than anyone else. You have a finance degree and I don't. At the very least, ensure that NOI > debt service. And be sure that you will encounter a problem at some point; it's as inevitable as losing money on the stock market.

RecursivelyYours

I want to understand the history of a company, as well as key events, strategic positioning, and also the actual numbers of the company. Buying a company is not only about how good the company is, but how expensive or cheap is based on the stock price. So it is important to understand the underlying economics as much as possible. I have created a tool called StockAInsights that uses AI to parse SEC filings automatically and not only generate normalized metrics like PE ratio, PB, PS, ROE and all relevant metrics and of course statements as well, but also strategically analyze the company filings and tell me what risks they have, competitors, debt, regulatory issues, funding, dilution, quality of earnings and a lot of things that are really important. It is a multifaceted analysis that you need to do if you are responsible about investing. Like do you understand why a company would have a prime position in the market against its competitors ? For example, TSM is a company that designs chips that are really tough to replicate, effectively a monopoly. Can you identify that ? and do the economics align with that story? AI can help you distinguish that fast by reading filings for you for example. If you attempt to do everything manually I'd say it's very frustrating to derive ratios and account for non GAAP adjustments. You'd need paper and pencil for sure. A tool helps a ton to automate all that.

Physical_Pepper8177

Walmart hitting $1T feels less like a hype moment and more like the market finally pricing what the business actually is... I ran a comp screen for companies with similar structural qualities to Walmart & not “retail vibes,” but the boring stuff that compounds: * scale * logistics and distribution advantages * steady ROE * consistent cash generation No surprise, names like HD, COST, TJX show up quickly. But what stood out to me is how long the market tends to treat these as “just retail” before eventually repricing them as something closer to infrastructure with cash flow. The pattern looks familiar: * Growth slows, expectations reset * Margins hold up better than expected * Cash keeps compounding * Multiple quietly expands * Suddenly it’s viewed as a platform, not a store Walmart just crossed that psychological threshold. The more interesting question (to me) is whether a few of the other large-scale, logistics-heavy names are earlier in that same arc. Not saying “next Walmart,” but the data suggests scale + distribution + pricing power still matter a lot, even when narratives change. Is this a one-off rerating, or do a few of these models still have room to surprise? Curious what others think..

UndercoverOptions

Balance sheet is rough. This stock has way too much debt compared to equity and PE is outrageous. ROE looks good this year but is far from stable over the last 5 years. This is certainly a hard pass for a long position. I would certainly consider some kind short position.

UndercoverOptions

I first do a rough-cut of the fundamentals. 1. ROE: Is it a good business and is the growth profitable? This is measured by ROE. A company that can demonstrate a 15% or better ROE for 3 to 5 years might have a moat. 2. DEBT/EQ: Is it a safe business and is the growth sustainable or are they just borrowing it? This is measured by the debt/equity ratio. I look for this to be less than 0.5. Higher than 1.0 could indicate that they are funding their growth through debt and when times get tough, they may have issues. 3. PE: Is it a good deal or has the market gotten ahead of itself? This is measured by the P/E ratio. Make sure that you are using gaap PE to avoid accounting tricks making earnings look better than it is. PE less than 25 is a good place to be. Greater than25 might be too expensive. If these measures are favorable then I will go through the process of determining FMV and set entry points and strategy. For selling puts, I will set strikes below FMV and below a strong support.

Glad-Lie8324

Most people don't know enough to fairly value companies. That's the simple truth. Institutional investors who manage millions might know a thing or two, and even they only find great opportunities once in a while. Only something like a third of all equities outperform the market over a 5 year span. That number drops more and more over longer time horizons. Only 4% of equities account for all the wealth generation of the stock market since the 20's. If you think you're finding genuine opportunities that everyone else is missing, it's more than likely you're chasing the hype and you'll get burned in the long run. With that said, I too think I'm smarter than everyone in the whole world and have deluded myself into thinking I can make money on equities so I allocate a small portion of my portfolio (10% or so) that I try to beat the market with, just to scratch that itch. My opinion is that truly great opportunities are more scarce than plentiful, and I try to limit my number of "buy" to 3-5 per year. I aim for companies I would never sell and basically try to follow all the Warren Buffet principles (competitive moat, great company at a fair value beats fair company at a great value, high free cash flow, strong ROE and ROIC, strong balance sheet and good cash management to weather storms, quality management, etc. etc. TLDR: Opportunities don't exist for the layman, and you should just VOO/VT and chill unless you hate money.

Moist-Car7709

Respect for the 4-year grind. Seeing a green curve like that in this sub is basically a miracle. Your **PHYS (Sprott Physical Gold)** play is actually the 'brain' of this portfolio for a few reasons: * **The Bulletproof Vest:** With a **Beta of 0.16**, this is what keeps you alive. While your tech lines like AMD or NVDA swing wildly with Betas near 2.0, PHYS barely flinches when the market catches a cold. * **The Fundamentals:** This trust is a profit machine with a **99.1% net margin** and a **32.0% ROE**. * **The Valuation:** You are sitting on a gold mine that is still technically 'undervalued'. The intrinsic value is estimated at **$40.00**, meaning even at current prices, there is still a **+9.7% margin of safety**. * **The P/E Steal:** It’s trading at a **5.3x P/E ratio**, which is a massive discount compared to the 18.0x average for the broader market. **The Reality Check:** Keep an eye on the cash flow. It’s showing a **negative operating cash flow of -$36.42M**, meaning it’s great at holding value but poor at generating fresh liquid cash. The AI strategy actually suggests **reducing exposure**slightly here to lock in those 47% gains and move into assets with a higher margin of safety. You’ve played the 'boomer' asset like a pro. Don't let the 'degenerate' side of the sub talk you into swapping this for 0DTE calls. Would you like me to look at the **AMD** portion of your portfolio to see if the recent volatility changes the 'Hold' recommendation?

