QRTAY personal page - To The Moon

QRTAY

QRTAY

No personal profile

7Follow

1Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-06-29

$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$up

2021-06-29

??

The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years

2021-06-29

??

The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years

2021-06-29

?

The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years

2021-06-28

Weeee

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-28

Roar

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-28

Upup

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-28

Bull

The IPO Market Has Never Been Hotter Than It Is Right Now

2021-06-26

Gg

Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings

2021-06-26

Up

Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings

2021-06-26

Bear

Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings

2021-06-24

$The9(NCTY)$when will it rise back

2021-06-23

Nice

Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next

2021-06-23

Tiger

Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next

2021-06-23

Bull

Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next

2021-06-22

Bull

5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued

2021-06-22

Nice

5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued

2021-06-22

Oh

5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued

2021-06-21

Bill

Troubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines

2021-06-21

Tiger

Macau beefs up casino rules, more than doubles number of gaming investigators

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3568700586550868","uuid":"3568700586550868","gmtCreate":1608827961232,"gmtModify":1623815609707,"name":"QRTAY","pinyin":"qrtay","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":7,"tweetSize":21,"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":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.09.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-1","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Boss Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $100,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8dfc27c1ee0e25db1c93e9d0b641101","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f43908c142f8a33c78f5bdf0e2897488","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82165ff19cb8a786e8919f92acee5213","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"60.26%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","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":3,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":150218626,"gmtCreate":1624905225465,"gmtModify":1703847617348,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WISH\">$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$</a>up","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WISH\">$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$</a>up","text":"$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150218626","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":412,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150200273,"gmtCreate":1624899719892,"gmtModify":1703847570725,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150200273","repostId":"1143737614","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143737614","pubTimestamp":1624894513,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143737614?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 23:35","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143737614","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses th","content":"<p>The ratio of the S&amp;P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/069c8eaa303d1a01ad0421a13eb9731b\" tg-width=\"1309\" tg-height=\"830\"><span>Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>This simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.&nbsp; Optimism and pessimism.</p>\n<p>When people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store&nbsp;of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.</p>\n<p>Of course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst.&nbsp;And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened&nbsp;and&nbsp;led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time&nbsp;before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.</p>\n<p>The recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.</p>\n<p>Obviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years</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\">\nThe S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 23:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years\">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"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143737614","content_text":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.  Optimism and pessimism.\nWhen people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.\nOf course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst. And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened and led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.\nThe recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.\nObviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":254,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150200808,"gmtCreate":1624899706804,"gmtModify":1703847570510,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150200808","repostId":"1143737614","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143737614","pubTimestamp":1624894513,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143737614?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 23:35","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143737614","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses th","content":"<p>The ratio of the S&amp;P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/069c8eaa303d1a01ad0421a13eb9731b\" tg-width=\"1309\" tg-height=\"830\"><span>Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>This simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.&nbsp; Optimism and pessimism.</p>\n<p>When people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store&nbsp;of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.</p>\n<p>Of course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst.&nbsp;And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened&nbsp;and&nbsp;led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time&nbsp;before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.</p>\n<p>The recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.</p>\n<p>Obviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years</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\">\nThe S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 23:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years\">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"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143737614","content_text":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.  Optimism and pessimism.\nWhen people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.\nOf course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst. And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened and led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.\nThe recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.\nObviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":461,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150200920,"gmtCreate":1624899695960,"gmtModify":1703847569847,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150200920","repostId":"1143737614","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143737614","pubTimestamp":1624894513,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143737614?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 23:35","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143737614","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses th","content":"<p>The ratio of the S&amp;P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/069c8eaa303d1a01ad0421a13eb9731b\" tg-width=\"1309\" tg-height=\"830\"><span>Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>This simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.&nbsp; Optimism and pessimism.</p>\n<p>When people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store&nbsp;of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.</p>\n<p>Of course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst.&nbsp;And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened&nbsp;and&nbsp;led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time&nbsp;before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.</p>\n<p>The recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.</p>\n<p>Obviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years</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\">\nThe S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 23:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years\">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"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143737614","content_text":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.  Optimism and pessimism.\nWhen people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.\nOf course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst. And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened and led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.\nThe recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.\nObviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":239,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127623503,"gmtCreate":1624846798202,"gmtModify":1703846079474,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Weeee","listText":"Weeee","text":"Weeee","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127623503","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":351,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127623163,"gmtCreate":1624846787752,"gmtModify":1703846073408,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Roar","listText":"Roar","text":"Roar","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127623163","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":386,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127629279,"gmtCreate":1624846776291,"gmtModify":1703846072090,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Upup&nbsp;","listText":"Upup&nbsp;","text":"Upup","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127629279","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":355,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127629902,"gmtCreate":1624846763806,"gmtModify":1703846071426,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bull","listText":"Bull","text":"Bull","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127629902","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1157825898","pubTimestamp":1624843887,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1157825898?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 09:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The IPO Market Has Never Been Hotter Than It Is Right Now","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1157825898","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"Companies are racing to public markets like never before, cashing in onrecord-highstock prices.\nAn a","content":"<p>Companies are racing to public markets like never before, cashing in onrecord-highstock prices.</p>\n<p>An all-time high of almost $350 billion has been raised in initial public offerings in the first six months of this year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, surpassing the previous peak of $282 billion from the second half of 2020 and enriching entrepreneurs and bankers alike.</p>\n<p>When the rush for IPOs kicked off last year, stay-at-home technology dominated the scene, seizing on investor interest in anything digital, while special-purpose acquisition companies also flooded the market. This year, with stocks continuing to push skyward, the trend has broadened to include renewable-energy companies and online retailers.</p>\n<p>Everyone from Swedish oat-milk company&nbsp;Oatly Group ABto boot&nbsp;maker&nbsp;Dr. Martens Plcsold shares in 2021. Still, tech accounts for a big chunk of the deals.Didi Global Inc.will rank among the biggest U.S. IPOs of the past decade if the Chinese ride-hailing giant carries through with plans to sell as much as $4 billion in stock.</p>\n<p>“The markets from New York to Hong Kong were on fire in the first half of this year and have left even the late 90sdotcomboom era in the rearview mirror,” said Aaron Arth, head of the financing group at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in Asia ex-Japan.</p>\n<p>Riding High</p>\n<p>Stocks in hot sectors like tech and renewables top the charts this year...</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a964f7a00f127e828df8eaafdb668f3b\" tg-width=\"958\" tg-height=\"395\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Bloomberg NOTE: Listings with an offer size of $1 billion or more</span></p>\n<p>The boom has been fueled by a torrent of cash that central banks have pumped into the economy and the rise of individual investors, who are eager to buy a piece of their favorite companies.</p>\n<p>It’s delivered a windfall for investment banks around the world, who reap the rewards from underwriting and advisory fees. Goldman and Citigroup Inc. rank Nos. 1 and 2 in the global league tables for IPOs this year.</p>\n<p>With so many companies rushing to market, the industry is starting to look saturated. Investors say they can afford to be picky and are increasingly reluctant to pay steep valuations demanded by the fast-growing companies that populate the IPO market.</p>\n<p>As a result, a number of high-profile stocks have stumbled in theirtrading debutsthis year and some companies are gettingspooked. Food-delivery startupDeliveroo Plcplunged 26% on its first day of trading in London, whileOscar Health Inc., the insurance startup co-founded by Josh Kushner, has fallen 40% since joining the New York market.</p>\n<p>Down and Out</p>\n<p>...while those investors deemed too pricey bring up the rear</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/691814a92639672723f85bd73b226885\" tg-width=\"941\" tg-height=\"423\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: BloombergNOTE: Listings with an offer size of $1 billion or more</span></p>\n<p>Russia’sNord Gold Plcon Tuesday pulled its IPO, citing market uncertainty and swings in the gold price, whileGenworth Financial Inc.last month postponed a U.S. offering for its Enact Holdings Inc. mortgage-insurance unit. And Friday, Hong Kong-tradedGeely Automobile Holdings Ltd.withdrew its application for a listing in Shanghai.</p>\n<p>“There has been a certain level of exhaustion among investors and increased selectivity,” said Saadi Soudavar, co-head of equity capital markets for Europe, the Middle East and Africa at Deutsche Bank AG. “It’s a record year after all, so they can have their pick among the multiple transactions coming their way.”</p>\n<p>Investor appetite for one type of listing hasalready faded. SPACs accounted for almost half the proceeds raised in the IPO market in the first quarter, but their share shrunk to about 13% this quarter.</p>\n<p>An index that tracks SPAC listings has dropped 23% from a February high. The poor performance, along with tougher regulatory scrutiny has been a blow to market sentiment. U.S. officials have cautioned individual investors against celebrity-endorsed cash shells and are scrutinizing accounting practices.</p>\n<p>Still, as long as the stock market is rising, the flow of IPOs is unlikely to dry up, and total proceeds this year are on track to eclipse the record of $420.1 billion set in 2007. The IPO boom will likely continue for the next six to 12 months, said Rob Leach, European head of equity capital markets at Jefferies Financial Group Inc.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The IPO Market Has Never Been Hotter Than It Is Right Now</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\">\nThe IPO Market Has Never Been Hotter Than It Is Right Now\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 09:31 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-27/the-global-ipo-market-has-never-been-hotter-than-it-is-right-now><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Companies are racing to public markets like never before, cashing in onrecord-highstock prices.