investabc的个人主页 - 老虎社区

investabc

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

50关注

0粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-07-07

Latest

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-07-07

Oh yes

Chinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines

2021-07-04

Latest

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-07-01

Latest

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-26

Yes

Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?

2021-06-23

Morning

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Latest

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

Latest

Google Faces EU Antitrust Probe of Alleged Ad-Tech Abuses

2021-06-21

Wow

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Latest

How Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3577518721457137","uuid":"3577518721457137","gmtCreate":1614429278486,"gmtModify":1614429278486,"name":"investabc","pinyin":"investabc","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":50,"tweetSize":10,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.07.19","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-1","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"精英交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到30次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"60.35%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":3,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":140100291,"gmtCreate":1625633994113,"gmtModify":1633938848671,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/140100291","repostId":"1163143630","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":47,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":140377422,"gmtCreate":1625633953566,"gmtModify":1633938849382,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh yes","listText":"Oh yes","text":"Oh yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/140377422","repostId":"2149360674","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2149360674","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1625626744,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2149360674?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-07 10:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2149360674","media":"Reuters","summary":"Shares of Chinese electric vehicle $(EV)$ maker Xpeng Inc trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from ","content":"<p>Shares of Chinese electric vehicle <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EV\">$(EV)$</a> maker Xpeng Inc&nbsp;trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from the offer price of HK$165 apiece in the company's dual primary listing debut in Hong Kong</p>\n<p>Stock loses steam after climbing as much as 2.1% to HK$168.50; among the 30 most actively trade by turnover</p>\n<p>Xpeng's New York-listed American Depository Shares <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ADS\">$(ADS)$</a> were up 0.7% late on Tuesday at $44.05 each. One ADS is equivalent to two Hong Kong shares</p>\n<p>Xpeng, which on Wednesday raised $1.8 bln by selling 85 mln shares in Hong Kong listing, will develop future models based on product platforms designed for international markets, its chief executive said</p>\n<p>Smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye Care Holdings shines in trading debut, with shares rising to HK$14.46, up 36.4% from the IPO price of HK$10.60 apiece</p>\n<p>The Beijing-based eye hospitals and optical centres operator sold 170.9 mln shares in IPO, raising HK$1.81 bln ($233 mln) for establishment and acquiring hospitals, upgrading IT systems</p>\n<p>The Hong Kong Hang Seng Commerce &amp; Industry Index slips 0.8%, while healthcare index rises 1.4%</p>\n<p>The Hang Seng China Enterprises Index falls 1.5%, and the benchmark index slides 1%</p>\n<p>($1 = 7.7677 Hong Kong dollars)</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-07 10:59</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Shares of Chinese electric vehicle <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EV\">$(EV)$</a> maker Xpeng Inc&nbsp;trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from the offer price of HK$165 apiece in the company's dual primary listing debut in Hong Kong</p>\n<p>Stock loses steam after climbing as much as 2.1% to HK$168.50; among the 30 most actively trade by turnover</p>\n<p>Xpeng's New York-listed American Depository Shares <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ADS\">$(ADS)$</a> were up 0.7% late on Tuesday at $44.05 each. One ADS is equivalent to two Hong Kong shares</p>\n<p>Xpeng, which on Wednesday raised $1.8 bln by selling 85 mln shares in Hong Kong listing, will develop future models based on product platforms designed for international markets, its chief executive said</p>\n<p>Smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye Care Holdings shines in trading debut, with shares rising to HK$14.46, up 36.4% from the IPO price of HK$10.60 apiece</p>\n<p>The Beijing-based eye hospitals and optical centres operator sold 170.9 mln shares in IPO, raising HK$1.81 bln ($233 mln) for establishment and acquiring hospitals, upgrading IT systems</p>\n<p>The Hong Kong Hang Seng Commerce &amp; Industry Index slips 0.8%, while healthcare index rises 1.4%</p>\n<p>The Hang Seng China Enterprises Index falls 1.5%, and the benchmark index slides 1%</p>\n<p>($1 = 7.7677 Hong Kong dollars)</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"02219":"朝聚眼科","09868":"小鹏汽车-W","XPEV":"小鹏汽车"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2149360674","content_text":"Shares of Chinese electric vehicle $(EV)$ maker Xpeng Inc trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from the offer price of HK$165 apiece in the company's dual primary listing debut in Hong Kong\nStock loses steam after climbing as much as 2.1% to HK$168.50; among the 30 most actively trade by turnover\nXpeng's New York-listed American Depository Shares $(ADS)$ were up 0.7% late on Tuesday at $44.05 each. One ADS is equivalent to two Hong Kong shares\nXpeng, which on Wednesday raised $1.8 bln by selling 85 mln shares in Hong Kong listing, will develop future models based on product platforms designed for international markets, its chief executive said\nSmaller newcomer Chaoju Eye Care Holdings shines in trading debut, with shares rising to HK$14.46, up 36.4% from the IPO price of HK$10.60 apiece\nThe Beijing-based eye hospitals and optical centres operator sold 170.9 mln shares in IPO, raising HK$1.81 bln ($233 mln) for establishment and acquiring hospitals, upgrading IT systems\nThe Hong Kong Hang Seng Commerce & Industry Index slips 0.8%, while healthcare index rises 1.4%\nThe Hang Seng China Enterprises Index falls 1.5%, and the benchmark index slides 1%\n($1 = 7.7677 Hong Kong dollars)","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":194,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":155116035,"gmtCreate":1625386715827,"gmtModify":1633941015942,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/155116035","repostId":"1160702483","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":170,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158810223,"gmtCreate":1625143016162,"gmtModify":1633944341957,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest&nbsp;","listText":"Latest&nbsp;","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158810223","repostId":"1131385251","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":190,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125476144,"gmtCreate":1624689545188,"gmtModify":1633949523019,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/125476144","repostId":"1108941456","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108941456","pubTimestamp":1624664800,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108941456?