Ontariomario的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Ontariomario

Ontariomario

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

11关注

0粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-06-28

Nice

Square: The Bear Case

2021-06-28

Nice

5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021

2021-06-27

Hello

Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict

2021-06-27

Yes

Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict

2021-06-27

Hi//@Ontariomario:Hi

Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?

2021-06-26

Hi

Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?

2021-06-25

Nice

Panasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments

2021-06-24

Nice

Deutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins

2021-06-23

Good morning

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Like pls

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Please like

Bitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold

2021-06-22

Hello

2021-06-22

Please like

Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In "Heat-Seeking Missiles": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":3578041155490573,"uuid":"3578041155490573","gmtCreate":1614966235948,"gmtModify":1624108678462,"name":"Ontariomario","pinyin":"ontariomario","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":11,"tweetSize":13,"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":"2022.07.23","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}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"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":127918677,"gmtCreate":1624813171599,"gmtModify":1633948416797,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice&nbsp;","listText":"Nice&nbsp;","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127918677","repostId":"1117734317","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1117734317","pubTimestamp":1624759414,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1117734317?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 10:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Square: The Bear Case","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1117734317","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nOn the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong re","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>On the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong revenue growth and a large Cash App user base.</li>\n <li>In reality, the company has struggled to translate its top line into bottom line earnings.</li>\n <li>This has resulted in Square expanding its products to justify exaggerated revenue valuations which may never result in meaningful earnings growth.</li>\n <li>And whilst at first glance its Cash App story appears to be a budding prospect, it may be nothing more than temporary growth based on necessity.</li>\n <li>Given the current valuation and the increasing Bitcoin headwinds, Square could face significant revisions downwards in revenue and earnings.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f072284e4d267ddbfaf6f17db8b6aa46\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\"><span>AndreyPopov/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Introduction</b></p>\n<p>Square Inc.(NYSE:SQ)is one of the&nbsp;most popular stocks&nbsp;among retail traders and investors, ranking 57 in Robinhood's top 100 rankings. This has resulted in a 135% increase in price over the last year allowing SQ to reach a market capitalization of greater than $100bln, trading with the volatility of a mid-cap company.</p>\n<p>On the surface the price and valuation may seem justified, with the company sequentially increasing revenues and expanding its portfolio of products through Cash App, Bitcoin (BTC-USD), PPP loans and most recently delving into the commercial loans business with a&nbsp;banking license&nbsp;via Square Financial Services.</p>\n<p>However, these valuations are becoming disaggregated from the fundamentals of the company and its core business on speculation of future revenue projections which are heavily reliant on Bitcoin revenues.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adc746c80eba08b76805234d32a7eff4\" tg-width=\"638\" tg-height=\"358\"><span>Source: Author, with data from SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Historical Financial Information)</span></p>\n<p>In addition to this, SQ potentially faces several other issues related to small business positioning; policy and regulation; and general macroeconomic factors which may create headwinds that will impact its valuation and pose an asymmetric downside risk for investors, which I will extrapolate on below.</p>\n<p><b>Overview</b></p>\n<p>SQ is a payment processing and business tool provider that facilitates transactions between businesses / sellers and individuals and provides them with hardware, online infrastructure and analytics. Additionally, it services individuals through Cash App which appears to be growing exponentially and allows users to send, receive, hold and invest money, and recently Bitcoin.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cee1136e6c6e1b5294daf79d06e4a1e8\" tg-width=\"382\" tg-height=\"421\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter - Cash App Inflows vs Gross Profit)</span></p>\n<p>As of March 2020, the&nbsp;company has received a Banking License&nbsp;from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to originate commercial loans to retailers which use SQ for payment processing.</p>\n<p>Given all of this positive news, it is not surprising that the stock has rallied over 330% in the last 3 years on the basis of future growth projections and, since 2020, has chased revenue estimates.</p>\n<p>This was a common occurrence during COVID, as unchartered waters meant that top line growth was imperative for survival. Further, seemingly endless money printing by the Fed, combined with zero rates, meant money flowed into stocks which showed the highest potential for growth.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/214a8d95ef4deef4b9e6e7ec8ca86793\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs EPS Estimates and Revenue Estimates 2021)</span></p>\n<p>However, in Q1 2021, as the printing slowed, yields began to rise and federal transfers to individuals dissipated, and consequently ever increasing revenue estimates began to mean less for the market, resulting in SQ price action ranging between $200 to $280.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5a03c8294f2805d4e82fbc3fed739f45\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price YTD)</span></p>\n<p><b>Quantitative</b></p>\n<p>Year to Date, SQ has been a good performer relative to the payment processing sector, returning ~12% price increases to shareholders.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c32bf1243cd5e4252fc8af88b2ee4bfb\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs Payment Processing Sector &gt;$50 bln Year to Date)</span></p>\n<p>It is also not a surprise to see why when evaluated against these companies on a forward earnings and revenue basis. SQ has above average and median earnings growth for 2021 and 2022, as well as strong revenue growth for 2021.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b67e41d041b35bf5e8ae3c7adb55c7d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"444\"><span>Source: Author, Sector Comparison (Payment Processors)</span></p>\n<p>Whilst SQ's forward PE seems exaggerated in contrast to its counterparts, its forward PS is relatively small and below the sector averages and median, perhaps justifying its present value.</p>\n<p>However, once you remove Bitcoin revenue from the equation, you get much more exaggerated forward PS estimates on much lower revenue growth, which represents SQ's primary business.</p>\n<p>For this equation, I have removed Bitcoin revenue from their Q1 2021 results, and judging by average analyst expectations which show little to no sequential revenue growth from Q2-Q4 2021, multiplied this figure by 4x for a year end revenue estimate of $6,140.70 mln. For prior years, I have removed Bitcoin from Revenue.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/624b2de0076a4f2d6062c52036b5d176\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"182\"><span>Source: Author, SQ Revenue Growth (2018 to 2021 Estimates with Bitcoin vs excl Bitcoin)</span></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5337259448695cf7fc6a796d86dba775\" tg-width=\"523\" tg-height=\"245\"><span>Source: Author, SQ vs Sector Comps (Revenue Estimates excl Bitcoin)</span></p>\n<p>As we can see this paints a very different picture of the company, and whilst revenue is still growing slightly above comps which also have high PS ratios, suddenly valuations on earnings look more meaningful and it becomes difficult to justify a forward PE 3x above the average and 4.5x above the median. Especially when companies such as American Express Co (AXP), Mastercard Inc (MA), PayPal Holdings Inc (PYPL) and Visa Inc (V) are producing on average 4x higher EPS. The majority of which pay a dividend and have similar growth estimates with less volatility risk.</p>\n<p>Many will suggest that \"this does not matter as BTC is now part of their revenue metrics and that is that, besides transaction volume is what is important\". However, I would cite the example of the 2018 Bitcoin sell off in which&nbsp;Bitcoin fell 70%, and transaction volumes fell from highs by approximately 75% as well:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b01941a1ab02f1b6dc27d73a2705a242\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"320\"><span>Source: Bitcoinvisuals.com (Bitcoin Market Volume 2018)</span></p>\n<p>On a valuation basis, this presents a substantial downside risk to investors if Bitcoin continued to retrace as a result of being met by increased regulation globally, as the company is essentially trading on revenue metrics propped up by Bitcoin. Quite simply, price down in Bitcoin could mean downwards revisions to revenue estimates and consequently a highly volatile retracement in the price of SQ.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c89cf1b41c0d446571c7a471bb8d8e50\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price Correlation - Revenue, EPS and EBITDA)</span></p>\n<p>This becomes increasingly likely given the historical volatility of the stock when compared to its peers and it is not surprising that it is also becoming a consensus short position.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2d47874b5957751f0d485a9aa9ec5016\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"233\"><span>Source: Author (SQ vs Sector Comps Implied and Realized Volatility and Short Interest)</span></p>\n<p>Given the analysis by another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend&nbsp;in which the author suggests that&nbsp;SQ's 2025 growth is essentially priced in&nbsp;I would have to agree. SQ's reliance on revenue estimates which have been amplified substantially by Bitcoin present an asymmetric risk to the downside in the short to medium term for investors.</p>\n<p><b>Macro</b></p>\n<p>Whilst we are in the process of reopening, many things remain uncertain, such as the level of demand sustainability, job growth and creation, and inflation.</p>\n<p>Whilst the sentiment is overall positive in the media, there are several macroeconomic issues that are beneath the surface which need to be resolved before we can conclude that we are in the clear.</p>\n<p><b>Small Business Environment</b></p>\n<p>SQ's MRQ shows that nearly 49% of the Gross Profit comes from the Seller ecosystem (small businesses).</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a0f50d03e91a1609a120fa139b61e292\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"319\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Page 39 - Segmented Gross Profit)</span></p>\n<p>The majority of this is originating from exposure to sellers with &lt;$500,000 Gross Payment Volume (69.5%). This makes square substantially exposed to fluctuations in the small business cycle.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75fbdbba973e9d39e9d07b50d6174b03\" tg-width=\"380\" tg-height=\"502\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter)</span></p>\n<p>Delving into the Business Formation Statistics, there is a rosy picture, with over 500,000 business applications for the month of May, 2021 providing an endless surge of opportunity for SQ.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/777bf7fbfba7b466a8c89baa9b21a72d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"475\"><span>Source: Census.gov (Business Applications, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>Again, when we dig deeper and look at the statistics below which rank the optimism of established small businesses, the picture begins to distort and starts to look like the descent into 2008.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5be8fe67a4c257868eb79101d262e77\" tg-width=\"525\" tg-height=\"557\"><span>Source: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Optimism, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>Further, when we examine Small Business future outlook on expansion, this has also descended to lows and similar to what was seen in 2008. This could suggest that the bread and butter of SQ's gross profit margin, may not expand at the rate previously seen during 2017 to 2020.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e1a555c19fb385f170bb6deb2b3abcca\" tg-width=\"539\" tg-height=\"319\"><span>Source: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Outlook, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>Additionally, it should be noted that the two primary reasons small businesses are giving for their negative outlook are \"Economic Conditions\" and \"Political Climate\", which could be related to the election in 2020, COVID, recent policy changes and be somewhat transitory. Alternatively it could resemble the slow march of 2008 to 2016, we simply do not know, except for the fact it is a low reading and consequently could weigh on SQ's high revenue and earnings growth estimates.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4fbef66ecf854fe482a86e001dec91e6\" tg-width=\"523\" tg-height=\"271\"><span>Source: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Reasons for Outlook, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p><b>Small Business Lending</b></p>\n<p>Looking forward, SQ clearly aims to solidify its position in the commercial lending space through acquiring a banking license. This is very positive for the company due to their large and growing small business user base,their experience since 2014, and the&nbsp;PPP program, which stopped on May 31, 2021.</p>\n<p>Currently, bank lending has receded as a result of recovery efforts from COVID.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/327e5b2f822c5f6e8b6298b58c0d4f94\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"401\"><span>Source: YCHARTS (US Commercial Banks - Commercial and Industrial Loans)</span></p>\n<p>This can be verified through the credit conditions index in the&nbsp;monthly NFIB report. Although, an&nbsp;American Banker survey&nbsp;is reporting that 86% of small businesses are finding it difficult to access credit, and are having to resort to personal credit.</p>\n<p>This is positive for SQ as it will allow them to fill the gap for credit to small business within the market. Though I believe it will be short lived as there is speculation that when the Fed tapers, they will also announce the lifting of&nbsp;capital restraints&nbsp;placed on Wells Fargo &amp; Company (WFC).</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/530b7de3c5d05e7e8f5de219d3582ea7\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"689\"><span>Source: Credit Suisse (Global Money Dispatch - 25 May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>There is a fairly good probability that this will occur, given that early in 2020 the Fed had&nbsp;lifted these restraints&nbsp;to help small businesses via the PPP program and tapering has a history of upsetting the market. If this occurs, I suspect WFC will become a giant amongst the small business credit space once more and be a very tough competitor to SQ due to their extensive network and history in the space.</p>\n<p><b>Bitcoin, Legislation &amp; Gensler</b></p>\n<p>Bitcoin has been making headlines as of 2H 2020 and much of 1H 2021 for good reason. It is gaining traction amongst retail traders and investors and has shown exceptional appreciation. Further, some minor&nbsp;banks&nbsp;have been interested in the medium although many banks and financial institutions have explicitly banned the&nbsp;purchase of Bitcoin using their services.</p>\n<p>The primary reasons for their objection is more than likely to do with illicit activities, such as&nbsp;money laundering,terrorism,fake transaction volumes, and similar activities which I do not want to get into and neither do banks.</p>\n<p>Consequently, on the recent hype, many countries are now stepping in to regulate the use of Bitcoin, but others are going a step further and are enacting legislation to ban its use and mining, most notably,China&nbsp;and&nbsp;India.</p>\n<p>This has had a negative impact on the price of Bitcoin since the ATHs in May 2021 of ~$65,000, retracing -46% since then.</p>\n<p>It is also extremely negative for Bitcoin going forward as the majority of Bitcoin mining is done in China (~70% YTD) with&nbsp;Hashrates of mining being correlated to the price. Therefore if these recede on decreasing Chinese mining activity, price could surely follow, affecting SQ's Bitcoin holdings and future transaction volumes.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75ef78953396700241870a3f3ae8d8be\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"382\"><span>Source: Cambridge University (Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index YTD)</span></p>\n<p>Whilst the SEC has come out and said that&nbsp;Bitcoin regulation is not on their agenda for 2021, Gary Gensler has&nbsp;warned investors to be cautious. Gensler is also has a long history on regulations to protect investors, and despite not putting Bitcoin on the agenda for 2021, I advise readers to study his history with respect to&nbsp;2000 and 2008.</p>\n<p>Looking out further, this does not bode well for Bitcoin and SQ, generally. It is likely that there could be further regulation rather than adoption, negatively impacting its price, leading to a repeat of 2018 lower volumes as well as mining activity.</p>\n<p><b>General Economy - The Worry for Retail</b></p>\n<p>Separately, we could also be seeing a negative situation for retail going forward. Much of the recovery in retail as not been driven by \"pent up demand\" but mostly through subsidies issued throughout&nbsp;2020 and the start of 2021. When examining the graph below, we can see that once you subtract transfer receipts (government stimulus cheques and employment benefits - red line), income is not what it used to be.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/97a5a8cfaa11dd3c5ab5544778a40b90\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"247\"><span>Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Disposable Income vs Real Income minus Transfers vs Personal Savings vs Retail Trade Sales)</span></p>\n<p>Additionally, we can see that much of the spikes in retail sales (purple) have been driven mainly through the stimulus cheques which bolstered disposable income (blue) and consumer savings (green), though now stimulus has ended and people are having to start to dig into their savings, which is dropped 54% month on month between March and April.</p>\n<p>The consumer spending situation is made worse when examining U6 unemployment, which is&nbsp;considered to be the most revealing&nbsp;amongst economists as it includes unemployed, underemployed and discouraged job seekers. This, generally speaking, does not bode well for consumer discretionary spending patterns going forward.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c09f260d254df1a847962a6b6896764c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"388\"><span>Source: Macrotrends.net (U6 Unemployment Rate vs U5 vs Official)</span></p>\n<p>Finally, the rising cost of food and energy, which for food I expect to continue, should hamper consumer discretionary spend going forward. I have previously written articles on The Mosaic Company (MOS)hereand The Andersons (ANDE)here, which outline my justification for this trend.</p>\n<p>In relation to SQ, we can see their historical exposure to consumer discretionary spend based on end 2019 data. When taking into account figures from: retail; professional services, beauty and personal care, home and repair, leisure and entertainment, and casual use, the total exposure is approximately 59%.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dddddbe8ed21ed16aab29a7b5ebbc846\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"340\"><span>Source: Statista (Raynor de Best - GPV by Seller Industry Dec 2019)</span></p>\n<p>Whilst this may not impact its revenue figures substantially due to the weighting of bitcoin, I do expect this to undermine is gross profit figures going forward and negatively impact margins as stimulus further fades.</p>\n<p><b>Financials</b></p>\n<p><b>Bitcoin</b></p>\n<p>When examining the financials of SQ we can easily see that Bitcoin is the predominant factor driving its revenue growth (MRQ 69% of total revenue) of which its valuation is derived (see above Introduction section - SQ Price vs Revenue Segments; and Quantitative section - SQ Price correlation).</p>\n<p>From their Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter, page 12 they have stated that on March 31, 2021 the fair value of their holdings was $472 million. On this date the closing price was $58,918.83, or approximately 8,011 Bitcoins. They also state they initially invested $200 million into bitcoin during this period and Q4, so their average price is roughly $25,000 per Bitcoin.</p>\n<p>Currently, the price of Bitcoin sits at approximately $34,600 and it also appears to be struggling to find traction, especially when you examine some other trends. For example, looking at search trends of \"Buy Bitcoin\" on Google Trends, this is clearly waning.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d6b3b70625f48232fa97f1aa14f5548e\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"333\"><span>Source: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - Worldwide 5 Yrs)</span></p>\n<p>Additionally, when you align this data with stimulus payments it is clear there is a relationship between the two in 2H 2020, and much of the recent speculation could be driven by government subsidies.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54329dbe61b7b1f9fc1347f632aff709\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"293\"><span>Source: USA.Gov (COVID Stimulus Cheque Dates)</span></p>\n<p>The spike in searches occurs roughly around the time of the two latter government stimulus cheques with a lag of a few days to a few weeks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c7a198a905e4a89f11faa1b4db4003b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"340\"><span>Source: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - USA 12 Months)</span></p>\n<p>This also coincides with Bitcoin's price run up in December 2020 and January 2021, as well the failed rally in March and April 2021.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0428576ae2c8312e747c3ae5fccab637\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"401\"><span>Source: YCHARTS (Bitcoin Price 1 Yr)</span></p>\n<p>Thus, in this example, if we have a continued sell off of -70%, which is similar to what occurred in 2018. We would be back at November 2020 Bitcoin prices of $20,000 approximately.</p>\n<p>This is still feasible on the basis of dwindling volume, further legislation and declining hashrates. It could also be theorized that SQ may carry an impairment charge of $40 million, which would greatly affect operating income, net income and shareholder earnings and future estimates. Though this is purely theoretical without accounting for transactions in the current quarter, such as purchases or sales at or near ATHs.</p>\n<p>Additionally, with the lack of stimulus payments going forward and tighter consumer discretionary spend, the revenue generated from Bitcoin may also decline as less money enters the space and volumes decline. Negatively impacting revenue estimates for SQ and subsequently their price and valuation.</p>\n<p><b>Cash App</b></p>\n<p>On the surface, it looks like Cash App is growing exponentially into a viable platform for users to transact, with more than 36 million monthly transacting active customers, up 50% YoY.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b457a1d1f65d9d40fac153a9926aa167\" tg-width=\"262\" tg-height=\"230\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter)</span></p>\n<p>However, this growth in Cash App may be unsustainable going forward, with SQ elaborating on this in their Quarterly filing notes:</p>\n<blockquote>\n Cash App revenue benefited from growth in numbers of active Cash App customers and from&nbsp;\n <b>government relief programs</b>&nbsp;most recently passed into law in late December 2020 and in March 2021, as well as cumulative benefit from earlier stimulus programs passed in 2020. These programs provided additional stimulus relief and unemployment benefits which resulted in an increase in consumer spending and inflows into our Cash App ecosystem. Cash App revenue growth may not be sustained at the same levels in future quarters and may be impacted by the enactment of further stimulus relief and benefit programs, as well as the demand and market prices for bitcoin, amongst other factors.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n <i>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Filings - Page 49)</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Part of the issue with Cash App is theoretical continued use and future adoption. Much of the growth seen over the last year was predominantly fueled by stimulus payments through the Cash App ecosystem, and therefore by necessity given the circumstances.</p>\n<p>The two sharp spikes in searches for the app occurred on:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>April 12-18 2020</li>\n <li>January 24-30 2021</li>\n</ul>\n<p>These coincide with stimulus payments as they initially sent them and they gradually deposited them into people's accounts.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f9485d2feac40030b5190195a471781e\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\"><span>Source: Google Trends (Cash App search terms - USA 5 Years)</span></p>\n<p>Therefore, as government stimulus payments end, and Bitcoin again fades from relevancy, and more people return to work and day-trade less, this could negatively impact user growth metrics going forward, impacting SQ revenue estimates, gross profit figures, and its earnings.</p>\n<p>Further, there are a multitude of other more viable platforms, which another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend, has elaborated onhere.</p>\n<p>It is also important to keep in mind how they define these users, a \"Transacting active Cash App customer\" is the following:</p>\n<blockquote>\n ... has at least\n <b>one financial transaction</b>using any product or service within Cash App during the specified period.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n <i>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter - Page 4)</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So, if a customer received their wages from an employer, or unemployment benefit, into Cash App once per month, and transferred all of it to their bank account once per month, they are a \"transacting active Cash App customer\"...</p>\n<p>Perhaps a better quantifier of an \"active\" customer would be greater than 5 transactions.</p>\n<p><b>Technicals</b></p>\n<p>Examining the technicals of SQ, it is clear that the stock is now ranging between $200 and $280, with several breakout attempts at $250 and 2 failed attempts near $300, showing several signs that momentum is dying out.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c277d5239e06c67b7ff6fd7fff319bb\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"642\"><span>Source: Author, with data from FINVIZ (SQ Chart)</span></p>\n<p>When examining dark pool order flows, there is a possibility for the current rally to continue as dark pools are at lows, which may likely continue into earnings by August. Although I would not get my hopes up unless some seriously good news occurs and Bitcoin rallies back to ATHs.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3323bfcd903c74dce542b53b0b56e093\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"281\"><span>Source: Squeezemetrics.com (SQ Dark Pools vs Implied Vol 2 Years)</span></p>\n<p>From the 13F filings, we can also see that many funds have reduced exposure and closed their positions, with fewer new positions being added. The Put to Call ratio is also becoming quite high, especially on a stock that has $100 bln market cap, signaling that we are not the only ones thinking the same thing.