\nAn all-time high of almost $350 billion has been raised in initial public offerings in the first six ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-27/the-global-ipo-market-has-never-been-hotter-than-it-is-right-now\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"DOCMF":"DR MARTENS PLC","OTLY":"Oatly Group AB"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-27/the-global-ipo-market-has-never-been-hotter-than-it-is-right-now","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1157825898","content_text":"Companies are racing to public markets like never before, cashing in onrecord-highstock prices.\nAn all-time high of almost $350 billion has been raised in initial public offerings in the first six months of this year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, surpassing the previous peak of $282 billion from the second half of 2020 and enriching entrepreneurs and bankers alike.\nWhen the rush for IPOs kicked off last year, stay-at-home technology dominated the scene, seizing on investor interest in anything digital, while special-purpose acquisition companies also flooded the market. This year, with stocks continuing to push skyward, the trend has broadened to include renewable-energy companies and online retailers.\nEveryone from Swedish oat-milk company Oatly Group ABto boot maker Dr. Martens Plcsold shares in 2021. Still, tech accounts for a big chunk of the deals.Didi Global Inc.will rank among the biggest U.S. IPOs of the past decade if the Chinese ride-hailing giant carries through with plans to sell as much as $4 billion in stock.\n“The markets from New York to Hong Kong were on fire in the first half of this year and have left even the late 90sdotcomboom era in the rearview mirror,” said Aaron Arth, head of the financing group at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in Asia ex-Japan.\nRiding High\nStocks in hot sectors like tech and renewables top the charts this year...\nSource: Bloomberg NOTE: Listings with an offer size of $1 billion or more\nThe boom has been fueled by a torrent of cash that central banks have pumped into the economy and the rise of individual investors, who are eager to buy a piece of their favorite companies.\nIt’s delivered a windfall for investment banks around the world, who reap the rewards from underwriting and advisory fees. Goldman and Citigroup Inc. rank Nos. 1 and 2 in the global league tables for IPOs this year.\nWith so many companies rushing to market, the industry is starting to look saturated. Investors say they can afford to be picky and are increasingly reluctant to pay steep valuations demanded by the fast-growing companies that populate the IPO market.\nAs a result, a number of high-profile stocks have stumbled in theirtrading debutsthis year and some companies are gettingspooked. Food-delivery startupDeliveroo Plcplunged 26% on its first day of trading in London, whileOscar Health Inc., the insurance startup co-founded by Josh Kushner, has fallen 40% since joining the New York market.\nDown and Out\n...while those investors deemed too pricey bring up the rear\nSource: BloombergNOTE: Listings with an offer size of $1 billion or more\nRussia’sNord Gold Plcon Tuesday pulled its IPO, citing market uncertainty and swings in the gold price, whileGenworth Financial Inc.last month postponed a U.S. offering for its Enact Holdings Inc. mortgage-insurance unit. And Friday, Hong Kong-tradedGeely Automobile Holdings Ltd.withdrew its application for a listing in Shanghai.\n“There has been a certain level of exhaustion among investors and increased selectivity,” said Saadi Soudavar, co-head of equity capital markets for Europe, the Middle East and Africa at Deutsche Bank AG. “It’s a record year after all, so they can have their pick among the multiple transactions coming their way.”\nInvestor appetite for one type of listing hasalready faded. SPACs accounted for almost half the proceeds raised in the IPO market in the first quarter, but their share shrunk to about 13% this quarter.\nAn index that tracks SPAC listings has dropped 23% from a February high. The poor performance, along with tougher regulatory scrutiny has been a blow to market sentiment. U.S. officials have cautioned individual investors against celebrity-endorsed cash shells and are scrutinizing accounting practices.\nStill, as long as the stock market is rising, the flow of IPOs is unlikely to dry up, and total proceeds this year are on track to eclipse the record of $420.1 billion set in 2007. The IPO boom will likely continue for the next six to 12 months, said Rob Leach, European head of equity capital markets at Jefferies Financial Group Inc.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":341,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125975798,"gmtCreate":1624645191614,"gmtModify":1703842744139,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Gg","listText":"Gg","text":"Gg","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/125975798","repostId":"1165822342","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165822342","pubTimestamp":1624636113,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165822342?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-25 23:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165822342","media":"cnbc","summary":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing","content":"<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.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>Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings</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\">\nJim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 23:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NKE":"耐克","AAPL":"苹果","SBUX":"星巴克"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1165822342","content_text":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of developments Thursday evening that altered his present outlook: comments fromNikemanagement on its earnings conference call and remarks fromStarbucksCEO Kevin Johnson on“Mad Money.”\n“This is ... a clarion call for Apple; they make things there. If it’s good for Nike, good for Starbucks, it’s going to be good for Apple,” Cramer said on“Squawk Box.”\nWhile Nike’s sales in Greater China were up just 17% in its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended May 31, CFO Matt Friend said on the conference call that the company saw improvements in May and June after a weaker April.\nFriend also mentioned Nike’s 40-year history in the region and said, “We continue to invest in serving consumers with the best products Nike has to offer in locally relevant ways.”\nIn late March, Nike began to experience backlash in China for a statement regarding forced labor allegations in the western region of Xinjiang. Citi in Aprildowngraded Nike’s stock to neutral from buy, citing China concerns as a key reason.\nCramer had previously expressed concerns about geopolitics potentially weighing on Nike. Last week, for example, hesaid of Nike: “Great story, but not if China stays as important as it’s been.”\nShares of Nike were soaring Friday, rising by more than 13% to touch a new intraday all-time high.\nCramer said Johnson also relieved some of his near-term investment concerns surrounding China risk after he interviewed the Starbucks boss on “Mad Money.”\n“We have built Starbucks in China, for China,” Johnson told Cramer on Thursday, while also emphasizing the coffee chain’s intentions to lead “by example of how we can take care of all stakeholders.”\nReflecting on that interview and Nike’s call on“Squawk on the Street”on Friday, Cramer said: “I think that what happened last night with Nike and with Starbucks was incredible.”\nCramer said what he took away is “there is no rift between the People’s Republic of China government and American companies that build plants there, which means to me one of the big worries about Tesla — whether China would embrace it — [is] off the table.”\n“If I were an Apple analyst, I would say, you know what, I have much greater conviction that Apple is going to have good numbers because they build there,” Cramer added.\nThe U.S. is Apple’s biggest country for revenue, but mainland China is second, according to FactSet estimates.\nCramer said he also feels better now aboutSkyworks Solutions, which makes semiconductor components. “Skyworks builds there; I would buy Skyworks,” he said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":534,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125975485,"gmtCreate":1624645183147,"gmtModify":1703842744301,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Up","listText":"Up","text":"Up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/125975485","repostId":"1165822342","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165822342","pubTimestamp":1624636113,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165822342?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-25 23:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165822342","media":"cnbc","summary":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing","content":"<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.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>Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings</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\">\nJim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 23:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NKE":"耐克","AAPL":"苹果","SBUX":"星巴克"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1165822342","content_text":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of developments Thursday evening that altered his present outlook: comments fromNikemanagement on its earnings conference call and remarks fromStarbucksCEO Kevin Johnson on“Mad Money.”\n“This is ... a clarion call for Apple; they make things there. If it’s good for Nike, good for Starbucks, it’s going to be good for Apple,” Cramer said on“Squawk Box.”\nWhile Nike’s sales in Greater China were up just 17% in its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended May 31, CFO Matt Friend said on the conference call that the company saw improvements in May and June after a weaker April.\nFriend also mentioned Nike’s 40-year history in the region and said, “We continue to invest in serving consumers with the best products Nike has to offer in locally relevant ways.”\nIn late March, Nike began to experience backlash in China for a statement regarding forced labor allegations in the western region of Xinjiang. Citi in Aprildowngraded Nike’s stock to neutral from buy, citing China concerns as a key reason.\nCramer had previously expressed concerns about geopolitics potentially weighing on Nike. Last week, for example, hesaid of Nike: “Great story, but not if China stays as important as it’s been.”\nShares of Nike were soaring Friday, rising by more than 13% to touch a new intraday all-time high.\nCramer said Johnson also relieved some of his near-term investment concerns surrounding China risk after he interviewed the Starbucks boss on “Mad Money.”\n“We have built Starbucks in China, for China,” Johnson told Cramer on Thursday, while also emphasizing the coffee chain’s intentions to lead “by example of how we can take care of all stakeholders.”\nReflecting on that interview and Nike’s call on“Squawk on the Street”on Friday, Cramer said: “I think that what happened last night with Nike and with Starbucks was incredible.”\nCramer said what he took away is “there is no rift between the People’s Republic of China government and American companies that build plants there, which means to me one of the big worries about Tesla — whether China would embrace it — [is] off the table.”\n“If I were an Apple analyst, I would say, you know what, I have much greater conviction that Apple is going to have good numbers because they build there,” Cramer added.\nThe U.S. is Apple’s biggest country for revenue, but mainland China is second, according to FactSet estimates.\nCramer said he also feels better now aboutSkyworks Solutions, which makes semiconductor components. “Skyworks builds there; I would buy Skyworks,” he said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":222,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125975587,"gmtCreate":1624645175349,"gmtModify":1703842743977,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bear","listText":"Bear","text":"Bear","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/125975587","repostId":"1165822342","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165822342","pubTimestamp":1624636113,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165822342?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-25 23:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165822342","media":"cnbc","summary":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing","content":"<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.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>Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings</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\">\nJim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 23:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NKE":"耐克","AAPL":"苹果","SBUX":"星巴克"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1165822342","content_text":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of developments Thursday evening that altered his present outlook: comments fromNikemanagement on its earnings conference call and remarks fromStarbucksCEO Kevin Johnson on“Mad Money.”\n“This is ... a clarion call for Apple; they make things there. If it’s good for Nike, good for Starbucks, it’s going to be good for Apple,” Cramer said on“Squawk Box.”\nWhile Nike’s sales in Greater China were up just 17% in its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended May 31, CFO Matt Friend said on the conference call that the company saw improvements in May and June after a weaker April.\nFriend also mentioned Nike’s 40-year history in the region and said, “We continue to invest in serving consumers with the best products Nike has to offer in locally relevant ways.”\nIn late March, Nike began to experience backlash in China for a statement regarding forced labor allegations in the western region of Xinjiang. Citi in Aprildowngraded Nike’s stock to neutral from buy, citing China concerns as a key reason.\nCramer had previously expressed concerns about geopolitics potentially weighing on Nike. Last week, for example, hesaid of Nike: “Great story, but not if China stays as important as it’s been.”\nShares of Nike were soaring Friday, rising by more than 13% to touch a new intraday all-time high.\nCramer said Johnson also relieved some of his near-term investment concerns surrounding China risk after he interviewed the Starbucks boss on “Mad Money.”\n“We have built Starbucks in China, for China,” Johnson told Cramer on Thursday, while also emphasizing the coffee chain’s intentions to lead “by example of how we can take care of all stakeholders.”\nReflecting on that interview and Nike’s call on“Squawk on the Street”on Friday, Cramer said: “I think that what happened last night with Nike and with Starbucks was incredible.”\nCramer said what he took away is “there is no rift between the People’s Republic of China government and American companies that build plants there, which means to me one of the big worries about Tesla — whether China would embrace it — [is] off the table.”\n“If I were an Apple analyst, I would say, you know what, I have much greater conviction that Apple is going to have good numbers because they build there,” Cramer added.\nThe U.S. is Apple’s biggest country for revenue, but mainland China is second, according to FactSet estimates.