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-26 07:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108941456","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.At 26-64x this year's expected net profi","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.</li>\n <li>Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.</li>\n <li>I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bb49d385ec6d3044db2f4474cbb2c57\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>MagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Article Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Going with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.</p>\n<p><b>Are FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?</b></p>\n<p>Looking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at least<i>were</i>a good investment in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae2b8e2b9caf99f74c28bafc10a0a872\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"484\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>With gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.</p>\n<p>These factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2ef865eea7af4369048432a9c85d1d83\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"540\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>At 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from&nbsp;Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.</p>\n<p><b>What Investors Can Expect From Apple</b></p>\n<p>Apple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate&nbsp;in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Facebook</b></p>\n<p>Both Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fd8043ca75dcb2c38f5ffa427c8c0b9\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Facebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3d49e0007aa77608b2992a9fef2142d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6b16c9b3e2eac182d42686bcd8a98fc5\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"515\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>While Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.</p>\n<p>To sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>When we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6360514d097081c546a0ccacfbdc7af6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhat<i>smaller</i>net cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.</p>\n<p>All in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Netflix And Amazon</b></p>\n<p>Looking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.</p>\n<p>This huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ccc2536fa3cadf06639a89e0b211b9a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>AMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.</p>\n<p>Netflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d84f013051fbb00b6b488f5cfed66d4\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Netflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&amp;T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.</p>\n<p>Amazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.</p>\n<p><b>Which Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?</b></p>\n<p>Not every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.</p>\n<p>Alphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.</p>\n<p>Depending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-26 07:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108941456","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.\nI believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.\n\nMagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nGoing with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.\nAre FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?\nLooking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at leastwerea good investment in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nWith gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.\nThese factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:\nData by YCharts\nAt 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.\nWhat Investors Can Expect From Apple\nApple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.\nApple Versus Facebook\nBoth Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nFacebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:\nData by YCharts\nThe fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:\nData by YCharts\nWhile Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.\nTo sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.\nApple Versus Alphabet\nWhen we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.\nData by YCharts\nAlphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.\nNevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhatsmallernet cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.\nAll in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.\nApple Versus Netflix And Amazon\nLooking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.\nThis huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:\nData by YCharts\nAMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.\nNetflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:\nData by YCharts\nNetflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.\nAmazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.\nWhich Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?\nNot every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.\nAlphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.\nDepending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":140,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123305811,"gmtCreate":1624408129233,"gmtModify":1634006623359,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Morning","listText":"Morning","text":"Morning","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123305811","repostId":"2145664330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":188,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123306409,"gmtCreate":1624408094601,"gmtModify":1634006624608,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123306409","repostId":"2145664330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":161,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129368633,"gmtCreate":1624359994522,"gmtModify":1634007326322,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129368633","repostId":"1158893202","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1158893202","pubTimestamp":1624356715,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1158893202?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 18:11","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Google Faces EU Antitrust Probe of Alleged Ad-Tech Abuses","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1158893202","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"EU probe increases scrutiny of Google’s leading role brokering digital ads across the internet.\n\nThe","content":"<blockquote>\n EU probe increases scrutiny of Google’s leading role brokering digital ads across the internet.