Artistic_Item_5710

You can't look at everything. You have to distill your approach to the most important metrics, those that capture what you are looking for. For example, I focus on ROE/ROA/ROIC metrics to understand management efficacy, I look at Operating/EBITDA margin to understand the business earning potential, I look at debt ratios and FCF to assess business resilience, I look at P/E and EV/EBITDA to assess valuation. I look at historic revenues and profit growth/decline to get a sense of their growth profile. I also look at insider ownership to assess management/shareholder alignment. Finally and perhaps first and foremost, I spend sometime reading a description of what the business does and see if I can understand what they do and how they make money, if I can't get the business in 5 minutes, the rest doesn't matter. All in all, I can get 80% of what I need to learn about a business in 45 min or less.

TugginPud

Not saying the earnings won't make it pop, and I'm not really familiar with the stock, but the ROA and ROE look weak af. Any reason that's expected to improve?

SpongEWorTHiebOb

I’ll buy MSFT on weakness and at a 25 PE OVER META any day. MSFT has a net profit margin of 31%. Return on equity 33%. The margin is higher than Meta. ROE about the same. It’s a reliable recurring earnings stream year in and year out. Meta’s ad revenue and earnings will plummet in the next recession like in did in 2022. MSFT is much more diversified and recession resistant.

decolored

Key Financial and Valuation Aspects for PSTV (as of early 2026):  Deep Negative Profitability: Return on Equity (ROE) has been reported as low as -407% and net margins around -391%, indicating heavy losses. Negative Intrinsic Value: Some models have indicated an intrinsic value for PSTV in the range of -7.19 to -1.15USD. Cash Burn & Sustainability: Although having low debt, the company’s high cash burn ($15.7M TTM) has created concerns about its cash runway, creating a need for more capital, which has led to significant share dilution. Stock Performance: The stock has seen extreme volatility, with significant price drops following financing announcements (e.g., $15 million offering in Jan 2026). High Risk: The company's financials are characterized by very weak fundamentals, with a high probability of bankruptcy if cash burn is not addressed. 

labowner85

That criteria is really solid and you can’t go wrong with low PE and high ROE stocks. So yes if you find those with consistent performance then definitely buy them. I think United Healthcare is priced once in a generation and is a screaming buy that I would suggest. But that’s a long term play.

Easik

This sounds like a modernized Berkshire Hathaway style start-up. There are a lot of issues with this style that Buffet talks about a fair bit over the years. I think long term ROE can be painful and dangerous depending on how aggressive the firm deploys capital. At 19, I'd definitely treat this as a learning opportunity and move on by 21.

sleuth_creamer

Gemini recommended below based on the give criteria Criteria,GigaCloud (GCT),Gravity (GRVY) Market Cap,~$1.5B (Borderline),~$430M (Pass) ROE / ROIC,30% / 25%,30% / 30% Revenue Growth,40%+,10% (Variable) EPS Growth,50%+,15%+ PEG Ratio,~0.4,~0.7 Founder-Led,Yes,No Moat Type,Network Effect / Cost,Intangible Assets (IP)

UndercoverOptions

PYPL has a solid balance sheet. Current/quick ratio at 1.34 means no liquidity issues, debt/equity at 0.60 is very manageable, and cash flow looks strong with P/FCF under 10. Profitability backs it up too (ROE 24%, ROIC 15%, margins near 20%), so they’re funding growth without piling on debt. Overall I feel is a low financial risk, well-run balance sheet, more of a market/volatility story than a balance-sheet problem. I worry about long term. These type of companies will be obsoleted as AI takes over. Need to watch that it’s moat don’t shrink over time. This really is my only worry about this company. It should be $70.

PaperHandsTheDip

\> If you know what you are doing you won't be capital constrained until 250-400 million. That is incorrect. You're capital constrained by the size of the inefficiency / markets you're operating on. Inefficiencies exist **everywhere** \- it's just a question of: is this worth chasing / extracting? Who is currently extracting it? What is the risk? How much work is it to extract it & how long will it be alive until someone else comes along and undercuts you? How long until it decays? Example of another decayed system I wrote (capital constrained to \~1BTC, net profit of over 200BTC. Unfortunately we sold for an average of \~10k each). That system resulted in 3 accounts on bitmex's top 25 leaderboard via ROE when that was a thing (as of 2022). The idea was braindead simple: derivatives closely mimic the price of the underlying, but not perfectly. There is a delay. If you can build a system fast enough, you can ingest the price of the underlying, update your internal derivatives pricing model and snipe mispriced orders in the orderbook. Since the derivative is very likely mispriced (we hit over 95% correctness rate on that one) - you basically enter into a 100x leveraged position long or short, wait for the market to correct itself (at the time it tended to happen in < a few hundred milliseconds), then you exit. Take profit or loss immediately. We accounted for close to 1% of their total trade volume, despite being funded with only 1 BTC. Our risk was almost always 0 (no position) - and when we DID have a position it more or less always turned immediately green (once the TRUE mark price was reflected) The capital constraints as defined above are constrained via the liquidity of mispriced assets (in this case perpetual swaps)... which tended to only be a couple million. Since bitmex offered such high amounts of leverage (100x+ for it's derivatives) you didn't need much capital to execute the trade. It was pure latency arb / better execution. There was no stop on the strategy, the stop was a forced liquidation (100% loss of collateral). The profit was auto withdrawn to another account to ensure it wasn't at risk. If it DID take a loss - we would have to investigate, potentially fix the bug, then redeploy the capital. Net profits from these systems across various venues are in the 8 figures, yes. But it's not $1m / day, and we are very capital constrained, yes. We have incredibly high ROE's and all capital is strictly speaking internal. Perks tho are we get to keep 100%, no stress, no boss, and pays incredibly well. Also with next to nothing at risk they're more like money extraction machines vs investing / risking capital (-> no stress).