\nCramer said he also feels better now aboutSkyworks Solutions, which makes semiconductor components. “Skyworks builds there; I would buy Skyworks,” he said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":180,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121510069,"gmtCreate":1624473561551,"gmtModify":1703837822060,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NCTY\">$The9(NCTY)$</a>when will it rise back","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NCTY\">$The9(NCTY)$</a>when will it rise back","text":"$The9(NCTY)$when will it rise back","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121510069","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":430,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129543334,"gmtCreate":1624378750528,"gmtModify":1703835073879,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129543334","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":126,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129549409,"gmtCreate":1624378742501,"gmtModify":1703835073393,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Tiger&nbsp;","listText":"Tiger&nbsp;","text":"Tiger","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129549409","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":115,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129549227,"gmtCreate":1624378734369,"gmtModify":1703835072584,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bull","listText":"Bull","text":"Bull","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129549227","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":160,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120368485,"gmtCreate":1624301044247,"gmtModify":1703832916411,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bull","listText":"Bull","text":"Bull","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/120368485","repostId":"2145084835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145084835","pubTimestamp":1624280460,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145084835?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145084835","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"If analysts are correct, these high-flying stocks will fizzle out over the next year.","content":"<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark <b>S&amp;P 500</b> since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.</p>\n<p>Not surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to <b>FactSet</b>, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.</p>\n<p>Based on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b04ade705354c4825038c4dfcd0187d9\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Palantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%</h3>\n<p>Since its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a>-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.</p>\n<p>The likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.</p>\n<p>Another possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.</p>\n<p>Over the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a38605bee8e62f3e8aa414fa24278e7e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Moderna: Implied downside of 11%</h3>\n<p>Biotech stock <b>Moderna</b> (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.</p>\n<p>Why the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.</p>\n<p>The other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.</p>\n<p>Based solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07841e6a8173146a0fbfddf95a0f1ccb\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>GameStop: Implied downside of 71%</h3>\n<p>This will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite <b>GameStop</b> (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it <i>still</i> implies up to 71% downside over the next year.</p>\n<p>The biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.</p>\n<p>Although the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.</p>\n<p>With sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7ff785aa0040a5565d474390f58b47a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Ocugen: Implied downside of 18%</h3>\n<p>Volatile clinical-stage biotech stock <b>Ocugen</b> (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.</p>\n<p>Arguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.</p>\n<p>What's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.</p>\n<p>Though it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f6037829ea3fb0ae1cae0b95d8d11e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>NVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%</h3>\n<p>Don't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says <b>NVIDIA</b> (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.</p>\n<p>One reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.</p>\n<p>Perhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.</p>\n<p>For what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 21:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","OCGN":"Ocugen","GME":"游戏驿站","NVDA":"英伟达","MRNA":"Moderna, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145084835","content_text":"Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark S&P 500 since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.\nNot surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to FactSet, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.\nBased on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nPalantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%\nSince its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's one-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.\nThe likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.\nAnother possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.\nOver the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nModerna: Implied downside of 11%\nBiotech stock Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's one of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.\nWhy the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.\nThe other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.\nBased solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nGameStop: Implied downside of 71%\nThis will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite GameStop (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it still implies up to 71% downside over the next year.\nThe biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.\nAlthough the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.\nWith sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nOcugen: Implied downside of 18%\nVolatile clinical-stage biotech stock Ocugen (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.\nArguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.\nWhat's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.\nThough it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nNVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%\nDon't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.\nOne reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.\nPerhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.\nFor what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":353,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120368557,"gmtCreate":1624301033479,"gmtModify":1703832916087,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/120368557","repostId":"2145084835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145084835","pubTimestamp":1624280460,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145084835?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145084835","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"If analysts are correct, these high-flying stocks will fizzle out over the next year.","content":"<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark <b>S&amp;P 500</b> since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.</p>\n<p>Not surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to <b>FactSet</b>, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.</p>\n<p>Based on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b04ade705354c4825038c4dfcd0187d9\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Palantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%</h3>\n<p>Since its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a>-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.</p>\n<p>The likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.</p>\n<p>Another possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.</p>\n<p>Over the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a38605bee8e62f3e8aa414fa24278e7e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Moderna: Implied downside of 11%</h3>\n<p>Biotech stock <b>Moderna</b> (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.</p>\n<p>Why the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.</p>\n<p>The other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.</p>\n<p>Based solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07841e6a8173146a0fbfddf95a0f1ccb\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>GameStop: Implied downside of 71%</h3>\n<p>This will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite <b>GameStop</b> (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it <i>still</i> implies up to 71% downside over the next year.</p>\n<p>The biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.</p>\n<p>Although the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.</p>\n<p>With sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7ff785aa0040a5565d474390f58b47a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Ocugen: Implied downside of 18%</h3>\n<p>Volatile clinical-stage biotech stock <b>Ocugen</b> (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.</p>\n<p>Arguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.</p>\n<p>What's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.</p>\n<p>Though it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f6037829ea3fb0ae1cae0b95d8d11e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>NVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%</h3>\n<p>Don't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says <b>NVIDIA</b> (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.</p>\n<p>One reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.</p>\n<p>Perhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.</p>\n<p>For what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 21:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","OCGN":"Ocugen","GME":"游戏驿站","NVDA":"英伟达","MRNA":"Moderna, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145084835","content_text":"Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark S&P 500 since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.\nNot surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to FactSet, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.\nBased on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nPalantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%\nSince its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's one-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.\nThe likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.\nAnother possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.\nOver the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nModerna: Implied downside of 11%\nBiotech stock Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's one of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.\nWhy the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.\nThe other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.\nBased solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nGameStop: Implied downside of 71%\nThis will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite GameStop (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it still implies up to 71% downside over the next year.\nThe biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.\nAlthough the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.\nWith sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nOcugen: Implied downside of 18%\nVolatile clinical-stage biotech stock Ocugen (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.\nArguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.\nWhat's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.\nThough it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nNVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%\nDon't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.\nOne reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.\nPerhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.\nFor what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":268,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120368839,"gmtCreate":1624301022621,"gmtModify":1703832915925,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh","listText":"Oh","text":"Oh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/120368839","repostId":"2145084835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145084835","pubTimestamp":1624280460,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145084835?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145084835","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"If analysts are correct, these high-flying stocks will fizzle out over the next year.","content":"<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark <b>S&amp;P 500</b> since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.</p>\n<p>Not surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to <b>FactSet</b>, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.</p>\n<p>Based on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b04ade705354c4825038c4dfcd0187d9\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Palantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%</h3>\n<p>Since its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a>-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.</p>\n<p>The likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.</p>\n<p>Another possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.</p>\n<p>Over the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a38605bee8e62f3e8aa414fa24278e7e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Moderna: Implied downside of 11%</h3>\n<p>Biotech stock <b>Moderna</b> (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.</p>\n<p>Why the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.</p>\n<p>The other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.</p>\n<p>Based solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07841e6a8173146a0fbfddf95a0f1ccb\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>GameStop: Implied downside of 71%</h3>\n<p>This will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite <b>GameStop</b> (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it <i>still</i> implies up to 71% downside over the next year.</p>\n<p>The biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.</p>\n<p>Although the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.</p>\n<p>With sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7ff785aa0040a5565d474390f58b47a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Ocugen: Implied downside of 18%</h3>\n<p>Volatile clinical-stage biotech stock <b>Ocugen</b> (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.</p>\n<p>Arguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.</p>\n<p>What's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.</p>\n<p>Though it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f6037829ea3fb0ae1cae0b95d8d11e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>NVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%</h3>\n<p>Don't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says <b>NVIDIA</b> (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.</p>\n<p>One reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.</p>\n<p>Perhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.</p>\n<p>For what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 21:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","OCGN":"Ocugen","GME":"游戏驿站","NVDA":"英伟达","MRNA":"Moderna, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145084835","content_text":"Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark S&P 500 since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.\nNot surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to FactSet, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.\nBased on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nPalantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%\nSince its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's one-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.\nThe likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.\nAnother possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.