</p>\n<p>Caution is required though, as SQ's issues with Bitcoin are obviously becoming a consensus trade, and when those puts are lifted, gamma may turn positive and it could cause the stock to rally significantly.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b221f08c025ba225e32114f0e76dd272\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"152\"><span>Source: Whalewisdom.com (SQ Funds Positioning)</span></p>\n<p>Further, with relation to ARK ETFs, it is no surprise that there have been&nbsp;significant liquidity issues&nbsp;the last 6 months, and I agree with another Seeking Alpha contributor's thesisherethat we will see a reversion to the mean with respect to prices of stocks held in these ETFs. What can be noted is that Cathie has significantly reduced her exposure to SQ and that she may be picking her battles.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ecce0e1f1cd9e7e47fe27105be3f6ad0\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"559\"><span>Source: Cathiesark.com (SQ Shares Held - All ETFs)</span></p>\n<p>Given the above information, this is a difficult company to be short. It will either payoff enormously, or rip your face off due to its volatility. Additionally there are many funds wanting some small level of exposure to a company with Bitcoin on the financial statements. Therefore, if you were to trade this as a short at your own risk, discretion is advised and you should always pick your battles.</p>\n<p><b>Price Targets</b></p>\n<p>On the basis of volatility through SQ's ATR it is possible that SQ could move to a low of approximately $100 by the end of the year, moving in favor 40% of the time. This aligns with my year end 2021 price if you remove Bitcoin entirely from the equation.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4ec1e2586568ef7e0aea0c54e3503acc\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"222\"><span>Source: Author (SQ ATR Calculator)</span></p>\n<p>However, it would not be sensible to do this as it is part of their revenue for the time being, no matter how high Bitcoin volumes were in the start of 2021 and how low they may be at the end of the year.</p>\n<p>I do expect the stock to fall again and retest $200, possibly breaking down to $160. Though it is very difficult to determine a valuation with SQ, mainly because the valuation is derived from Bitcoin revenues, and also the perceived value by funds and the market in the future adoption of the asset.</p>\n<p>If the market begins to perceive Bitcoin again as irrelevant, I would expect SQ to slowly sell off to between $150 and $160 (-37% downside) with a low probability that it will rally past $300 (25% upside).</p>\n<p><b>Risks</b></p>\n<p>With respect to SQ the following risks should be noted.</p>\n<p>The company is growing, whether you like SQ or not. The main questions are: Will the market value Bitcoin on any realistic basis? How much is it growing with and without Bitcoin? What is the potential future growth with and without Bitcoin? And does the market believe it, or for that matter care?</p>\n<p>If the Bitcoin fades from relevancy, and judging by Google Trends, it is more likely than it is not, it is not outlandish to assume that SQ will suffer as a result of this and over the 2H 2021 and take a substantial hit to revenue estimates. However, if Bitcoin adoption increases and negative news fades, since this is a growth company, it could simply continue rallying.</p>\n<p>Further, consumer spending patterns are producing mixed data, and above I have presented a bear case. This could easily turn the other way if people's behavior changes, such as applying for jobs which will increase spending in the economy and hopefully produce small business growth and increase small business optimism and expansion, which is very beneficial for SQ as a cyclical business in the payment processing space.</p>\n<p>Again, caution is necessary, though I do think that future growth of the company is priced in and there is a higher risk to holders of SQ to the downside than to the upside.</p>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<p>SQ is a high growth company with some potential positive points in the long run; however, its valuation is highly questionable due to its high revenue estimates predominantly derived from Bitcoin transactions and not bottom-line earnings growth.</p>\n<p>From a quantitative perspective, it looks good amongst its peers but upon further examination it appears to be extremely overvalued as future growth, at least for 2021, may be derived from Bitcoin. Further, its Cash App adoption statistics may not continue to see the same run rate going forward without continued government stimulus.</p>\n<p>Additionally, it faces several potential macroeconomic hurdles with respect to small business exposure, lending competitors, consumer transaction competitors, Bitcoin legislation and softening retail demand.</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>Square: The Bear Case</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\">\nSquare: The Bear Case\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 10:03 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436723-square-the-bear-case><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nOn the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong revenue growth and a large Cash App user base.\nIn reality, the company has struggled to translate its ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436723-square-the-bear-case\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SQ":"Block"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436723-square-the-bear-case","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1117734317","content_text":"Summary\n\nOn the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong revenue growth and a large Cash App user base.\nIn reality, the company has struggled to translate its top line into bottom line earnings.\nThis has resulted in Square expanding its products to justify exaggerated revenue valuations which may never result in meaningful earnings growth.\nAnd whilst at first glance its Cash App story appears to be a budding prospect, it may be nothing more than temporary growth based on necessity.\nGiven the current valuation and the increasing Bitcoin headwinds, Square could face significant revisions downwards in revenue and earnings.\n\nAndreyPopov/iStock via Getty Images\nIntroduction\nSquare Inc.(NYSE:SQ)is one of the most popular stocks among retail traders and investors, ranking 57 in Robinhood's top 100 rankings. This has resulted in a 135% increase in price over the last year allowing SQ to reach a market capitalization of greater than $100bln, trading with the volatility of a mid-cap company.\nOn the surface the price and valuation may seem justified, with the company sequentially increasing revenues and expanding its portfolio of products through Cash App, Bitcoin (BTC-USD), PPP loans and most recently delving into the commercial loans business with a banking license via Square Financial Services.\nHowever, these valuations are becoming disaggregated from the fundamentals of the company and its core business on speculation of future revenue projections which are heavily reliant on Bitcoin revenues.\nSource: Author, with data from SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Historical Financial Information)\nIn addition to this, SQ potentially faces several other issues related to small business positioning; policy and regulation; and general macroeconomic factors which may create headwinds that will impact its valuation and pose an asymmetric downside risk for investors, which I will extrapolate on below.\nOverview\nSQ is a payment processing and business tool provider that facilitates transactions between businesses / sellers and individuals and provides them with hardware, online infrastructure and analytics. Additionally, it services individuals through Cash App which appears to be growing exponentially and allows users to send, receive, hold and invest money, and recently Bitcoin.\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter - Cash App Inflows vs Gross Profit)\nAs of March 2020, the company has received a Banking License from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to originate commercial loans to retailers which use SQ for payment processing.\nGiven all of this positive news, it is not surprising that the stock has rallied over 330% in the last 3 years on the basis of future growth projections and, since 2020, has chased revenue estimates.\nThis was a common occurrence during COVID, as unchartered waters meant that top line growth was imperative for survival. Further, seemingly endless money printing by the Fed, combined with zero rates, meant money flowed into stocks which showed the highest potential for growth.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs EPS Estimates and Revenue Estimates 2021)\nHowever, in Q1 2021, as the printing slowed, yields began to rise and federal transfers to individuals dissipated, and consequently ever increasing revenue estimates began to mean less for the market, resulting in SQ price action ranging between $200 to $280.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price YTD)\nQuantitative\nYear to Date, SQ has been a good performer relative to the payment processing sector, returning ~12% price increases to shareholders.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs Payment Processing Sector >$50 bln Year to Date)\nIt is also not a surprise to see why when evaluated against these companies on a forward earnings and revenue basis. SQ has above average and median earnings growth for 2021 and 2022, as well as strong revenue growth for 2021.\nSource: Author, Sector Comparison (Payment Processors)\nWhilst SQ's forward PE seems exaggerated in contrast to its counterparts, its forward PS is relatively small and below the sector averages and median, perhaps justifying its present value.\nHowever, once you remove Bitcoin revenue from the equation, you get much more exaggerated forward PS estimates on much lower revenue growth, which represents SQ's primary business.\nFor this equation, I have removed Bitcoin revenue from their Q1 2021 results, and judging by average analyst expectations which show little to no sequential revenue growth from Q2-Q4 2021, multiplied this figure by 4x for a year end revenue estimate of $6,140.70 mln. For prior years, I have removed Bitcoin from Revenue.\nSource: Author, SQ Revenue Growth (2018 to 2021 Estimates with Bitcoin vs excl Bitcoin)\nSource: Author, SQ vs Sector Comps (Revenue Estimates excl Bitcoin)\nAs we can see this paints a very different picture of the company, and whilst revenue is still growing slightly above comps which also have high PS ratios, suddenly valuations on earnings look more meaningful and it becomes difficult to justify a forward PE 3x above the average and 4.5x above the median. Especially when companies such as American Express Co (AXP), Mastercard Inc (MA), PayPal Holdings Inc (PYPL) and Visa Inc (V) are producing on average 4x higher EPS. The majority of which pay a dividend and have similar growth estimates with less volatility risk.\nMany will suggest that \"this does not matter as BTC is now part of their revenue metrics and that is that, besides transaction volume is what is important\". However, I would cite the example of the 2018 Bitcoin sell off in which Bitcoin fell 70%, and transaction volumes fell from highs by approximately 75% as well:\nSource: Bitcoinvisuals.com (Bitcoin Market Volume 2018)\nOn a valuation basis, this presents a substantial downside risk to investors if Bitcoin continued to retrace as a result of being met by increased regulation globally, as the company is essentially trading on revenue metrics propped up by Bitcoin. Quite simply, price down in Bitcoin could mean downwards revisions to revenue estimates and consequently a highly volatile retracement in the price of SQ.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price Correlation - Revenue, EPS and EBITDA)\nThis becomes increasingly likely given the historical volatility of the stock when compared to its peers and it is not surprising that it is also becoming a consensus short position.\nSource: Author (SQ vs Sector Comps Implied and Realized Volatility and Short Interest)\nGiven the analysis by another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend in which the author suggests that SQ's 2025 growth is essentially priced in I would have to agree. SQ's reliance on revenue estimates which have been amplified substantially by Bitcoin present an asymmetric risk to the downside in the short to medium term for investors.\nMacro\nWhilst we are in the process of reopening, many things remain uncertain, such as the level of demand sustainability, job growth and creation, and inflation.\nWhilst the sentiment is overall positive in the media, there are several macroeconomic issues that are beneath the surface which need to be resolved before we can conclude that we are in the clear.\nSmall Business Environment\nSQ's MRQ shows that nearly 49% of the Gross Profit comes from the Seller ecosystem (small businesses).\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Page 39 - Segmented Gross Profit)\nThe majority of this is originating from exposure to sellers with <$500,000 Gross Payment Volume (69.5%). This makes square substantially exposed to fluctuations in the small business cycle.\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter)\nDelving into the Business Formation Statistics, there is a rosy picture, with over 500,000 business applications for the month of May, 2021 providing an endless surge of opportunity for SQ.\nSource: Census.gov (Business Applications, May 2021)\nAgain, when we dig deeper and look at the statistics below which rank the optimism of established small businesses, the picture begins to distort and starts to look like the descent into 2008.\nSource: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Optimism, May 2021)\nFurther, when we examine Small Business future outlook on expansion, this has also descended to lows and similar to what was seen in 2008. This could suggest that the bread and butter of SQ's gross profit margin, may not expand at the rate previously seen during 2017 to 2020.\nSource: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Outlook, May 2021)\nAdditionally, it should be noted that the two primary reasons small businesses are giving for their negative outlook are \"Economic Conditions\" and \"Political Climate\", which could be related to the election in 2020, COVID, recent policy changes and be somewhat transitory. Alternatively it could resemble the slow march of 2008 to 2016, we simply do not know, except for the fact it is a low reading and consequently could weigh on SQ's high revenue and earnings growth estimates.\nSource: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Reasons for Outlook, May 2021)\nSmall Business Lending\nLooking forward, SQ clearly aims to solidify its position in the commercial lending space through acquiring a banking license. This is very positive for the company due to their large and growing small business user base,their experience since 2014, and the PPP program, which stopped on May 31, 2021.\nCurrently, bank lending has receded as a result of recovery efforts from COVID.\nSource: YCHARTS (US Commercial Banks - Commercial and Industrial Loans)\nThis can be verified through the credit conditions index in the monthly NFIB report. Although, an American Banker survey is reporting that 86% of small businesses are finding it difficult to access credit, and are having to resort to personal credit.\nThis is positive for SQ as it will allow them to fill the gap for credit to small business within the market. Though I believe it will be short lived as there is speculation that when the Fed tapers, they will also announce the lifting of capital restraints placed on Wells Fargo & Company (WFC).\nSource: Credit Suisse (Global Money Dispatch - 25 May 2021)\nThere is a fairly good probability that this will occur, given that early in 2020 the Fed had lifted these restraints to help small businesses via the PPP program and tapering has a history of upsetting the market. If this occurs, I suspect WFC will become a giant amongst the small business credit space once more and be a very tough competitor to SQ due to their extensive network and history in the space.\nBitcoin, Legislation & Gensler\nBitcoin has been making headlines as of 2H 2020 and much of 1H 2021 for good reason. It is gaining traction amongst retail traders and investors and has shown exceptional appreciation. Further, some minor banks have been interested in the medium although many banks and financial institutions have explicitly banned the purchase of Bitcoin using their services.\nThe primary reasons for their objection is more than likely to do with illicit activities, such as money laundering,terrorism,fake transaction volumes, and similar activities which I do not want to get into and neither do banks.\nConsequently, on the recent hype, many countries are now stepping in to regulate the use of Bitcoin, but others are going a step further and are enacting legislation to ban its use and mining, most notably,China and India.\nThis has had a negative impact on the price of Bitcoin since the ATHs in May 2021 of ~$65,000, retracing -46% since then.\nIt is also extremely negative for Bitcoin going forward as the majority of Bitcoin mining is done in China (~70% YTD) with Hashrates of mining being correlated to the price. Therefore if these recede on decreasing Chinese mining activity, price could surely follow, affecting SQ's Bitcoin holdings and future transaction volumes.\nSource: Cambridge University (Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index YTD)\nWhilst the SEC has come out and said that Bitcoin regulation is not on their agenda for 2021, Gary Gensler has warned investors to be cautious. Gensler is also has a long history on regulations to protect investors, and despite not putting Bitcoin on the agenda for 2021, I advise readers to study his history with respect to 2000 and 2008.\nLooking out further, this does not bode well for Bitcoin and SQ, generally. It is likely that there could be further regulation rather than adoption, negatively impacting its price, leading to a repeat of 2018 lower volumes as well as mining activity.\nGeneral Economy - The Worry for Retail\nSeparately, we could also be seeing a negative situation for retail going forward. Much of the recovery in retail as not been driven by \"pent up demand\" but mostly through subsidies issued throughout 2020 and the start of 2021. When examining the graph below, we can see that once you subtract transfer receipts (government stimulus cheques and employment benefits - red line), income is not what it used to be.\nSource: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Disposable Income vs Real Income minus Transfers vs Personal Savings vs Retail Trade Sales)\nAdditionally, we can see that much of the spikes in retail sales (purple) have been driven mainly through the stimulus cheques which bolstered disposable income (blue) and consumer savings (green), though now stimulus has ended and people are having to start to dig into their savings, which is dropped 54% month on month between March and April.\nThe consumer spending situation is made worse when examining U6 unemployment, which is considered to be the most revealing amongst economists as it includes unemployed, underemployed and discouraged job seekers. This, generally speaking, does not bode well for consumer discretionary spending patterns going forward.\nSource: Macrotrends.net (U6 Unemployment Rate vs U5 vs Official)\nFinally, the rising cost of food and energy, which for food I expect to continue, should hamper consumer discretionary spend going forward. I have previously written articles on The Mosaic Company (MOS)hereand The Andersons (ANDE)here, which outline my justification for this trend.\nIn relation to SQ, we can see their historical exposure to consumer discretionary spend based on end 2019 data. When taking into account figures from: retail; professional services, beauty and personal care, home and repair, leisure and entertainment, and casual use, the total exposure is approximately 59%.\nSource: Statista (Raynor de Best - GPV by Seller Industry Dec 2019)\nWhilst this may not impact its revenue figures substantially due to the weighting of bitcoin, I do expect this to undermine is gross profit figures going forward and negatively impact margins as stimulus further fades.\nFinancials\nBitcoin\nWhen examining the financials of SQ we can easily see that Bitcoin is the predominant factor driving its revenue growth (MRQ 69% of total revenue) of which its valuation is derived (see above Introduction section - SQ Price vs Revenue Segments; and Quantitative section - SQ Price correlation).\nFrom their Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter, page 12 they have stated that on March 31, 2021 the fair value of their holdings was $472 million. On this date the closing price was $58,918.83, or approximately 8,011 Bitcoins. They also state they initially invested $200 million into bitcoin during this period and Q4, so their average price is roughly $25,000 per Bitcoin.\nCurrently, the price of Bitcoin sits at approximately $34,600 and it also appears to be struggling to find traction, especially when you examine some other trends. For example, looking at search trends of \"Buy Bitcoin\" on Google Trends, this is clearly waning.\nSource: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - Worldwide 5 Yrs)\nAdditionally, when you align this data with stimulus payments it is clear there is a relationship between the two in 2H 2020, and much of the recent speculation could be driven by government subsidies.\nSource: USA.Gov (COVID Stimulus Cheque Dates)\nThe spike in searches occurs roughly around the time of the two latter government stimulus cheques with a lag of a few days to a few weeks.\nSource: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - USA 12 Months)\nThis also coincides with Bitcoin's price run up in December 2020 and January 2021, as well the failed rally in March and April 2021.\nSource: YCHARTS (Bitcoin Price 1 Yr)\nThus, in this example, if we have a continued sell off of -70%, which is similar to what occurred in 2018. We would be back at November 2020 Bitcoin prices of $20,000 approximately.\nThis is still feasible on the basis of dwindling volume, further legislation and declining hashrates. It could also be theorized that SQ may carry an impairment charge of $40 million, which would greatly affect operating income, net income and shareholder earnings and future estimates. Though this is purely theoretical without accounting for transactions in the current quarter, such as purchases or sales at or near ATHs.\nAdditionally, with the lack of stimulus payments going forward and tighter consumer discretionary spend, the revenue generated from Bitcoin may also decline as less money enters the space and volumes decline. Negatively impacting revenue estimates for SQ and subsequently their price and valuation.\nCash App\nOn the surface, it looks like Cash App is growing exponentially into a viable platform for users to transact, with more than 36 million monthly transacting active customers, up 50% YoY.\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter)\nHowever, this growth in Cash App may be unsustainable going forward, with SQ elaborating on this in their Quarterly filing notes:\n\n Cash App revenue benefited from growth in numbers of active Cash App customers and from \n government relief programs most recently passed into law in late December 2020 and in March 2021, as well as cumulative benefit from earlier stimulus programs passed in 2020. These programs provided additional stimulus relief and unemployment benefits which resulted in an increase in consumer spending and inflows into our Cash App ecosystem. Cash App revenue growth may not be sustained at the same levels in future quarters and may be impacted by the enactment of further stimulus relief and benefit programs, as well as the demand and market prices for bitcoin, amongst other factors.\n\n\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Filings - Page 49)\n\nPart of the issue with Cash App is theoretical continued use and future adoption. Much of the growth seen over the last year was predominantly fueled by stimulus payments through the Cash App ecosystem, and therefore by necessity given the circumstances.\nThe two sharp spikes in searches for the app occurred on:\n\nApril 12-18 2020\nJanuary 24-30 2021\n\nThese coincide with stimulus payments as they initially sent them and they gradually deposited them into people's accounts.\nSource: Google Trends (Cash App search terms - USA 5 Years)\nTherefore, as government stimulus payments end, and Bitcoin again fades from relevancy, and more people return to work and day-trade less, this could negatively impact user growth metrics going forward, impacting SQ revenue estimates, gross profit figures, and its earnings.\nFurther, there are a multitude of other more viable platforms, which another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend, has elaborated onhere.\nIt is also important to keep in mind how they define these users, a \"Transacting active Cash App customer\" is the following:\n\n ... has at least\n one financial transactionusing any product or service within Cash App during the specified period.\n\n\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter - Page 4)\n\nSo, if a customer received their wages from an employer, or unemployment benefit, into Cash App once per month, and transferred all of it to their bank account once per month, they are a \"transacting active Cash App customer\"...\nPerhaps a better quantifier of an \"active\" customer would be greater than 5 transactions.\nTechnicals\nExamining the technicals of SQ, it is clear that the stock is now ranging between $200 and $280, with several breakout attempts at $250 and 2 failed attempts near $300, showing several signs that momentum is dying out.\nSource: Author, with data from FINVIZ (SQ Chart)\nWhen examining dark pool order flows, there is a possibility for the current rally to continue as dark pools are at lows, which may likely continue into earnings by August. Although I would not get my hopes up unless some seriously good news occurs and Bitcoin rallies back to ATHs.\nSource: Squeezemetrics.com (SQ Dark Pools vs Implied Vol 2 Years)\nFrom the 13F filings, we can also see that many funds have reduced exposure and closed their positions, with fewer new positions being added. The Put to Call ratio is also becoming quite high, especially on a stock that has $100 bln market cap, signaling that we are not the only ones thinking the same thing.\nCaution is required though, as SQ's issues with Bitcoin are obviously becoming a consensus trade, and when those puts are lifted, gamma may turn positive and it could cause the stock to rally significantly.\nSource: Whalewisdom.com (SQ Funds Positioning)\nFurther, with relation to ARK ETFs, it is no surprise that there have been significant liquidity issues the last 6 months, and I agree with another Seeking Alpha contributor's thesisherethat we will see a reversion to the mean with respect to prices of stocks held in these ETFs. What can be noted is that Cathie has significantly reduced her exposure to SQ and that she may be picking her battles.\nSource: Cathiesark.com (SQ Shares Held - All ETFs)\nGiven the above information, this is a difficult company to be short. It will either payoff enormously, or rip your face off due to its volatility. Additionally there are many funds wanting some small level of exposure to a company with Bitcoin on the financial statements. Therefore, if you were to trade this as a short at your own risk, discretion is advised and you should always pick your battles.\nPrice Targets\nOn the basis of volatility through SQ's ATR it is possible that SQ could move to a low of approximately $100 by the end of the year, moving in favor 40% of the time. This aligns with my year end 2021 price if you remove Bitcoin entirely from the equation.\nSource: Author (SQ ATR Calculator)\nHowever, it would not be sensible to do this as it is part of their revenue for the time being, no matter how high Bitcoin volumes were in the start of 2021 and how low they may be at the end of the year.\nI do expect the stock to fall again and retest $200, possibly breaking down to $160. Though it is very difficult to determine a valuation with SQ, mainly because the valuation is derived from Bitcoin revenues, and also the perceived value by funds and the market in the future adoption of the asset.\nIf the market begins to perceive Bitcoin again as irrelevant, I would expect SQ to slowly sell off to between $150 and $160 (-37% downside) with a low probability that it will rally past $300 (25% upside).\nRisks\nWith respect to SQ the following risks should be noted.\nThe company is growing, whether you like SQ or not. The main questions are: Will the market value Bitcoin on any realistic basis? How much is it growing with and without Bitcoin? What is the potential future growth with and without Bitcoin? And does the market believe it, or for that matter care?