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The European Union opened a formal antitrust investigation into allegations that Google abuses its leading role in the advertising-technology sector, the most wide-ranging case yet to look at that pillar of the tech giant’s business.</p>\n<p>The European Commission, the EU’s top antitrust enforcer, said Tuesday that its investigation, which has been under way informally since at least 2019, will look at a broad array of allegedly anticompetitive business practices around theAlphabetInc.GOOG0.71%unit’s brokering of advertisements and sharing of user data with advertisers across websites and mobile apps—one of the newest areas of antitrust scrutiny for the company.</p>\n<p>Some of the EU’s investigation will cover similar ground to a case filed last year against Google by agroup of U.S. states led by Texas. Similar areas include Google’s allegedly favoring its own ad-buying tools in the advertising auctions it runs.</p>\n<p>But the EU probe will also cover complaints that haven’t yet been the subject of formal inquiries anywhere, including Google’s alleged exclusion of competitors from brokering ad buys on Google-owned video site YouTube.</p>\n<p>The EU investigation is also examining Google’s plans to block certain kinds of user-tracking technologies on its platforms, such as the Chrome browser and Android mobile operating system. Curtailing such tracking responds, at least in part, to pressure from privacy regulators and activists, but has led to antitrust complaints from competitors in the advertising-technology industry.</p>\n<p>“Online advertising services are at the heart of how Google and publishers monetize their online services,” said Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s antitrust chief. “We are concerned that Google has made it harder for rival online advertising services to compete in the so-called ad tech stack.”</p>\n<p>Google didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Google Faces EU Antitrust Probe of Alleged Ad-Tech Abuses</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nGoogle Faces EU Antitrust Probe of Alleged Ad-Tech Abuses\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 18:11 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-faces-eu-antitrust-probe-of-alleged-ad-tech-abuses-11624355128?mod=hp_lead_pos1><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>EU probe increases scrutiny of Google’s leading role brokering digital ads across the internet.\n\nThe European Union opened a formal antitrust investigation into allegations that Google abuses its ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-faces-eu-antitrust-probe-of-alleged-ad-tech-abuses-11624355128?mod=hp_lead_pos1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOOG":"谷歌","GOOGL":"谷歌A"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-faces-eu-antitrust-probe-of-alleged-ad-tech-abuses-11624355128?mod=hp_lead_pos1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1158893202","content_text":"EU probe increases scrutiny of Google’s leading role brokering digital ads across the internet.\n\nThe European Union opened a formal antitrust investigation into allegations that Google abuses its leading role in the advertising-technology sector, the most wide-ranging case yet to look at that pillar of the tech giant’s business.\nThe European Commission, the EU’s top antitrust enforcer, said Tuesday that its investigation, which has been under way informally since at least 2019, will look at a broad array of allegedly anticompetitive business practices around theAlphabetInc.GOOG0.71%unit’s brokering of advertisements and sharing of user data with advertisers across websites and mobile apps—one of the newest areas of antitrust scrutiny for the company.\nSome of the EU’s investigation will cover similar ground to a case filed last year against Google by agroup of U.S. states led by Texas. Similar areas include Google’s allegedly favoring its own ad-buying tools in the advertising auctions it runs.\nBut the EU probe will also cover complaints that haven’t yet been the subject of formal inquiries anywhere, including Google’s alleged exclusion of competitors from brokering ad buys on Google-owned video site YouTube.\nThe EU investigation is also examining Google’s plans to block certain kinds of user-tracking technologies on its platforms, such as the Chrome browser and Android mobile operating system. Curtailing such tracking responds, at least in part, to pressure from privacy regulators and activists, but has led to antitrust complaints from competitors in the advertising-technology industry.\n“Online advertising services are at the heart of how Google and publishers monetize their online services,” said Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s antitrust chief. “We are concerned that Google has made it harder for rival online advertising services to compete in the so-called ad tech stack.”\nGoogle didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167239017,"gmtCreate":1624269203739,"gmtModify":1634008646764,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167239017","repostId":"1113916113","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":182,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167645001,"gmtCreate":1624267467003,"gmtModify":1634008669690,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3577518721457137","authorIdStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167645001","repostId":"1105691189","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105691189","pubTimestamp":1624266134,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105691189?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 17:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"How Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105691189","media":"zerohedge","summary":"This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief ane","content":"<p>This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief anecdote from my time at SAC Capital back in 2000:</p>\n<p><b>Just after the peak of the dot com bubble in March, it was not immediately clear which way the US equity market was headed.</b></p>\n<p>Many thought the momentum would return soon enough. Others were more cautious, but most bears had been wrong for years. It was therefore hard to take them seriously.</p>\n<p><b>Going into a Fed meeting day in mid-2000, Steve had set up his portfolio very short S&amp;P futures.</b></p>\n<p>Because every trader in the room was allowed to see his pad, we all followed suit. Everyone was max-out short, confident in Steve’s market call even though it wasn’t exactly clear what he saw.</p>\n<p><b>Stocks opened up that morning, and then headed higher still.</b></p>\n<p>The room was dead quiet, as every trading desk will be when experiencing sharp, sudden losses.</p>\n<p><b>Then Steve did something I had never seen him do before: he left the desk and went downstairs to have lunch with his family.</b>At the time, SAC shared space with GE Capital in a Stamford, CT office building. When I went down to the cafeteria to get lunch a little while later, I saw Steve chatting with his kids and wife while munching on some fish sticks. He didn’t really seem to have a care in the world.</p>\n<p><b>At 2:00pm, with Steve back on the desk, we all waited for the Fed decision.