\nOver the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nModerna: Implied downside of 11%\nBiotech stock Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's one of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.\nWhy the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.\nThe other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.\nBased solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nGameStop: Implied downside of 71%\nThis will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite GameStop (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it still implies up to 71% downside over the next year.\nThe biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.\nAlthough the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.\nWith sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nOcugen: Implied downside of 18%\nVolatile clinical-stage biotech stock Ocugen (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.\nArguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.\nWhat's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.\nThough it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nNVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%\nDon't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.\nOne reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.\nPerhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.\nFor what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":221,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167125044,"gmtCreate":1624253499588,"gmtModify":1703831673439,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Bill&nbsp;","listText":"&nbsp;Bill&nbsp;","text":"Bill","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/167125044","repostId":"1135860567","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1135860567","pubTimestamp":1624243350,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1135860567?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 10:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Troubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1135860567","media":"WSJ","summary":"The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.More companies with steep financial challenges are seeking a lifeline from equity markets, eager to capitalize on thesurge of interest in stock buyingfrom nonprofessional investors. Earlier this month, coal miner Peabody Energy Corp.,offshore drilling contractor Transocean Ltd.and retailer Express Inc.,all announced plan","content":"<p>The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved&nbsp;AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.</p>\n<p>More companies with steep financial challenges are seeking a lifeline from equity markets, eager to capitalize on thesurge of interest in stock buyingfrom nonprofessional investors. Earlier this month, coal miner&nbsp;Peabody Energy Corp.,offshore drilling contractor&nbsp;Transocean Ltd.and retailer&nbsp;Express Inc.,all announced plans to sell stock, betting equity markets will support them despite heavy debt loads, recent losses and industry headwinds.</p>\n<p>Selling stock isn’t the typical way for distressed companies to grab a lifeline. More often, they are forced to seek out rescue loans, sell off assets or pursue a merger, which can be difficult because of their existing debt.</p>\n<p>But equity markets now are more open to supporting troubled issuers, in large part because of risk-hungry individual investors eager to speculate, according to bankers and investors following the trend.</p>\n<p>The planned equity sales, if successful, mark another way nonprofessional investors have reshaped financial markets since they began to demonstrate their collective power last year,creating opportunitiesfor finance executives in the process.</p>\n<p>“It’s a new phenomenon for some of these distressed companies,” said Scott Hartman, partner and co-head of corporate and traded credit at asset manager Värde Partners. “If I were in their seat, it makes a lot of sense to take equity capital when they can.”</p>\n<p>Peabody,Transoceanand Express are seeking to replicate—on a smaller scale—the capital-raising success of AMC, a favorite pick of individual investors who gather in online investing forums such as Reddit’s WallStreetBets.</p>\n<p>AMC raised $2.2 billionthrough several stock salesduring the pandemic, largely to an enthusiastic following of day traders, despite warnings it was at risk of bankruptcy.</p>\n<p>It is difficult to classify even a highly leveraged company as distressed when its access to equity is “seemingly infinite,” said Andy Moore, chief executive of B. Riley Securities Inc. His firm is acting as sales agent for Peabody, which earlier this month kicked off an effort to sell up to 12.5 million shares through an “at-the-market” offering. In such offerings, companies sell shares bit-by-bit at market prices in a manner that is accessible to individual investors as well as institutional ones.</p>\n<p>Since exiting bankruptcy in 2017, Peabody has faced difficulties as utilities rely less on coal, and it restructured debt in February to avert a default. The company’s bonds trade at discounts of between 69 and 78 cents on the dollar, indicating market doubts they will be fully repaid. It reported an $80 million net loss in the first quarter amid continued weak conditions for the coal industry.</p>\n<p>Express, the apparel retailer, borrowed money from private-equity firm Sycamore Partners in January to stockpile cash for surviving the pandemic. Then the company launched an ATM stock sale earlier this month, aiming to sell up to 15 million new shares, despite reporting a loss of $405 million for the last fiscal year as a result of the pandemic and its impact on shopping.</p>\n<p>On Tuesday, offshore drillerTransoceanjoined in with an offering of up to $400 million in shares despite a junk credit rating, more than $7 billion in debt, andongoing creditor litigationover its restructuring efforts last year.</p>\n<p>Peabody and Express didn’t respond to requests for comment. Transocean referred inquiries to its securities filings.</p>\n<p>Jamie Zimmerman, founder and CEO of hedge-fund manager Litespeed Management LLC, said that some troubled companies may be unable to raise new debt, and selling stock may be their only path to obtain financing.</p>\n<p>“You don’t get unless you ask,” said Dan Zwirn, founder and chief executive of asset manager Arena Investors LP. “If I’m structurally insolvent and can’t refinance myself into extending the life of the enterprise, I might as well take this shot.”</p>\n<p>“With this infusion of retail people, there are more counterparties for such a transaction,” Mr. Zwirn added.</p>\n<p>Inflows of capital from individual investors, some using money from federal stimulus funds to open trading accounts, have buoyed the broader stock market, driving gains of more than10% year-to-datefor the Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index.</p>\n<p>Individual investors’ share of overall U.S. equities trading volume rose last year to roughly double what it was a decade before andcontinues to grow. At times, their bets on beaten-down stocks havebeat out institutional investors.</p>\n<p>Howard Fischer, a securities lawyer with Moses &amp; Singer LLP, said that the underlying economic health now seems less important than the unbridled enthusiasm of individual investors, even if that enthusiasm is divorced from any rational economic analysis.</p>\n<p>Hertz Global Holdings Inc.tried to ride a wave of interest from retail traders to finance itself last year while it was under bankruptcy protection, and ended up scrapping the effort under pressure from the Securities and Exchange Commission.</p>\n<p>The bullish individual investors who bet on the business shortly after it filed for chapter 11 were vindicated when Hertz found buyers agreeing to pay up to $8 a share in value.</p>\n<p>Adi Habbu, a director on the credit trading desk atBarclays PLC,said widespread bullishness in equity markets goes beyond retail traders, and is fueled by the economic recovery and the easing of pandemic restrictions.</p>\n<p>“It’s certainly not a bad time to try,” he said. “The core trend is that there is positive reopening sentiment that is driven not just by retail but by institutional players as well.”</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>Troubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines</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\">\nTroubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 10:42 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/troubled-companies-take-page-from-amc-playbook-in-seeking-stock-market-lifelines-11624190402?mod=markets_lead_pos6><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.\nMore companies with ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/troubled-companies-take-page-from-amc-playbook-in-seeking-stock-market-lifelines-11624190402?mod=markets_lead_pos6\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线","RIG":"Transocean Ltd.","BTU":"Peabody","EXPR":"Express, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/troubled-companies-take-page-from-amc-playbook-in-seeking-stock-market-lifelines-11624190402?mod=markets_lead_pos6","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1135860567","content_text":"The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.\nMore companies with steep financial challenges are seeking a lifeline from equity markets, eager to capitalize on thesurge of interest in stock buyingfrom nonprofessional investors. Earlier this month, coal miner Peabody Energy Corp.,offshore drilling contractor Transocean Ltd.and retailer Express Inc.,all announced plans to sell stock, betting equity markets will support them despite heavy debt loads, recent losses and industry headwinds.\nSelling stock isn’t the typical way for distressed companies to grab a lifeline. More often, they are forced to seek out rescue loans, sell off assets or pursue a merger, which can be difficult because of their existing debt.\nBut equity markets now are more open to supporting troubled issuers, in large part because of risk-hungry individual investors eager to speculate, according to bankers and investors following the trend.\nThe planned equity sales, if successful, mark another way nonprofessional investors have reshaped financial markets since they began to demonstrate their collective power last year,creating opportunitiesfor finance executives in the process.\n“It’s a new phenomenon for some of these distressed companies,” said Scott Hartman, partner and co-head of corporate and traded credit at asset manager Värde Partners. “If I were in their seat, it makes a lot of sense to take equity capital when they can.”\nPeabody,Transoceanand Express are seeking to replicate—on a smaller scale—the capital-raising success of AMC, a favorite pick of individual investors who gather in online investing forums such as Reddit’s WallStreetBets.\nAMC raised $2.2 billionthrough several stock salesduring the pandemic, largely to an enthusiastic following of day traders, despite warnings it was at risk of bankruptcy.\nIt is difficult to classify even a highly leveraged company as distressed when its access to equity is “seemingly infinite,” said Andy Moore, chief executive of B. Riley Securities Inc. His firm is acting as sales agent for Peabody, which earlier this month kicked off an effort to sell up to 12.5 million shares through an “at-the-market” offering. In such offerings, companies sell shares bit-by-bit at market prices in a manner that is accessible to individual investors as well as institutional ones.\nSince exiting bankruptcy in 2017, Peabody has faced difficulties as utilities rely less on coal, and it restructured debt in February to avert a default. The company’s bonds trade at discounts of between 69 and 78 cents on the dollar, indicating market doubts they will be fully repaid. It reported an $80 million net loss in the first quarter amid continued weak conditions for the coal industry.\nExpress, the apparel retailer, borrowed money from private-equity firm Sycamore Partners in January to stockpile cash for surviving the pandemic. Then the company launched an ATM stock sale earlier this month, aiming to sell up to 15 million new shares, despite reporting a loss of $405 million for the last fiscal year as a result of the pandemic and its impact on shopping.\nOn Tuesday, offshore drillerTransoceanjoined in with an offering of up to $400 million in shares despite a junk credit rating, more than $7 billion in debt, andongoing creditor litigationover its restructuring efforts last year.\nPeabody and Express didn’t respond to requests for comment. Transocean referred inquiries to its securities filings.\nJamie Zimmerman, founder and CEO of hedge-fund manager Litespeed Management LLC, said that some troubled companies may be unable to raise new debt, and selling stock may be their only path to obtain financing.\n“You don’t get unless you ask,” said Dan Zwirn, founder and chief executive of asset manager Arena Investors LP. “If I’m structurally insolvent and can’t refinance myself into extending the life of the enterprise, I might as well take this shot.”\n“With this infusion of retail people, there are more counterparties for such a transaction,” Mr. Zwirn added.\nInflows of capital from individual investors, some using money from federal stimulus funds to open trading accounts, have buoyed the broader stock market, driving gains of more than10% year-to-datefor the Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index.\nIndividual investors’ share of overall U.S. equities trading volume rose last year to roughly double what it was a decade before andcontinues to grow. At times, their bets on beaten-down stocks havebeat out institutional investors.\nHoward Fischer, a securities lawyer with Moses & Singer LLP, said that the underlying economic health now seems less important than the unbridled enthusiasm of individual investors, even if that enthusiasm is divorced from any rational economic analysis.\nHertz Global Holdings Inc.tried to ride a wave of interest from retail traders to finance itself last year while it was under bankruptcy protection, and ended up scrapping the effort under pressure from the Securities and Exchange Commission.\nThe bullish individual investors who bet on the business shortly after it filed for chapter 11 were vindicated when Hertz found buyers agreeing to pay up to $8 a share in value.\nAdi Habbu, a director on the credit trading desk atBarclays PLC,said widespread bullishness in equity markets goes beyond retail traders, and is fueled by the economic recovery and the easing of pandemic restrictions.\n“It’s certainly not a bad time to try,” he said. “The core trend is that there is positive reopening sentiment that is driven not just by retail but by institutional players as well.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":180,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167122274,"gmtCreate":1624253479598,"gmtModify":1703831671644,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Tiger","listText":"Tiger","text":"Tiger","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/167122274","repostId":"2145888450","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2145888450","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1624245361,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145888450?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 11:16","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Macau beefs up casino rules, more than doubles number of gaming investigators","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145888450","media":"Reuters","summary":"HONG KONG, June 21 (Reuters) - The world's biggest casino hub of Macau will shake up its casino regu","content":"<html><body><p>HONG KONG, June 21 (Reuters) - The world's biggest casino hub of Macau will shake up its casino regulator by more than doubling the number of gaming inspectors and restructuring several departments in its latest move to ramp up supervision.</p><p>   The executive council that advises Macau's chief executive announced proposals to boost the number of inspectors to 459 from 192 now, as well as creating a new director-level post at the regulator.