BreadCoLLC

Considering a LEAP Put on Globalstar (GSAT) Business Description: Founded in 1991, Satellite Communication Infrastructure provider, providing service to mobile wireless devices (cell phones). Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) player, with a lot of time in the space....per Chat GPT -- Globalstar is a satellite communications company focused on low-earth orbit (LEO) connectivity for voice, data, IoT, and asset tracking. It’s one of the older LEO players, but its relevance jumped materially in recent years due to a very specific — and very valuable — partnership. Leading Indicators: * P/S > 30x * F P/E >7,000 * EPS this year = 106.38% * ROA / ROE / ROIC = -3.07% / -12.45% / -6.39% * Profit Margin = -22% Industry Notes * Extremely Capex heavy * Customer Concentration to AAPL * Long time player, IPO'd in 1995 * Fiber Build outs have been preferred and more reliable Thesis: This growth is heavily event driven as (i) they received equity investment from AAPL amounting to \~20%; (ii) and increase in acquisition speculation from Spacex. Apple has been a customer to GSAT since 2022 (from my brief research). My understanding is that this equity stake was a way to keep GSAT alive so that Apple could continue to maintain their emergency services on their iPhones for devices that were out of cell-coverage. Apple isnt a full guarantee, but there should be some consideration to their investment and willingness to let GSAT fail. SpaceX acquisition seems like pure speculation. The acquisition makes sense from a Starlink integration as both GSAT and Starlink operate LEO. However, this would not be an asset acquisition, it would be either (i) a defensive play for Starlink out of fears that Apple would be acquiring their way into sat-telco, (ii) or customer acquisition play...which would be very expensive. ASTS is a new player with a lot of forward momentum. In my experience, the legacy telco players (of any time) struggle to pivot their business models. Lastly, GSAT growth is going to be very capital hungry for growth (researching now to verify). I do not think their is a strong debt market for them to tap into, and Apple Equity can only go so far. Capex can quickly yield negative returns on a failed launch, and for a company with this much experience, the markets would be less forgiving of an event.

SharestepAI

I personally am not invested in defence, but it's on a tear. There are obviously the classics like RTX, LMT and NOC. To me NOC looks best value there @ 24x earnings and solid ROE. There are other defence use cases like CW (defence electronics) and BWXT (nuclear defence) that are flying, with healthy margins, although looking a bit expensive (PE 54x/63x). And all kinds of other specialists: IT, shipbuilding, ... Full list: [https://www.sharestep.co/pub?tid=ts\_ezj0mbtl](https://www.sharestep.co/pub?tid=ts_ezj0mbtl)

endwithel

Why not NMG, GAMB, MDAI, NVO, EQX, RIGL, DRTS? Just mentioned all my portfolio. I expect 50% ROE this year. Assymetric bets in all of them.

SharestepAI

Mining companies excluding gold/silver are tricky. The famous viral "rare earths" play is MP Materials which I strongly suspect is a scam and is trading at forward P/E of \~1,666. UUUU and Denison are decent established names. I think ERO is interesting as a copper play, also CGAU (although they're also in gold). These trade at PE 22 and 10 just now - strong margins and ROE. There are some other interesting ones worth looking at. Full list: [https://www.sharestep.co/pub?tid=ts\_emslr2x0](https://www.sharestep.co/pub?tid=ts_emslr2x0)

SharestepAI

Mining companies excluding gold/silver are tricky. The famous viral "rare earths" play is MP Materials which I strongly suspect is a scam and is trading at forward P/E of \~1,666. UUUU and DNN are decent established names. I think ERO is interesting as a copper play, also CGAU (although they're also in gold). These trade at PE 22 and 10 just now - strong margins and ROE. There are some other interesting ones worth looking at. Full list: [https://www.sharestep.co/pub?tid=ts\_emslr2x0](https://www.sharestep.co/pub?tid=ts_emslr2x0)

GlobalResolution77

Bought a few today also at 368. Think they're undervalued on a forward basis. **Forward P/E at \~11** \- Ridiculous cheap. Sector avg sits at 20x-25x. Earnings expected to grow over 100% year-over-year + management has confirmed 2025 and 2026 HBM supply is already "sold out." **Enterprise Value-to-Cash Flow from Operations (EV/CFO) at 10x-12x** \- They´re Cash-Cow with no debt. Micron funds its massive CAPEX entirely from internal cash flows that protects the balance sheet during the aggressive expansion. **Price-to-Book Value at 6x-7x** (Historically high but viewed alongside Return on Equity. Projected to achieve ROE in the 40-50% range for FY2026 i think is appropriate). Micron's assets are no longer just commodity fab equipment. They now include high-barrier-to-entry HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) production lines with significantly higher margins than traditional DRAM. No wonder they are the largest holding of Xtrackers MSCI World Value UCITS ETF - IE00BL25JM42

Chednip914

JBS has a agentic AI on their IR website and I asked why should I buy JBS shares. Very cool tool Here is what the response was: "Considering the latest available data for the third quarter of 2025 (3Q25), JBS reported record net sales of $22.6 billion, representing a 13% increase from the prior year. This growth was across all business units, illustrating the strength and diversification of its global multiprotein platform. Despite some declines in profitability measures—such as a 15% drop in IFRS Adjusted EBITDA to $1.8 billion and a 22% decrease in IFRS Adjusted Operating Income to $1.25 billion—the company maintained solid financial metrics. Net income was $581 million, with an earnings per share of $0.52. Importantly, the Return on Equity (ROE) reached a robust 23.7%, showing effective use of shareholders’ equity, and the leverage ratio was well-controlled at 2.39x, aligning with the company’s long-term target. JBS also completed strategic corporate restructuring and dual listing on the NYSE and B3 in 2025, which broadens its investor base and enhances access to global capital markets. Furthermore, the company has undertaken initiatives such as share repurchase programs and investments in its production capacity, indicating a commitment to value creation and operational expansion. These factors—record sales growth, diversified operations, solid return metrics, prudent financial management, enhanced market presence through dual listing, and strategic investments—constitute compelling reasons why investing in JBS shares could be attractive as of the third quarter of 2025. The latest share price at the beginning of 2026 was $14.67, reflecting market valuation amid these fundamentals,,."