</b>It was another rate hike. But instead of selling off, the S&amp;P just kept going up. The only sound in the room was Steve’s assistant calling out S&amp;P levels, each one higher than the last, her voice growing more urgent with each number. Had Steve misread the tape?</p>\n<p><b>After about 15 minutes, though, the S&amp;P leveled out and started to drop.</b></p>\n<p>First by just a little, but then it went into free fall. The whole firm’s P&amp;L swung from dangerously in the red to deeply profitable.</p>\n<p><b>At 4pm, with all his shorts covered, Steve stood up and addressed the room: “And that’s how you do it … I’m going home now”.</b>We gave him a standing ovation.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5dc81a4bd27d4c16642589177ca9ad3e\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"289\">I’ve thought a lot about that day in the last 20 years, and not just because it so neatly encapsulates the experience of equity day trading in its late 1990s – early 2000s heyday.</p>\n<p><b>It taught me that:</b></p>\n<p><u><b>#1) Conviction matters.</b></u></p>\n<p>We used to have a debate on the desk at SAC: was Steve so good because he was already worth a billion dollars and could afford to take risk, or did his net worth come from his ability to only scale and stick with bets where he had the highest conviction? Days like the one I just described always made us realize it was the latter.</p>\n<p>There is more to that point, though. Many years later, I met a data team that had done a deep diagnostic analysis of hundreds of hedge funds. They looked primarily at what separated top decile performing funds from the rest of the pack.</p>\n<p>They found that much of the slippage in underperforming funds came from a myriad of small portfolio positions that collectively ate away at returns. Some were losers, yes, but many were winners that weren’t sized large enough to make a real difference in the portfolio. Top performing funds owned winners in size; lesser funds were involved as well, but only in a small way.</p>\n<p>No prizes for guessing why that happened: conviction.<b>Mediocre funds had enough of an investment process to unearth good ideas, but not enough to size them correctly</b>. They weren’t willing to make a larger bet because they knew they would not be able to patiently sit out any volatility that might arise if it were 5 percent of the portfolio rather than 0.5 percent.</p>\n<p>Takeaway: conviction and sizing are what separated Steve, and every other great investor I’ve ever met, from the merely “very good”. It’s not enough to find ideas that work. The real magic is in making them count.</p>\n<p><u><b>#2: Use whatever mental hacks you need to foster patience</b></u><u>.</u></p>\n<p>Steve’s was getting off the desk for an hour. Other highly successful investors I’ve met over the years literally turned off their screens or took a symbol off their monitors.</p>\n<p>This is not to say one can just blindly buy an asset and hold it whatever comes. Productive patience means following many rules. A few of my personal favorites:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><p>Don’t buy new lows.</p></li>\n <li><p>Don’t short new highs.</p></li>\n <li><p>Always scale in and out of positions.</p></li>\n <li><p>Set stop losses where you re-evaluate your point of view.</p></li>\n <li><p>Always look for new ideas.</p></li>\n <li><p>Admit when you’re wrong and move on.</p></li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>Takeaway: the story about Steve on Fed Day is not meant to celebrate blind patience, but rather to show how patience fits in the context of a broader, disciplined approach.</b>If Steve had been wrong on that day, he would have still stuck to his process the next day and the day after that. No one has a 100 percent hit rate in this business.</p>\n<p>Final thought: the ability to be patient is, in the end, always a function of conviction and environment. Since we have little control over environment, especially with capital markets, the only effective way to cultivate patience is to build and follow a process that increases conviction in the context of prevailing circumstances.</p>\n<p>Ironically, low volatility markets such as what we have now demand more patience and conviction than when prices are choppier. Even a 1 percent position in a spicy name can meaningfully help portfolio returns when the VIX is at 40. But when the VIX is below 20 (today’s close was 18), it’s an entirely different game. The current environment demands a focused investment approach, not a scattershot one.</p>\n<p>Yes, this is hard, but as Steve said, “That’s how you do it”.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>How Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHow Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 17:02 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/how-steve-cohen-traded-bursting-dot-com-bubble?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief anecdote from my time at SAC Capital back in 2000:\nJust after the peak of the dot com bubble in March, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/how-steve-cohen-traded-bursting-dot-com-bubble?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/how-steve-cohen-traded-bursting-dot-com-bubble?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105691189","content_text":"This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief anecdote from my time at SAC Capital back in 2000:\nJust after the peak of the dot com bubble in March, it was not immediately clear which way the US equity market was headed.\nMany thought the momentum would return soon enough. Others were more cautious, but most bears had been wrong for years. It was therefore hard to take them seriously.\nGoing into a Fed meeting day in mid-2000, Steve had set up his portfolio very short S&P futures.\nBecause every trader in the room was allowed to see his pad, we all followed suit. Everyone was max-out short, confident in Steve’s market call even though it wasn’t exactly clear what he saw.\nStocks opened up that morning, and then headed higher still.\nThe room was dead quiet, as every trading desk will be when experiencing sharp, sudden losses.\nThen Steve did something I had never seen him do before: he left the desk and went downstairs to have lunch with his family.At the time, SAC shared space with GE Capital in a Stamford, CT office building. When I went down to the cafeteria to get lunch a little while later, I saw Steve chatting with his kids and wife while munching on some fish sticks. He didn’t really seem to have a care in the world.\nAt 2:00pm, with Steve back on the desk, we all waited for the Fed decision.It was another rate hike. But instead of selling off, the S&P just kept going up. The only sound in the room was Steve’s assistant calling out S&P levels, each one higher than the last, her voice growing more urgent with each number. Had Steve misread the tape?\nAfter about 15 minutes, though, the S&P leveled out and started to drop.\nFirst by just a little, but then it went into free fall. The whole firm’s P&L swung from dangerously in the red to deeply profitable.\nAt 4pm, with all his shorts covered, Steve stood up and addressed the room: “And that’s how you do it … I’m going home now”.We gave him a standing ovation.\nI’ve thought a lot about that day in the last 20 years, and not just because it so neatly encapsulates the experience of equity day trading in its late 1990s – early 2000s heyday.\nIt taught me that:\n#1) Conviction matters.