</p><p>   The regulations will take effect once published in the city's official gazette, the council said on Friday in a statement on the government's website, with local media saying it was likely to be within a few weeks. </p><p>   The change comes just months before the expiry of multi-billion-dollar casino licenses that will require operators Sands China   , Wynn Macau   , MGM China</p><p> , SJM Holdings   , Melco Resorts    and Galaxy Entertainment    to rebid for new gaming concessions. </p><p>   A Chinese special administrative region, Macau has massively tightened scrutiny of casinos in recent years, with authorities clamping down on illicit capital flows from mainland China and targeting underground lending and illegal cash transfers. </p><p>   Beijing has also intensified a war on cross border flows of funds for gambling, affecting the financing channels of Macau's junket operators and their VIP casino customers.</p><p>   Macau has struggled with a dearth of travellers because of coronavirus curbs since the start of 2020. While gambling revenues have picked up in recent months, they are less than half the 2019 figure.</p><p> (Reporting by Farah Master; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)</p><p>((farah.master@thomsonreuters.com; +852 3462 7709;))</p></body></html>","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>Macau beefs up casino rules, more than doubles number of gaming investigators</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\">\nMacau beefs up casino rules, more than doubles number of gaming investigators\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-06-21 11:16</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><body><p>HONG KONG, June 21 (Reuters) - The world's biggest casino hub of Macau will shake up its casino regulator by more than doubling the number of gaming inspectors and restructuring several departments in its latest move to ramp up supervision.</p><p>   The executive council that advises Macau's chief executive announced proposals to boost the number of inspectors to 459 from 192 now, as well as creating a new director-level post at the regulator.</p><p>   The regulations will take effect once published in the city's official gazette, the council said on Friday in a statement on the government's website, with local media saying it was likely to be within a few weeks. </p><p>   The change comes just months before the expiry of multi-billion-dollar casino licenses that will require operators Sands China   , Wynn Macau   , MGM China</p><p> , SJM Holdings   , Melco Resorts    and Galaxy Entertainment    to rebid for new gaming concessions. </p><p>   A Chinese special administrative region, Macau has massively tightened scrutiny of casinos in recent years, with authorities clamping down on illicit capital flows from mainland China and targeting underground lending and illegal cash transfers. </p><p>   Beijing has also intensified a war on cross border flows of funds for gambling, affecting the financing channels of Macau's junket operators and their VIP casino customers.</p><p>   Macau has struggled with a dearth of travellers because of coronavirus curbs since the start of 2020. While gambling revenues have picked up in recent months, they are less than half the 2019 figure.</p><p> (Reporting by Farah Master; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)</p><p>((farah.master@thomsonreuters.com; +852 3462 7709;))</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"00027":"银河娱乐","WYNN":"永利度假村","02282":"美高梅中国","00880":"澳博控股","01928":"金沙中国有限公司","MGM":"美高梅","01128":"永利澳门","LVS":"金沙集团"},"source_url":"http://api.rkd.refinitiv.com/api/News/News.svc/REST/News_1/RetrieveStoryML_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145888450","content_text":"HONG KONG, June 21 (Reuters) - The world's biggest casino hub of Macau will shake up its casino regulator by more than doubling the number of gaming inspectors and restructuring several departments in its latest move to ramp up supervision.   The executive council that advises Macau's chief executive announced proposals to boost the number of inspectors to 459 from 192 now, as well as creating a new director-level post at the regulator.   The regulations will take effect once published in the city's official gazette, the council said on Friday in a statement on the government's website, with local media saying it was likely to be within a few weeks.    The change comes just months before the expiry of multi-billion-dollar casino licenses that will require operators Sands China   , Wynn Macau   , MGM China , SJM Holdings   , Melco Resorts    and Galaxy Entertainment    to rebid for new gaming concessions.    A Chinese special administrative region, Macau has massively tightened scrutiny of casinos in recent years, with authorities clamping down on illicit capital flows from mainland China and targeting underground lending and illegal cash transfers.    Beijing has also intensified a war on cross border flows of funds for gambling, affecting the financing channels of Macau's junket operators and their VIP casino customers.   Macau has struggled with a dearth of travellers because of coronavirus curbs since the start of 2020. While gambling revenues have picked up in recent months, they are less than half the 2019 figure. (Reporting by Farah Master; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)((farah.master@thomsonreuters.com; +852 3462 7709;))","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":202,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":129543334,"gmtCreate":1624378750528,"gmtModify":1703835073879,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129543334","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":126,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150218626,"gmtCreate":1624905225465,"gmtModify":1703847617348,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WISH\">$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$</a>up","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/WISH\">$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$</a>up","text":"$ContextLogic Inc.(WISH)$up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150218626","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":412,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121510069,"gmtCreate":1624473561551,"gmtModify":1703837822060,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NCTY\">$The9(NCTY)$</a>when will it rise back","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NCTY\">$The9(NCTY)$</a>when will it rise back","text":"$The9(NCTY)$when will it rise back","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121510069","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":430,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167125044,"gmtCreate":1624253499588,"gmtModify":1703831673439,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Bill&nbsp;","listText":"&nbsp;Bill&nbsp;","text":"Bill","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/167125044","repostId":"1135860567","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1135860567","pubTimestamp":1624243350,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1135860567?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 10:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Troubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1135860567","media":"WSJ","summary":"The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.More companies with steep financial challenges are seeking a lifeline from equity markets, eager to capitalize on thesurge of interest in stock buyingfrom nonprofessional investors. Earlier this month, coal miner Peabody Energy Corp.,offshore drilling contractor Transocean Ltd.and retailer Express Inc.,all announced plan","content":"<p>The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved&nbsp;AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.</p>\n<p>More companies with steep financial challenges are seeking a lifeline from equity markets, eager to capitalize on thesurge of interest in stock buyingfrom nonprofessional investors. Earlier this month, coal miner&nbsp;Peabody Energy Corp.,offshore drilling contractor&nbsp;Transocean Ltd.and retailer&nbsp;Express Inc.,all announced plans to sell stock, betting equity markets will support them despite heavy debt loads, recent losses and industry headwinds.</p>\n<p>Selling stock isn’t the typical way for distressed companies to grab a lifeline. More often, they are forced to seek out rescue loans, sell off assets or pursue a merger, which can be difficult because of their existing debt.</p>\n<p>But equity markets now are more open to supporting troubled issuers, in large part because of risk-hungry individual investors eager to speculate, according to bankers and investors following the trend.</p>\n<p>The planned equity sales, if successful, mark another way nonprofessional investors have reshaped financial markets since they began to demonstrate their collective power last year,creating opportunitiesfor finance executives in the process.</p>\n<p>“It’s a new phenomenon for some of these distressed companies,” said Scott Hartman, partner and co-head of corporate and traded credit at asset manager Värde Partners. “If I were in their seat, it makes a lot of sense to take equity capital when they can.”</p>\n<p>Peabody,Transoceanand Express are seeking to replicate—on a smaller scale—the capital-raising success of AMC, a favorite pick of individual investors who gather in online investing forums such as Reddit’s WallStreetBets.</p>\n<p>AMC raised $2.2 billionthrough several stock salesduring the pandemic, largely to an enthusiastic following of day traders, despite warnings it was at risk of bankruptcy.</p>\n<p>It is difficult to classify even a highly leveraged company as distressed when its access to equity is “seemingly infinite,” said Andy Moore, chief executive of B. Riley Securities Inc. His firm is acting as sales agent for Peabody, which earlier this month kicked off an effort to sell up to 12.5 million shares through an “at-the-market” offering. In such offerings, companies sell shares bit-by-bit at market prices in a manner that is accessible to individual investors as well as institutional ones.</p>\n<p>Since exiting bankruptcy in 2017, Peabody has faced difficulties as utilities rely less on coal, and it restructured debt in February to avert a default. The company’s bonds trade at discounts of between 69 and 78 cents on the dollar, indicating market doubts they will be fully repaid. It reported an $80 million net loss in the first quarter amid continued weak conditions for the coal industry.</p>\n<p>Express, the apparel retailer, borrowed money from private-equity firm Sycamore Partners in January to stockpile cash for surviving the pandemic. Then the company launched an ATM stock sale earlier this month, aiming to sell up to 15 million new shares, despite reporting a loss of $405 million for the last fiscal year as a result of the pandemic and its impact on shopping.</p>\n<p>On Tuesday, offshore drillerTransoceanjoined in with an offering of up to $400 million in shares despite a junk credit rating, more than $7 billion in debt, andongoing creditor litigationover its restructuring efforts last year.</p>\n<p>Peabody and Express didn’t respond to requests for comment. Transocean referred inquiries to its securities filings.</p>\n<p>Jamie Zimmerman, founder and CEO of hedge-fund manager Litespeed Management LLC, said that some troubled companies may be unable to raise new debt, and selling stock may be their only path to obtain financing.</p>\n<p>“You don’t get unless you ask,” said Dan Zwirn, founder and chief executive of asset manager Arena Investors LP. “If I’m structurally insolvent and can’t refinance myself into extending the life of the enterprise, I might as well take this shot.”</p>\n<p>“With this infusion of retail people, there are more counterparties for such a transaction,” Mr. Zwirn added.</p>\n<p>Inflows of capital from individual investors, some using money from federal stimulus funds to open trading accounts, have buoyed the broader stock market, driving gains of more than10% year-to-datefor the Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index.</p>\n<p>Individual investors’ share of overall U.S. equities trading volume rose last year to roughly double what it was a decade before andcontinues to grow. At times, their bets on beaten-down stocks havebeat out institutional investors.</p>\n<p>Howard Fischer, a securities lawyer with Moses &amp; Singer LLP, said that the underlying economic health now seems less important than the unbridled enthusiasm of individual investors, even if that enthusiasm is divorced from any rational economic analysis.</p>\n<p>Hertz Global Holdings Inc.tried to ride a wave of interest from retail traders to finance itself last year while it was under bankruptcy protection, and ended up scrapping the effort under pressure from the Securities and Exchange Commission.</p>\n<p>The bullish individual investors who bet on the business shortly after it filed for chapter 11 were vindicated when Hertz found buyers agreeing to pay up to $8 a share in value.</p>\n<p>Adi Habbu, a director on the credit trading desk atBarclays PLC,said widespread bullishness in equity markets goes beyond retail traders, and is fueled by the economic recovery and the easing of pandemic restrictions.</p>\n<p>“It’s certainly not a bad time to try,” he said. “The core trend is that there is positive reopening sentiment that is driven not just by retail but by institutional players as well.”</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>Troubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines</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\">\nTroubled Companies Take Page From AMC Playbook in Seeking Stock-Market Lifelines\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 10:42 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/troubled-companies-take-page-from-amc-playbook-in-seeking-stock-market-lifelines-11624190402?mod=markets_lead_pos6><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.\nMore companies with ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/troubled-companies-take-page-from-amc-playbook-in-seeking-stock-market-lifelines-11624190402?mod=markets_lead_pos6\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线","RIG":"Transocean Ltd.","BTU":"Peabody","EXPR":"Express, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/troubled-companies-take-page-from-amc-playbook-in-seeking-stock-market-lifelines-11624190402?mod=markets_lead_pos6","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1135860567","content_text":"The frenzied stock-buying activity that may have saved AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc.from bankruptcy is opening up a potential escape hatch for other troubled borrowers as well.\nMore companies with steep financial challenges are seeking a lifeline from equity markets, eager to capitalize on thesurge of interest in stock buyingfrom nonprofessional investors. Earlier this month, coal miner Peabody Energy Corp.,offshore drilling contractor Transocean Ltd.and retailer Express Inc.,all announced plans to sell stock, betting equity markets will support them despite heavy debt loads, recent losses and industry headwinds.\nSelling stock isn’t the typical way for distressed companies to grab a lifeline. More often, they are forced to seek out rescue loans, sell off assets or pursue a merger, which can be difficult because of their existing debt.\nBut equity markets now are more open to supporting troubled issuers, in large part because of risk-hungry individual investors eager to speculate, according to bankers and investors following the trend.\nThe planned equity sales, if successful, mark another way nonprofessional investors have reshaped financial markets since they began to demonstrate their collective power last year,creating opportunitiesfor finance executives in the process.\n“It’s a new phenomenon for some of these distressed companies,” said Scott Hartman, partner and co-head of corporate and traded credit at asset manager Värde Partners. “If I were in their seat, it makes a lot of sense to take equity capital when they can.”\nPeabody,Transoceanand Express are seeking to replicate—on a smaller scale—the capital-raising success of AMC, a favorite pick of individual investors who gather in online investing forums such as Reddit’s WallStreetBets.\nAMC raised $2.2 billionthrough several stock salesduring the pandemic, largely to an enthusiastic following of day traders, despite warnings it was at risk of bankruptcy.