\nIf the Bitcoin fades from relevancy, and judging by Google Trends, it is more likely than it is not, it is not outlandish to assume that SQ will suffer as a result of this and over the 2H 2021 and take a substantial hit to revenue estimates. However, if Bitcoin adoption increases and negative news fades, since this is a growth company, it could simply continue rallying.\nFurther, consumer spending patterns are producing mixed data, and above I have presented a bear case. This could easily turn the other way if people's behavior changes, such as applying for jobs which will increase spending in the economy and hopefully produce small business growth and increase small business optimism and expansion, which is very beneficial for SQ as a cyclical business in the payment processing space.\nAgain, caution is necessary, though I do think that future growth of the company is priced in and there is a higher risk to holders of SQ to the downside than to the upside.\nSummary\nSQ is a high growth company with some potential positive points in the long run; however, its valuation is highly questionable due to its high revenue estimates predominantly derived from Bitcoin transactions and not bottom-line earnings growth.\nFrom a quantitative perspective, it looks good amongst its peers but upon further examination it appears to be extremely overvalued as future growth, at least for 2021, may be derived from Bitcoin. Further, its Cash App adoption statistics may not continue to see the same run rate going forward without continued government stimulus.\nAdditionally, it faces several potential macroeconomic hurdles with respect to small business exposure, lending competitors, consumer transaction competitors, Bitcoin legislation and softening retail demand.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":149,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127918125,"gmtCreate":1624813124667,"gmtModify":1633948417020,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127918125","repostId":"2146090006","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2146090006","pubTimestamp":1624755315,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2146090006?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 08:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2146090006","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"These growth and value stocks are begging to be bought by investors.","content":"<p>When Warren Buffett buys or sells a stock, Wall Street and retail investors tend to pay very close attention. That's because the Oracle of Omaha's track record is virtually unsurpassed. Since taking the reins of <b>Berkshire Hathaway</b> (NYSE:BRK.A)(NYSE:BRK.B) in the mid-1960s, Buffett's company has averaged an annual return of 20%. This works out to an aggregate gain of greater than 2,800,000% for its Class A shares.</p>\n<p>Although Buffett isn't perfect, he and his investing team have a knack for identifying attractively valued businesses that have clear competitive advantages. As we prepare to move into the second half of 2021, the following five Buffett stocks stand out as those that should be bought hand over fist.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1077c8372814d2b8150e933b4c608005\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Image source: The Motley Fool.</span></p>\n<h2>Amazon</h2>\n<p>Even though Buffett's investing lieutenants, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler, are the architects behind Berkshire Hathaway's stake in <b>Amazon</b> (NASDAQ:AMZN), it's arguably the Buffett stock that should be bought most aggressively ahead of the second half of the year.</p>\n<p>As most folks probably know, Amazon is an e-commerce juggernaut. Based on an April report from eMarketer, the company effectively controls $0.40 of every $1 spent online in the United States. It's also pivoted its online retail popularity into signing up more than 200 million people to its Prime program worldwide. The fees Amazon collects from Prime help it to undercut its competition on price. And it certainly doesn't hurt that Prime members tend to spend many multiples more than non-Prime shoppers during the course of the year.</p>\n<p>But it's the company's cloud infrastructure service, Amazon Web Services (AWS), that has truly budded into a star. Since the operating margins associated with cloud infrastructure are considerably higher than what Amazon nets from retail and advertising, AWS' growth is leading to a surge in operating cash flow. If investors were to continue to pay the midpoint of Amazon's operating cash flow multiple over the past decade, it could hit $10,000 a share by 2025.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b18b49b2b35da2fc49e0a83b883d1c22\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Bristol Myers Squibb</h2>\n<p>Pharmaceutical stocks are money machines, and none looks to be more attractive on a valuation basis than <b>Bristol Myers Squibb</b> (NYSE:BMY).</p>\n<p>One reason to be excited about this drug developer is its organic growth potential. Eliquis, which was co-developed with <b>Pfizer</b>, has blossomed into the world's leading oral anticoagulant, with sales expected to surpass $10 billion in 2021. Meanwhile, dozens of additional clinical trials are underway for cancer immunotherapy Opdivo, which generated $7 billion in sales last year. This offers plenty of opportunity to expand Opdivo's label and pump up its pricing power.</p>\n<p>Another reason Bristol Myers Squibb is such an intriguing stock is its November 2019 acquisition of cancer and immunology company Celgene. Buying Celgene brought the blockbuster multiple-myeloma drug Revlimid into the fold. Revlimid has sustainably grown its annual sales by a double-digit percentage for more than a decade, with label expansion, longer duration of use, and pricing power all playing a role. This key treatment, which topped $12 billion in sales last year, is protected from a full onslaught of generic competition until early 2026. That means Bristol Myers will be rolling in the dough for another five years, at minimum.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b152e369d7c967dcbc926192ee888c1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"531\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Mastercard</h2>\n<p>Everyone seems to be looking for the smartest recovery play from the pandemic. Payment processor <b>Mastercard</b> (NYSE:MA) might well be the safest way to take advantage of a steady uptick in consumer and enterprise spending.</p>\n<p>Mastercard isn't a cheap stock by any means -- at 36 times Wall Street's forward-year earnings consensus -- but it benefits from a simple numbers game. While economic contractions and recessions are inevitable, these periods of turbulence tend to be short-lived. By comparison, economic expansions often last many years. Buying into Mastercard allows investors to take full advantage of these long periods of economic expansion and robust spending. Plus, it doesn't hurt that Mastercard has the second-highest share of credit-card network purchase volume in the U.S., the leading market for consumption.</p>\n<p>Investors can also sleep easy with the understanding that Mastercard strictly sticks to payment facilitation. Even though some of its peers also lend, and are therefore able to generate interest income and fees during bull markets, Mastercard has avoided becoming a lender. It's something you'll truly appreciate when a recession strikes. Whereas most financial stocks will be forced to set aside capital to cover credit or loan delinquencies, Mastercard won't have to. This is a big reason it bounces back from recessions quicker than most financial stocks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e4e1a1fe028efa4c966b66ef2cd466f5\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Teva Pharmaceutical Industries</h2>\n<p>If you have an appetite for turnaround plays, brand-name and generic-drug developer <b>Teva Pharmaceutical Industries</b> (NYSE:TEVA) is the stock to buy hand over fist for the second half of 2021. Like Amazon, it's a stock that was added to Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio by either Combs or Weschler and not Buffett.</p>\n<p>While there's no denying that Teva has its fair share of hurdles to overcome, the company's turnaround-focused CEO, Kare Schultz, has been a blessing. Since taking the helm less than four years ago, Schultz has helped shave off more than $10 billion in net debt, and he's overseen the reduction of roughly $3 billion in annual operating expenses. There's more work to do to improve Teva's balance sheet, but the company is very clearly on much firmer ground than it was back in 2016-2017.</p>\n<p>Schultz also has the potential to play peacemaker for a number of outstanding lawsuits targeting Teva's role in the opioid crisis. If this litigation can be resolved with minimal cash outlay, Teva's valuation could soar. At just 4 times the company's projected earnings in 2021, Teva is about as cheap as a healthcare stock can get.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44a30c4dfd6886a29e22d3c6558c3e56\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Bank of America</h2>\n<p>Lastly, bank stock <b>Bank of America</b> (NYSE:BAC) has the look of a company that can be confidently bought hand over fist for the second half of 2021.</p>\n<p>For much of the past decade, the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates at or near historic lows. That's meant less in the way of interest income for banks. But the latest update from the nation's central bank suggests that interest rates could begin creeping up in 2023, a year earlier than previously forecast. Bank of America is the most interest-sensitive money-center bank. According to its first-quarter investor presentation, BofA would generate $8.3 billion in net interest income on a 100-basis-point shift in the interest rate yield curve. Translation: Bank of America's profits should rocket higher beginning in 2023-2024.</p>\n<p>At the same time, BofA has done an outstanding job of controlling its costs and improving its operating efficiency. Investments in digitization have resulted in higher mobile app and digital banking use, which is allowing the company to consolidate some of its branches. Even with its shares at a 13-year high, Bank of America has plenty left in the tank.</p>","source":"fool_stock","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>5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021</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\">\n5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 08:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/26/buffett-stocks-buy-hand-over-fist-second-half-2021/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>When Warren Buffett buys or sells a stock, Wall Street and retail investors tend to pay very close attention. That's because the Oracle of Omaha's track record is virtually unsurpassed. Since taking ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/26/buffett-stocks-buy-hand-over-fist-second-half-2021/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","BMY":"施贵宝","BAC":"美国银行","TEVA":"梯瓦制药","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","MA":"万事达"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/26/buffett-stocks-buy-hand-over-fist-second-half-2021/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2146090006","content_text":"When Warren Buffett buys or sells a stock, Wall Street and retail investors tend to pay very close attention. That's because the Oracle of Omaha's track record is virtually unsurpassed. Since taking the reins of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A)(NYSE:BRK.B) in the mid-1960s, Buffett's company has averaged an annual return of 20%. This works out to an aggregate gain of greater than 2,800,000% for its Class A shares.\nAlthough Buffett isn't perfect, he and his investing team have a knack for identifying attractively valued businesses that have clear competitive advantages. As we prepare to move into the second half of 2021, the following five Buffett stocks stand out as those that should be bought hand over fist.\nBerkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Image source: The Motley Fool.\nAmazon\nEven though Buffett's investing lieutenants, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler, are the architects behind Berkshire Hathaway's stake in Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), it's arguably the Buffett stock that should be bought most aggressively ahead of the second half of the year.\nAs most folks probably know, Amazon is an e-commerce juggernaut. Based on an April report from eMarketer, the company effectively controls $0.40 of every $1 spent online in the United States. It's also pivoted its online retail popularity into signing up more than 200 million people to its Prime program worldwide. The fees Amazon collects from Prime help it to undercut its competition on price. And it certainly doesn't hurt that Prime members tend to spend many multiples more than non-Prime shoppers during the course of the year.\nBut it's the company's cloud infrastructure service, Amazon Web Services (AWS), that has truly budded into a star. Since the operating margins associated with cloud infrastructure are considerably higher than what Amazon nets from retail and advertising, AWS' growth is leading to a surge in operating cash flow. If investors were to continue to pay the midpoint of Amazon's operating cash flow multiple over the past decade, it could hit $10,000 a share by 2025.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nBristol Myers Squibb\nPharmaceutical stocks are money machines, and none looks to be more attractive on a valuation basis than Bristol Myers Squibb (NYSE:BMY).\nOne reason to be excited about this drug developer is its organic growth potential. Eliquis, which was co-developed with Pfizer, has blossomed into the world's leading oral anticoagulant, with sales expected to surpass $10 billion in 2021. Meanwhile, dozens of additional clinical trials are underway for cancer immunotherapy Opdivo, which generated $7 billion in sales last year. This offers plenty of opportunity to expand Opdivo's label and pump up its pricing power.\nAnother reason Bristol Myers Squibb is such an intriguing stock is its November 2019 acquisition of cancer and immunology company Celgene. Buying Celgene brought the blockbuster multiple-myeloma drug Revlimid into the fold. Revlimid has sustainably grown its annual sales by a double-digit percentage for more than a decade, with label expansion, longer duration of use, and pricing power all playing a role. This key treatment, which topped $12 billion in sales last year, is protected from a full onslaught of generic competition until early 2026. That means Bristol Myers will be rolling in the dough for another five years, at minimum.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nMastercard\nEveryone seems to be looking for the smartest recovery play from the pandemic. Payment processor Mastercard (NYSE:MA) might well be the safest way to take advantage of a steady uptick in consumer and enterprise spending.\nMastercard isn't a cheap stock by any means -- at 36 times Wall Street's forward-year earnings consensus -- but it benefits from a simple numbers game. While economic contractions and recessions are inevitable, these periods of turbulence tend to be short-lived. By comparison, economic expansions often last many years. Buying into Mastercard allows investors to take full advantage of these long periods of economic expansion and robust spending. Plus, it doesn't hurt that Mastercard has the second-highest share of credit-card network purchase volume in the U.S., the leading market for consumption.\nInvestors can also sleep easy with the understanding that Mastercard strictly sticks to payment facilitation. Even though some of its peers also lend, and are therefore able to generate interest income and fees during bull markets, Mastercard has avoided becoming a lender. It's something you'll truly appreciate when a recession strikes. Whereas most financial stocks will be forced to set aside capital to cover credit or loan delinquencies, Mastercard won't have to. This is a big reason it bounces back from recessions quicker than most financial stocks.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nTeva Pharmaceutical Industries\nIf you have an appetite for turnaround plays, brand-name and generic-drug developer Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (NYSE:TEVA) is the stock to buy hand over fist for the second half of 2021. Like Amazon, it's a stock that was added to Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio by either Combs or Weschler and not Buffett.\nWhile there's no denying that Teva has its fair share of hurdles to overcome, the company's turnaround-focused CEO, Kare Schultz, has been a blessing. Since taking the helm less than four years ago, Schultz has helped shave off more than $10 billion in net debt, and he's overseen the reduction of roughly $3 billion in annual operating expenses. There's more work to do to improve Teva's balance sheet, but the company is very clearly on much firmer ground than it was back in 2016-2017.\nSchultz also has the potential to play peacemaker for a number of outstanding lawsuits targeting Teva's role in the opioid crisis. If this litigation can be resolved with minimal cash outlay, Teva's valuation could soar. At just 4 times the company's projected earnings in 2021, Teva is about as cheap as a healthcare stock can get.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nBank of America\nLastly, bank stock Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) has the look of a company that can be confidently bought hand over fist for the second half of 2021.\nFor much of the past decade, the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates at or near historic lows. That's meant less in the way of interest income for banks. But the latest update from the nation's central bank suggests that interest rates could begin creeping up in 2023, a year earlier than previously forecast. Bank of America is the most interest-sensitive money-center bank. According to its first-quarter investor presentation, BofA would generate $8.3 billion in net interest income on a 100-basis-point shift in the interest rate yield curve. Translation: Bank of America's profits should rocket higher beginning in 2023-2024.\nAt the same time, BofA has done an outstanding job of controlling its costs and improving its operating efficiency. Investments in digitization have resulted in higher mobile app and digital banking use, which is allowing the company to consolidate some of its branches. Even with its shares at a 13-year high, Bank of America has plenty left in the tank.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127085210,"gmtCreate":1624803714430,"gmtModify":1633948490264,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Hello","listText":"&nbsp;Hello","text":"Hello","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127085210","repostId":"1137119316","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1137119316","pubTimestamp":1624754401,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1137119316?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 08:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137119316","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.With Ford  launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO  will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.</li>\n <li>The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.</li>\n <li>NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5033fa117d7852799244b8275bc1000f\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"886\"><span>peterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p>With Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.</p>\n<p><b>Ford vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up</b></p>\n<p>Although there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing&nbsp;$30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.</p>\n<p><b>Market opportunity</b></p>\n<p>In 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b48c23b32134542f51227d9b1b612887\" tg-width=\"1083\" tg-height=\"863\"><span>(Source: Wikipedia)</span></p>\n<p>China, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is&nbsp;on the cusp of entering the European market&nbsp;in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.</p>\n<p>Beijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a&nbsp;twenty percent share&nbsp;of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9871e44eaf69adb27151425887870ace\" tg-width=\"739\" tg-height=\"454\"><span>(Source:Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>Turning to growth projections.</p>\n<p>With more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61d19dff2f34e2d8828aca854e85d84a\" tg-width=\"825\" tg-height=\"565\"><span>(Source:McKinsey)</span></p>\n<p>Since China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Scale and manufacturing competence</b></p>\n<p>Ford has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.</p>\n<p>Since NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.</p>\n<p>Winner here: Ford.</p>\n<p><b>Differentiation and BaaS revenue model</b></p>\n<p>Both Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.</p>\n<p>Ford is&nbsp;forming a joint venture&nbsp;with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has&nbsp;formed its own joint venture&nbsp;to secure battery supply.</p>\n<p>The difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.</p>\n<p>The BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.</p>\n<p>Ford and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.</p>\n<p>Battery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c42acb75905affe7570a2f399ea3192f\" tg-width=\"758\" tg-height=\"449\"><span>(Source: Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>The “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Sales growth and valuation</b></p>\n<p>Ford’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.</p>\n<p>Ford's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df5a0a393e44ed74241c5effcdd92350\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!</p>\n<p>Due to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/817605c6b1e82c03d0473ea570d32b8f\" tg-width=\"506\" tg-height=\"406\"><span>(Source: Author)</span></p>\n<p><b>NIO has larger risks...</b></p>\n<p>NIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.</p>\n<p><b>Final verdict</b></p>\n<p>NIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.</p>\n<p>Ford’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.</p>\n<p>If you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.</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>Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict</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\">\nFord Or NIO? The Final Verdict\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 08:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"F":"福特汽车","NIO":"蔚来"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1137119316","content_text":"Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.\nNIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.\n\npeterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images\nWith Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.\nFord vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up\nAlthough there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing $30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.\nMarket opportunity\nIn 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.\n(Source: Wikipedia)\nChina, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is on the cusp of entering the European market in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.\nBeijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a twenty percent share of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.\n(Source:Schroders)\nTurning to growth projections.\nWith more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.\n(Source:McKinsey)\nSince China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.\nScale and manufacturing competence\nFord has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.\nSince NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.\nWinner here: Ford.\nDifferentiation and BaaS revenue model\nBoth Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.\nFord is forming a joint venture with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has formed its own joint venture to secure battery supply.\nThe difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.\nThe BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.\nFord and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.\nBattery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.\n(Source: Schroders)\nThe “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.\nSales growth and valuation\nFord’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.\nFord's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.\nData by YCharts\nThe difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!\nDue to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.\n(Source: Author)\nNIO has larger risks...\nNIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.\nFinal verdict\nNIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.\nFord’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.\nIf you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":102,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127085337,"gmtCreate":1624803689129,"gmtModify":1633948490608,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127085337","repostId":"1137119316","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1137119316","pubTimestamp":1624754401,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1137119316?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 08:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137119316","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.With Ford  launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO  will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.</li>\n <li>The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.</li>\n <li>NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5033fa117d7852799244b8275bc1000f\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"886\"><span>peterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p>With Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.</p>\n<p><b>Ford vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up</b></p>\n<p>Although there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing&nbsp;$30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.</p>\n<p><b>Market opportunity</b></p>\n<p>In 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b48c23b32134542f51227d9b1b612887\" tg-width=\"1083\" tg-height=\"863\"><span>(Source: Wikipedia)</span></p>\n<p>China, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is&nbsp;on the cusp of entering the European market&nbsp;in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.</p>\n<p>Beijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a&nbsp;twenty percent share&nbsp;of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9871e44eaf69adb27151425887870ace\" tg-width=\"739\" tg-height=\"454\"><span>(Source:Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>Turning to growth projections.</p>\n<p>With more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61d19dff2f34e2d8828aca854e85d84a\" tg-width=\"825\" tg-height=\"565\"><span>(Source:McKinsey)</span></p>\n<p>Since China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Scale and manufacturing competence</b></p>\n<p>Ford has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.</p>\n<p>Since NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.</p>\n<p>Winner here: Ford.</p>\n<p><b>Differentiation and BaaS revenue model</b></p>\n<p>Both Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.</p>\n<p>Ford is&nbsp;forming a joint venture&nbsp;with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has&nbsp;formed its own joint venture&nbsp;to secure battery supply.</p>\n<p>The difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.</p>\n<p>The BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.</p>\n<p>Ford and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.</p>\n<p>Battery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c42acb75905affe7570a2f399ea3192f\" tg-width=\"758\" tg-height=\"449\"><span>(Source: Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>The “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Sales growth and valuation</b></p>\n<p>Ford’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.</p>\n<p>Ford's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df5a0a393e44ed74241c5effcdd92350\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!</p>\n<p>Due to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/817605c6b1e82c03d0473ea570d32b8f\" tg-width=\"506\" tg-height=\"406\"><span>(Source: Author)</span></p>\n<p><b>NIO has larger risks...</b></p>\n<p>NIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.</p>\n<p><b>Final verdict</b></p>\n<p>NIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.</p>\n<p>Ford’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.