explorer_soul99

| Company | Mkt Cap | ROE | ROA | EV/FCF | CapEx % | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | META | $1,646B | 30.9% | 19.3% | 37.6x | 33.1% | | NFLX | $379B | 41.9% | 19.0% | 42.8x | 1.4% | | AMZN | $2,644B | 23.6% | 10.5% | 256.9x | 17.4% | | TSM | $43,558B | 34.5% | 21.6% | 48.1x | 36.3% | | UBER | $178B | 70.6% | 26.3% | 21.0x | 0.6% | UBER at 21.0x EV/FCF with 70.6% ROE is the value pick, recent profitability inflection not fully priced. AMZN at 256.9x EV/FCF is egregiously expensive (heavy AWS reinvestment dilutes FCF). META/NFLX/TSM cluster at 38-48x FCF with 31-42% ROE, fair value for quality growers. TSM's 36.3% CapEx (fab expansion) vs UBER's 0.6% shows capital allocation extremes. For DCF, use UBER/META (visible FCF), avoid AMZN (FCF suppressed by growth CapEx).

isomojo

Lifeway Foods (LFVN) What they do • Produces and sells kefir and probiotic dairy beverages • Niche brand with loyal consumer base; pricing power improving • Capital-light food business with steady cash generation Key indicators • FCF yield: ~10–11% (strong cash generation vs price) • Book-to-market: ~0.41 (P/B ≈ 2.4) • Market cap: ~$80M • Profitability trend: Operating & net margins trending up • Balance sheet: Positive equity, no balance-sheet distress ⸻ First Commonwealth Financial (FCF) What they do • Regional bank offering commercial, consumer, and wealth services • Conservative underwriting; benefits from higher-for-longer rates • Strong deposit franchise in the Mid-Atlantic Key indicators • FCF yield: ~7% • Book-to-market: ~0.85 (P/B ≈ 1.18) • Market cap: ~$1.8B • Profitability trend: Net interest margin & ROE improving • Balance sheet: Positive equity, well-capitalized ⸻ Greenbrier Companies (GBX) What they do • Manufactures railcars and provides leasing & aftermarket services • Beneficiary of freight, infrastructure, and reshoring • Backlog-driven revenue with improving pricing discipline Key indicators • FCF yield: ~8% • Book-to-market: >0.40 (P/B < 2) • Market cap: ~$1.5B • Profitability trend: Operating margin & ROIC rising • Balance sheet: Positive equity, manageable leverage ⸻ Mercantile Bank (MBWM) What they do • Michigan-based commercial & retail bank • High operating efficiency and disciplined credit risk • Shareholder-friendly capital return profile Key indicators • FCF yield: ~8% • Book-to-market: ~0.80 (P/B ≈ 1.25) • Market cap: ~$800M • Profitability trend: ROA & ROE improving • Balance sheet: Positive equity, strong capital ratios ⸻ RPC Inc (RES) What they do • Provides oilfield services & equipment to U.S. shale producers • Asset-light relative to peers; strong cycle discipline • Returns excess cash to shareholders during upcycles Key indicators • FCF yield: ~5.5–6% • Book-to-market: ~0.80 (P/B ≈ 1.2) • Market cap: < $2B • Profitability trend: Margins recovering and stabilizing • Balance sheet: Positive equity, low net debt ⸻ Quick Take All five names: • ✔ FCF yield ≥ 5% • ✔ B/M > 0.40 • ✔ Market cap < $2B • ✔ Positive & improving profitability • ✔ No negative equity • ✔ Trading closer to 12-month lows than highs If you want, next I can: • Rank them best → worst by value + quality • Remove banks and replace with industrials/tech • Extend this to a full 10-stock portfolio with weights and risk notes These are the ones I got from using the screen in the post.

explorer_soul99

UBER fundamentals: | Stock | Market Cap | ROE | EV/EBITDA | Net Margin | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | **UBER** | **$177.5B** | **70.6%** | **11.6x** | **33.5%** | **The numbers are surprisingly strong:** - **70.6% ROE** - Exceptional (reflects asset-light model + turning profitable) - **11.6x EV/EBITDA** - Reasonable for 20%+ revenue growth - **33.5% net margin** - Way higher than expected for ride-sharing **Your autonomous driving thesis:** 1. **Bull case**: UBER becomes the platform layer. Waymo provides cars, UBER provides demand. Labor cost elimination = margin expansion. 2. **Bear case**: Waymo/Tesla build their own networks and cut out UBER. **UBER vs TSLA valuation disconnect:** - TSLA trades at massive premium for robotaxi potential - UBER has 150M monthly active users, already operational - If robotaxis are the future, UBER's network is valuable **Risks:** - Regulatory (driver classification) - Competition (Lyft, Waymo, Tesla) - Profitability sustainability (subsidies → pricing power?) At 11.6x EV/EBITDA with 70% ROE and 20%+ growth, UBER is reasonably valued. The robotaxi optionality is free upside if the Waymo partnership works.

explorer_soul99

Consumer defensive screening: | Stock | Market Cap | ROE | EV/EBITDA | FCF Yield | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | PG | $332B | 32.1% | 14.4x | 4.5% | | TGT | $48B | 24.9% | 7.6x | 6.3% | | SFM | $7.5B | 38.0% | 11.0x | 6.1% | | USFD | $17B | 12.2% | 15.7x | 5.8% | | FLO | $2.3B | 13.7% | 8.9x | 14.4% | **Your picks ranked by value metrics:** 1. **SFM (Sprouts)** - Best combo: 38% ROE, 11x EV/EBITDA, 6.1% FCF yield. Health-focused grocery niche. 2. **TGT (Target)** - 24.9% ROE at 7.6x EV/EBITDA is interesting. Beaten down from 2022 highs. Risk: Walmart competition. 3. **FLO (Flowers Foods)** - 14.4% FCF yield at 8.9x EV/EBITDA. Bread/bakery is stable but low growth. 4. **USFD** - Food distribution. Lower ROE (12.2%) but steady business. 5. **PG** - Quality compounder but 14.4x isn't "undervalued" - it's fairly valued for a blue chip. **Screen criteria for defensives:** - ROE > 15% - EV/EBITDA < 12x - Positive FCF yield SFM hits all three and has growth optionality (health/organic trend).