\nWe used to have a debate on the desk at SAC: was Steve so good because he was already worth a billion dollars and could afford to take risk, or did his net worth come from his ability to only scale and stick with bets where he had the highest conviction? Days like the one I just described always made us realize it was the latter.\nThere is more to that point, though. Many years later, I met a data team that had done a deep diagnostic analysis of hundreds of hedge funds. They looked primarily at what separated top decile performing funds from the rest of the pack.\nThey found that much of the slippage in underperforming funds came from a myriad of small portfolio positions that collectively ate away at returns. Some were losers, yes, but many were winners that weren’t sized large enough to make a real difference in the portfolio. Top performing funds owned winners in size; lesser funds were involved as well, but only in a small way.\nNo prizes for guessing why that happened: conviction.Mediocre funds had enough of an investment process to unearth good ideas, but not enough to size them correctly. They weren’t willing to make a larger bet because they knew they would not be able to patiently sit out any volatility that might arise if it were 5 percent of the portfolio rather than 0.5 percent.\nTakeaway: conviction and sizing are what separated Steve, and every other great investor I’ve ever met, from the merely “very good”. It’s not enough to find ideas that work. The real magic is in making them count.\n#2: Use whatever mental hacks you need to foster patience.\nSteve’s was getting off the desk for an hour. Other highly successful investors I’ve met over the years literally turned off their screens or took a symbol off their monitors.\nThis is not to say one can just blindly buy an asset and hold it whatever comes. Productive patience means following many rules. A few of my personal favorites:\n\nDon’t buy new lows.\nDon’t short new highs.\nAlways scale in and out of positions.\nSet stop losses where you re-evaluate your point of view.\nAlways look for new ideas.\nAdmit when you’re wrong and move on.\n\nTakeaway: the story about Steve on Fed Day is not meant to celebrate blind patience, but rather to show how patience fits in the context of a broader, disciplined approach.If Steve had been wrong on that day, he would have still stuck to his process the next day and the day after that. No one has a 100 percent hit rate in this business.\nFinal thought: the ability to be patient is, in the end, always a function of conviction and environment. Since we have little control over environment, especially with capital markets, the only effective way to cultivate patience is to build and follow a process that increases conviction in the context of prevailing circumstances.\nIronically, low volatility markets such as what we have now demand more patience and conviction than when prices are choppier. Even a 1 percent position in a spicy name can meaningfully help portfolio returns when the VIX is at 40. But when the VIX is below 20 (today’s close was 18), it’s an entirely different game. The current environment demands a focused investment approach, not a scattershot one.\nYes, this is hard, but as Steve said, “That’s how you do it”.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":106,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":155116035,"gmtCreate":1625386715827,"gmtModify":1633941015942,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/155116035","repostId":"1160702483","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":170,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123306409,"gmtCreate":1624408094601,"gmtModify":1634006624608,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123306409","repostId":"2145664330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":161,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":140100291,"gmtCreate":1625633994113,"gmtModify":1633938848671,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/140100291","repostId":"1163143630","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":47,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":140377422,"gmtCreate":1625633953566,"gmtModify":1633938849382,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh yes","listText":"Oh yes","text":"Oh yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/140377422","repostId":"2149360674","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2149360674","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1625626744,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2149360674?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-07 10:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2149360674","media":"Reuters","summary":"Shares of Chinese electric vehicle $(EV)$ maker Xpeng Inc trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from ","content":"<p>Shares of Chinese electric vehicle <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EV\">$(EV)$</a> maker Xpeng Inc&nbsp;trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from the offer price of HK$165 apiece in the company's dual primary listing debut in Hong Kong</p>\n<p>Stock loses steam after climbing as much as 2.1% to HK$168.50; among the 30 most actively trade by turnover</p>\n<p>Xpeng's New York-listed American Depository Shares <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ADS\">$(ADS)$</a> were up 0.7% late on Tuesday at $44.05 each. One ADS is equivalent to two Hong Kong shares</p>\n<p>Xpeng, which on Wednesday raised $1.8 bln by selling 85 mln shares in Hong Kong listing, will develop future models based on product platforms designed for international markets, its chief executive said</p>\n<p>Smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye Care Holdings shines in trading debut, with shares rising to HK$14.46, up 36.4% from the IPO price of HK$10.60 apiece</p>\n<p>The Beijing-based eye hospitals and optical centres operator sold 170.9 mln shares in IPO, raising HK$1.81 bln ($233 mln) for establishment and acquiring hospitals, upgrading IT systems</p>\n<p>The Hong Kong Hang Seng Commerce &amp; Industry Index slips 0.8%, while healthcare index rises 1.4%</p>\n<p>The Hang Seng China Enterprises Index falls 1.5%, and the benchmark index slides 1%</p>\n<p>($1 = 7.7677 Hong Kong dollars)</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChinese EV maker Xpeng loses steam in HK debut; smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye shines\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-07 10:59</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Shares of Chinese electric vehicle <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EV\">$(EV)$</a> maker Xpeng Inc&nbsp;trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from the offer price of HK$165 apiece in the company's dual primary listing debut in Hong Kong</p>\n<p>Stock loses steam after climbing as much as 2.1% to HK$168.50; among the 30 most actively trade by turnover</p>\n<p>Xpeng's New York-listed American Depository Shares <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ADS\">$(ADS)$</a> were up 0.7% late on Tuesday at $44.05 each. One ADS is equivalent to two Hong Kong shares</p>\n<p>Xpeng, which on Wednesday raised $1.8 bln by selling 85 mln shares in Hong Kong listing, will develop future models based on product platforms designed for international markets, its chief executive said</p>\n<p>Smaller newcomer