</p>\n<p>If you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.</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>Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict</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\">\nFord Or NIO? The Final Verdict\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 08:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"F":"福特汽车","NIO":"蔚来"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1137119316","content_text":"Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.\nNIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.\n\npeterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images\nWith Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.\nFord vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up\nAlthough there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing $30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.\nMarket opportunity\nIn 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.\n(Source: Wikipedia)\nChina, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is on the cusp of entering the European market in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.\nBeijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a twenty percent share of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.\n(Source:Schroders)\nTurning to growth projections.\nWith more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.\n(Source:McKinsey)\nSince China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.\nScale and manufacturing competence\nFord has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.\nSince NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.\nWinner here: Ford.\nDifferentiation and BaaS revenue model\nBoth Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.\nFord is forming a joint venture with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has formed its own joint venture to secure battery supply.\nThe difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.\nThe BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.\nFord and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.\nBattery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.\n(Source: Schroders)\nThe “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.\nSales growth and valuation\nFord’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.\nFord's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.\nData by YCharts\nThe difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!\nDue to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.\n(Source: Author)\nNIO has larger risks...\nNIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.\nFinal verdict\nNIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.\nFord’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.\nIf you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":6,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127082991,"gmtCreate":1624803604313,"gmtModify":1633948491642,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi//<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/U/3578041155490573\">@Ontariomario</a>:Hi","listText":"Hi//<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/U/3578041155490573\">@Ontariomario</a>:Hi","text":"Hi//@Ontariomario:Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127082991","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":45,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125734111,"gmtCreate":1624692528233,"gmtModify":1633949495676,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/125734111","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":101,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122324597,"gmtCreate":1624599038719,"gmtModify":1633950678992,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122324597","repostId":"1180366049","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1180366049","pubTimestamp":1624598362,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1180366049?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-25 13:19","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Panasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1180366049","media":"Reuters","summary":"TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion","content":"<p>TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion yen ($3.61 billion) in the year ended March, a spokesperson for the Japanese company said on Friday.</p>\n<p>The sale comes as the bicycles-to-hair dryers conglomerate is seeking to reduce its dependence on Tesla and raise cash for investing in growth.</p>\n<p>Panasonic’s battery business is dominated by Elon Musk’s Tesla, but the two firms have had a tense relationship at times with executives trading barbs publicly.</p>\n<p>Panasonic bought 1.4 million Tesla shares at $21.15 each in 2010 for about $30 million. That stake was worth $730 million at the end of March 2020. The shares have gained almost seven fold since then and closed up 3.5% at $679.82 apiece on Thursday.</p>\n<p>“The impact of crypto assets may have pushed Tesla’s share price above its intrinsic value, making it a good time to sell,” said Hideki Yasuda, an analyst at Ace Research Institute.</p>\n<p>Musk said in February his firm bought bitcoin and would take payment in the cryptocurrency, a decision he later reversed, and his comments on Twitter drive swings in the price of such assets.</p>\n<p>While Panasonic gave financial backing to Tesla when it was smaller, the automaker’s expansion means there’s no need for capital ties, Yasuda added. Panasonic’s shares were up 4.2% on Friday.</p>\n<p>The stake sale will not affect the partnership with Tesla, the Panasonic spokesperson said, but comes as the automaker is diversifying its own battery supply chain.</p>\n<p>Tesla has struck deals with South Korea’s LG Energy Solution, a unit of LG Chem, and China’s CATL, with Reuters reporting the latter is planning a plant in Shanghai near the automaker’s production base.</p>\n<p>Panasonic said earlier this year it would buy the shareshereof U.S. supply-chain software company Blue Yonder that it does not already own, in a $7.1 billion deal. Its biggest such deal in a decade, the price raised the eyebrows of analysts who pointed to the firm's spotty M&amp;A track record.</p>","source":"lsy1601381805984","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>Panasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments</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\">\nPanasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 13:19 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.reuters.com/article/panasonic-tesla/update-4-panasonic-sells-tesla-stake-for-3-6-bln-may-use-cash-for-strategic-investments-idUSL2N2O6374><strong>Reuters</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion yen ($3.61 billion) in the year ended March, a spokesperson for the Japanese company said on Friday...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.reuters.com/article/panasonic-tesla/update-4-panasonic-sells-tesla-stake-for-3-6-bln-may-use-cash-for-strategic-investments-idUSL2N2O6374\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉","PCRFY":"松下"},"source_url":"https://www.reuters.com/article/panasonic-tesla/update-4-panasonic-sells-tesla-stake-for-3-6-bln-may-use-cash-for-strategic-investments-idUSL2N2O6374","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1180366049","content_text":"TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion yen ($3.61 billion) in the year ended March, a spokesperson for the Japanese company said on Friday.\nThe sale comes as the bicycles-to-hair dryers conglomerate is seeking to reduce its dependence on Tesla and raise cash for investing in growth.\nPanasonic’s battery business is dominated by Elon Musk’s Tesla, but the two firms have had a tense relationship at times with executives trading barbs publicly.\nPanasonic bought 1.4 million Tesla shares at $21.15 each in 2010 for about $30 million. That stake was worth $730 million at the end of March 2020. The shares have gained almost seven fold since then and closed up 3.5% at $679.82 apiece on Thursday.\n“The impact of crypto assets may have pushed Tesla’s share price above its intrinsic value, making it a good time to sell,” said Hideki Yasuda, an analyst at Ace Research Institute.\nMusk said in February his firm bought bitcoin and would take payment in the cryptocurrency, a decision he later reversed, and his comments on Twitter drive swings in the price of such assets.\nWhile Panasonic gave financial backing to Tesla when it was smaller, the automaker’s expansion means there’s no need for capital ties, Yasuda added. Panasonic’s shares were up 4.2% on Friday.\nThe stake sale will not affect the partnership with Tesla, the Panasonic spokesperson said, but comes as the automaker is diversifying its own battery supply chain.\nTesla has struck deals with South Korea’s LG Energy Solution, a unit of LG Chem, and China’s CATL, with Reuters reporting the latter is planning a plant in Shanghai near the automaker’s production base.\nPanasonic said earlier this year it would buy the shareshereof U.S. supply-chain software company Blue Yonder that it does not already own, in a $7.1 billion deal. Its biggest such deal in a decade, the price raised the eyebrows of analysts who pointed to the firm's spotty M&A track record.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":118,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128753547,"gmtCreate":1624533336589,"gmtModify":1634004790682,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128753547","repostId":"1112034265","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1112034265","pubTimestamp":1624532571,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1112034265?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-24 19:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Deutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1112034265","media":"cnbc","summary":"MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, accord","content":"<div>\n<p>MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, according to Deutsche Bank.\nShares of the casino and hotel company have risen nearly 37% year to date, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"cnbc_highlight","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>Deutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins</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\">\nDeutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-24 19:02 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, according to Deutsche Bank.\nShares of the casino and hotel company have risen nearly 37% year to date, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"MGM":"美高梅"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1112034265","content_text":"MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, according to Deutsche Bank.\nShares of the casino and hotel company have risen nearly 37% year to date, thanks in part to the economic reopening and the continued growth of online gambling.\nAnalyst Carlo Santarelli upgraded the casino stock to buy from hold in a note entitled, “Margins to surprise to the upside.”\nOne reason for profit expansion will be lower labor costs, according to Deutsche Bank.\n“We believe the next leg of the stock story for MGM is likely to be one of improving margins that extend well beyond the ‘over 30%’ targets management has discussed as the LV Strip goal, as well as the 32.5% peak margins of 2006,” the note said.\nAdditionally Santarelli cited “continued improvements in Las Vegas, with the outlook further buoyed by improving group trends and a Raiders season with fans in the stadium.”\nTo be sure, the analyst made the upgrade despite becoming more bearish on the valuation of MGM’s online betting unit.\n“We see out year Consensus as being too low and, accordingly, the perceived embedded sports / iCasino valuation as too high,” the note said.\nDeutsche Bank hiked its price target on the stock to $54 per share from $42. The new target is 25% above where the stock closed on Wednesday.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":85,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123879072,"gmtCreate":1624418192396,"gmtModify":1634006391186,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good morning&nbsp;","listText":"Good morning&nbsp;","text":"Good morning","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123879072","repostId":"2145664330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":60,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123870037,"gmtCreate":1624418141629,"gmtModify":1634006391975,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like pls&nbsp;","listText":"Like pls&nbsp;","text":"Like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123870037","repostId":"2145068314","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":65,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123847226,"gmtCreate":1624418117665,"gmtModify":1634006392442,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Please like&nbsp;","listText":"Please like&nbsp;","text":"Please like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123847226","repostId":"2145069164","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145069164","pubTimestamp":1624417950,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2145069164?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 11:12","market":"sg","language":"en","title":"Bitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145069164","media":"The Straits Times","summary":"NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time si","content":"<div>\n<p>NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time since January and erasing gains for the year before recouping the day's losses.\nThe original ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"straits_highlight","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>Bitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold</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\">\nBitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 11:12 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold><strong>The Straits Times</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time since January and erasing gains for the year before recouping the day's losses.\nThe original ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GBTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust"},"source_url":"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145069164","content_text":"NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time since January and erasing gains for the year before recouping the day's losses.\nThe original cryptocurrency closed out the New York trading session on Tuesday (June 22) marginally higher at around US$32,900, after falling as much as 12 per cent.\nThe wild ride continued subsequently, since Bitcoin trades around the clock, with the digital token tracking slightly lower again. It has lost more than 50 per cent from its mid-April high of almost US$65,000.\nThe coin started 2021 trading around US$29,000 following a fourfold increase last year.\nSuch trading signals \"that Bitcoin traders could find themselves in choppy waters for weeks to come\", said Mr Sean Rooney, head of research at crypto asset manager Valkyrie Investments.\nChart-watchers said Bitcoin, which failed to retake US$40,000 last week, could have a tough time finding support in the US$20,000 range following its drop below US$30,000. Still, Bitcoin had prior to Tuesday breached US$30,000 during at least five separate instances this year but recuperated to trade above that level each time.\n\"Any meaningful break below US$30,000 is going to make a lot of momentum players to throw in the towel,\" said Mr Matt Maley, chief market strategist for Miller Tabak + Co. \"Therefore, even if Bitcoin is going to change the world over the long term, it does not mean it cannot fall back into the teens over the short term.\"\nIt is a remarkable comedown for the digital asset which just weeks ago was trekking higher amid a warmer embrace from Wall Street as well as retail investors. But negative press about its energy use, brought on largely by Tesla's Elon Musk, as well as a clampdown from China have pushed it lower in recent weeks.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":39,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120302240,"gmtCreate":1624295046380,"gmtModify":1634008196927,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hello&nbsp;","listText":"Hello&nbsp;","text":"Hello","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/120302240","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":14,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120301387,"gmtCreate":1624294863549,"gmtModify":1634008200110,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Please like&nbsp;","listText":"Please like&nbsp;","text":"Please like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/120301387","repostId":"1146982088","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146982088","pubTimestamp":1624259620,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1146982088?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 15:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146982088","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpect","content":"<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e3c93e7ae558cd9f2fdb7e4a2769f1\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"377\">What does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP&nbsp; facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.</p>\n<p>But what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8b99df7af1731b4bdcbcf072dcf39ce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\">The problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:</p>\n<blockquote>\n When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Bottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"<i>the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"</i></p>\n<p>In retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0fba18d7808300abc3bdf4ffaa3d5fb6\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\">Needless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"<b>the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:</b><b><u>the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market</u></b><b>).\"</b></p>\n<p>What he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did not<i>reward</i>allocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.</p>\n<p>In other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fed<i><b>also</b></i>made a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “<b>yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"</b></p>\n<p>He's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),<b>5bps is too generous</b>, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo rate<b>will upset the state of \"singularity\"</b>and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –<b>at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"</b></p>\n<p>Indeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,<b>and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.</b>They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.<b>So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bf593f7b1d2d665f39384ed6a998d3bf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"403\">To help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves with<i><b>too few</b></i>intraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.</p>\n<p>This process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.</p>\n<p>And here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,<b>some bond-heavy banks cannot.</b>As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who can<i><b>not</b></i>handle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"</p>\n<p>Bottom line:<i><b>whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.</b></i></p>\n<p>Or, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,<b>in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"</b>While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,<b>the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.</b></p>\n<p>Bottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"</p>\n<p>Translation:&nbsp;<b>by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.</b></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>Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis</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\">\nPowell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 15:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1146982088","content_text":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.\nWhat does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP  facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.\nBut what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.\nThe problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:\n\n When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.\n\nBottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"\nIn retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.\nNeedless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market).\"\nWhat he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did notrewardallocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.\nIn other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fedalsomade a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"\nHe's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),5bps is too generous, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo ratewill upset the state of \"singularity\"and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"\nIndeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.\nTo help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves withtoo fewintraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.\nThis process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.\nAnd here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,some bond-heavy banks cannot.As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who cannothandle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"\nBottom line:whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.\nOr, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.\nBottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"\nTranslation: by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":9,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":122324597,"gmtCreate":1624599038719,"gmtModify":1633950678992,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122324597","repostId":"1180366049","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1180366049","pubTimestamp":1624598362,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1180366049?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-25 13:19","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Panasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1180366049","media":"Reuters","summary":"TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion","content":"<p>TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion yen ($3.61 billion) in the year ended March, a spokesperson for the Japanese company said on Friday.</p>\n<p>The sale comes as the bicycles-to-hair dryers conglomerate is seeking to reduce its dependence on Tesla and raise cash for investing in growth.</p>\n<p>Panasonic’s battery business is dominated by Elon Musk’s Tesla, but the two firms have had a tense relationship at times with executives trading barbs publicly.</p>\n<p>Panasonic bought 1.4 million Tesla shares at $21.15 each in 2010 for about $30 million. That stake was worth $730 million at the end of March 2020. The shares have gained almost seven fold since then and closed up 3.5% at $679.82 apiece on Thursday.</p>\n<p>“The impact of crypto assets may have pushed Tesla’s share price above its intrinsic value, making it a good time to sell,” said Hideki Yasuda, an analyst at Ace Research Institute.</p>\n<p>Musk said in February his firm bought bitcoin and would take payment in the cryptocurrency, a decision he later reversed, and his comments on Twitter drive swings in the price of such assets.</p>\n<p>While Panasonic gave financial backing to Tesla when it was smaller, the automaker’s expansion means there’s no need for capital ties, Yasuda added. Panasonic’s shares were up 4.2% on Friday.</p>\n<p>The stake sale will not affect the partnership with Tesla, the Panasonic spokesperson said, but comes as the automaker is diversifying its own battery supply chain.</p>\n<p>Tesla has struck deals with South Korea’s LG Energy Solution, a unit of LG Chem, and China’s CATL, with Reuters reporting the latter is planning a plant in Shanghai near the automaker’s production base.</p>\n<p>Panasonic said earlier this year it would buy the shareshereof U.S. supply-chain software company Blue Yonder that it does not already own, in a $7.1 billion deal. Its biggest such deal in a decade, the price raised the eyebrows of analysts who pointed to the firm's spotty M&amp;A track record.</p>","source":"lsy1601381805984","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>Panasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments</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\">\nPanasonic sells Tesla stake for $3.6 billion, may use cash for strategic investments\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 13:19 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.reuters.com/article/panasonic-tesla/update-4-panasonic-sells-tesla-stake-for-3-6-bln-may-use-cash-for-strategic-investments-idUSL2N2O6374><strong>Reuters</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion yen ($3.61 billion) in the year ended March, a spokesperson for the Japanese company said on Friday...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.reuters.com/article/panasonic-tesla/update-4-panasonic-sells-tesla-stake-for-3-6-bln-may-use-cash-for-strategic-investments-idUSL2N2O6374\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉","PCRFY":"松下"},"source_url":"https://www.reuters.com/article/panasonic-tesla/update-4-panasonic-sells-tesla-stake-for-3-6-bln-may-use-cash-for-strategic-investments-idUSL2N2O6374","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1180366049","content_text":"TOKYO (Reuters) -Panasonic Corp sold its stake in electric car maker Tesla Inc for about 400 billion yen ($3.61 billion) in the year ended March, a spokesperson for the Japanese company said on Friday.\nThe sale comes as the bicycles-to-hair dryers conglomerate is seeking to reduce its dependence on Tesla and raise cash for investing in growth.\nPanasonic’s battery business is dominated by Elon Musk’s Tesla, but the two firms have had a tense relationship at times with executives trading barbs publicly.\nPanasonic bought 1.4 million Tesla shares at $21.15 each in 2010 for about $30 million. That stake was worth $730 million at the end of March 2020. The shares have gained almost seven fold since then and closed up 3.5% at $679.82 apiece on Thursday.\n“The impact of crypto assets may have pushed Tesla’s share price above its intrinsic value, making it a good time to sell,” said Hideki Yasuda, an analyst at Ace Research Institute.\nMusk said in February his firm bought bitcoin and would take payment in the cryptocurrency, a decision he later reversed, and his comments on Twitter drive swings in the price of such assets.\nWhile Panasonic gave financial backing to Tesla when it was smaller, the automaker’s expansion means there’s no need for capital ties, Yasuda added. Panasonic’s shares were up 4.2% on Friday.\nThe stake sale will not affect the partnership with Tesla, the Panasonic spokesperson said, but comes as the automaker is diversifying its own battery supply chain.\nTesla has struck deals with South Korea’s LG Energy Solution, a unit of LG Chem, and China’s CATL, with Reuters reporting the latter is planning a plant in Shanghai near the automaker’s production base.\nPanasonic said earlier this year it would buy the shareshereof U.S. supply-chain software company Blue Yonder that it does not already own, in a $7.1 billion deal. Its biggest such deal in a decade, the price raised the eyebrows of analysts who pointed to the firm's spotty M&A track record.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":118,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123847226,"gmtCreate":1624418117665,"gmtModify":1634006392442,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Please like&nbsp;","listText":"Please like&nbsp;","text":"Please like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123847226","repostId":"2145069164","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145069164","pubTimestamp":1624417950,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2145069164?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 11:12","market":"sg","language":"en","title":"Bitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145069164","media":"The Straits Times","summary":"NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time si","content":"<div>\n<p>NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time since January and erasing gains for the year before recouping the day's losses.