\nIt is difficult to classify even a highly leveraged company as distressed when its access to equity is “seemingly infinite,” said Andy Moore, chief executive of B. Riley Securities Inc. His firm is acting as sales agent for Peabody, which earlier this month kicked off an effort to sell up to 12.5 million shares through an “at-the-market” offering. In such offerings, companies sell shares bit-by-bit at market prices in a manner that is accessible to individual investors as well as institutional ones.\nSince exiting bankruptcy in 2017, Peabody has faced difficulties as utilities rely less on coal, and it restructured debt in February to avert a default. The company’s bonds trade at discounts of between 69 and 78 cents on the dollar, indicating market doubts they will be fully repaid. It reported an $80 million net loss in the first quarter amid continued weak conditions for the coal industry.\nExpress, the apparel retailer, borrowed money from private-equity firm Sycamore Partners in January to stockpile cash for surviving the pandemic. Then the company launched an ATM stock sale earlier this month, aiming to sell up to 15 million new shares, despite reporting a loss of $405 million for the last fiscal year as a result of the pandemic and its impact on shopping.\nOn Tuesday, offshore drillerTransoceanjoined in with an offering of up to $400 million in shares despite a junk credit rating, more than $7 billion in debt, andongoing creditor litigationover its restructuring efforts last year.\nPeabody and Express didn’t respond to requests for comment. Transocean referred inquiries to its securities filings.\nJamie Zimmerman, founder and CEO of hedge-fund manager Litespeed Management LLC, said that some troubled companies may be unable to raise new debt, and selling stock may be their only path to obtain financing.\n“You don’t get unless you ask,” said Dan Zwirn, founder and chief executive of asset manager Arena Investors LP. “If I’m structurally insolvent and can’t refinance myself into extending the life of the enterprise, I might as well take this shot.”\n“With this infusion of retail people, there are more counterparties for such a transaction,” Mr. Zwirn added.\nInflows of capital from individual investors, some using money from federal stimulus funds to open trading accounts, have buoyed the broader stock market, driving gains of more than10% year-to-datefor the Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index.\nIndividual investors’ share of overall U.S. equities trading volume rose last year to roughly double what it was a decade before andcontinues to grow. At times, their bets on beaten-down stocks havebeat out institutional investors.\nHoward Fischer, a securities lawyer with Moses & Singer LLP, said that the underlying economic health now seems less important than the unbridled enthusiasm of individual investors, even if that enthusiasm is divorced from any rational economic analysis.\nHertz Global Holdings Inc.tried to ride a wave of interest from retail traders to finance itself last year while it was under bankruptcy protection, and ended up scrapping the effort under pressure from the Securities and Exchange Commission.\nThe bullish individual investors who bet on the business shortly after it filed for chapter 11 were vindicated when Hertz found buyers agreeing to pay up to $8 a share in value.\nAdi Habbu, a director on the credit trading desk atBarclays PLC,said widespread bullishness in equity markets goes beyond retail traders, and is fueled by the economic recovery and the easing of pandemic restrictions.\n“It’s certainly not a bad time to try,” he said. “The core trend is that there is positive reopening sentiment that is driven not just by retail but by institutional players as well.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":180,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150200273,"gmtCreate":1624899719892,"gmtModify":1703847570725,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150200273","repostId":"1143737614","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143737614","pubTimestamp":1624894513,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143737614?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 23:35","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143737614","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses th","content":"<p>The ratio of the S&amp;P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/069c8eaa303d1a01ad0421a13eb9731b\" tg-width=\"1309\" tg-height=\"830\"><span>Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>This simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.&nbsp; Optimism and pessimism.</p>\n<p>When people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store&nbsp;of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.</p>\n<p>Of course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst.&nbsp;And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened&nbsp;and&nbsp;led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time&nbsp;before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.</p>\n<p>The recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.</p>\n<p>Obviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years</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\">\nThe S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 23:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years\">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"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143737614","content_text":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.  Optimism and pessimism.\nWhen people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.\nOf course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst. And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened and led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.\nThe recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.\nObviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":254,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150200808,"gmtCreate":1624899706804,"gmtModify":1703847570510,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150200808","repostId":"1143737614","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143737614","pubTimestamp":1624894513,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143737614?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 23:35","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143737614","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses th","content":"<p>The ratio of the S&amp;P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/069c8eaa303d1a01ad0421a13eb9731b\" tg-width=\"1309\" tg-height=\"830\"><span>Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>This simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.&nbsp; Optimism and pessimism.</p>\n<p>When people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store&nbsp;of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.</p>\n<p>Of course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst.&nbsp;And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened&nbsp;and&nbsp;led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time&nbsp;before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.</p>\n<p>The recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.</p>\n<p>Obviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years</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\">\nThe S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 23:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years\">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"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143737614","content_text":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.  Optimism and pessimism.\nWhen people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.\nOf course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst. And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened and led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.\nThe recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.\nObviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":461,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":150200920,"gmtCreate":1624899695960,"gmtModify":1703847569847,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/150200920","repostId":"1143737614","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1143737614","pubTimestamp":1624894513,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1143737614?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-28 23:35","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143737614","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses th","content":"<p>The ratio of the S&amp;P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/069c8eaa303d1a01ad0421a13eb9731b\" tg-width=\"1309\" tg-height=\"830\"><span>Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>This simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.&nbsp; Optimism and pessimism.</p>\n<p>When people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store&nbsp;of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.</p>\n<p>Of course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst.&nbsp;And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened&nbsp;and&nbsp;led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time&nbsp;before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.</p>\n<p>The recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.</p>\n<p>Obviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>The S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years</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\">\nThe S&P 500-to-Gold Ratio Is Nearing Its Highest Level in Over 15 Years\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-28 23:35 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years\">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"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/the-s-p-500-to-gold-ratio-is-nearing-its-highest-level-in-over-15-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143737614","content_text":"The ratio of the S&P 500 to the price of gold is nearing its 2018 peak. And if the ratio eclipses that level, it will be at a more-than 15-year high.\nBloomberg\nThis simple chart tells a great story about fear and greed.  Optimism and pessimism.\nWhen people are feeling good, they bet on humans and companies. When people are fearful, they buy the yellow metal, which has been a store of value for thousands of years. It doesn’t do anything, really, other than exist.\nOf course it peaked in the late `90s, when the world was bursting with optimism. It wasn’t just the dotcom boom that was happening, but that was also peak “end of history” times. Then the bubble burst. And not long thereafter, the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, happened and led to years of war, causing the ratio to sink for a long time before going into freefall during the Great Financial Crisis. It only bottomed and started turning around in late 2011, which was when housing and other measures, like real wage growth, started to turn around.\nThe recent peak was in 2018, the last time emerging market stocks were soaring. That ultimately started giving way, however, after some higher-than-expected inflation readings and a series of Fed hikes throughout that year that caused the 2019 backtrack.\nObviously, the line plunged last year when the pandemic hit, and lately it’s been surging back. It’s well above its pre-crisis highs, and now as we see it’s on the verge of eclipsing 2018’s peak.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":239,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127623503,"gmtCreate":1624846798202,"gmtModify":1703846079474,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Weeee","listText":"Weeee","text":"Weeee","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127623503","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":351,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125975798,"gmtCreate":1624645191614,"gmtModify":1703842744139,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Gg","listText":"Gg","text":"Gg","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/125975798","repostId":"1165822342","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165822342","pubTimestamp":1624636113,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165822342?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-25 23:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165822342","media":"cnbc","summary":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing","content":"<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.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>Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings</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\">\nJim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 23:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NKE":"耐克","AAPL":"苹果","SBUX":"星巴克"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1165822342","content_text":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of developments Thursday evening that altered his present outlook: comments fromNikemanagement on its earnings conference call and remarks fromStarbucksCEO Kevin Johnson on“Mad Money.”\n“This is ... a clarion call for Apple; they make things there. If it’s good for Nike, good for Starbucks, it’s going to be good for Apple,” Cramer said on“Squawk Box.”\nWhile Nike’s sales in Greater China were up just 17% in its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended May 31, CFO Matt Friend said on the conference call that the company saw improvements in May and June after a weaker April.\nFriend also mentioned Nike’s 40-year history in the region and said, “We continue to invest in serving consumers with the best products Nike has to offer in locally relevant ways.”\nIn late March, Nike began to experience backlash in China for a statement regarding forced labor allegations in the western region of Xinjiang. Citi in Aprildowngraded Nike’s stock to neutral from buy, citing China concerns as a key reason.\nCramer had previously expressed concerns about geopolitics potentially weighing on Nike. Last week, for example, hesaid of Nike: “Great story, but not if China stays as important as it’s been.”\nShares of Nike were soaring Friday, rising by more than 13% to touch a new intraday all-time high.\nCramer said Johnson also relieved some of his near-term investment concerns surrounding China risk after he interviewed the Starbucks boss on “Mad Money.”\n“We have built Starbucks in China, for China,” Johnson told Cramer on Thursday, while also emphasizing the coffee chain’s intentions to lead “by example of how we can take care of all stakeholders.”\nReflecting on that interview and Nike’s call on“Squawk on the Street”on Friday, Cramer said: “I think that what happened last night with Nike and with Starbucks was incredible.”\nCramer said what he took away is “there is no rift between the People’s Republic of China government and American companies that build plants there, which means to me one of the big worries about Tesla — whether China would embrace it — [is] off the table.”\n“If I were an Apple analyst, I would say, you know what, I have much greater conviction that Apple is going to have good numbers because they build there,” Cramer added.\nThe U.S. is Apple’s biggest country for revenue, but mainland China is second, according to FactSet estimates.\nCramer said he also feels better now aboutSkyworks Solutions, which makes semiconductor components. “Skyworks builds there; I would buy Skyworks,” he said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":534,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129549227,"gmtCreate":1624378734369,"gmtModify":1703835072584,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bull","listText":"Bull","text":"Bull","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129549227","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":160,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120368485,"gmtCreate":1624301044247,"gmtModify":1703832916411,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bull","listText":"Bull","text":"Bull","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/120368485","repostId":"2145084835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145084835","pubTimestamp":1624280460,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145084835?