Chaoju Eye Care Holdings shines in trading debut, with shares rising to HK$14.46, up 36.4% from the IPO price of HK$10.60 apiece</p>\n<p>The Beijing-based eye hospitals and optical centres operator sold 170.9 mln shares in IPO, raising HK$1.81 bln ($233 mln) for establishment and acquiring hospitals, upgrading IT systems</p>\n<p>The Hong Kong Hang Seng Commerce &amp; Industry Index slips 0.8%, while healthcare index rises 1.4%</p>\n<p>The Hang Seng China Enterprises Index falls 1.5%, and the benchmark index slides 1%</p>\n<p>($1 = 7.7677 Hong Kong dollars)</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"02219":"朝聚眼科","09868":"小鹏汽车-W","XPEV":"小鹏汽车"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2149360674","content_text":"Shares of Chinese electric vehicle $(EV)$ maker Xpeng Inc trade as low as HK$159.30, down 3.5% from the offer price of HK$165 apiece in the company's dual primary listing debut in Hong Kong\nStock loses steam after climbing as much as 2.1% to HK$168.50; among the 30 most actively trade by turnover\nXpeng's New York-listed American Depository Shares $(ADS)$ were up 0.7% late on Tuesday at $44.05 each. One ADS is equivalent to two Hong Kong shares\nXpeng, which on Wednesday raised $1.8 bln by selling 85 mln shares in Hong Kong listing, will develop future models based on product platforms designed for international markets, its chief executive said\nSmaller newcomer Chaoju Eye Care Holdings shines in trading debut, with shares rising to HK$14.46, up 36.4% from the IPO price of HK$10.60 apiece\nThe Beijing-based eye hospitals and optical centres operator sold 170.9 mln shares in IPO, raising HK$1.81 bln ($233 mln) for establishment and acquiring hospitals, upgrading IT systems\nThe Hong Kong Hang Seng Commerce & Industry Index slips 0.8%, while healthcare index rises 1.4%\nThe Hang Seng China Enterprises Index falls 1.5%, and the benchmark index slides 1%\n($1 = 7.7677 Hong Kong dollars)","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":194,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123305811,"gmtCreate":1624408129233,"gmtModify":1634006623359,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Morning","listText":"Morning","text":"Morning","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123305811","repostId":"2145664330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":188,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158810223,"gmtCreate":1625143016162,"gmtModify":1633944341957,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest&nbsp;","listText":"Latest&nbsp;","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/158810223","repostId":"1131385251","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":190,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125476144,"gmtCreate":1624689545188,"gmtModify":1633949523019,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/125476144","repostId":"1108941456","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108941456","pubTimestamp":1624664800,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108941456?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-26 07:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108941456","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.At 26-64x this year's expected net profi","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.</li>\n <li>Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.</li>\n <li>I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bb49d385ec6d3044db2f4474cbb2c57\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>MagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Article Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Going with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.</p>\n<p><b>Are FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?</b></p>\n<p>Looking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at least<i>were</i>a good investment in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae2b8e2b9caf99f74c28bafc10a0a872\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"484\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>With gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.</p>\n<p>These factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2ef865eea7af4369048432a9c85d1d83\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"540\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>At 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from&nbsp;Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.</p>\n<p><b>What Investors Can Expect From Apple</b></p>\n<p>Apple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate&nbsp;in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Facebook</b></p>\n<p>Both Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fd8043ca75dcb2c38f5ffa427c8c0b9\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Facebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3d49e0007aa77608b2992a9fef2142d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6b16c9b3e2eac182d42686bcd8a98fc5\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"515\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>While Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.</p>\n<p>To sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>When we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6360514d097081c546a0ccacfbdc7af6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhat<i>smaller</i>net cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.</p>\n<p>All in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Netflix And Amazon</b></p>\n<p>Looking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.</p>\n<p>This huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ccc2536fa3cadf06639a89e0b211b9a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>AMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.</p>\n<p>Netflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d84f013051fbb00b6b488f5cfed66d4\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Netflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&amp;T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.</p>\n<p>Amazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.</p>\n<p><b>Which Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?</b></p>\n<p>Not every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.</p>\n<p>Alphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.</p>\n<p>Depending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-26 07:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108941456","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.\nI believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.\n\nMagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nGoing with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.\nAre FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?\nLooking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at leastwerea good investment in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nWith gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.\nThese factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:\nData by YCharts\nAt 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.\nWhat Investors Can Expect From Apple\nApple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.\nApple Versus Facebook\nBoth Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nFacebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:\nData by YCharts\nThe fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:\nData by YCharts\nWhile Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.