\nThe original ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"straits_highlight","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>Bitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold</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\">\nBitcoin bounces back after tumbling below US$30,000 threshold\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-23 11:12 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold><strong>The Straits Times</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time since January and erasing gains for the year before recouping the day's losses.\nThe original ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GBTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust"},"source_url":"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/bitcoin-bounces-back-after-tumbling-below-us30000-threshold","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145069164","content_text":"NEW YORK (BLOOMBERG) - Bitcoin whipsawed investors by tumbling below US$30,000 for the first time since January and erasing gains for the year before recouping the day's losses.\nThe original cryptocurrency closed out the New York trading session on Tuesday (June 22) marginally higher at around US$32,900, after falling as much as 12 per cent.\nThe wild ride continued subsequently, since Bitcoin trades around the clock, with the digital token tracking slightly lower again. It has lost more than 50 per cent from its mid-April high of almost US$65,000.\nThe coin started 2021 trading around US$29,000 following a fourfold increase last year.\nSuch trading signals \"that Bitcoin traders could find themselves in choppy waters for weeks to come\", said Mr Sean Rooney, head of research at crypto asset manager Valkyrie Investments.\nChart-watchers said Bitcoin, which failed to retake US$40,000 last week, could have a tough time finding support in the US$20,000 range following its drop below US$30,000. Still, Bitcoin had prior to Tuesday breached US$30,000 during at least five separate instances this year but recuperated to trade above that level each time.\n\"Any meaningful break below US$30,000 is going to make a lot of momentum players to throw in the towel,\" said Mr Matt Maley, chief market strategist for Miller Tabak + Co. \"Therefore, even if Bitcoin is going to change the world over the long term, it does not mean it cannot fall back into the teens over the short term.\"\nIt is a remarkable comedown for the digital asset which just weeks ago was trekking higher amid a warmer embrace from Wall Street as well as retail investors. But negative press about its energy use, brought on largely by Tesla's Elon Musk, as well as a clampdown from China have pushed it lower in recent weeks.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":39,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127918125,"gmtCreate":1624813124667,"gmtModify":1633948417020,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127918125","repostId":"2146090006","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2146090006","pubTimestamp":1624755315,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2146090006?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 08:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2146090006","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"These growth and value stocks are begging to be bought by investors.","content":"<p>When Warren Buffett buys or sells a stock, Wall Street and retail investors tend to pay very close attention. That's because the Oracle of Omaha's track record is virtually unsurpassed. Since taking the reins of <b>Berkshire Hathaway</b> (NYSE:BRK.A)(NYSE:BRK.B) in the mid-1960s, Buffett's company has averaged an annual return of 20%. This works out to an aggregate gain of greater than 2,800,000% for its Class A shares.</p>\n<p>Although Buffett isn't perfect, he and his investing team have a knack for identifying attractively valued businesses that have clear competitive advantages. As we prepare to move into the second half of 2021, the following five Buffett stocks stand out as those that should be bought hand over fist.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1077c8372814d2b8150e933b4c608005\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Image source: The Motley Fool.</span></p>\n<h2>Amazon</h2>\n<p>Even though Buffett's investing lieutenants, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler, are the architects behind Berkshire Hathaway's stake in <b>Amazon</b> (NASDAQ:AMZN), it's arguably the Buffett stock that should be bought most aggressively ahead of the second half of the year.</p>\n<p>As most folks probably know, Amazon is an e-commerce juggernaut. Based on an April report from eMarketer, the company effectively controls $0.40 of every $1 spent online in the United States. It's also pivoted its online retail popularity into signing up more than 200 million people to its Prime program worldwide. The fees Amazon collects from Prime help it to undercut its competition on price. And it certainly doesn't hurt that Prime members tend to spend many multiples more than non-Prime shoppers during the course of the year.</p>\n<p>But it's the company's cloud infrastructure service, Amazon Web Services (AWS), that has truly budded into a star. Since the operating margins associated with cloud infrastructure are considerably higher than what Amazon nets from retail and advertising, AWS' growth is leading to a surge in operating cash flow. If investors were to continue to pay the midpoint of Amazon's operating cash flow multiple over the past decade, it could hit $10,000 a share by 2025.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b18b49b2b35da2fc49e0a83b883d1c22\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Bristol Myers Squibb</h2>\n<p>Pharmaceutical stocks are money machines, and none looks to be more attractive on a valuation basis than <b>Bristol Myers Squibb</b> (NYSE:BMY).</p>\n<p>One reason to be excited about this drug developer is its organic growth potential. Eliquis, which was co-developed with <b>Pfizer</b>, has blossomed into the world's leading oral anticoagulant, with sales expected to surpass $10 billion in 2021. Meanwhile, dozens of additional clinical trials are underway for cancer immunotherapy Opdivo, which generated $7 billion in sales last year. This offers plenty of opportunity to expand Opdivo's label and pump up its pricing power.</p>\n<p>Another reason Bristol Myers Squibb is such an intriguing stock is its November 2019 acquisition of cancer and immunology company Celgene. Buying Celgene brought the blockbuster multiple-myeloma drug Revlimid into the fold. Revlimid has sustainably grown its annual sales by a double-digit percentage for more than a decade, with label expansion, longer duration of use, and pricing power all playing a role. This key treatment, which topped $12 billion in sales last year, is protected from a full onslaught of generic competition until early 2026. That means Bristol Myers will be rolling in the dough for another five years, at minimum.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1b152e369d7c967dcbc926192ee888c1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"531\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Mastercard</h2>\n<p>Everyone seems to be looking for the smartest recovery play from the pandemic. Payment processor <b>Mastercard</b> (NYSE:MA) might well be the safest way to take advantage of a steady uptick in consumer and enterprise spending.</p>\n<p>Mastercard isn't a cheap stock by any means -- at 36 times Wall Street's forward-year earnings consensus -- but it benefits from a simple numbers game. While economic contractions and recessions are inevitable, these periods of turbulence tend to be short-lived. By comparison, economic expansions often last many years. Buying into Mastercard allows investors to take full advantage of these long periods of economic expansion and robust spending. Plus, it doesn't hurt that Mastercard has the second-highest share of credit-card network purchase volume in the U.S., the leading market for consumption.</p>\n<p>Investors can also sleep easy with the understanding that Mastercard strictly sticks to payment facilitation. Even though some of its peers also lend, and are therefore able to generate interest income and fees during bull markets, Mastercard has avoided becoming a lender. It's something you'll truly appreciate when a recession strikes. Whereas most financial stocks will be forced to set aside capital to cover credit or loan delinquencies, Mastercard won't have to. This is a big reason it bounces back from recessions quicker than most financial stocks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e4e1a1fe028efa4c966b66ef2cd466f5\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Teva Pharmaceutical Industries</h2>\n<p>If you have an appetite for turnaround plays, brand-name and generic-drug developer <b>Teva Pharmaceutical Industries</b> (NYSE:TEVA) is the stock to buy hand over fist for the second half of 2021. Like Amazon, it's a stock that was added to Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio by either Combs or Weschler and not Buffett.</p>\n<p>While there's no denying that Teva has its fair share of hurdles to overcome, the company's turnaround-focused CEO, Kare Schultz, has been a blessing. Since taking the helm less than four years ago, Schultz has helped shave off more than $10 billion in net debt, and he's overseen the reduction of roughly $3 billion in annual operating expenses. There's more work to do to improve Teva's balance sheet, but the company is very clearly on much firmer ground than it was back in 2016-2017.</p>\n<p>Schultz also has the potential to play peacemaker for a number of outstanding lawsuits targeting Teva's role in the opioid crisis. If this litigation can be resolved with minimal cash outlay, Teva's valuation could soar. At just 4 times the company's projected earnings in 2021, Teva is about as cheap as a healthcare stock can get.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44a30c4dfd6886a29e22d3c6558c3e56\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Bank of America</h2>\n<p>Lastly, bank stock <b>Bank of America</b> (NYSE:BAC) has the look of a company that can be confidently bought hand over fist for the second half of 2021.</p>\n<p>For much of the past decade, the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates at or near historic lows. That's meant less in the way of interest income for banks. But the latest update from the nation's central bank suggests that interest rates could begin creeping up in 2023, a year earlier than previously forecast. Bank of America is the most interest-sensitive money-center bank. According to its first-quarter investor presentation, BofA would generate $8.3 billion in net interest income on a 100-basis-point shift in the interest rate yield curve. Translation: Bank of America's profits should rocket higher beginning in 2023-2024.</p>\n<p>At the same time, BofA has done an outstanding job of controlling its costs and improving its operating efficiency. Investments in digitization have resulted in higher mobile app and digital banking use, which is allowing the company to consolidate some of its branches. Even with its shares at a 13-year high, Bank of America has plenty left in the tank.</p>","source":"fool_stock","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>5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021</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\">\n5 Buffett Stocks to Buy Hand Over Fist for the Second Half of 2021\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 08:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/26/buffett-stocks-buy-hand-over-fist-second-half-2021/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>When Warren Buffett buys or sells a stock, Wall Street and retail investors tend to pay very close attention. That's because the Oracle of Omaha's track record is virtually unsurpassed. Since taking ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/26/buffett-stocks-buy-hand-over-fist-second-half-2021/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","BMY":"施贵宝","BAC":"美国银行","TEVA":"梯瓦制药","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","MA":"万事达"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/26/buffett-stocks-buy-hand-over-fist-second-half-2021/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2146090006","content_text":"When Warren Buffett buys or sells a stock, Wall Street and retail investors tend to pay very close attention. That's because the Oracle of Omaha's track record is virtually unsurpassed. Since taking the reins of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A)(NYSE:BRK.B) in the mid-1960s, Buffett's company has averaged an annual return of 20%. This works out to an aggregate gain of greater than 2,800,000% for its Class A shares.\nAlthough Buffett isn't perfect, he and his investing team have a knack for identifying attractively valued businesses that have clear competitive advantages. As we prepare to move into the second half of 2021, the following five Buffett stocks stand out as those that should be bought hand over fist.\nBerkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Image source: The Motley Fool.\nAmazon\nEven though Buffett's investing lieutenants, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler, are the architects behind Berkshire Hathaway's stake in Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), it's arguably the Buffett stock that should be bought most aggressively ahead of the second half of the year.\nAs most folks probably know, Amazon is an e-commerce juggernaut. Based on an April report from eMarketer, the company effectively controls $0.40 of every $1 spent online in the United States. It's also pivoted its online retail popularity into signing up more than 200 million people to its Prime program worldwide. The fees Amazon collects from Prime help it to undercut its competition on price. And it certainly doesn't hurt that Prime members tend to spend many multiples more than non-Prime shoppers during the course of the year.\nBut it's the company's cloud infrastructure service, Amazon Web Services (AWS), that has truly budded into a star. Since the operating margins associated with cloud infrastructure are considerably higher than what Amazon nets from retail and advertising, AWS' growth is leading to a surge in operating cash flow. If investors were to continue to pay the midpoint of Amazon's operating cash flow multiple over the past decade, it could hit $10,000 a share by 2025.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nBristol Myers Squibb\nPharmaceutical stocks are money machines, and none looks to be more attractive on a valuation basis than Bristol Myers Squibb (NYSE:BMY).\nOne reason to be excited about this drug developer is its organic growth potential. Eliquis, which was co-developed with Pfizer, has blossomed into the world's leading oral anticoagulant, with sales expected to surpass $10 billion in 2021. Meanwhile, dozens of additional clinical trials are underway for cancer immunotherapy Opdivo, which generated $7 billion in sales last year. This offers plenty of opportunity to expand Opdivo's label and pump up its pricing power.\nAnother reason Bristol Myers Squibb is such an intriguing stock is its November 2019 acquisition of cancer and immunology company Celgene. Buying Celgene brought the blockbuster multiple-myeloma drug Revlimid into the fold. Revlimid has sustainably grown its annual sales by a double-digit percentage for more than a decade, with label expansion, longer duration of use, and pricing power all playing a role. This key treatment, which topped $12 billion in sales last year, is protected from a full onslaught of generic competition until early 2026. That means Bristol Myers will be rolling in the dough for another five years, at minimum.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nMastercard\nEveryone seems to be looking for the smartest recovery play from the pandemic. Payment processor Mastercard (NYSE:MA) might well be the safest way to take advantage of a steady uptick in consumer and enterprise spending.\nMastercard isn't a cheap stock by any means -- at 36 times Wall Street's forward-year earnings consensus -- but it benefits from a simple numbers game. While economic contractions and recessions are inevitable, these periods of turbulence tend to be short-lived. By comparison, economic expansions often last many years. Buying into Mastercard allows investors to take full advantage of these long periods of economic expansion and robust spending. Plus, it doesn't hurt that Mastercard has the second-highest share of credit-card network purchase volume in the U.S., the leading market for consumption.\nInvestors can also sleep easy with the understanding that Mastercard strictly sticks to payment facilitation. Even though some of its peers also lend, and are therefore able to generate interest income and fees during bull markets, Mastercard has avoided becoming a lender. It's something you'll truly appreciate when a recession strikes. Whereas most financial stocks will be forced to set aside capital to cover credit or loan delinquencies, Mastercard won't have to. This is a big reason it bounces back from recessions quicker than most financial stocks.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nTeva Pharmaceutical Industries\nIf you have an appetite for turnaround plays, brand-name and generic-drug developer Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (NYSE:TEVA) is the stock to buy hand over fist for the second half of 2021. Like Amazon, it's a stock that was added to Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio by either Combs or Weschler and not Buffett.\nWhile there's no denying that Teva has its fair share of hurdles to overcome, the company's turnaround-focused CEO, Kare Schultz, has been a blessing. Since taking the helm less than four years ago, Schultz has helped shave off more than $10 billion in net debt, and he's overseen the reduction of roughly $3 billion in annual operating expenses. There's more work to do to improve Teva's balance sheet, but the company is very clearly on much firmer ground than it was back in 2016-2017.\nSchultz also has the potential to play peacemaker for a number of outstanding lawsuits targeting Teva's role in the opioid crisis. If this litigation can be resolved with minimal cash outlay, Teva's valuation could soar. At just 4 times the company's projected earnings in 2021, Teva is about as cheap as a healthcare stock can get.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nBank of America\nLastly, bank stock Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) has the look of a company that can be confidently bought hand over fist for the second half of 2021.\nFor much of the past decade, the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates at or near historic lows. That's meant less in the way of interest income for banks. But the latest update from the nation's central bank suggests that interest rates could begin creeping up in 2023, a year earlier than previously forecast. Bank of America is the most interest-sensitive money-center bank. According to its first-quarter investor presentation, BofA would generate $8.3 billion in net interest income on a 100-basis-point shift in the interest rate yield curve. Translation: Bank of America's profits should rocket higher beginning in 2023-2024.\nAt the same time, BofA has done an outstanding job of controlling its costs and improving its operating efficiency. Investments in digitization have resulted in higher mobile app and digital banking use, which is allowing the company to consolidate some of its branches. Even with its shares at a 13-year high, Bank of America has plenty left in the tank.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":5,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123879072,"gmtCreate":1624418192396,"gmtModify":1634006391186,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good morning&nbsp;","listText":"Good morning&nbsp;","text":"Good morning","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123879072","repostId":"2145664330","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":60,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128753547,"gmtCreate":1624533336589,"gmtModify":1634004790682,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/128753547","repostId":"1112034265","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1112034265","pubTimestamp":1624532571,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1112034265?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-24 19:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Deutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1112034265","media":"cnbc","summary":"MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, accord","content":"<div>\n<p>MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, according to Deutsche Bank.\nShares of the casino and hotel company have risen nearly 37% year to date, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"cnbc_highlight","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>Deutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins</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\">\nDeutsche Bank upgrades MGM to buy, citing Las Vegas strip comeback and improving margins\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-24 19:02 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, according to Deutsche Bank.\nShares of the casino and hotel company have risen nearly 37% year to date, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"MGM":"美高梅"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mgm-resorts-stock-upgrade-buy-deutsche-bank.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1112034265","content_text":"MGM Resortshas not gotten enough credit for the strength of its casinos as Las Vegas reopens, according to Deutsche Bank.\nShares of the casino and hotel company have risen nearly 37% year to date, thanks in part to the economic reopening and the continued growth of online gambling.\nAnalyst Carlo Santarelli upgraded the casino stock to buy from hold in a note entitled, “Margins to surprise to the upside.”\nOne reason for profit expansion will be lower labor costs, according to Deutsche Bank.\n“We believe the next leg of the stock story for MGM is likely to be one of improving margins that extend well beyond the ‘over 30%’ targets management has discussed as the LV Strip goal, as well as the 32.5% peak margins of 2006,” the note said.\nAdditionally Santarelli cited “continued improvements in Las Vegas, with the outlook further buoyed by improving group trends and a Raiders season with fans in the stadium.”\nTo be sure, the analyst made the upgrade despite becoming more bearish on the valuation of MGM’s online betting unit.\n“We see out year Consensus as being too low and, accordingly, the perceived embedded sports / iCasino valuation as too high,” the note said.\nDeutsche Bank hiked its price target on the stock to $54 per share from $42. The new target is 25% above where the stock closed on Wednesday.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":85,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120301387,"gmtCreate":1624294863549,"gmtModify":1634008200110,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Please like&nbsp;","listText":"Please like&nbsp;","text":"Please like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/120301387","repostId":"1146982088","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1146982088","pubTimestamp":1624259620,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1146982088?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 15:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1146982088","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpect","content":"<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e3c93e7ae558cd9f2fdb7e4a2769f1\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"377\">What does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP&nbsp; facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.</p>\n<p>But what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8b99df7af1731b4bdcbcf072dcf39ce\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"272\">The problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:</p>\n<blockquote>\n When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Bottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"<i>the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"</i></p>\n<p>In retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0fba18d7808300abc3bdf4ffaa3d5fb6\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"273\">Needless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"<b>the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:</b><b><u>the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market</u></b><b>).\"</b></p>\n<p>What he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did not<i>reward</i>allocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.</p>\n<p>In other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fed<i><b>also</b></i>made a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “<b>yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"</b></p>\n<p>He's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),<b>5bps is too generous</b>, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo rate<b>will upset the state of \"singularity\"</b>and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –<b>at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"</b></p>\n<p>Indeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,<b>and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.</b>They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.<b>So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bf593f7b1d2d665f39384ed6a998d3bf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"403\">To help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves with<i><b>too few</b></i>intraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.</p>\n<p>This process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.</p>\n<p>And here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,<b>some bond-heavy banks cannot.</b>As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who can<i><b>not</b></i>handle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"</p>\n<p>Bottom line:<i><b>whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.</b></i></p>\n<p>Or, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,<b>in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"</b>While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,<b>the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.</b></p>\n<p>Bottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"</p>\n<p>Translation:&nbsp;<b>by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.</b></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>Powell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis</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\">\nPowell Just Launched $2 Trillion In \"Heat-Seeking Missiles\": Zoltan Explains How The Fed Started The Next Repo Crisis\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 15:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/powell-just-launched-2-trillion-heat-seeking-missiles-zoltan-explains-how-fed-started-next","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1146982088","content_text":"Last week, amid thefire and brimstone surroundingthe market's shocked response to the Fed's unexpected hawkish pivot, we noted that there were two tangible, if less noted changes: the Fed adjusted the two key \"administered\" rates, raising both the IOER and RRP rates by 5 basis points (as correctly predicted by Bank of America, JPMorgan, Wrightson, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo while Citi, Oxford Economics, Jefferies, Credit Suisse, Standard Chartered, BMO were wrong in predicting no rate change), in an effort to push the Effective Fed Funds rate higher and away from its imminent rendezvous with 0%.\nWhat does this mean? As Curvature Securities repo guru,Scott Skyrm wrote last week, \"clearly the Fed intends to move overnight rates above zero and drain the RRP  facility of cash.\" Unfortunately, the end result would be precisely the opposite of what the Fed had wanted to achieve.\nBut what does this really mean for overnight rates and RRP volume? As Skyrm further noted, the increase in the IOER should pull the daily fed funds rate 5 basis points higher and, in turn, put upward pressure on Repo GC. Combined with the 5 basis point increase in RRP, GC should move a solid 5 basis points higher, which it has.\nThe problem, as Skyrm warned, is that the Fed's technical adjustment would do nothing to ease the RRP volume:\n\n When market Repo rates were at 0% and the RRP rate was at zero, ~$500 billion went into the RRP. Well, if both market Repo rates and the RRP rate are 5 basis points higher, there's no reason to pull cash out of the RRP. For example, if GC rates moved to .05% and the RRP rate stayed at zero, investor preferences to invest at a higher rate would remove cash from the RRP.