explorer_soul99

FIGS fundamentals: | Stock | Market Cap | ROE | EV/EBITDA | Gross Margin | Net Margin | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | **FIGS** | **$1.9B** | **4.5%** | **53.3x** | **68.0%** | **9.8%** | **Your thesis check:** - Revenue ~$580M, flat vs prior year - 4.5% ROE is weak - 53.3x EV/EBITDA is expensive for a no-growth business **The math problem:** - 68% gross margin is great (brand pricing power) - But 9.8% net margin and 4.5% ROE mean operating leverage is broken - At $1.9B market cap with flat revenue, P/S is ~3.3x **Your short thesis:** - 53x EV/EBITDA for flat growth is expensive - If revenue doesn't reaccelerate, multiple compression is likely - The 12.5/15 or 15/17.5 call spreads make sense if you expect reversion **Counter-argument:** - Healthcare scrubs is a niche moat - If they can get back to growth, multiple re-rates - Short interest creates squeeze risk **Risk to your trade:** The "steady rise" you mentioned could continue if: 1. M&A speculation emerges 2. Growth reaccelerates 3. Short covering creates momentum At 53x with 4.5% ROE, fundamentals support your bearish view. But market can stay irrational longer than shorts can stay solvent.

S1gorJabjong

Yes. But I stated some reasons with interest rate & currency value difference which adds to EMs having more inherent risk of lower ROE than those wih reserve currency status, and this minor difference makes every similar problem have more weight. You need to understand that a nation with a reserve currency have more leeway (lower interest or premium) when issuing debt (bonds) or trading internationally, whereas EMs such as my country generally have to offer higher rates when issuing debt and use USD when doing business offshore - which leads to inherent less demand for that nation's currency and the majority of investors in that market for short-term gains - resulting in higher volatility.

explorer_soul99

Your skepticism is valid. Let me give you the data framework: META vs Mag 6 peers: | Stock | Market Cap | ROE | EV/EBITDA | Gross Margin | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | NVDA | $4,501B | 103.8% | 39.9x | 70.1% | | GOOGL | $3,965B | 35.0% | 23.1x | N/A | | MSFT | $3,562B | 31.5% | 21.1x | 68.8% | | **META** | **$1,646B** | **30.9%** | **16.4x** | **82.0%** | What the numbers show: 1. **82% gross margin**: Actually highest among peers. The ad business is a cash machine. 2. **16.4x EV/EBITDA**: Cheapest Mag 6 by far. MSFT trades 21x, GOOGL 23x. 3. **30.9% ROE**: Comparable to MSFT (31.5%), GOOGL (35%) Your concerns addressed: - **"98% from ads"**: True, but 82% gross margin means the ads business prints money - **"$73B Metaverse"**: Sunk cost. Question is whether future CapEx generates returns - **"AI spend"**: Llama is the open-source play. They're betting on being the Android of AI (free, widespread) vs Google's iOS approach The bull case: At 16.4x, you're getting GOOGL-quality returns at a 30% discount. The market is pricing in the CapEx uncertainty. The bear case: CapEx could stay elevated forever with no clear monetization.

explorer_soul99

**Key Metrics (Private Prison Operators)** | Metric | GEO | CXW | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $2.4B | $2.2B | | ROE | 6.5% | 7.4% | | ROA | 2.4% | 3.5% | | EV/EBITDA | 9.2x | 9.5x | **Income Statement (TTM)** | Metric | GEO | CXW | |:--|:--|:--| | Revenue | $2.45B | $2.09B | | Op Income | $280M | $240M | | Gross Margin | 80.6% | 23.7% | | Op Margin | 11.6% | 11.3% | **Cash Flow (TTM)** | Metric | GEO | CXW | |:--|:--|:--| | Operating CF | $240M | $230M | | Free Cash Flow | $130M | $210M | Both trade at similar valuations (~9x EV/EBITDA) with similar ROE (6-7%). GEO has higher gross margin (80.6%) but CXW generates more FCF ($210M vs $130M). The ICE contract risk is real. these are essentially government contractors with political risk. At 6-7% ROE, you're not getting paid much for the headline risk. If you want the sector, CXW's better FCF conversion provides more margin of safety.

explorer_soul99

**Key Metrics (GLP-1 Leaders)** | Metric | NVO | LLY | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $1,695B | $955B | | ROE | **77.9%** | 102.3% | | ROA | **23.0%** | 16.0% | | EV/EBITDA | **11.5x** | 39.1x | **Income Statement (TTM)** | Metric | NVO | LLY | |:--|:--|:--| | Revenue | $315.6B | $59.4B | | Op Income | $132.7B | $26.1B | | Gross Margin | 82.0% | 83.0% | | Op Margin | **42.0%** | **43.9%** | **Cash Flow (TTM)** | Metric | NVO | LLY | |:--|:--|:--| | Operating CF | $123.8B | $16.1B | | Free Cash Flow | **$62.7B** | $9.0B | NVO vs LLY comes down to valuation: - **NVO:** 11.5x EV/EBITDA, $62.7B FCF, 42% op margin - **LLY:** 39.1x EV/EBITDA, $9.0B FCF, 44% op margin LLY trades at 3.4x NVO's multiple despite similar margins. NVO's recent drop (oral GLP-1 concerns) created a valuation gap. **OZEM ETF** dilutes exposure across the value chain. If you're bullish GLP-1, concentrated positions in NVO (cheaper) or LLY (momentum) outperform diversified ETF. OZEM makes sense only if you can't pick between them.