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145084835","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"If analysts are correct, these high-flying stocks will fizzle out over the next year.","content":"<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark <b>S&amp;P 500</b> since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.</p>\n<p>Not surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to <b>FactSet</b>, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.</p>\n<p>Based on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b04ade705354c4825038c4dfcd0187d9\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Palantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%</h3>\n<p>Since its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a>-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.</p>\n<p>The likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.</p>\n<p>Another possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.</p>\n<p>Over the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a38605bee8e62f3e8aa414fa24278e7e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Moderna: Implied downside of 11%</h3>\n<p>Biotech stock <b>Moderna</b> (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.</p>\n<p>Why the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.</p>\n<p>The other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.</p>\n<p>Based solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07841e6a8173146a0fbfddf95a0f1ccb\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>GameStop: Implied downside of 71%</h3>\n<p>This will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite <b>GameStop</b> (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it <i>still</i> implies up to 71% downside over the next year.</p>\n<p>The biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.</p>\n<p>Although the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.</p>\n<p>With sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7ff785aa0040a5565d474390f58b47a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Ocugen: Implied downside of 18%</h3>\n<p>Volatile clinical-stage biotech stock <b>Ocugen</b> (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.</p>\n<p>Arguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.</p>\n<p>What's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.</p>\n<p>Though it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f6037829ea3fb0ae1cae0b95d8d11e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>NVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%</h3>\n<p>Don't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says <b>NVIDIA</b> (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.</p>\n<p>One reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.</p>\n<p>Perhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.</p>\n<p>For what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 21:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","OCGN":"Ocugen","GME":"游戏驿站","NVDA":"英伟达","MRNA":"Moderna, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145084835","content_text":"Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark S&P 500 since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.\nNot surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to FactSet, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.\nBased on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nPalantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%\nSince its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's one-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.\nThe likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.\nAnother possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.\nOver the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nModerna: Implied downside of 11%\nBiotech stock Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's one of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.\nWhy the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.\nThe other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.\nBased solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nGameStop: Implied downside of 71%\nThis will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite GameStop (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it still implies up to 71% downside over the next year.\nThe biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.\nAlthough the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.\nWith sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nOcugen: Implied downside of 18%\nVolatile clinical-stage biotech stock Ocugen (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.\nArguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.\nWhat's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.\nThough it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nNVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%\nDon't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.\nOne reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.\nPerhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.\nFor what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":353,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120368839,"gmtCreate":1624301022621,"gmtModify":1703832915925,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh","listText":"Oh","text":"Oh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/120368839","repostId":"2145084835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145084835","pubTimestamp":1624280460,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145084835?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145084835","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"If analysts are correct, these high-flying stocks will fizzle out over the next year.","content":"<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark <b>S&amp;P 500</b> since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.</p>\n<p>Not surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to <b>FactSet</b>, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.</p>\n<p>Based on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b04ade705354c4825038c4dfcd0187d9\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Palantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%</h3>\n<p>Since its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a>-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.</p>\n<p>The likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.</p>\n<p>Another possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.</p>\n<p>Over the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a38605bee8e62f3e8aa414fa24278e7e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Moderna: Implied downside of 11%</h3>\n<p>Biotech stock <b>Moderna</b> (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.</p>\n<p>Why the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.</p>\n<p>The other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.</p>\n<p>Based solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07841e6a8173146a0fbfddf95a0f1ccb\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>GameStop: Implied downside of 71%</h3>\n<p>This will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite <b>GameStop</b> (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it <i>still</i> implies up to 71% downside over the next year.</p>\n<p>The biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.</p>\n<p>Although the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.</p>\n<p>With sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7ff785aa0040a5565d474390f58b47a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Ocugen: Implied downside of 18%</h3>\n<p>Volatile clinical-stage biotech stock <b>Ocugen</b> (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.</p>\n<p>Arguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.</p>\n<p>What's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.</p>\n<p>Though it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f6037829ea3fb0ae1cae0b95d8d11e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>NVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%</h3>\n<p>Don't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says <b>NVIDIA</b> (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.</p>\n<p>One reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.</p>\n<p>Perhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.</p>\n<p>For what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 21:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","OCGN":"Ocugen","GME":"游戏驿站","NVDA":"英伟达","MRNA":"Moderna, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145084835","content_text":"Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark S&P 500 since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.\nNot surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to FactSet, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.\nBased on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nPalantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%\nSince its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's one-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.\nThe likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.\nAnother possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.\nOver the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nModerna: Implied downside of 11%\nBiotech stock Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's one of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.\nWhy the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.\nThe other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.\nBased solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nGameStop: Implied downside of 71%\nThis will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite GameStop (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it still implies up to 71% downside over the next year.\nThe biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.\nAlthough the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.\nWith sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nOcugen: Implied downside of 18%\nVolatile clinical-stage biotech stock Ocugen (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.\nArguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.\nWhat's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.\nThough it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nNVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%\nDon't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.\nOne reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.\nPerhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.\nFor what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":221,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167122274,"gmtCreate":1624253479598,"gmtModify":1703831671644,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Tiger","listText":"Tiger","text":"Tiger","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/167122274","repostId":"2145888450","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":202,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127623163,"gmtCreate":1624846787752,"gmtModify":1703846073408,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Roar","listText":"Roar","text":"Roar","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127623163","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":386,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127629279,"gmtCreate":1624846776291,"gmtModify":1703846072090,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Upup&nbsp;","listText":"Upup&nbsp;","text":"Upup","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127629279","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":355,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127629902,"gmtCreate":1624846763806,"gmtModify":1703846071426,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bull","listText":"Bull","text":"Bull","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127629902","repostId":"1157825898","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":341,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125975485,"gmtCreate":1624645183147,"gmtModify":1703842744301,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Up","listText":"Up","text":"Up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/125975485","repostId":"1165822342","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165822342","pubTimestamp":1624636113,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165822342?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-25 23:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165822342","media":"cnbc","summary":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing","content":"<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.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>Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings</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\">\nJim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 23:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NKE":"耐克","AAPL":"苹果","SBUX":"星巴克"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1165822342","content_text":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of developments Thursday evening that altered his present outlook: comments fromNikemanagement on its earnings conference call and remarks fromStarbucksCEO Kevin Johnson on“Mad Money.”\n“This is ... a clarion call for Apple; they make things there. If it’s good for Nike, good for Starbucks, it’s going to be good for Apple,” Cramer said on“Squawk Box.”\nWhile Nike’s sales in Greater China were up just 17% in its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended May 31, CFO Matt Friend said on the conference call that the company saw improvements in May and June after a weaker April.\nFriend also mentioned Nike’s 40-year history in the region and said, “We continue to invest in serving consumers with the best products Nike has to offer in locally relevant ways.”\nIn late March, Nike began to experience backlash in China for a statement regarding forced labor allegations in the western region of Xinjiang. Citi in Aprildowngraded Nike’s stock to neutral from buy, citing China concerns as a key reason.\nCramer had previously expressed concerns about geopolitics potentially weighing on Nike. Last week, for example, hesaid of Nike: “Great story, but not if China stays as important as it’s been.”\nShares of Nike were soaring Friday, rising by more than 13% to touch a new intraday all-time high.\nCramer said Johnson also relieved some of his near-term investment concerns surrounding China risk after he interviewed the Starbucks boss on “Mad Money.”\n“We have built Starbucks in China, for China,” Johnson told Cramer on Thursday, while also emphasizing the coffee chain’s intentions to lead “by example of how we can take care of all stakeholders.”\nReflecting on that interview and Nike’s call on“Squawk on the Street”on Friday, Cramer said: “I think that what happened last night with Nike and with Starbucks was incredible.”\nCramer said what he took away is “there is no rift between the People’s Republic of China government and American companies that build plants there, which means to me one of the big worries about Tesla — whether China would embrace it — [is] off the table.”\n“If I were an Apple analyst, I would say, you know what, I have much greater conviction that Apple is going to have good numbers because they build there,” Cramer added.\nThe U.S. is Apple’s biggest country for revenue, but mainland China is second, according to FactSet estimates.\nCramer said he also feels better now aboutSkyworks Solutions, which makes semiconductor components. “Skyworks builds there; I would buy Skyworks,” he said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":222,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":125975587,"gmtCreate":1624645175349,"gmtModify":1703842743977,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Bear","listText":"Bear","text":"Bear","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/125975587","repostId":"1165822342","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165822342","pubTimestamp":1624636113,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165822342?