\nTo sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.\nApple Versus Alphabet\nWhen we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.\nData by YCharts\nAlphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.\nNevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhatsmallernet cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.\nAll in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.\nApple Versus Netflix And Amazon\nLooking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.\nThis huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:\nData by YCharts\nAMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.\nNetflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:\nData by YCharts\nNetflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.\nAmazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.\nWhich Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?\nNot every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.\nAlphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.\nDepending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":140,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129368633,"gmtCreate":1624359994522,"gmtModify":1634007326322,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129368633","repostId":"1158893202","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167239017,"gmtCreate":1624269203739,"gmtModify":1634008646764,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167239017","repostId":"1113916113","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":182,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167645001,"gmtCreate":1624267467003,"gmtModify":1634008669690,"author":{"id":"3577518721457137","authorId":"3577518721457137","name":"investabc","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3577518721457137","idStr":"3577518721457137"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167645001","repostId":"1105691189","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105691189","pubTimestamp":1624266134,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105691189?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 17:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"How Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105691189","media":"zerohedge","summary":"This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief ane","content":"<p>This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief anecdote from my time at SAC Capital back in 2000:</p>\n<p><b>Just after the peak of the dot com bubble in March, it was not immediately clear which way the US equity market was headed.</b></p>\n<p>Many thought the momentum would return soon enough. Others were more cautious, but most bears had been wrong for years. It was therefore hard to take them seriously.</p>\n<p><b>Going into a Fed meeting day in mid-2000, Steve had set up his portfolio very short S&amp;P futures.</b></p>\n<p>Because every trader in the room was allowed to see his pad, we all followed suit. Everyone was max-out short, confident in Steve’s market call even though it wasn’t exactly clear what he saw.</p>\n<p><b>Stocks opened up that morning, and then headed higher still.</b></p>\n<p>The room was dead quiet, as every trading desk will be when experiencing sharp, sudden losses.</p>\n<p><b>Then Steve did something I had never seen him do before: he left the desk and went downstairs to have lunch with his family.</b>At the time, SAC shared space with GE Capital in a Stamford, CT office building. When I went down to the cafeteria to get lunch a little while later, I saw Steve chatting with his kids and wife while munching on some fish sticks. He didn’t really seem to have a care in the world.</p>\n<p><b>At 2:00pm, with Steve back on the desk, we all waited for the Fed decision.</b>It was another rate hike. But instead of selling off, the S&amp;P just kept going up. The only sound in the room was Steve’s assistant calling out S&amp;P levels, each one higher than the last, her voice growing more urgent with each number. Had Steve misread the tape?</p>\n<p><b>After about 15 minutes, though, the S&amp;P leveled out and started to drop.</b></p>\n<p>First by just a little, but then it went into free fall. The whole firm’s P&amp;L swung from dangerously in the red to deeply profitable.</p>\n<p><b>At 4pm, with all his shorts covered, Steve stood up and addressed the room: “And that’s how you do it … I’m going home now”.</b>We gave him a standing ovation.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5dc81a4bd27d4c16642589177ca9ad3e\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"289\">I’ve thought a lot about that day in the last 20 years, and not just because it so neatly encapsulates the experience of equity day trading in its late 1990s – early 2000s heyday.</p>\n<p><b>It taught me that:</b></p>\n<p><u><b>#1) Conviction matters.</b></u></p>\n<p>We used to have a debate on the desk at SAC: was Steve so good because he was already worth a billion dollars and could afford to take risk, or did his net worth come from his ability to only scale and stick with bets where he had the highest conviction? Days like the one I just described always made us realize it was the latter.</p>\n<p>There is more to that point, though. Many years later, I met a data team that had done a deep diagnostic analysis of hundreds of hedge funds. They looked primarily at what separated top decile performing funds from the rest of the pack.</p>\n<p>They found that much of the slippage in underperforming funds came from a myriad of small portfolio positions that collectively ate away at returns. Some were losers, yes, but many were winners that weren’t sized large enough to make a real difference in the portfolio. Top performing funds owned winners in size; lesser funds were involved as well, but only in a small way.</p>\n<p>No prizes for guessing why that happened: conviction.<b>Mediocre funds had enough of an investment process to unearth good ideas, but not enough to size them correctly</b>. They weren’t willing to make a larger bet because they knew they would not be able to patiently sit out any volatility that might arise if it were 5 percent of the portfolio rather than 0.5 percent.</p>\n<p>Takeaway: conviction and sizing are what separated Steve, and every other great investor I’ve ever met, from the merely “very good”. It’s not enough to find ideas that work. The real magic is in making them count.</p>\n<p><u><b>#2: Use whatever mental hacks you need to foster patience</b></u><u>.</u></p>\n<p>Steve’s was getting off the desk for an hour. Other highly successful investors I’ve met over the years literally turned off their screens or took a symbol off their monitors.</p>\n<p>This is not to say one can just blindly buy an asset and hold it whatever comes. Productive patience means following many rules. A few of my personal favorites:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><p>Don’t buy new lows.</p></li>\n <li><p>Don’t short new highs.</p></li>\n <li><p>Always scale in and out of positions.</p></li>\n <li><p>Set stop losses where you re-evaluate your point of view.</p></li>\n <li><p>Always look for new ideas.</p></li>\n <li><p>Admit when you’re wrong and move on.