explorer_soul99

GOOGL at $4T vs Mag 6 peers: | Stock | Market Cap | ROE | EV/EBITDA | CapEx % Rev | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | NVDA | $4,501B | 103.8% | 39.9x | 3.1% | | **GOOGL** | **$3,965B** | **35.0%** | **23.1x** | **20.2%** | | AAPL | $3,833B | 164.0% | 27.0x | 3.1% | | MSFT | $3,562B | 31.5% | 21.1x | 23.5% | | META | $1,646B | 30.9% | 16.4x | 33.1% | At 23.1x EV/EBITDA, GOOGL is actually mid-pack vs MSFT (21.1x) and AAPL (27.0x). The Apple AI partnership is a distribution win, but: 1. **Already priced in?** GOOGL has run from ~$140 to ~$200+ over the past year 2. **CapEx intensity** - 20.2% of revenue going to AI infra, similar to MSFT 3. **ROE of 35%** - Strong but below AAPL's 164% capital efficiency The bull case: Gemini in iOS is billions of users. The bear case: At $4T, you need Cloud + AI to meaningfully move the needle, and search ad growth is maturing. Still investable? The 23.1x EV/EBITDA isn't stretched vs peers. But "not expensive relative to other expensive stocks" isn't the same as cheap.

explorer_soul99

Your yield-focused concern is valid. Here's the current state of the Mag 6 driving the indexes: | Stock | Market Cap | ROE | EV/EBITDA | CapEx % Rev | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | NVDA | $4,501B | 103.8% | 39.9x | 3.1% | | GOOGL | $3,965B | 35.0% | 23.1x | 20.2% | | AAPL | $3,833B | 164.0% | 27.0x | 3.1% | | MSFT | $3,562B | 31.5% | 21.1x | 23.5% | | AMZN | $2,644B | 23.6% | 17.3x | 17.4% | | META | $1,646B | 30.9% | 16.4x | 33.1% | The narrowness you're seeing is real. META at 16.4x EV/EBITDA vs NVDA at 39.9x shows significant dispersion even within mega-caps. What stands out: MSFT/GOOGL are spending 20-24% of revenue on CapEx (AI buildout), while NVDA/AAPL spend only 3%. The market is paying very different multiples for asset-light vs capital-intensive AI plays. Your instinct to hold cash isn't wrong, when ROEs vary from 24% (AMZN) to 164% (AAPL) but valuations cluster in a narrow band, the market is pricing in perfection across the board.

explorer_soul99

**Key Metrics (Shipping/Tankers)** | Metric | LPG | STNG | EURN | INSW | FRO | |:--|:--|:--|:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $1.2B | $2.8B | $3.3B | $2.7B | $5.6B | | ROE | 4.6% | 9.6% | **37.9%** | 11.5% | 9.3% | | ROA | 2.8% | 7.1% | **25.1%** | 7.8% | 3.8% | | EV/EBITDA | 10.4x | 6.7x | **4.7x** | 7.4x | 10.7x | | Net Debt/EBITDA | 2.7x | 0.6x | **0.6x** | 0.9x | 3.8x | LPG (Dorian LPG) vs shipping peers: - **Weakest returns:** 4.6% ROE vs peer avg 14.6% - **Expensive:** 10.4x EV/EBITDA vs EURN at 4.7x and STNG at 6.7x - **Higher leverage:** 2.7x Net Debt/EBITDA vs STNG/EURN at 0.6x CEO buying is a signal, but fundamentals lag peers. EURN (Euronav) offers 37.9% ROE at 4.7x EV/EBITDA with minimal debt. That's a better risk/reward unless you have specific insight on LPG rates improving.

explorer_soul99

**2. AMD - HOLD (Neutral)** | Metric | Value | Analysis | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $330B | | | YTD Return | +68.4% | Strong, but trailing NVDA | | P/E | 99.9x | **Expensive** | | Forward PEG | 0.75x (est) | 25% discount to sector, but still pricey | | ROE | 5.6% | **Weak** for a growth stock | | Analyst Rating | Buy (47 of 69) | Consensus positive | **Your Thesis:** Lisa Su is a legend, and MI300X is NVDA's only credible competitor. But... AMD trades at 100x P/E with 5.6% ROE. That's a lot of hope priced in. **Risk:** If MI300X doesn't steal meaningful share from NVDA, stock tanks. **Verdict:** **HOLD.** I love Lisa Su too, but valuation is rich. Wait for -15% pullback. --- **3. ALL (Allstate) - VALUE PLAY** | Metric | Value | Analysis | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $56B | | | YTD Return | +10.5% | Steady | | P/E | 6.7x | **Cheap** | | ROE | 35.3% | Excellent | | Analyst Rating | Buy (22 of 42) | Positive | **Your Thesis Confirmed:** P&C insurance is defensive + rate hikes = higher investment income. 200% YoY growth sounds like an acquisition or one-time event (not organic). Verify in 10-K. **Risk:** Climate risk (hurricanes, wildfires) could spike claims. **Verdict:** **BUY.** Cheap defensive play with 35% ROE. Good for portfolio balance. --- **4. INCY (Incyte) - BUY** | Metric | Value | Analysis | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $21B | | | YTD Return | +53.7% | Strong | | P/E | 17.6x | **Cheap for biotech** | | ROE | 29.8% | Healthy | | Analyst Rating | Buy (24 of 43) | Positive | **Your Thesis Confirmed:** Jakafi is mature, but pipeline (blood cancers, dermatology) is diversifying. Low debt, insider buybacks, 30% ROE = quality compounder. **Risk:** Patent cliffs. Jakafi loses exclusivity 2027 (US), 2029 (EU). Pipeline must deliver. **Verdict:** **BUY more.** At P/E 17.6x with 30% ROE, this is a steal if pipeline works. --- **5. B (Barrick Gold) - CONTRARIAN BUY** | Metric | Value | Analysis | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $82B | | | YTD Return | **+199%** | Huge move | | P/E | 22.7x | Reasonable for gold miner | | ROE | 14.5% | Decent | | Dividend Yield | 1.1% | Bonus | **Your Thesis:** Gold up 35% in 2024 (to $2,650/oz), but B is up 200%. Some of this is catch-up (miners lag gold), but momentum is strong. Copper exposure (30% of revenue) adds diversification. **Risk:** Gold peaked? If we get a Trump "strong dollar" policy, gold could correct 15-20%. **Verdict:** **HOLD (trim 25%).** Take profits, keep core position. Gold is overbought short-term. --- **Portfolio Allocation (if $10k):** - **MU:** 30% ($3k) - High conviction - **INCY:** 25% ($2.5k) - Value + growth - **ALL:** 20% ($2k) - Defensive - **B:** 15% ($1.5k) - Commodity hedge (trimmed) - **AMD:** 10% ($1k) - Speculative (wait for dip) **Bull:** Diversified across tech, healthcare, financials, commodities **Bear:** Heavy on semiconductors (MU + AMD = 40%) - if AI crashes, portfolio hurts Solid list. I'd rank: **MU > INCY > ALL > B > AMD** (on current valuation).

