+Follow
西红柿炒韭菜
No personal profile
7
Follow
1
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
西红柿炒韭菜
2021-03-18
Future is uncertain
Sorry, the original content has been removed
西红柿炒韭菜
2021-03-18
Oh too bad
Sorry, the original content has been removed
西红柿炒韭菜
2021-03-18
Apple?
Sorry, the original content has been removed
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3572910972101152","uuid":"3572910972101152","gmtCreate":1616074548181,"gmtModify":1616077667757,"name":"西红柿炒韭菜","pinyin":"xhscjcxihongshichaojiucai","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":7,"tweetSize":3,"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":"2023.12.14","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"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":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"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":327825424,"gmtCreate":1616077392668,"gmtModify":1704790648964,"author":{"id":"3572910972101152","authorId":"3572910972101152","name":"西红柿炒韭菜","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3572910972101152","authorIdStr":"3572910972101152"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Future is uncertain","listText":"Future is uncertain","text":"Future is uncertain","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327825424","repostId":"1162260876","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":206,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":327823105,"gmtCreate":1616077190207,"gmtModify":1704790641353,"author":{"id":"3572910972101152","authorId":"3572910972101152","name":"西红柿炒韭菜","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3572910972101152","authorIdStr":"3572910972101152"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh too bad","listText":"Oh too bad","text":"Oh too bad","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327823105","repostId":"1198107390","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":298,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":327867544,"gmtCreate":1616077063388,"gmtModify":1704790638438,"author":{"id":"3572910972101152","authorId":"3572910972101152","name":"西红柿炒韭菜","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3572910972101152","authorIdStr":"3572910972101152"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Apple?","listText":"Apple?","text":"Apple?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327867544","repostId":"1168097383","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":419,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":327867544,"gmtCreate":1616077063388,"gmtModify":1704790638438,"author":{"id":"3572910972101152","authorId":"3572910972101152","name":"西红柿炒韭菜","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3572910972101152","authorIdStr":"3572910972101152"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Apple?","listText":"Apple?","text":"Apple?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327867544","repostId":"1168097383","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1168097383","pubTimestamp":1616075301,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1168097383?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-18 21:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"FANG: An In-Depth Comparison Of Amazon, Facebook, Google And Netflix Across 13 Categories","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1168097383","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Several Seeking Alpha readers have reached out to me for an opinion about which FANG stock represents the best valuation for a new investment.I conducted a 13-category analysis across AMZN, FB, GOOGL, and NFLX's balance sheets and income statements to determine which is the most attractive today.My finding were shocking as NFLX underperformed while AMZN, FB and GOOGL all present interesting cases.I formed my opinion around revenue growth, gross profit growth, net income growth, gross profit marg","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Several Seeking Alpha readers have reached out to me for an opinion about which FANG stock represents the best valuation for a new investment.</li>\n <li>I conducted a 13-category analysis across AMZN, FB, GOOGL, and NFLX's balance sheets and income statements to determine which is the most attractive today.</li>\n <li>My finding were shocking as NFLX underperformed while AMZN, FB and GOOGL all present interesting cases.</li>\n <li>I formed my opinion around revenue growth, gross profit growth, net income growth, gross profit margin, net income conversion, return on asset ratio, etc.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>FANG which is the acronym for Facebook (FB), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Google (GOOGL) has been in the spotlight for years. I have written several articles onAMZNandFBand several Seeking Alpha readers have asked me if I had to choose one of the original FANG stocks to invest in which would it be? It’s a great question that I have never thought about. Putting the businesses aside I decided to tear through the numbers and form an opinion as my curiosity was now stimulated. All 4 companies have generated unbelievable returns for their shareholders over the years but the question isn’t about the past, it’s about the future.</p>\n<p>I am going to focus on the numbers and determine which company is growing at the quickest pace, who has the best margins and which company has the best ratios. My analysis will focus on the income statements and balance sheets from each company's financials at the end of fiscal year 2020. I am going to put AMZN, FB, GOOGL and NFLX head to head across 13 categories and award 1 point to the winner of each. In the end I will tally up the points and determine a winner based on my findings.</p>\n<p>From the income statement, I am going to evaluate each company's revenue growth, gross profit margin, net income growth, gross profit margin, net income conversion and their P/E ratios. On the balance sheets, I am going to compare their total cash and short-term investments, total asset position and growth, return on asset ratio, total long-term debt to total cash and short-term investment ratio, total equity growth, total equity to total asset ratio and each company's total equity to market cap ratio. For full transparency, I am a shareholder of AMZN, FB and GOOGL, but that will not affect my analysis as I am going strictly by the numbers.