\n\nBottom line: with both market rates and RRP at .05%, there's really no economic incentive for cash investors to move cash to the Repo market. Or, as we summarized, \"the Fed's rate change may have zero impact on the Fed's reverse repo facility, or the record half a trillion in cash parked there.\"\nIn retrospect, boy was that an understatement, because just one day later the already record usage of the Fed's Reverse Repo facility spiked by a record 50%, exploding to a staggering $756 billion (it closed Friday at $747 billion) as the GSEs.\nNeedless to say, flooding the Fed's RRP facility and sterilizing reserves is hardly what the Fed had intended, and as Credit Suisse's own repo guru (and former NY Fed staffer) Zoltan Pozsar wrote in his post-mortem, \"the re-priced RRP facility will become a problem for the banking system fast:the banking system is going from being asset constrained (deposits flooding in, but nowhere to lend them but to the Fed), to being liability constrained (deposits slipping away and nowhere to replace them but in the money market).\"\nWhat he means by that is that whereas previously the RRP rate of 0.00% did notrewardallocation of inert, excess reserves but merely provided a place to park them, now that the Fed is providing a generous yield pick up compared to rates offered by trillions in Bills, we are about to see a sea-change in the overnight, money-market, as trillions in capital reallocate away from traditional investments and into the the Fed's RRP.\nIn other words, as Pozsar puts it, \"the RRP facility started to sterilize reserves... with more to come.\" And just as Deutsche Bank explained why the Fed's signaling was an r* policy error, to Pozsar, the Fedalsomade a policy error - only this time with its technical rates - by steriling reserves because \"it’s one thing to raise the rate on the RRP facility when an increase was not strictly speaking necessary, and it’s another to raise it “unduly” high – as one money fund manager put it, “yesterday we could not even get a basis points a year; to get endless paper at five basis points from the most trusted counterparty is a dream come true.\"\nHe's right: while 0bps may have been viewed by many as too low, it was hardly catastrophic for now (Credit Suisse was one of those predicting no administered rate hike),5bps is too generous, according to Pozsar who warns that the new reverse repo ratewill upset the state of \"singularity\"and \"like heat-seeking missiles, money market investors move hundreds of billions, making sharp, 90º turns hunting for even a basis point of yield at the zero bound –at 5 bps, money funds have an incentive to trade out of all their Treasury bills and park cash at the RRP facility.\"\nIndeed, as shown below, bills yield less than 5 bps out to 6 months,and money funds have over $2 trillion of bills.They got an the incentive to sell, while others have the incentive to buy: institutions whose deposits have been “tolerated” by banks until now earning zero interest have an incentive to harvest the 0-5 bps range the bill curve has to offer. Putting your cash at a basis point in bills is better than deposits at zero.So the sterilization of reserves begins, and so the o/n RRP facility turns from a largely passive tool that provided an interest rate floor to the deposits that large banks have been pushing away, into an active tool that \"sucks\" the deposits away that banks decided to retain.\nTo help readers visualize what is going on, the Credit Suisse strategist suggest the following \"extreme\" thought experiment: most of the “Covid-19” deposits currently with banks go into the bill market where rates are better. Money funds sell bills to institutional investors that currently keep their cash at banks, and money funds swap bills for o/n RRPs. Said (somewhat) simply, while previously the Fed provided banks with a convenient place to park reserves, it now will actively drain reserves to the point where we may end up with another 2019-style repo crisis, as most financial institutions suddenly find themsleves withtoo fewintraday reserves, forcing them to use the Fed's other funding facilities (such as FX swap lines) to remain consistently solvent.\nThis process is not overnight. It will take a few weeks to observe the fallout from the Fed's reserve sterilization.\nAnd here is why the problem is similar to the repo crisis of 2019: soon we will find that while cash-rich banks can handle the outflows,some bond-heavy banks cannot.As a result, Zoltan predicts that next \"we will notice that some banks (those who cannothandle outflows) are borrowing advances from FHLBs, and cash-rich banks stop lending in the FX swap market as the RRP facility pulled reserves away from them and the Fed has to re-start the FX swap lines to offset.\"\nBottom line:whereas previously we saw Libor-OIS collapse, this key funding spread will have to widen from here, unless the Fed lowers the o/n RRP rate again back to where it was before.\nOr, as Zoltan summarizes, \"It’s either quantities or prices\" - indeed,in 2019 the Fed chose prices over quantities, which backfired, and led to the repo crisis which ended the Fed's hiking cycle and started \"NOT QE.\"While the Fed redeemed itself in February, when it expanded the usage of the RRP without making it liability-constrained as it chose quantities over prices - which worked well - last Wednesday,the Fed turned “unlimited” quantities into “money for free” and started to sterilize reserves.\nBottom line: \"we are witnessing the dealer of last resort (DoLR) learning the art of dealing, making unforced errors – if the Fed sterilizes with an overpriced o/n RRP facility, it has to be ready to add liquidity via the swap lines…\"\nTranslation: by paying trillions in reserves 5bps, the Fed just planted the seeds of the next liquidity crisis.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":9,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127085210,"gmtCreate":1624803714430,"gmtModify":1633948490264,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Hello","listText":"&nbsp;Hello","text":"Hello","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127085210","repostId":"1137119316","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1137119316","pubTimestamp":1624754401,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1137119316?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 08:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137119316","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.With Ford  launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO  will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.</li>\n <li>The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.</li>\n <li>NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5033fa117d7852799244b8275bc1000f\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"886\"><span>peterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p>With Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.</p>\n<p><b>Ford vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up</b></p>\n<p>Although there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing&nbsp;$30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.</p>\n<p><b>Market opportunity</b></p>\n<p>In 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b48c23b32134542f51227d9b1b612887\" tg-width=\"1083\" tg-height=\"863\"><span>(Source: Wikipedia)</span></p>\n<p>China, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is&nbsp;on the cusp of entering the European market&nbsp;in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.</p>\n<p>Beijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a&nbsp;twenty percent share&nbsp;of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9871e44eaf69adb27151425887870ace\" tg-width=\"739\" tg-height=\"454\"><span>(Source:Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>Turning to growth projections.</p>\n<p>With more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61d19dff2f34e2d8828aca854e85d84a\" tg-width=\"825\" tg-height=\"565\"><span>(Source:McKinsey)</span></p>\n<p>Since China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Scale and manufacturing competence</b></p>\n<p>Ford has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.</p>\n<p>Since NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.</p>\n<p>Winner here: Ford.</p>\n<p><b>Differentiation and BaaS revenue model</b></p>\n<p>Both Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.</p>\n<p>Ford is&nbsp;forming a joint venture&nbsp;with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has&nbsp;formed its own joint venture&nbsp;to secure battery supply.</p>\n<p>The difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.</p>\n<p>The BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.</p>\n<p>Ford and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.</p>\n<p>Battery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c42acb75905affe7570a2f399ea3192f\" tg-width=\"758\" tg-height=\"449\"><span>(Source: Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>The “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Sales growth and valuation</b></p>\n<p>Ford’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.</p>\n<p>Ford's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df5a0a393e44ed74241c5effcdd92350\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!</p>\n<p>Due to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/817605c6b1e82c03d0473ea570d32b8f\" tg-width=\"506\" tg-height=\"406\"><span>(Source: Author)</span></p>\n<p><b>NIO has larger risks...</b></p>\n<p>NIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.</p>\n<p><b>Final verdict</b></p>\n<p>NIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.</p>\n<p>Ford’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.</p>\n<p>If you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.</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>Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict</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\">\nFord Or NIO? The Final Verdict\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 08:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"F":"福特汽车","NIO":"蔚来"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1137119316","content_text":"Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.\nNIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.\n\npeterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images\nWith Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.\nFord vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up\nAlthough there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing $30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.\nMarket opportunity\nIn 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.\n(Source: Wikipedia)\nChina, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is on the cusp of entering the European market in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.\nBeijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a twenty percent share of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.\n(Source:Schroders)\nTurning to growth projections.\nWith more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.\n(Source:McKinsey)\nSince China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.\nScale and manufacturing competence\nFord has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.\nSince NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.\nWinner here: Ford.\nDifferentiation and BaaS revenue model\nBoth Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.\nFord is forming a joint venture with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has formed its own joint venture to secure battery supply.\nThe difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.\nThe BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.\nFord and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.\nBattery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.\n(Source: Schroders)\nThe “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.\nSales growth and valuation\nFord’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.\nFord's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.\nData by YCharts\nThe difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!\nDue to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.\n(Source: Author)\nNIO has larger risks...\nNIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.\nFinal verdict\nNIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.\nFord’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.\nIf you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":102,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120302240,"gmtCreate":1624295046380,"gmtModify":1634008196927,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hello&nbsp;","listText":"Hello&nbsp;","text":"Hello","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/120302240","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":14,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127918677,"gmtCreate":1624813171599,"gmtModify":1633948416797,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice&nbsp;","listText":"Nice&nbsp;","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127918677","repostId":"1117734317","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1117734317","pubTimestamp":1624759414,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1117734317?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 10:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Square: The Bear Case","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1117734317","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nOn the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong re","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>On the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong revenue growth and a large Cash App user base.</li>\n <li>In reality, the company has struggled to translate its top line into bottom line earnings.</li>\n <li>This has resulted in Square expanding its products to justify exaggerated revenue valuations which may never result in meaningful earnings growth.</li>\n <li>And whilst at first glance its Cash App story appears to be a budding prospect, it may be nothing more than temporary growth based on necessity.</li>\n <li>Given the current valuation and the increasing Bitcoin headwinds, Square could face significant revisions downwards in revenue and earnings.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f072284e4d267ddbfaf6f17db8b6aa46\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\"><span>AndreyPopov/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Introduction</b></p>\n<p>Square Inc.(NYSE:SQ)is one of the&nbsp;most popular stocks&nbsp;among retail traders and investors, ranking 57 in Robinhood's top 100 rankings. This has resulted in a 135% increase in price over the last year allowing SQ to reach a market capitalization of greater than $100bln, trading with the volatility of a mid-cap company.</p>\n<p>On the surface the price and valuation may seem justified, with the company sequentially increasing revenues and expanding its portfolio of products through Cash App, Bitcoin (BTC-USD), PPP loans and most recently delving into the commercial loans business with a&nbsp;banking license&nbsp;via Square Financial Services.</p>\n<p>However, these valuations are becoming disaggregated from the fundamentals of the company and its core business on speculation of future revenue projections which are heavily reliant on Bitcoin revenues.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adc746c80eba08b76805234d32a7eff4\" tg-width=\"638\" tg-height=\"358\"><span>Source: Author, with data from SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Historical Financial Information)</span></p>\n<p>In addition to this, SQ potentially faces several other issues related to small business positioning; policy and regulation; and general macroeconomic factors which may create headwinds that will impact its valuation and pose an asymmetric downside risk for investors, which I will extrapolate on below.</p>\n<p><b>Overview</b></p>\n<p>SQ is a payment processing and business tool provider that facilitates transactions between businesses / sellers and individuals and provides them with hardware, online infrastructure and analytics. Additionally, it services individuals through Cash App which appears to be growing exponentially and allows users to send, receive, hold and invest money, and recently Bitcoin.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cee1136e6c6e1b5294daf79d06e4a1e8\" tg-width=\"382\" tg-height=\"421\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter - Cash App Inflows vs Gross Profit)</span></p>\n<p>As of March 2020, the&nbsp;company has received a Banking License&nbsp;from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to originate commercial loans to retailers which use SQ for payment processing.</p>\n<p>Given all of this positive news, it is not surprising that the stock has rallied over 330% in the last 3 years on the basis of future growth projections and, since 2020, has chased revenue estimates.</p>\n<p>This was a common occurrence during COVID, as unchartered waters meant that top line growth was imperative for survival. Further, seemingly endless money printing by the Fed, combined with zero rates, meant money flowed into stocks which showed the highest potential for growth.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/214a8d95ef4deef4b9e6e7ec8ca86793\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs EPS Estimates and Revenue Estimates 2021)</span></p>\n<p>However, in Q1 2021, as the printing slowed, yields began to rise and federal transfers to individuals dissipated, and consequently ever increasing revenue estimates began to mean less for the market, resulting in SQ price action ranging between $200 to $280.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5a03c8294f2805d4e82fbc3fed739f45\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price YTD)</span></p>\n<p><b>Quantitative</b></p>\n<p>Year to Date, SQ has been a good performer relative to the payment processing sector, returning ~12% price increases to shareholders.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c32bf1243cd5e4252fc8af88b2ee4bfb\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs Payment Processing Sector &gt;$50 bln Year to Date)</span></p>\n<p>It is also not a surprise to see why when evaluated against these companies on a forward earnings and revenue basis. SQ has above average and median earnings growth for 2021 and 2022, as well as strong revenue growth for 2021.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b67e41d041b35bf5e8ae3c7adb55c7d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"444\"><span>Source: Author, Sector Comparison (Payment Processors)</span></p>\n<p>Whilst SQ's forward PE seems exaggerated in contrast to its counterparts, its forward PS is relatively small and below the sector averages and median, perhaps justifying its present value.</p>\n<p>However, once you remove Bitcoin revenue from the equation, you get much more exaggerated forward PS estimates on much lower revenue growth, which represents SQ's primary business.</p>\n<p>For this equation, I have removed Bitcoin revenue from their Q1 2021 results, and judging by average analyst expectations which show little to no sequential revenue growth from Q2-Q4 2021, multiplied this figure by 4x for a year end revenue estimate of $6,140.70 mln. For prior years, I have removed Bitcoin from Revenue.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/624b2de0076a4f2d6062c52036b5d176\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"182\"><span>Source: Author, SQ Revenue Growth (2018 to 2021 Estimates with Bitcoin vs excl Bitcoin)</span></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5337259448695cf7fc6a796d86dba775\" tg-width=\"523\" tg-height=\"245\"><span>Source: Author, SQ vs Sector Comps (Revenue Estimates excl Bitcoin)</span></p>\n<p>As we can see this paints a very different picture of the company, and whilst revenue is still growing slightly above comps which also have high PS ratios, suddenly valuations on earnings look more meaningful and it becomes difficult to justify a forward PE 3x above the average and 4.5x above the median. Especially when companies such as American Express Co (AXP), Mastercard Inc (MA), PayPal Holdings Inc (PYPL) and Visa Inc (V) are producing on average 4x higher EPS. The majority of which pay a dividend and have similar growth estimates with less volatility risk.</p>\n<p>Many will suggest that \"this does not matter as BTC is now part of their revenue metrics and that is that, besides transaction volume is what is important\". However, I would cite the example of the 2018 Bitcoin sell off in which&nbsp;Bitcoin fell 70%, and transaction volumes fell from highs by approximately 75% as well:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b01941a1ab02f1b6dc27d73a2705a242\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"320\"><span>Source: Bitcoinvisuals.com (Bitcoin Market Volume 2018)</span></p>\n<p>On a valuation basis, this presents a substantial downside risk to investors if Bitcoin continued to retrace as a result of being met by increased regulation globally, as the company is essentially trading on revenue metrics propped up by Bitcoin. Quite simply, price down in Bitcoin could mean downwards revisions to revenue estimates and consequently a highly volatile retracement in the price of SQ.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c89cf1b41c0d446571c7a471bb8d8e50\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"377\"><span>Source: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price Correlation - Revenue, EPS and EBITDA)</span></p>\n<p>This becomes increasingly likely given the historical volatility of the stock when compared to its peers and it is not surprising that it is also becoming a consensus short position.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2d47874b5957751f0d485a9aa9ec5016\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"233\"><span>Source: Author (SQ vs Sector Comps Implied and Realized Volatility and Short Interest)</span></p>\n<p>Given the analysis by another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend&nbsp;in which the author suggests that&nbsp;SQ's 2025 growth is essentially priced in&nbsp;I would have to agree. SQ's reliance on revenue estimates which have been amplified substantially by Bitcoin present an asymmetric risk to the downside in the short to medium term for investors.</p>\n<p><b>Macro</b></p>\n<p>Whilst we are in the process of reopening, many things remain uncertain, such as the level of demand sustainability, job growth and creation, and inflation.</p>\n<p>Whilst the sentiment is overall positive in the media, there are several macroeconomic issues that are beneath the surface which need to be resolved before we can conclude that we are in the clear.</p>\n<p><b>Small Business Environment</b></p>\n<p>SQ's MRQ shows that nearly 49% of the Gross Profit comes from the Seller ecosystem (small businesses).</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a0f50d03e91a1609a120fa139b61e292\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"319\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Page 39 - Segmented Gross Profit)</span></p>\n<p>The majority of this is originating from exposure to sellers with &lt;$500,000 Gross Payment Volume (69.5%). This makes square substantially exposed to fluctuations in the small business cycle.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75fbdbba973e9d39e9d07b50d6174b03\" tg-width=\"380\" tg-height=\"502\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter)</span></p>\n<p>Delving into the Business Formation Statistics, there is a rosy picture, with over 500,000 business applications for the month of May, 2021 providing an endless surge of opportunity for SQ.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/777bf7fbfba7b466a8c89baa9b21a72d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"475\"><span>Source: Census.gov (Business Applications, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>Again, when we dig deeper and look at the statistics below which rank the optimism of established small businesses, the picture begins to distort and starts to look like the descent into 2008.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5be8fe67a4c257868eb79101d262e77\" tg-width=\"525\" tg-height=\"557\"><span>Source: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Optimism, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>Further, when we examine Small Business future outlook on expansion, this has also descended to lows and similar to what was seen in 2008. This could suggest that the bread and butter of SQ's gross profit margin, may not expand at the rate previously seen during 2017 to 2020.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e1a555c19fb385f170bb6deb2b3abcca\" tg-width=\"539\" tg-height=\"319\"><span>Source: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Outlook, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>Additionally, it should be noted that the two primary reasons small businesses are giving for their negative outlook are \"Economic Conditions\" and \"Political Climate\", which could be related to the election in 2020, COVID, recent policy changes and be somewhat transitory. Alternatively it could resemble the slow march of 2008 to 2016, we simply do not know, except for the fact it is a low reading and consequently could weigh on SQ's high revenue and earnings growth estimates.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4fbef66ecf854fe482a86e001dec91e6\" tg-width=\"523\" tg-height=\"271\"><span>Source: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Reasons for Outlook, May 2021)</span></p>\n<p><b>Small Business Lending</b></p>\n<p>Looking forward, SQ clearly aims to solidify its position in the commercial lending space through acquiring a banking license. This is very positive for the company due to their large and growing small business user base,their experience since 2014, and the&nbsp;PPP program, which stopped on May 31, 2021.</p>\n<p>Currently, bank lending has receded as a result of recovery efforts from COVID.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/327e5b2f822c5f6e8b6298b58c0d4f94\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"401\"><span>Source: YCHARTS (US Commercial Banks - Commercial and Industrial Loans)</span></p>\n<p>This can be verified through the credit conditions index in the&nbsp;monthly NFIB report. Although, an&nbsp;American Banker survey&nbsp;is reporting that 86% of small businesses are finding it difficult to access credit, and are having to resort to personal credit.</p>\n<p>This is positive for SQ as it will allow them to fill the gap for credit to small business within the market. Though I believe it will be short lived as there is speculation that when the Fed tapers, they will also announce the lifting of&nbsp;capital restraints&nbsp;placed on Wells Fargo &amp; Company (WFC).</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/530b7de3c5d05e7e8f5de219d3582ea7\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"689\"><span>Source: Credit Suisse (Global Money Dispatch - 25 May 2021)</span></p>\n<p>There is a fairly good probability that this will occur, given that early in 2020 the Fed had&nbsp;lifted these restraints&nbsp;to help small businesses via the PPP program and tapering has a history of upsetting the market. If this occurs, I suspect WFC will become a giant amongst the small business credit space once more and be a very tough competitor to SQ due to their extensive network and history in the space.</p>\n<p><b>Bitcoin, Legislation &amp; Gensler</b></p>\n<p>Bitcoin has been making headlines as of 2H 2020 and much of 1H 2021 for good reason. It is gaining traction amongst retail traders and investors and has shown exceptional appreciation. Further, some minor&nbsp;banks&nbsp;have been interested in the medium although many banks and financial institutions have explicitly banned the&nbsp;purchase of Bitcoin using their services.</p>\n<p>The primary reasons for their objection is more than likely to do with illicit activities, such as&nbsp;money laundering,terrorism,fake transaction volumes, and similar activities which I do not want to get into and neither do banks.</p>\n<p>Consequently, on the recent hype, many countries are now stepping in to regulate the use of Bitcoin, but others are going a step further and are enacting legislation to ban its use and mining, most notably,China&nbsp;and&nbsp;India.</p>\n<p>This has had a negative impact on the price of Bitcoin since the ATHs in May 2021 of ~$65,000, retracing -46% since then.</p>\n<p>It is also extremely negative for Bitcoin going forward as the majority of Bitcoin mining is done in China (~70% YTD) with&nbsp;Hashrates of mining being correlated to the price. Therefore if these recede on decreasing Chinese mining activity, price could surely follow, affecting SQ's Bitcoin holdings and future transaction volumes.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75ef78953396700241870a3f3ae8d8be\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"382\"><span>Source: Cambridge University (Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index YTD)</span></p>\n<p>Whilst the SEC has come out and said that&nbsp;Bitcoin regulation is not on their agenda for 2021, Gary Gensler has&nbsp;warned investors to be cautious. Gensler is also has a long history on regulations to protect investors, and despite not putting Bitcoin on the agenda for 2021, I advise readers to study his history with respect to&nbsp;2000 and 2008.