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-25 23:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165822342","media":"cnbc","summary":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing","content":"<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.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>Jim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings</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\">\nJim Cramer says he feels better about Apple's China exposure after Nike earnings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-25 23:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NKE":"耐克","AAPL":"苹果","SBUX":"星巴克"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/cramer-feels-better-about-apples-china-exposure-after-nike-earnings.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1165822342","content_text":"CNBC’s Jim Cramer indicated Friday he’s feeling more comfortable about the geopolitical risks facing U.S. companies with important exposure to China such asAppleandTesla.\nCramer pointed to a pair of developments Thursday evening that altered his present outlook: comments fromNikemanagement on its earnings conference call and remarks fromStarbucksCEO Kevin Johnson on“Mad Money.”\n“This is ... a clarion call for Apple; they make things there. If it’s good for Nike, good for Starbucks, it’s going to be good for Apple,” Cramer said on“Squawk Box.”\nWhile Nike’s sales in Greater China were up just 17% in its fiscal fourth quarter, which ended May 31, CFO Matt Friend said on the conference call that the company saw improvements in May and June after a weaker April.\nFriend also mentioned Nike’s 40-year history in the region and said, “We continue to invest in serving consumers with the best products Nike has to offer in locally relevant ways.”\nIn late March, Nike began to experience backlash in China for a statement regarding forced labor allegations in the western region of Xinjiang. Citi in Aprildowngraded Nike’s stock to neutral from buy, citing China concerns as a key reason.\nCramer had previously expressed concerns about geopolitics potentially weighing on Nike. Last week, for example, hesaid of Nike: “Great story, but not if China stays as important as it’s been.”\nShares of Nike were soaring Friday, rising by more than 13% to touch a new intraday all-time high.\nCramer said Johnson also relieved some of his near-term investment concerns surrounding China risk after he interviewed the Starbucks boss on “Mad Money.”\n“We have built Starbucks in China, for China,” Johnson told Cramer on Thursday, while also emphasizing the coffee chain’s intentions to lead “by example of how we can take care of all stakeholders.”\nReflecting on that interview and Nike’s call on“Squawk on the Street”on Friday, Cramer said: “I think that what happened last night with Nike and with Starbucks was incredible.”\nCramer said what he took away is “there is no rift between the People’s Republic of China government and American companies that build plants there, which means to me one of the big worries about Tesla — whether China would embrace it — [is] off the table.”\n“If I were an Apple analyst, I would say, you know what, I have much greater conviction that Apple is going to have good numbers because they build there,” Cramer added.\nThe U.S. is Apple’s biggest country for revenue, but mainland China is second, according to FactSet estimates.\nCramer said he also feels better now aboutSkyworks Solutions, which makes semiconductor components. “Skyworks builds there; I would buy Skyworks,” he said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":180,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129549409,"gmtCreate":1624378742501,"gmtModify":1703835073393,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Tiger&nbsp;","listText":"Tiger&nbsp;","text":"Tiger","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129549409","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</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>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</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\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":115,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":120368557,"gmtCreate":1624301033479,"gmtModify":1703832916087,"author":{"id":"3568700586550868","authorId":"3568700586550868","name":"QRTAY","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3789e221001cdaa22f8fcb889f0dd8c0","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568700586550868","authorIdStr":"3568700586550868"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/120368557","repostId":"2145084835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2145084835","pubTimestamp":1624280460,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2145084835?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-21 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145084835","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"If analysts are correct, these high-flying stocks will fizzle out over the next year.","content":"<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark <b>S&amp;P 500</b> since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.</p>\n<p>Not surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to <b>FactSet</b>, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.</p>\n<p>Based on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b04ade705354c4825038c4dfcd0187d9\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"500\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Palantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%</h3>\n<p>Since its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a>-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.</p>\n<p>The likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.</p>\n<p>Another possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.</p>\n<p>Over the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a38605bee8e62f3e8aa414fa24278e7e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Moderna: Implied downside of 11%</h3>\n<p>Biotech stock <b>Moderna</b> (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.</p>\n<p>Why the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.</p>\n<p>The other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.</p>\n<p>Based solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07841e6a8173146a0fbfddf95a0f1ccb\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>GameStop: Implied downside of 71%</h3>\n<p>This will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite <b>GameStop</b> (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it <i>still</i> implies up to 71% downside over the next year.</p>\n<p>The biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.</p>\n<p>Although the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.</p>\n<p>With sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c7ff785aa0040a5565d474390f58b47a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"457\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>Ocugen: Implied downside of 18%</h3>\n<p>Volatile clinical-stage biotech stock <b>Ocugen</b> (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.</p>\n<p>Arguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.</p>\n<p>What's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.</p>\n<p>Though it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91f6037829ea3fb0ae1cae0b95d8d11e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>NVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%</h3>\n<p>Don't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says <b>NVIDIA</b> (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.</p>\n<p>One reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.</p>\n<p>Perhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.</p>\n<p>For what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued</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 Ultra-Popular Stocks Wall Street Views as Overvalued\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-21 21:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","OCGN":"Ocugen","GME":"游戏驿站","NVDA":"英伟达","MRNA":"Moderna, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/21/5-ultra-popular-stocks-wall-street-view-overvalued/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145084835","content_text":"Generally speaking, it pays to be bullish on Wall Street. Despite navigating its way through Black Monday in 1987, the dot-com bubble, the Great Recession, and more recently the coronavirus crash, the average annual total return for the benchmark S&P 500 since 1980, including dividends, is north of 11%.\nNot surprisingly, we see this optimism readily apparent in Wall Street's ratings on stocks. According to FactSet, more than half of all stocks carry a consensus buy rating, 38% have the equivalent of a hold rating, and just 7% are rated as sells. Yet, history shows that far more than 7% of stocks will eventually head lower.\nBased on Wall Street's consensus price targets, the following five ultra-popular stocks are all expected to lose value over the coming 12 months.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nPalantir Technologies: Implied downside of 12%\nSince its direct listing in late September 2020, data-mining company Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) has been a favorite among growth and retail investors. But if Wall Street's one-year consensus price target proves accurate, Palantir will head in reverse by up to 12%.\nThe likeliest reason Wall Street is tempering expectations on Palantir is valuation. Specifically, Palantir ended June 17 with a market cap of nearly $48 billion, but is on track to bring in perhaps $1.5 billion in full-year sales in 2021. That's a multiple of about 32 times sales. Even if Palantir continues to grow its top-line at 30% annually, it could take years for this price-to-sales multiple to come down to anywhere close to the average for cloud stocks.\nAnother possible concern is the growth potential for its government-focused Gotham platform. Big government contract wins in the U.S. have been primarily responsible for Palantir's exceptional growth rate. However, there remains an outside chance that President Joe Biden may curb funding to some of the federal agencies that employ Palantir's services.\nOver the long run, I'm optimistic and believe Palantir's platform is unlike anything else available. But tempering near-term expectations given its valuation premium may be warranted.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nModerna: Implied downside of 11%\nBiotech stock Moderna (NASDAQ:MRNA) is arguably the biggest beneficiary of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It's one of only three drugmakers to currently have their COVID-19 vaccine approved on an emergency-use authorization (EUA) basis in the United States. But if Wall Street's consensus 12-month price target is correct, it's stock is also on its way to a double-digit decline.\nWhy the lack of love from Wall Street? The answer looks to be analysts looking to the future. While Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is a mainstay in the U.S., and it's likely to play a clear role in other markets, time might prove the company's enemy. Over time, new vaccines are expected to come onto the scene, which'll eat away at Moderna's potential pool of patients.\nThe other worry is that no one is exactly certain how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last. If it's a year, Moderna is unlikely to be the only drugmaker supplying booster shots. Meanwhile, if it's longer than a year, it means reduced sales opportunities for the company.\nBased solely on Wall Street's earnings per share consensus in 2021 and 2022, Moderna appears reasonably priced. But with the company staring down a potentially significant haircut in revenue next year as new drugmakers enter the space, caution is advised.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nGameStop: Implied downside of 71%\nThis will probably come as a shock to no one, but Reddit favorite GameStop (NYSE:GME) is fully expected to fall flat on its face. Even though Wall Street's consensus price target for the company has quintupled in recent months, it still implies up to 71% downside over the next year.\nThe biggest issue for GameStop is that its valuation has completely detached from its underlying fundamentals. While it's not uncommon for stocks to trade on emotion for short periods of time, operating performance is what always dictates the long-term movement in the share price of a stock. When it comes to operating performance, GameStop has been a dud.\nAlthough the company's first-quarter fiscal results highlighted a 25% net sales increase from the prior-year period, total sales for the company have been falling precipitously for years. That's because video game retailer GameStop recognized the shift to digital gaming too late, and it's now stuck with its massive portfolio of brick-and-mortar gaming stores. Even though e-commerce sales have been a bright spot for the company, slashing costs and closing stores remains its No. 1 priority.\nWith sufficient cash, bankruptcy isn't a concern for GameStop. But without any true top-line growth and the company still losing money, it's an impossible sell at its current price tag.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nOcugen: Implied downside of 18%\nVolatile clinical-stage biotech stock Ocugen (NASDAQ:OCGN) may also be in for an unpleasant next 12 months. The company behind an experimental COVID-19 vaccine (Covaxin) and a trio of internally developed eye-blindness candidates is expected to shed 18% of its value, if Wall Street's consensus price target is correct.\nArguably the biggest issue for Ocugen is the clinical update the company issued on June 10 concerning Covaxin. Even though partner Bharat Biotech led a large clinical study in India that yielded an overall efficacy of 78%, along with 100% efficacy in preventing severe forms of COVID-19, Ocugen announced on June 10 that it would forgo seeking an EUA in the U.S. and would instead file for a biologics license application. In other words, Ocugen's path to a quick emergency approval in the U.S. just flew out the window.\nWhat's more, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requested additional information and data on Covaxin. This is a fancy of saying that Ocugen will very likely have to run a clinical study in the U.S. prior to submitting Covaxin for approval. That means added costs and an even longer wait before Ocugen has a chance to penetrate the lucrative U.S. market.\nThough it's impossible to predict how long COVID-19 vaccine immunity will last, Ocugen's chances of being a significant player in the U.S. COVID-19 vaccine space are dwindling.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nNVIDIA: Implied downside of 3%\nDon't adjust your computer, laptop, or smartphone screens -- that really says NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA). Following its incredible run higher (NVIDIA has doubled over the past year), graphics processing unit giant NVIDIA closed 3% above Wall Street's consensus price target, as of June 17.\nOne reason for tempered expectations at this point has to be valuation. Even with NVIDIA crushing expectations and seeing strong PC gaming demand, sales growth is expected to slow from an estimated 49% in fiscal 2022 to a high single digit percentage in each of the next two fiscal years. In fact, the company closed at nearly 20 times projected sales for the current fiscal year. That's a bit optimistic given an expected sales growth slowdown.\nPerhaps the other reason Wall Street expects NVIDIA to go sideways is the company's cryptocurrency mining chip segment. While sales of crypto chips could hit $400 million in the current quarter, demand is entirely dependent on the hype surrounding digital currencies and the favorability of technical charts. Crypto is just as well known for its long bear markets as it is for the big gains it's delivered over the past decade. If another lull strikes, a fast-growing ancillary segment for NVIDA could easily become a drag.\nFor what it's worth, I see no fundamental reasons to sell NVIDIA if you're already a long-term shareholder. But if you're on the outside looking in, I don't exactly see $746 as an attractive entry point, either.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":268,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}