</p>\n<p>(Source:Stockprice)</p>\n<p>A brief overview of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix’s 2020 numbers</p>\n<p>Before I conduct the analysis, I want to build a financial profile for all of the readers.</p>\n<p>AMZN</p>\n<ul>\n <li>Income Statement</li>\n <li>Balance Sheet</li>\n</ul>\n<p>FB</p>\n<ul>\n <li>Income Statement</li>\n <li>Balance Sheet</li>\n</ul>\n<p>GOOGL</p>\n<ul>\n <li>Income Statement</li>\n <li>Balance Sheet</li>\n</ul>\n<p>NFLX</p>\n<ul>\n <li>Income Statement</li>\n <li>Balance Sheet</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p><b>An in-depth analysis of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix’s Income Statements from the close of 2020</b></p>\n<p>In the first category, I am looking at each company’s 3-year average revenue growth. AMZN grew its annual revenue by $208.20 billion (117.05%) over the last 3 fiscal years and has an average annual revenue growth rate of 29.67%. Over the same time period FB has grown their annual revenue by $45.31 billion (111.46%) and has an average annual growth rate of 28.52%. GOOGL has increased its revenue on an annual basis over this period by $71.67 billion (64.55%) and has an average annual growth rate of 18.16%.</p>\n<p>Over the past 3 fiscal years NFLX has increased its annual revenue by $13.30 billion (113.78%) and their average annual growth rate is 28.90%. Point AMZN as they increased their annual revenue by the largest amount, had the largest percentage increase and the highest 3-year annual revenue growth rate.</p>\n<p>AMZN: 1 Point for revenue growth.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 1</li>\n <li>FB – 0</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 0</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>Revenue is just one component of an income statement and a winner can’t be crowned simply by how much revenue they generate or how quickly their revenue is growing. Businesses are in the business of making money so it’s critical to identify how much of the revenue is flowing to the bottom line. At the end of the day, investors want to see profits so that’s where I am looking next.</p>\n<p>AMZN has grown its annual gross profit by $86.83 billion (131.69%) over the past 3 fiscal years at an average annual growth rate of 32.56%. Over the same time period, FB has increased its annual gross profit by $34.07 billion (96.80%) at an average annual growth rate of 25.42%. GOOGL has seen its average annual gross profit increase by $32.52 billion (49.83%) at an average annual rate of 14.50% over the past 3 fiscal years. NFLX saw the largest percentage increase as their gross profit increased by $6.06 billion (165.59%) at an average annual rate of 39.20% over this period.</p>\n<p>Even though NFLX had the largest percentage increase, I am giving the point to AMZN. While NFLX did grow their annual gross profit by 165.59%, they started from a much lower position. In fiscal year 2017 NFLX generated $3.66 billion in gross profit while AMZN produced $65.93 billion. Over the past 3 fiscal years AMZN grew its gross profit by an additional 1,433% than NFLX did. AMZN started from a much larger position, generated an additional $80.77 billion in gross profit than NFLX and had an average annual gross profit growth rate of 32.56%. Some may disagree but I am calling AMZN the winner here.</p>\n<p>AMZN: 1 Point for gross profit growth.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 2</li>\n <li>FB – 0</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 0</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>After all the expenses are deducted from the revenue, we’re left with the net income. Over the past 3 fiscal years, AMZN has increased its net income by $18.30 billion (603%) and has had an average net income growth rate of 110.41%. FB has increased their annual net income by $13.21 billion (82.92%) at an average growth rate of 26.68%. GOOGL has seen their annual net income over the same time period increase by $27.61 billion (218.03%) at an annual average growth rate of 57.24%. NFLX increased their annual net income by $2.20 billion (394.08%) at an average annual growth rate of 72.92%.</p>\n<p>The same way I didn’t go with NFLX for gross income growth, I am not giving the point to AMZN here. Yes, they increased their net income over the past 3 fiscal years by 603.3% but they started from a much lower position and generated 212% more revenue than GOOGL. GOOGL generated $182.53 billion in total revenue and turned $40.27 billion into net income for 2020. While AMZN did have the largest percentage growth over the 3-year period and the highest average annual growth rate, GOOGL generated an additional $9.31 billion (151%) of new net income over the past three years than AMZN did while producing less than half of AMZN’s revenue. GOOGL is my winner for this category.</p>\n<p>GOOGL: 1 Point for net income growth.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 2</li>\n <li>FB – 0</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>Next, I am looking at the margins and gross income is first. If you read<i>Warren Buffet and the Interpretation of Financial Statements</i>on page 34 of the Kindle edition it says,</p>\n<blockquote>\n As a very general rule (and there are exceptions): Companies with gross profit margins of 40% or better tend to be companies with some sort of durable competitive advantage. Companies with gross profit margins below 40% tend to be companies in highly competitive industries, where competition is hurting overall profit margins (there are exceptions here, too).\n</blockquote>\n<p>On the surface, the larger a company's gross profit margin is, the less their revenue costs to generate. I look at the gross profit margin because it tells me how much of a company's revenue goes directly to producing it and if they have a moat around their business. AMZN had a gross profit margin of 39.57% in 2020 and their 3-year average was 40.27%. FB had a gross profit margin of 80.58% in 2020 which is one of the largest I have ever seen.