</p>\n<p>Looking out further, this does not bode well for Bitcoin and SQ, generally. It is likely that there could be further regulation rather than adoption, negatively impacting its price, leading to a repeat of 2018 lower volumes as well as mining activity.</p>\n<p><b>General Economy - The Worry for Retail</b></p>\n<p>Separately, we could also be seeing a negative situation for retail going forward. Much of the recovery in retail as not been driven by \"pent up demand\" but mostly through subsidies issued throughout&nbsp;2020 and the start of 2021. When examining the graph below, we can see that once you subtract transfer receipts (government stimulus cheques and employment benefits - red line), income is not what it used to be.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/97a5a8cfaa11dd3c5ab5544778a40b90\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"247\"><span>Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Disposable Income vs Real Income minus Transfers vs Personal Savings vs Retail Trade Sales)</span></p>\n<p>Additionally, we can see that much of the spikes in retail sales (purple) have been driven mainly through the stimulus cheques which bolstered disposable income (blue) and consumer savings (green), though now stimulus has ended and people are having to start to dig into their savings, which is dropped 54% month on month between March and April.</p>\n<p>The consumer spending situation is made worse when examining U6 unemployment, which is&nbsp;considered to be the most revealing&nbsp;amongst economists as it includes unemployed, underemployed and discouraged job seekers. This, generally speaking, does not bode well for consumer discretionary spending patterns going forward.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c09f260d254df1a847962a6b6896764c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"388\"><span>Source: Macrotrends.net (U6 Unemployment Rate vs U5 vs Official)</span></p>\n<p>Finally, the rising cost of food and energy, which for food I expect to continue, should hamper consumer discretionary spend going forward. I have previously written articles on The Mosaic Company (MOS)hereand The Andersons (ANDE)here, which outline my justification for this trend.</p>\n<p>In relation to SQ, we can see their historical exposure to consumer discretionary spend based on end 2019 data. When taking into account figures from: retail; professional services, beauty and personal care, home and repair, leisure and entertainment, and casual use, the total exposure is approximately 59%.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dddddbe8ed21ed16aab29a7b5ebbc846\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"340\"><span>Source: Statista (Raynor de Best - GPV by Seller Industry Dec 2019)</span></p>\n<p>Whilst this may not impact its revenue figures substantially due to the weighting of bitcoin, I do expect this to undermine is gross profit figures going forward and negatively impact margins as stimulus further fades.</p>\n<p><b>Financials</b></p>\n<p><b>Bitcoin</b></p>\n<p>When examining the financials of SQ we can easily see that Bitcoin is the predominant factor driving its revenue growth (MRQ 69% of total revenue) of which its valuation is derived (see above Introduction section - SQ Price vs Revenue Segments; and Quantitative section - SQ Price correlation).</p>\n<p>From their Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter, page 12 they have stated that on March 31, 2021 the fair value of their holdings was $472 million. On this date the closing price was $58,918.83, or approximately 8,011 Bitcoins. They also state they initially invested $200 million into bitcoin during this period and Q4, so their average price is roughly $25,000 per Bitcoin.</p>\n<p>Currently, the price of Bitcoin sits at approximately $34,600 and it also appears to be struggling to find traction, especially when you examine some other trends. For example, looking at search trends of \"Buy Bitcoin\" on Google Trends, this is clearly waning.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d6b3b70625f48232fa97f1aa14f5548e\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"333\"><span>Source: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - Worldwide 5 Yrs)</span></p>\n<p>Additionally, when you align this data with stimulus payments it is clear there is a relationship between the two in 2H 2020, and much of the recent speculation could be driven by government subsidies.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54329dbe61b7b1f9fc1347f632aff709\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"293\"><span>Source: USA.Gov (COVID Stimulus Cheque Dates)</span></p>\n<p>The spike in searches occurs roughly around the time of the two latter government stimulus cheques with a lag of a few days to a few weeks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c7a198a905e4a89f11faa1b4db4003b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"340\"><span>Source: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - USA 12 Months)</span></p>\n<p>This also coincides with Bitcoin's price run up in December 2020 and January 2021, as well the failed rally in March and April 2021.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0428576ae2c8312e747c3ae5fccab637\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"401\"><span>Source: YCHARTS (Bitcoin Price 1 Yr)</span></p>\n<p>Thus, in this example, if we have a continued sell off of -70%, which is similar to what occurred in 2018. We would be back at November 2020 Bitcoin prices of $20,000 approximately.</p>\n<p>This is still feasible on the basis of dwindling volume, further legislation and declining hashrates. It could also be theorized that SQ may carry an impairment charge of $40 million, which would greatly affect operating income, net income and shareholder earnings and future estimates. Though this is purely theoretical without accounting for transactions in the current quarter, such as purchases or sales at or near ATHs.</p>\n<p>Additionally, with the lack of stimulus payments going forward and tighter consumer discretionary spend, the revenue generated from Bitcoin may also decline as less money enters the space and volumes decline. Negatively impacting revenue estimates for SQ and subsequently their price and valuation.</p>\n<p><b>Cash App</b></p>\n<p>On the surface, it looks like Cash App is growing exponentially into a viable platform for users to transact, with more than 36 million monthly transacting active customers, up 50% YoY.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b457a1d1f65d9d40fac153a9926aa167\" tg-width=\"262\" tg-height=\"230\"><span>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter)</span></p>\n<p>However, this growth in Cash App may be unsustainable going forward, with SQ elaborating on this in their Quarterly filing notes:</p>\n<blockquote>\n Cash App revenue benefited from growth in numbers of active Cash App customers and from&nbsp;\n <b>government relief programs</b>&nbsp;most recently passed into law in late December 2020 and in March 2021, as well as cumulative benefit from earlier stimulus programs passed in 2020. These programs provided additional stimulus relief and unemployment benefits which resulted in an increase in consumer spending and inflows into our Cash App ecosystem. Cash App revenue growth may not be sustained at the same levels in future quarters and may be impacted by the enactment of further stimulus relief and benefit programs, as well as the demand and market prices for bitcoin, amongst other factors.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n <i>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Filings - Page 49)</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Part of the issue with Cash App is theoretical continued use and future adoption. Much of the growth seen over the last year was predominantly fueled by stimulus payments through the Cash App ecosystem, and therefore by necessity given the circumstances.</p>\n<p>The two sharp spikes in searches for the app occurred on:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>April 12-18 2020</li>\n <li>January 24-30 2021</li>\n</ul>\n<p>These coincide with stimulus payments as they initially sent them and they gradually deposited them into people's accounts.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f9485d2feac40030b5190195a471781e\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"337\"><span>Source: Google Trends (Cash App search terms - USA 5 Years)</span></p>\n<p>Therefore, as government stimulus payments end, and Bitcoin again fades from relevancy, and more people return to work and day-trade less, this could negatively impact user growth metrics going forward, impacting SQ revenue estimates, gross profit figures, and its earnings.</p>\n<p>Further, there are a multitude of other more viable platforms, which another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend, has elaborated onhere.</p>\n<p>It is also important to keep in mind how they define these users, a \"Transacting active Cash App customer\" is the following:</p>\n<blockquote>\n ... has at least\n <b>one financial transaction</b>using any product or service within Cash App during the specified period.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n <i>Source: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter - Page 4)</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>So, if a customer received their wages from an employer, or unemployment benefit, into Cash App once per month, and transferred all of it to their bank account once per month, they are a \"transacting active Cash App customer\"...</p>\n<p>Perhaps a better quantifier of an \"active\" customer would be greater than 5 transactions.</p>\n<p><b>Technicals</b></p>\n<p>Examining the technicals of SQ, it is clear that the stock is now ranging between $200 and $280, with several breakout attempts at $250 and 2 failed attempts near $300, showing several signs that momentum is dying out.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c277d5239e06c67b7ff6fd7fff319bb\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"642\"><span>Source: Author, with data from FINVIZ (SQ Chart)</span></p>\n<p>When examining dark pool order flows, there is a possibility for the current rally to continue as dark pools are at lows, which may likely continue into earnings by August. Although I would not get my hopes up unless some seriously good news occurs and Bitcoin rallies back to ATHs.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3323bfcd903c74dce542b53b0b56e093\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"281\"><span>Source: Squeezemetrics.com (SQ Dark Pools vs Implied Vol 2 Years)</span></p>\n<p>From the 13F filings, we can also see that many funds have reduced exposure and closed their positions, with fewer new positions being added. The Put to Call ratio is also becoming quite high, especially on a stock that has $100 bln market cap, signaling that we are not the only ones thinking the same thing.</p>\n<p>Caution is required though, as SQ's issues with Bitcoin are obviously becoming a consensus trade, and when those puts are lifted, gamma may turn positive and it could cause the stock to rally significantly.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b221f08c025ba225e32114f0e76dd272\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"152\"><span>Source: Whalewisdom.com (SQ Funds Positioning)</span></p>\n<p>Further, with relation to ARK ETFs, it is no surprise that there have been&nbsp;significant liquidity issues&nbsp;the last 6 months, and I agree with another Seeking Alpha contributor's thesisherethat we will see a reversion to the mean with respect to prices of stocks held in these ETFs. What can be noted is that Cathie has significantly reduced her exposure to SQ and that she may be picking her battles.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ecce0e1f1cd9e7e47fe27105be3f6ad0\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"559\"><span>Source: Cathiesark.com (SQ Shares Held - All ETFs)</span></p>\n<p>Given the above information, this is a difficult company to be short. It will either payoff enormously, or rip your face off due to its volatility. Additionally there are many funds wanting some small level of exposure to a company with Bitcoin on the financial statements. Therefore, if you were to trade this as a short at your own risk, discretion is advised and you should always pick your battles.</p>\n<p><b>Price Targets</b></p>\n<p>On the basis of volatility through SQ's ATR it is possible that SQ could move to a low of approximately $100 by the end of the year, moving in favor 40% of the time. This aligns with my year end 2021 price if you remove Bitcoin entirely from the equation.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4ec1e2586568ef7e0aea0c54e3503acc\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"222\"><span>Source: Author (SQ ATR Calculator)</span></p>\n<p>However, it would not be sensible to do this as it is part of their revenue for the time being, no matter how high Bitcoin volumes were in the start of 2021 and how low they may be at the end of the year.</p>\n<p>I do expect the stock to fall again and retest $200, possibly breaking down to $160. Though it is very difficult to determine a valuation with SQ, mainly because the valuation is derived from Bitcoin revenues, and also the perceived value by funds and the market in the future adoption of the asset.</p>\n<p>If the market begins to perceive Bitcoin again as irrelevant, I would expect SQ to slowly sell off to between $150 and $160 (-37% downside) with a low probability that it will rally past $300 (25% upside).</p>\n<p><b>Risks</b></p>\n<p>With respect to SQ the following risks should be noted.</p>\n<p>The company is growing, whether you like SQ or not. The main questions are: Will the market value Bitcoin on any realistic basis? How much is it growing with and without Bitcoin? What is the potential future growth with and without Bitcoin? And does the market believe it, or for that matter care?</p>\n<p>If the Bitcoin fades from relevancy, and judging by Google Trends, it is more likely than it is not, it is not outlandish to assume that SQ will suffer as a result of this and over the 2H 2021 and take a substantial hit to revenue estimates. However, if Bitcoin adoption increases and negative news fades, since this is a growth company, it could simply continue rallying.</p>\n<p>Further, consumer spending patterns are producing mixed data, and above I have presented a bear case. This could easily turn the other way if people's behavior changes, such as applying for jobs which will increase spending in the economy and hopefully produce small business growth and increase small business optimism and expansion, which is very beneficial for SQ as a cyclical business in the payment processing space.</p>\n<p>Again, caution is necessary, though I do think that future growth of the company is priced in and there is a higher risk to holders of SQ to the downside than to the upside.</p>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<p>SQ is a high growth company with some potential positive points in the long run; however, its valuation is highly questionable due to its high revenue estimates predominantly derived from Bitcoin transactions and not bottom-line earnings growth.</p>\n<p>From a quantitative perspective, it looks good amongst its peers but upon further examination it appears to be extremely overvalued as future growth, at least for 2021, may be derived from Bitcoin. Further, its Cash App adoption statistics may not continue to see the same run rate going forward without continued government stimulus.</p>\n<p>Additionally, it faces several potential macroeconomic hurdles with respect to small business exposure, lending competitors, consumer transaction competitors, Bitcoin legislation and softening retail demand.</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>Square: The Bear Case</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\">\nSquare: The Bear Case\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 10:03 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436723-square-the-bear-case><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nOn the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong revenue growth and a large Cash App user base.\nIn reality, the company has struggled to translate its ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436723-square-the-bear-case\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SQ":"Block"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436723-square-the-bear-case","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1117734317","content_text":"Summary\n\nOn the surface, Square appears to be a growing company and a good investment with strong revenue growth and a large Cash App user base.\nIn reality, the company has struggled to translate its top line into bottom line earnings.\nThis has resulted in Square expanding its products to justify exaggerated revenue valuations which may never result in meaningful earnings growth.\nAnd whilst at first glance its Cash App story appears to be a budding prospect, it may be nothing more than temporary growth based on necessity.\nGiven the current valuation and the increasing Bitcoin headwinds, Square could face significant revisions downwards in revenue and earnings.\n\nAndreyPopov/iStock via Getty Images\nIntroduction\nSquare Inc.(NYSE:SQ)is one of the most popular stocks among retail traders and investors, ranking 57 in Robinhood's top 100 rankings. This has resulted in a 135% increase in price over the last year allowing SQ to reach a market capitalization of greater than $100bln, trading with the volatility of a mid-cap company.\nOn the surface the price and valuation may seem justified, with the company sequentially increasing revenues and expanding its portfolio of products through Cash App, Bitcoin (BTC-USD), PPP loans and most recently delving into the commercial loans business with a banking license via Square Financial Services.\nHowever, these valuations are becoming disaggregated from the fundamentals of the company and its core business on speculation of future revenue projections which are heavily reliant on Bitcoin revenues.\nSource: Author, with data from SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Historical Financial Information)\nIn addition to this, SQ potentially faces several other issues related to small business positioning; policy and regulation; and general macroeconomic factors which may create headwinds that will impact its valuation and pose an asymmetric downside risk for investors, which I will extrapolate on below.\nOverview\nSQ is a payment processing and business tool provider that facilitates transactions between businesses / sellers and individuals and provides them with hardware, online infrastructure and analytics. Additionally, it services individuals through Cash App which appears to be growing exponentially and allows users to send, receive, hold and invest money, and recently Bitcoin.\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter - Cash App Inflows vs Gross Profit)\nAs of March 2020, the company has received a Banking License from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to originate commercial loans to retailers which use SQ for payment processing.\nGiven all of this positive news, it is not surprising that the stock has rallied over 330% in the last 3 years on the basis of future growth projections and, since 2020, has chased revenue estimates.\nThis was a common occurrence during COVID, as unchartered waters meant that top line growth was imperative for survival. Further, seemingly endless money printing by the Fed, combined with zero rates, meant money flowed into stocks which showed the highest potential for growth.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs EPS Estimates and Revenue Estimates 2021)\nHowever, in Q1 2021, as the printing slowed, yields began to rise and federal transfers to individuals dissipated, and consequently ever increasing revenue estimates began to mean less for the market, resulting in SQ price action ranging between $200 to $280.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price YTD)\nQuantitative\nYear to Date, SQ has been a good performer relative to the payment processing sector, returning ~12% price increases to shareholders.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ vs Payment Processing Sector >$50 bln Year to Date)\nIt is also not a surprise to see why when evaluated against these companies on a forward earnings and revenue basis. SQ has above average and median earnings growth for 2021 and 2022, as well as strong revenue growth for 2021.\nSource: Author, Sector Comparison (Payment Processors)\nWhilst SQ's forward PE seems exaggerated in contrast to its counterparts, its forward PS is relatively small and below the sector averages and median, perhaps justifying its present value.\nHowever, once you remove Bitcoin revenue from the equation, you get much more exaggerated forward PS estimates on much lower revenue growth, which represents SQ's primary business.\nFor this equation, I have removed Bitcoin revenue from their Q1 2021 results, and judging by average analyst expectations which show little to no sequential revenue growth from Q2-Q4 2021, multiplied this figure by 4x for a year end revenue estimate of $6,140.70 mln. For prior years, I have removed Bitcoin from Revenue.\nSource: Author, SQ Revenue Growth (2018 to 2021 Estimates with Bitcoin vs excl Bitcoin)\nSource: Author, SQ vs Sector Comps (Revenue Estimates excl Bitcoin)\nAs we can see this paints a very different picture of the company, and whilst revenue is still growing slightly above comps which also have high PS ratios, suddenly valuations on earnings look more meaningful and it becomes difficult to justify a forward PE 3x above the average and 4.5x above the median. Especially when companies such as American Express Co (AXP), Mastercard Inc (MA), PayPal Holdings Inc (PYPL) and Visa Inc (V) are producing on average 4x higher EPS. The majority of which pay a dividend and have similar growth estimates with less volatility risk.\nMany will suggest that \"this does not matter as BTC is now part of their revenue metrics and that is that, besides transaction volume is what is important\". However, I would cite the example of the 2018 Bitcoin sell off in which Bitcoin fell 70%, and transaction volumes fell from highs by approximately 75% as well:\nSource: Bitcoinvisuals.com (Bitcoin Market Volume 2018)\nOn a valuation basis, this presents a substantial downside risk to investors if Bitcoin continued to retrace as a result of being met by increased regulation globally, as the company is essentially trading on revenue metrics propped up by Bitcoin. Quite simply, price down in Bitcoin could mean downwards revisions to revenue estimates and consequently a highly volatile retracement in the price of SQ.\nSource: Author, using data from YCHARTS (SQ Price Correlation - Revenue, EPS and EBITDA)\nThis becomes increasingly likely given the historical volatility of the stock when compared to its peers and it is not surprising that it is also becoming a consensus short position.\nSource: Author (SQ vs Sector Comps Implied and Realized Volatility and Short Interest)\nGiven the analysis by another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend in which the author suggests that SQ's 2025 growth is essentially priced in I would have to agree. SQ's reliance on revenue estimates which have been amplified substantially by Bitcoin present an asymmetric risk to the downside in the short to medium term for investors.\nMacro\nWhilst we are in the process of reopening, many things remain uncertain, such as the level of demand sustainability, job growth and creation, and inflation.\nWhilst the sentiment is overall positive in the media, there are several macroeconomic issues that are beneath the surface which need to be resolved before we can conclude that we are in the clear.\nSmall Business Environment\nSQ's MRQ shows that nearly 49% of the Gross Profit comes from the Seller ecosystem (small businesses).\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Page 39 - Segmented Gross Profit)\nThe majority of this is originating from exposure to sellers with <$500,000 Gross Payment Volume (69.5%). This makes square substantially exposed to fluctuations in the small business cycle.\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter)\nDelving into the Business Formation Statistics, there is a rosy picture, with over 500,000 business applications for the month of May, 2021 providing an endless surge of opportunity for SQ.\nSource: Census.gov (Business Applications, May 2021)\nAgain, when we dig deeper and look at the statistics below which rank the optimism of established small businesses, the picture begins to distort and starts to look like the descent into 2008.\nSource: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Optimism, May 2021)\nFurther, when we examine Small Business future outlook on expansion, this has also descended to lows and similar to what was seen in 2008. This could suggest that the bread and butter of SQ's gross profit margin, may not expand at the rate previously seen during 2017 to 2020.\nSource: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Outlook, May 2021)\nAdditionally, it should be noted that the two primary reasons small businesses are giving for their negative outlook are \"Economic Conditions\" and \"Political Climate\", which could be related to the election in 2020, COVID, recent policy changes and be somewhat transitory. Alternatively it could resemble the slow march of 2008 to 2016, we simply do not know, except for the fact it is a low reading and consequently could weigh on SQ's high revenue and earnings growth estimates.\nSource: NFIB (Small Business Economic Trends - Reasons for Outlook, May 2021)\nSmall Business Lending\nLooking forward, SQ clearly aims to solidify its position in the commercial lending space through acquiring a banking license. This is very positive for the company due to their large and growing small business user base,their experience since 2014, and the PPP program, which stopped on May 31, 2021.\nCurrently, bank lending has receded as a result of recovery efforts from COVID.\nSource: YCHARTS (US Commercial Banks - Commercial and Industrial Loans)\nThis can be verified through the credit conditions index in the monthly NFIB report. Although, an American Banker survey is reporting that 86% of small businesses are finding it difficult to access credit, and are having to resort to personal credit.\nThis is positive for SQ as it will allow them to fill the gap for credit to small business within the market. Though I believe it will be short lived as there is speculation that when the Fed tapers, they will also announce the lifting of capital restraints placed on Wells Fargo & Company (WFC).\nSource: Credit Suisse (Global Money Dispatch - 25 May 2021)\nThere is a fairly good probability that this will occur, given that early in 2020 the Fed had lifted these restraints to help small businesses via the PPP program and tapering has a history of upsetting the market. If this occurs, I suspect WFC will become a giant amongst the small business credit space once more and be a very tough competitor to SQ due to their extensive network and history in the space.\nBitcoin, Legislation & Gensler\nBitcoin has been making headlines as of 2H 2020 and much of 1H 2021 for good reason. It is gaining traction amongst retail traders and investors and has shown exceptional appreciation. Further, some minor banks have been interested in the medium although many banks and financial institutions have explicitly banned the purchase of Bitcoin using their services.\nThe primary reasons for their objection is more than likely to do with illicit activities, such as money laundering,terrorism,fake transaction volumes, and similar activities which I do not want to get into and neither do banks.\nConsequently, on the recent hype, many countries are now stepping in to regulate the use of Bitcoin, but others are going a step further and are enacting legislation to ban its use and mining, most notably,China and India.\nThis has had a negative impact on the price of Bitcoin since the ATHs in May 2021 of ~$65,000, retracing -46% since then.\nIt is also extremely negative for Bitcoin going forward as the majority of Bitcoin mining is done in China (~70% YTD) with Hashrates of mining being correlated to the price. Therefore if these recede on decreasing Chinese mining activity, price could surely follow, affecting SQ's Bitcoin holdings and future transaction volumes.\nSource: Cambridge University (Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index YTD)\nWhilst the SEC has come out and said that Bitcoin regulation is not on their agenda for 2021, Gary Gensler has warned investors to be cautious. Gensler is also has a long history on regulations to protect investors, and despite not putting Bitcoin on the agenda for 2021, I advise readers to study his history with respect to 2000 and 2008.