explorer_soul99

Solid watchlist—mix of growth (MU, AMD), value (ALL, INCY), and commodities (B). Let's rate each with data: **1. MU (Micron Technology) - STRONG BUY** | Metric | Value | Analysis | |:--|:--|:--| | Market Cap | $386B | | | YTD Return | **+295%** | Massive momentum | | P/E (TTM) | 32.6x | vs sector median 1.66x forward PEG | | Forward PEG | 0.20x | **Screaming cheap** for growth | | ROE | 22.4% | Healthy | | Analyst Rating | Buy (54 of 67) | Strong consensus | **Your Thesis Confirmed:** HBM3E dominance (80% market share vs Samsung/Hynix) + AI demand = multi-year tailwind. Yes, it's near 52-week highs, but forward PEG of 0.20x is insane for a semiconductor in an AI super-cycle. **Risk:** Cyclical business. If AI demand slows (2026?), memory prices crash. **Verdict:** **BUY on any -10% dip.** This is a 3-5 year hold.

explorer_soul99

"Apple Intelligence" outsourcing to Google is a massive narrative shift, but let's check if fundamentals support your thesis: **GOOGL vs AAPL - TTM Comparison:** | Metric | GOOGL | AAPL | |--------|-------|------| | Market Cap | $3.97T | $3.83T | | YTD Return | +73.4% | +6.4% | | P/E Ratio | 32.0x | 34.6x | | FCF Yield | 1.9% | 2.6% | | ROE | 35.0% | 164.0% | | Analyst Rating | Buy (67/81 analysts) | Buy (67/109 analysts) | **Your Thesis - Reality Check:** 1. **"GOOGL owns AI for entire mobile world"** - TRUE. Gemini powering iOS Siri (rumored $1B+ deal) gives Google data moat + revenue from both platforms. But... Apple historically pays for services (see $20B/year to Google for search). This isn't new; it's scale. 2. **"Apple Services margins take a hit"** - MAYBE. Apple's Services segment has 71% gross margins. Even a $1-2B Gemini tax is ~1-2% of Services revenue ($85B TTM). Not material unless usage explodes. 3. **"GOOGL calls for iPhone 17 cycle"** - DATA SAYS YES. GOOGL is up 73% YTD vs AAPL's 6%. Market already sees this. But GOOGL trades at P/E 32x (slight discount to AAPL's 35x), so some room left. **Reality:** - AAPL is NOT just a "luxury hardware wrapper." Services + Ecosystem lock-in = 164% ROE (highest of Mag 7). They're a cash-printing machine. - GOOGL benefits from AI dominance, but faces antitrust risk (DOJ search monopoly case). **Trade:** GOOGL momentum looks strong (+73% YTD), but I'd ladder in vs YOLO calls. For AAPL puts, you're betting against $99B FCF/year and 164% ROE—gutsy. **Bull GOOGL:** AI infrastructure leader, data moat, cheaper than AAPL on P/E **Bear AAPL:** Services growth slowing, AI outsourced, China risk I'd play a **paired trade** (long GOOGL, underweight AAPL) rather than naked puts on Cook's ego.

fredditf

$JPM | JPMorgan Q4 2025 Earnings - Adj EPS $5.23 (est $4.70) - Adj. Rev. $46.77B (est $46.35B) - FICC Sales & Trading Rev $5.38B (est $5.27B) - Investment Banking Rev. $2.55B (est $2.65B) - Equities Sales & Trading Rev $2.86B (est $2.7B) - Standardized CET1 Ratio 14.5% (est 14.8%) - Managed Net Interest Income $25.11B (est $24.99B) - Total Deposits $2.56T (est $2.58T) - ROE 15% (est 15.7%) - Loans $1.49T (est $1.45T) - Qtr Included $2.2B Net Reserve Build