</p></li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>Takeaway: the story about Steve on Fed Day is not meant to celebrate blind patience, but rather to show how patience fits in the context of a broader, disciplined approach.</b>If Steve had been wrong on that day, he would have still stuck to his process the next day and the day after that. No one has a 100 percent hit rate in this business.</p>\n<p>Final thought: the ability to be patient is, in the end, always a function of conviction and environment. Since we have little control over environment, especially with capital markets, the only effective way to cultivate patience is to build and follow a process that increases conviction in the context of prevailing circumstances.</p>\n<p>Ironically, low volatility markets such as what we have now demand more patience and conviction than when prices are choppier. Even a 1 percent position in a spicy name can meaningfully help portfolio returns when the VIX is at 40. But when the VIX is below 20 (today’s close was 18), it’s an entirely different game. The current environment demands a focused investment approach, not a scattershot one.</p>\n<p>Yes, this is hard, but as Steve said, “That’s how you do it”.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>How Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHow Steve Cohen Traded The Bursting Of The Dot Com Bubble\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 17:02 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/how-steve-cohen-traded-bursting-dot-com-bubble?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief anecdote from my time at SAC Capital back in 2000:\nJust after the peak of the dot com bubble in March, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/how-steve-cohen-traded-bursting-dot-com-bubble?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/how-steve-cohen-traded-bursting-dot-com-bubble?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105691189","content_text":"This week’s Story Time Thursday is about “Patience”, and I (Nick here …) will start with a brief anecdote from my time at SAC Capital back in 2000:\nJust after the peak of the dot com bubble in March, it was not immediately clear which way the US equity market was headed.\nMany thought the momentum would return soon enough. Others were more cautious, but most bears had been wrong for years. It was therefore hard to take them seriously.\nGoing into a Fed meeting day in mid-2000, Steve had set up his portfolio very short S&P futures.\nBecause every trader in the room was allowed to see his pad, we all followed suit. Everyone was max-out short, confident in Steve’s market call even though it wasn’t exactly clear what he saw.\nStocks opened up that morning, and then headed higher still.\nThe room was dead quiet, as every trading desk will be when experiencing sharp, sudden losses.\nThen Steve did something I had never seen him do before: he left the desk and went downstairs to have lunch with his family.At the time, SAC shared space with GE Capital in a Stamford, CT office building. When I went down to the cafeteria to get lunch a little while later, I saw Steve chatting with his kids and wife while munching on some fish sticks. He didn’t really seem to have a care in the world.\nAt 2:00pm, with Steve back on the desk, we all waited for the Fed decision.It was another rate hike. But instead of selling off, the S&P just kept going up. The only sound in the room was Steve’s assistant calling out S&P levels, each one higher than the last, her voice growing more urgent with each number. Had Steve misread the tape?\nAfter about 15 minutes, though, the S&P leveled out and started to drop.\nFirst by just a little, but then it went into free fall. The whole firm’s P&L swung from dangerously in the red to deeply profitable.\nAt 4pm, with all his shorts covered, Steve stood up and addressed the room: “And that’s how you do it … I’m going home now”.We gave him a standing ovation.\nI’ve thought a lot about that day in the last 20 years, and not just because it so neatly encapsulates the experience of equity day trading in its late 1990s – early 2000s heyday.\nIt taught me that:\n#1) Conviction matters.\nWe used to have a debate on the desk at SAC: was Steve so good because he was already worth a billion dollars and could afford to take risk, or did his net worth come from his ability to only scale and stick with bets where he had the highest conviction? Days like the one I just described always made us realize it was the latter.\nThere is more to that point, though. Many years later, I met a data team that had done a deep diagnostic analysis of hundreds of hedge funds. They looked primarily at what separated top decile performing funds from the rest of the pack.\nThey found that much of the slippage in underperforming funds came from a myriad of small portfolio positions that collectively ate away at returns. Some were losers, yes, but many were winners that weren’t sized large enough to make a real difference in the portfolio. Top performing funds owned winners in size; lesser funds were involved as well, but only in a small way.\nNo prizes for guessing why that happened: conviction.Mediocre funds had enough of an investment process to unearth good ideas, but not enough to size them correctly. They weren’t willing to make a larger bet because they knew they would not be able to patiently sit out any volatility that might arise if it were 5 percent of the portfolio rather than 0.5 percent.\nTakeaway: conviction and sizing are what separated Steve, and every other great investor I’ve ever met, from the merely “very good”. It’s not enough to find ideas that work. The real magic is in making them count.\n#2: Use whatever mental hacks you need to foster patience.\nSteve’s was getting off the desk for an hour. Other highly successful investors I’ve met over the years literally turned off their screens or took a symbol off their monitors.\nThis is not to say one can just blindly buy an asset and hold it whatever comes. Productive patience means following many rules. A few of my personal favorites:\n\nDon’t buy new lows.\nDon’t short new highs.\nAlways scale in and out of positions.\nSet stop losses where you re-evaluate your point of view.\nAlways look for new ideas.\nAdmit when you’re wrong and move on.\n\nTakeaway: the story about Steve on Fed Day is not meant to celebrate blind patience, but rather to show how patience fits in the context of a broader, disciplined approach.If Steve had been wrong on that day, he would have still stuck to his process the next day and the day after that. No one has a 100 percent hit rate in this business.\nFinal thought: the ability to be patient is, in the end, always a function of conviction and environment. Since we have little control over environment, especially with capital markets, the only effective way to cultivate patience is to build and follow a process that increases conviction in the context of prevailing circumstances.\nIronically, low volatility markets such as what we have now demand more patience and conviction than when prices are choppier. Even a 1 percent position in a spicy name can meaningfully help portfolio returns when the VIX is at 40. But when the VIX is below 20 (today’s close was 18), it’s an entirely different game. The current environment demands a focused investment approach, not a scattershot one.\nYes, this is hard, but as Steve said, “That’s how you do it”.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":106,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}