\nLooking out further, this does not bode well for Bitcoin and SQ, generally. It is likely that there could be further regulation rather than adoption, negatively impacting its price, leading to a repeat of 2018 lower volumes as well as mining activity.\nGeneral Economy - The Worry for Retail\nSeparately, we could also be seeing a negative situation for retail going forward. Much of the recovery in retail as not been driven by \"pent up demand\" but mostly through subsidies issued throughout 2020 and the start of 2021. When examining the graph below, we can see that once you subtract transfer receipts (government stimulus cheques and employment benefits - red line), income is not what it used to be.\nSource: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Disposable Income vs Real Income minus Transfers vs Personal Savings vs Retail Trade Sales)\nAdditionally, we can see that much of the spikes in retail sales (purple) have been driven mainly through the stimulus cheques which bolstered disposable income (blue) and consumer savings (green), though now stimulus has ended and people are having to start to dig into their savings, which is dropped 54% month on month between March and April.\nThe consumer spending situation is made worse when examining U6 unemployment, which is considered to be the most revealing amongst economists as it includes unemployed, underemployed and discouraged job seekers. This, generally speaking, does not bode well for consumer discretionary spending patterns going forward.\nSource: Macrotrends.net (U6 Unemployment Rate vs U5 vs Official)\nFinally, the rising cost of food and energy, which for food I expect to continue, should hamper consumer discretionary spend going forward. I have previously written articles on The Mosaic Company (MOS)hereand The Andersons (ANDE)here, which outline my justification for this trend.\nIn relation to SQ, we can see their historical exposure to consumer discretionary spend based on end 2019 data. When taking into account figures from: retail; professional services, beauty and personal care, home and repair, leisure and entertainment, and casual use, the total exposure is approximately 59%.\nSource: Statista (Raynor de Best - GPV by Seller Industry Dec 2019)\nWhilst this may not impact its revenue figures substantially due to the weighting of bitcoin, I do expect this to undermine is gross profit figures going forward and negatively impact margins as stimulus further fades.\nFinancials\nBitcoin\nWhen examining the financials of SQ we can easily see that Bitcoin is the predominant factor driving its revenue growth (MRQ 69% of total revenue) of which its valuation is derived (see above Introduction section - SQ Price vs Revenue Segments; and Quantitative section - SQ Price correlation).\nFrom their Q1 2021 Shareholder Letter, page 12 they have stated that on March 31, 2021 the fair value of their holdings was $472 million. On this date the closing price was $58,918.83, or approximately 8,011 Bitcoins. They also state they initially invested $200 million into bitcoin during this period and Q4, so their average price is roughly $25,000 per Bitcoin.\nCurrently, the price of Bitcoin sits at approximately $34,600 and it also appears to be struggling to find traction, especially when you examine some other trends. For example, looking at search trends of \"Buy Bitcoin\" on Google Trends, this is clearly waning.\nSource: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - Worldwide 5 Yrs)\nAdditionally, when you align this data with stimulus payments it is clear there is a relationship between the two in 2H 2020, and much of the recent speculation could be driven by government subsidies.\nSource: USA.Gov (COVID Stimulus Cheque Dates)\nThe spike in searches occurs roughly around the time of the two latter government stimulus cheques with a lag of a few days to a few weeks.\nSource: Google Trends (Buy Bitcoin search terms - USA 12 Months)\nThis also coincides with Bitcoin's price run up in December 2020 and January 2021, as well the failed rally in March and April 2021.\nSource: YCHARTS (Bitcoin Price 1 Yr)\nThus, in this example, if we have a continued sell off of -70%, which is similar to what occurred in 2018. We would be back at November 2020 Bitcoin prices of $20,000 approximately.\nThis is still feasible on the basis of dwindling volume, further legislation and declining hashrates. It could also be theorized that SQ may carry an impairment charge of $40 million, which would greatly affect operating income, net income and shareholder earnings and future estimates. Though this is purely theoretical without accounting for transactions in the current quarter, such as purchases or sales at or near ATHs.\nAdditionally, with the lack of stimulus payments going forward and tighter consumer discretionary spend, the revenue generated from Bitcoin may also decline as less money enters the space and volumes decline. Negatively impacting revenue estimates for SQ and subsequently their price and valuation.\nCash App\nOn the surface, it looks like Cash App is growing exponentially into a viable platform for users to transact, with more than 36 million monthly transacting active customers, up 50% YoY.\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter)\nHowever, this growth in Cash App may be unsustainable going forward, with SQ elaborating on this in their Quarterly filing notes:\n\n Cash App revenue benefited from growth in numbers of active Cash App customers and from \n government relief programs most recently passed into law in late December 2020 and in March 2021, as well as cumulative benefit from earlier stimulus programs passed in 2020. These programs provided additional stimulus relief and unemployment benefits which resulted in an increase in consumer spending and inflows into our Cash App ecosystem. Cash App revenue growth may not be sustained at the same levels in future quarters and may be impacted by the enactment of further stimulus relief and benefit programs, as well as the demand and market prices for bitcoin, amongst other factors.\n\n\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q1 2021 10Q Filings - Page 49)\n\nPart of the issue with Cash App is theoretical continued use and future adoption. Much of the growth seen over the last year was predominantly fueled by stimulus payments through the Cash App ecosystem, and therefore by necessity given the circumstances.\nThe two sharp spikes in searches for the app occurred on:\n\nApril 12-18 2020\nJanuary 24-30 2021\n\nThese coincide with stimulus payments as they initially sent them and they gradually deposited them into people's accounts.\nSource: Google Trends (Cash App search terms - USA 5 Years)\nTherefore, as government stimulus payments end, and Bitcoin again fades from relevancy, and more people return to work and day-trade less, this could negatively impact user growth metrics going forward, impacting SQ revenue estimates, gross profit figures, and its earnings.\nFurther, there are a multitude of other more viable platforms, which another Seeking Alpha contributor,The Value Trend, has elaborated onhere.\nIt is also important to keep in mind how they define these users, a \"Transacting active Cash App customer\" is the following:\n\n ... has at least\n one financial transactionusing any product or service within Cash App during the specified period.\n\n\nSource: SQ Investor Relations (Q4 2020 Shareholder Letter - Page 4)\n\nSo, if a customer received their wages from an employer, or unemployment benefit, into Cash App once per month, and transferred all of it to their bank account once per month, they are a \"transacting active Cash App customer\"...\nPerhaps a better quantifier of an \"active\" customer would be greater than 5 transactions.\nTechnicals\nExamining the technicals of SQ, it is clear that the stock is now ranging between $200 and $280, with several breakout attempts at $250 and 2 failed attempts near $300, showing several signs that momentum is dying out.\nSource: Author, with data from FINVIZ (SQ Chart)\nWhen examining dark pool order flows, there is a possibility for the current rally to continue as dark pools are at lows, which may likely continue into earnings by August. Although I would not get my hopes up unless some seriously good news occurs and Bitcoin rallies back to ATHs.\nSource: Squeezemetrics.com (SQ Dark Pools vs Implied Vol 2 Years)\nFrom the 13F filings, we can also see that many funds have reduced exposure and closed their positions, with fewer new positions being added. The Put to Call ratio is also becoming quite high, especially on a stock that has $100 bln market cap, signaling that we are not the only ones thinking the same thing.\nCaution is required though, as SQ's issues with Bitcoin are obviously becoming a consensus trade, and when those puts are lifted, gamma may turn positive and it could cause the stock to rally significantly.\nSource: Whalewisdom.com (SQ Funds Positioning)\nFurther, with relation to ARK ETFs, it is no surprise that there have been significant liquidity issues the last 6 months, and I agree with another Seeking Alpha contributor's thesisherethat we will see a reversion to the mean with respect to prices of stocks held in these ETFs. What can be noted is that Cathie has significantly reduced her exposure to SQ and that she may be picking her battles.\nSource: Cathiesark.com (SQ Shares Held - All ETFs)\nGiven the above information, this is a difficult company to be short. It will either payoff enormously, or rip your face off due to its volatility. Additionally there are many funds wanting some small level of exposure to a company with Bitcoin on the financial statements. Therefore, if you were to trade this as a short at your own risk, discretion is advised and you should always pick your battles.\nPrice Targets\nOn the basis of volatility through SQ's ATR it is possible that SQ could move to a low of approximately $100 by the end of the year, moving in favor 40% of the time. This aligns with my year end 2021 price if you remove Bitcoin entirely from the equation.\nSource: Author (SQ ATR Calculator)\nHowever, it would not be sensible to do this as it is part of their revenue for the time being, no matter how high Bitcoin volumes were in the start of 2021 and how low they may be at the end of the year.\nI do expect the stock to fall again and retest $200, possibly breaking down to $160. Though it is very difficult to determine a valuation with SQ, mainly because the valuation is derived from Bitcoin revenues, and also the perceived value by funds and the market in the future adoption of the asset.\nIf the market begins to perceive Bitcoin again as irrelevant, I would expect SQ to slowly sell off to between $150 and $160 (-37% downside) with a low probability that it will rally past $300 (25% upside).\nRisks\nWith respect to SQ the following risks should be noted.\nThe company is growing, whether you like SQ or not. The main questions are: Will the market value Bitcoin on any realistic basis? How much is it growing with and without Bitcoin? What is the potential future growth with and without Bitcoin? And does the market believe it, or for that matter care?\nIf the Bitcoin fades from relevancy, and judging by Google Trends, it is more likely than it is not, it is not outlandish to assume that SQ will suffer as a result of this and over the 2H 2021 and take a substantial hit to revenue estimates. However, if Bitcoin adoption increases and negative news fades, since this is a growth company, it could simply continue rallying.\nFurther, consumer spending patterns are producing mixed data, and above I have presented a bear case. This could easily turn the other way if people's behavior changes, such as applying for jobs which will increase spending in the economy and hopefully produce small business growth and increase small business optimism and expansion, which is very beneficial for SQ as a cyclical business in the payment processing space.\nAgain, caution is necessary, though I do think that future growth of the company is priced in and there is a higher risk to holders of SQ to the downside than to the upside.\nSummary\nSQ is a high growth company with some potential positive points in the long run; however, its valuation is highly questionable due to its high revenue estimates predominantly derived from Bitcoin transactions and not bottom-line earnings growth.\nFrom a quantitative perspective, it looks good amongst its peers but upon further examination it appears to be extremely overvalued as future growth, at least for 2021, may be derived from Bitcoin. Further, its Cash App adoption statistics may not continue to see the same run rate going forward without continued government stimulus.\nAdditionally, it faces several potential macroeconomic hurdles with respect to small business exposure, lending competitors, consumer transaction competitors, Bitcoin legislation and softening retail demand.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":149,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127085337,"gmtCreate":1624803689129,"gmtModify":1633948490608,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127085337","repostId":"1137119316","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1137119316","pubTimestamp":1624754401,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1137119316?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-27 08:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137119316","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.With Ford  launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO  will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based ","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>I am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.</li>\n <li>The comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.</li>\n <li>NIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5033fa117d7852799244b8275bc1000f\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"886\"><span>peterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p>With Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.</p>\n<p><b>Ford vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up</b></p>\n<p>Although there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing&nbsp;$30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.</p>\n<p><b>Market opportunity</b></p>\n<p>In 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b48c23b32134542f51227d9b1b612887\" tg-width=\"1083\" tg-height=\"863\"><span>(Source: Wikipedia)</span></p>\n<p>China, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is&nbsp;on the cusp of entering the European market&nbsp;in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.</p>\n<p>Beijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a&nbsp;twenty percent share&nbsp;of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9871e44eaf69adb27151425887870ace\" tg-width=\"739\" tg-height=\"454\"><span>(Source:Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>Turning to growth projections.</p>\n<p>With more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61d19dff2f34e2d8828aca854e85d84a\" tg-width=\"825\" tg-height=\"565\"><span>(Source:McKinsey)</span></p>\n<p>Since China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Scale and manufacturing competence</b></p>\n<p>Ford has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.</p>\n<p>Since NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.</p>\n<p>Winner here: Ford.</p>\n<p><b>Differentiation and BaaS revenue model</b></p>\n<p>Both Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.</p>\n<p>Ford is&nbsp;forming a joint venture&nbsp;with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has&nbsp;formed its own joint venture&nbsp;to secure battery supply.</p>\n<p>The difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.</p>\n<p>The BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.</p>\n<p>Ford and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.</p>\n<p>Battery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c42acb75905affe7570a2f399ea3192f\" tg-width=\"758\" tg-height=\"449\"><span>(Source: Schroders)</span></p>\n<p>The “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.</p>\n<p><b>Sales growth and valuation</b></p>\n<p>Ford’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.</p>\n<p>Ford's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/df5a0a393e44ed74241c5effcdd92350\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"419\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!</p>\n<p>Due to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/817605c6b1e82c03d0473ea570d32b8f\" tg-width=\"506\" tg-height=\"406\"><span>(Source: Author)</span></p>\n<p><b>NIO has larger risks...</b></p>\n<p>NIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.</p>\n<p><b>Final verdict</b></p>\n<p>NIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.</p>\n<p>Ford’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.</p>\n<p>If you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.</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>Ford Or NIO? The Final Verdict</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\">\nFord Or NIO? The Final Verdict\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-27 08:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"F":"福特汽车","NIO":"蔚来"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436600-ford-or-nio-the-final-verdict","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1137119316","content_text":"Summary\n\nI am comparing Ford against NIO in different categories.\nThe comparison is intended to improve the understanding of Ford's and NIO's growth potential while highlighting differences in market position and opportunities.\nNIO is growing a lot faster than Ford and the high valuation may be justified.\n\npeterschreiber.media/iStock via Getty Images\nWith Ford (F) launching a major offensive in the market for electric vehicles, Chinese EV maker NIO (NIO) will face one more rival competing for sales in the future. Which vehicle maker offers the best deal based on market opportunity, scale, revenue model, growth prospects and valuation? I will compare Ford against NIO in each category and issue a final verdict at the end.\nFord vs. NIO: The battle for the global electric vehicle market is heating up\nAlthough there is a world of difference between Ford and NIO, both companies are set to go toe-to-toe in the rapidly growing global electric vehicle market. Ford’s fleet is not yet EV-focused but this is going to change: Feeling that the EV race is heating up, Ford said it is accelerating its electrification plan by investing $30B into its EV manufacturing capabilities until 2025. Ford’s previous capital plan called for a $22B investment in zero-emission vehicles. Ford also set an ambitious sales goal: 40% of its global sales will be electric within the next decade and 33% of pickup truck sales. Electric vehicle sales account for just 1% of Ford's sales today. As Ford is phasing out combustion engines, it is set to evolve into an all-electric vehicle maker by 2040.\nMarket opportunity\nIn 2020, 3.2m electric vehicles were sold in the world which represented a small market share of just 4.2%. China, however, was responsible for buying 41% of all electric vehicles in the world in 2020. Chinese buyers purchased 1.3m electric vehicles last year and sales are set to grow fast as Beijing seeks to boost EV adoption. The second largest market for electric vehicles was Europe which accounted for 42% of global EV sales. The US is only the third-largest market for plug-in electric vehicles in the world.\n(Source: Wikipedia)\nChina, by far, is the fastest growing EV market in the world, although Europe is catching up fast, in part due to a legislative efforts to increase adoption of zero-emission passenger vehicles and because of massive investments in a Europe-wide charging station network. NIO is on the cusp of entering the European market in a bid to grow market share in the world’s second-largest EV market before the competition is ready.\nBeijing is a driver behind the electrification of the Chinese auto industry: The government wants to see a twenty percent share of electric vehicles for new car sales by 2025 which will drive EV penetration in NIO’s home market.\n(Source:Schroders)\nTurning to growth projections.\nWith more favorable government policies for EV makers in places like China and Europe, these markets are poised to see the fastest sales growth and the highest EV adoption rates in the world. China is not only the largest market due to population size but is also expected to outperform all other markets in the world in EV sales until 2030.\n(Source:McKinsey)\nSince China has a larger total market size, a higher EV adoption rate, stronger expected sales growth and a more favorable regulatory framework, the winner here would be: NIO.\nScale and manufacturing competence\nFord has a century’s worth of manufacturing experience. But Ford, so far, has only one all-electric vehicle in its product line-up that compares to NIO: The Mustang Mach-E SUV. In 2022, Ford will begin to sell the all-electric F-150 Lightening which builds on the success of Ford’s best-selling pick-up truck. NIO already has a stronger product catalog including the 5-seater ES6 SUV, the 5-seater coupe SUV EC6 and the ES8, a 6-seater and 7-seater full-sized SUV.\nSince NIO is solely focused on producing EVs and occupies a very small and defined niche, the Chinese firm has an advantage as far as EV-manufacturing expertise goes. The question is how long this advantage can last. Ford has extensive experience in building cars and can leverage a global manufacturing base to ramp up EV production faster than any niche EV maker could ever hope to achieve. This makes Ford a very serious rival not only to Tesla (TSLA) in the US, but also to NIO abroad. Ford is accelerating its electrification plans and it has the resources and the ambition to become a leader in EVs within the next decade. Ford’s proposed $30B spending on the electrification of its fleet will accelerate its transformation and turn Ford into a long term threat to other EV makers.\nWinner here: Ford.\nDifferentiation and BaaS revenue model\nBoth Ford and NIO know about the importance of differentiation in a market that will only get more competitive over time, which is why both companies are investing heavily in a related field that can break or solidify dominance in the EV market: Battery technology.\nFord is forming a joint venture with South Korean battery technology company SK Innovation to secure supply of traction battery cells and array modules. The joint venture is meant to accelerate battery deliveries and will produce approximately 60 GWh annually, enough to cover 25% of Ford’s estimated annual energy demand by 2030. NIO is also investing in battery technology and has formed its own joint venture to secure battery supply.\nThe difference to Ford is that NIO’s battery investment strategy revolves around a battery subscription model, also called “battery-as-a-service”, which creates a strong, long term revenue opportunity for the Chinese vehicle maker. Under this “BaaS” model, users who buy a NIO electric vehicle get a 70,000 RMB initial discount, equivalent to $10,800, and can sign up for a monthly subscription to rent a rechargeable 70 kWh battery. Batteries can then be exchanged at one of NIO’s battery-swapping stations which can be found in most big Chinese cities. A battery subscription costs 980 RMB monthly which is the equivalent of $150.\nThe BaaS model has a couple of benefits for both the vehicle maker and the user: Purchasing an electric vehicle from NIO gets a lot more affordable due to the up-front discount and the subscription model ensures that users benefit from advancement in battery technology and better performance over time. Decoupling battery costs from vehicle prices creates an entirely new revenue stream on a subscription basis for NIO. Revenues from “BaaS” subscriptions could be used to increase the density of NIO’s network of charging/replacement stations. The battery subscription model also binds customers to NIO, potentially increasing customer lifetime value.\nFord and NIO are primed to benefit from falling battery costs for electric vehicles as they ramp up capital allocations. As more investments flow into developing more efficient batteries, performance will go up and costs will go down which should drive EV adoption and benefit all EV makers. This is because lower battery prices make EVs more competitive to passenger vehicles with combustion engines. But since NIO is structuring a part of its business model explicitly around battery subscriptions, NIO could benefit more than Ford.\nBattery costs for EVs have decreased 70% since 2014, based on information provided by investment firm Schroders, and are set to decrease more this decade.\n(Source: Schroders)\nThe “BaaS” model is genius and could develop into a $500M a year revenue opportunity for NIO long term. Although Ford is ramping up its investments in battery technology, the winner in this category is: NIO.\nSales growth and valuation\nFord’s sales in May grew 4.1% Y/Y but electrified vehicle sales (including hybrids) surged 184% Y/Y as Ford sold a record 10,364 EVs/hybrids in May. Escape electrified sales and Explorer Hybrid grew sales at 125% and 132% Y/Y showing strong customer uptake. NIO delivered 6,711 vehicles last month including 3,017 ES6s, 1,412 ES8s and 2,282 EC6s. Total Y/Y delivery growth for May was 95.3%.\nFord's sales are fifty-four times larger than NIO's which creates more sales growth and revaluation potential for NIO.\nData by YCharts\nThe difference in valuation between Ford and NIO is like the difference between night and day. This is because Ford is still seen as a mature vehicle maker with expected enterprise sales growth in the low-to-mid digits, despite explosive growth in the EV category. Ford is expected to grow revenues by 33% until FY 2025 (base year: FY 2020) and NIO by 808%!\nDue to these differences in sales growth, NIO is the complete opposite of Ford, at least as far as valuation goes. The Chinese EV-maker is expected to see sales and delivery growth close to 100% this year and since NIO is only dealing in EVs, NIO gets a much higher market-cap-to-sales ratio than Ford.\n(Source: Author)\nNIO has larger risks...\nNIO is the more risky venture, but also the one that offers the most promise. Government policy favors EV-makers like NIO. The potential for total global sales growth is larger for NIO as it operates from a smaller revenue base compared to Ford. But there are also a few things that work against NIO. For example, recalls due to production defects would be a much bigger challenge for NIO to overcome than for Ford which can rely on a global service and distribution network. NIO’s valuation is also not without risk as an unexpected slowing of sales growth due to production setbacks would leave a much larger dent in the financials.\nFinal verdict\nNIO is definitely the more “sexy” vehicle maker. Strong adoption and sales growth in China and Europe support NIO. Its super smart BaaS model which decouples vehicle purchase prices from battery costs is genius. You pay a high price for this growth but the market opportunity for NIO is immense.\nFord’s EV sales are booming and the percentage of EV sales will increase as the vehicle maker electrifies its fleet. Ford has a lot of potential in the EV market but since EV sales are still a relatively low percentage of total sales, it will take a long time for Ford to complete its transformation.\nIf you believe in the potential of the global EV market, buy NIO. If you believe in the potential of the global EV market and don’t like much risk, buy Ford.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":6,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127082991,"gmtCreate":1624803604313,"gmtModify":1633948491642,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi//<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/U/3578041155490573\">@Ontariomario</a>:Hi","listText":"Hi//<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/U/3578041155490573\">@Ontariomario</a>:Hi","text":"Hi//@Ontariomario:Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/127082991","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":45,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125734111,"gmtCreate":1624692528233,"gmtModify":1633949495676,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/125734111","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":101,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123870037,"gmtCreate":1624418141629,"gmtModify":1634006391975,"author":{"id":"3578041155490573","authorId":"3578041155490573","authorIdStr":"3578041155490573","name":"Ontariomario","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92434f8bae3789bd7a7ff6fc1cc603ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3578041155490573"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like pls&nbsp;","listText":"Like pls&nbsp;","text":"Like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123870037","repostId":"2145068314","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":65,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}