MajesticBread9147

I have three long term holds. **ASE Technology (ASX)** A Taiwanese company that is the market leader in outsourced semiconductor packaging and testing. Semiconductor process nodes can't shrink too much more before we get into issues, which is why many companies are not focusing as much on die-shrinks to increase performance but instead more advanced packaging. You see this with the increased use in 2.5 and 3D packaging, chiplets, SiP and the like. This trend is across the electronics industry, from auto manufacturers, the main CPU and GPU designers we all know, as well as SOCs used in cell phones, and combined CPU/GPU SOCs designed by big cloud providers used for AI training. The company is well diversified within the industry, and is the main player in their space, so isn't reliant on the current AI hype train to succeed. They have lower margins than TSMC however they have a significantly lower PE and PEG ratios and pay a 3% dividend which I reinvest. They are investing heavily into new equipment and factories to support the latest and highest margin technologies that they work with, but are still diversified across pretty much all semiconductor packaging beyond just the high end. The company doesn't get a lot of hype, and isn't captured by a lot of semiconductor ETFs, so while it absolutely is positive impact on the AI hype cycle, they are much less likely to be severely hurt by a bubble popping the hype cycle compared to NVIDIA or TSM, especially with their diversification. **Secondly, since we need to power the datacenters**: **First Solar(FSLR)** Basically zero debt, 0.57 PEG, and 28% profit margin with a huge backlog and new factories coming online this year. They make most of their panels in America and despite that and their large margins they were the first solar company to achieve sub $1/watt pricing over a decade ago. Their panels don't use silicon and instead use a different semiconductor (CdTe) that allows an efficient thin film deposited on glass ( vs sliced silicon crystals) meaning they use less material, and this semiconductor is both significantly better at maintaining efficiency in high heat environments and cheaper to produce. They focus exclusively on grid scale solar projects and contracts, so their revenues are more predictable and less sensitive to interest rates than rooftop solar. Current government policy can't change the fact that utility scale solar is by far the cheapest and fastest way to add electricity to the grid in a time when fossil fuels are set to become more expensive due to both increased exports and domestic demand, and nuclear projects, even SMRs take significantly longer and cost significantly more. **Lastly, I think Celestica(CLS) is still fairly valued as a growth play.** They are an advanced electronics manufacturer and large manufacturer of high speed network switches that are used in hyperscaler datacenters. Every server rack, and at multiple connections upstream has a switch, and networking is very important for ML workloads because large amounts of data needs to be sent between different servers quite quickly. They are the market leader in 800G switches which is the cutting edge right now. And while this is a good portion of their business, they also do healthcare technology,rack integration, general electronics design and offer services to better automate factories, which is important if we are going to bring manufacturing back. There are dozens of cloud companies, most of whom are unlikely to last til 2030, but Celestica will last, and every cloud company uses something made by them. They even make components and contracted out design and manufacturing for companies like Juniper and Dell. They beat last quarter earnings expectations by 50%, have a 30% ROE, and are expected to grow their EPS by 28% each year over the next five years. It's my largest holding by far. All of these are positioned to grow with whatever Cloud/Datacenter providers win out, whether AMD, Nvidia, or custom SOCs dominate compute, and are diversified enough to not go bankrupt if this turns out to be all hype.

Lost_Grand3468

*Valuation Stretched* Stock up ~ (Yahoo Finance) 138% YTD with a 35.7x earnings multiple. Average analyst price target of $51.55 implies ~4% downside, suggesting the stock is "priced to perfection" (TipRanks). P/S ratio of 4.49x near its 3-year high of 4.54x, well above industry average of 2.74x (Finimize) *Good News Already Priced In* Concerns mounting that the market has already priced in much of the good news from the $2.1 billion MAG Silver deal and higher production guidance (Weiss Ratings) With the stock trading near its 52-week high and institutional buying like North of South Capital's 444% stake increase already disclosed, fresh incremental catalysts are limited in the near term (Weiss Ratings) *Silver Price Dependency* Financial health closely tied to the price of metals on the world stage (Finimize). Silver is notoriously volatile—a mean reversion from current ~$30+ levels would compress margins significantly. Shares vulnerable to pullbacks as traders react to any disappointment in silver prices (Weiss Ratings) *Operational/Execution Risks* Business model heavily exposed to operational disruptions, cost inflation, regulatory challenges and environmental compliance in multiple jurisdictions (Weiss Ratings). Faces integration and execution risk as it manages assets at different stages of their life cycles (Weiss Ratings). Increased exploration costs have sparked discussions about potential impact on future production and profit margins (StocksToTrade). *Jurisdictional Risk* Operations across Mexico, Peru, Argentina, Bolivia—politically volatile mining jurisdictions. Permitting and social-license requirements can delay projects or restrict expansions. Mexico in particular has become increasingly hostile to mining interests. Poor Shareholder Returns Relative to Volatility. Weak dividend support—despite reasonable profitability and 11.29% ROE, shareholders not being well-compensated through dividends for the volatility they endure (Weiss Ratings). Compared with peers like Southern Copper (SCCO) and Agnico Eagle (AEM), PAAS offers similar ratings but less dividend support (Weiss Ratings). *Technical Weakness* Recent session volume of 3.77M shares well below the 90-day average of 6.57M, suggesting pullback unfolding without heavy buying support (Weiss Ratings). Stock losing ground near the top of its trading range rather than extending higher (Weiss Ratings). Bottom line: If you're bearish silver prices, see the MAG Silver integration as a "sell the news" event, or believe the ~30-35x multiple is unsustainable for a miner, PAAS has meaningful downside risk from current levels. The analyst targets clustered around $51-52 vs. recent trading near $53-55 suggest limited upside even in a constructive scenario.

redditmodsRrussians

about to start testing how AI/drones/robots deal with guerilla warfare especially when the ROE is basically non existent now.

Senior-Preference678

This is the version you would lock in and run for at least 10 years. ETF: VUG (Vanguard Growth ETF) Benchmark: Russell 1000 Growth Expense Ratio: 0.04% Why 75%: US growth remains the global growth engine, deep innovation, high margins, strong capital markets, avoids over-concentration while staying aggressive. International Growth — 15% ETF: VIGI (Vanguard International Growth), exposure: Developed + Emerging growth stocks Expense Ratio: 0.15% Why 15%: Geographic diversification, access to non-US growth leaders, limits drag from structurally weaker markets. Quality Factor Tilt — 10% ETF: QUAL (iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor) Factor: High ROE, low debt, earnings stability Expense Ratio: 0.15% Why 10%: reduces drawdowns without sacrificing growth, improves risk-adjusted returns, helps behaviorally during market stress. Cost & Efficiency: Weighted Expense Ratio: ~0.07% Turnover: Low Tax efficiency: Excellent Scalability: $100k - $1M+ with no changes Rebalance annually or if any sleeve deviates ±5%, direct new contributions to the most underweight ETF. This Portfolio intentionally excludes: SMAs, active mutual funds, crypto / NFTs, sector chasing, high-fee “advisor products”. Volatility: High Max drawdown, severe markets: -35% to –45% Long-term expected return: ~9–11% This portfolio assumes 10+ year horizon, no panic selling, no need for income today!!

crazybutthole

I was thinking more in the context of drone defense (aka red sea attacks last year) where destroyers were using very expensive SM's to take down (relatively) cheap drones i also grew up in a different state of mind from ROE perspective (fire only when fired upon) vs today - where we seem to have changed our mindset a tiny bit and i am not sure how that is going to evolve in the future Its......different