</p>\n<p>To make sure this wasn’t an anomaly or a fluke, I went back further than 3 years. Over the past 3 years FB had an average gross profit margin of 81.92% and over the past 10 years their average gross profit margin was 82.28%. GOOGL generated a gross profit margin of 53.58% in 2020 and their 3-year gross profit margin average is 55.21%. In 2020 NFLX produced a gross profit margin of 38.88% and their 3-year average is 38.02%.</p>\n<p>FB is the clear winner as they simply dominate AMZN, GOOGL and NFLX in this category. While AMZN and GOOGL generated more revenue and gross profit than FB, the margins are simply too large to ignore. FB isn’t a small company cornering the market on an obscure widget and generating $1 million dollars in revenue. In 2020 FB generated $85.97 billion in revenue, generated $69.27 billion in gross profit and had a gross profit margin of 80.58%. FB has held an average gross profit margin of over 80% for the past decade so this isn’t a fluke. Point FB.</p>\n<p>FB: 1 Point for gross profit margin.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 2</li>\n <li>FB – 1</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>My next category is net income conversion rate, which is something people rarely discuss. This metric is one of the most important to me because it indicates exactly how much of a company's revenue becomes pure profit. As an investor, profits are extremely important to me. Companies with larger profits can erase liabilities, build their war chest, buy back stock, pay a dividend, expand into new business segments and invest more in their company.</p>\n<p>In 2020 AMZN generated $21.33 billion in net income and had a net income conversion rate of 5.53%. FB produced $29.15 billion in net income and converted 33.90% of its revenue into net income. FB has an average net income conversion rate for the past 3 years of 33.22% and 26.70% for the past decade so this wasn’t an anomaly. GOOGL generated $40.27 billion in net income from their revenue giving them a net income conversion rate of 22.06% in 2020. NFLX was able to convert 11.05% of their revenue to net income in 2020.</p>\n<p>GOOGL did generate the most net income but they generated more than double the revenue than FB did in 2020. GOOGL had a net income conversion rate of 22.06% while FB’s was 33.90%. FB converts just over 1/3rdof their revenue into profit while GOOGL is working its way to converting 1/4thof their revenue. FB is the winner in the net income conversion category.</p>\n<p>FB: 1 Point for net income conversion.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 2</li>\n <li>FB – 2</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>The last area I am going to evaluate, which I consider to be associated with the income statement, is the P/E ratio for each company. Investors use theP/E ratioto determine the market value of a stock compared to the company's earnings. The P/E ratio indicates how much investors are willing to pay per dollar of earnings. The P/E ratio is determined by dividing the current stock price by the earnings per share (EPS). After the market closed on 3/16/21, FB had the lowest P/E ratio at $27.40 with GOOGL taking 2ndwith $35.25. I am awarding FB the point as they have the lowest P/E ratio.</p>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>FB: 1 Point for P/E ratio.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 2</li>\n <li>FB – 3</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>FANG Income Statements and My Calculations:</p>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p><b>An in-depth analysis of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix’s Balance Sheets from the close of 2020</b></p>\n<p>Currently based off of my income statement analysis, FB has racked up the most points taking 3 categories, AMZN is in 2ndwith 2 points, GOOGL is in 3rdwith 1 point and NFLX is yet to get on the board. Now I am going to analyze the balance sheets of the FANG’s and look at 7 specific categories which include:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>Total cash and short-term investment position and growth</li>\n <li>Total asset position and growth</li>\n <li>Return on assets</li>\n <li>Total equity growth</li>\n <li>Total Long-Term Debt to Total Cash and ST Investment Ratio</li>\n <li>Total equity to total asset ratio</li>\n <li>Total equity to market cap ratio</li>\n</ul>\n<p>One of the first things I look at is the total cash and short-term investments. When a company has a large amount of cash and highly liquid short-term investments, it indicates that they have a competitive advantage that is generating large amounts of profits. I always look at the trend over 3-5 years because an anomaly in this category could indicate a bond sale.</p>\n<p>AMZN finished 2020 with $84.40 billion in cash and short-term investments. Over the past 3 years AMZN’s liquidity position has grown by $53.41 billion, or 172.37%. Their annual average growth rate over the past 3 years was 39.97%. FB finished 2020 with $61.95 billion in cash and short-term investments. Over the past 3 years this position has grown by $20.24 billion, or 48.53%, with an average 3-year growth rate of 14.98%.</p>\n<p>Out of the FANG stocks GOOGL finished the year with the largest war chest as their cash and short-term investments grew to $136.70 billion. Over the past 3 years this stockpile has grown by $34.82 billion (34.18%) at an average 3-year annual rate of 10.34%. NFLX has the least amount of assets in this category as they ended 2020 with $8.21 billion in cash and short-term investments. NFLX has grown their pile of cash by $5.38 billion by 190.70% over the past 3 years at an average annual rate of 43.40%.</p>\n<p>While GOOGL had the largest stockpile and NFLX had the best % gains, I am awarding the point to AMZN. AMZN’s average growth rate was almost 4x while they generated 1.53x the amount of cash compared to GOOGL over the past 3 years.</p>\n<p>AMZN: 1 Point for total cash and short-term investment position and growth.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 3</li>\n <li>FB – 3</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>Next I am going to evaluate each of the FANG stocks total asset position and growth. A company's assets include everything of value from the cash stockpile, the patents to the property, plants and equipment. AMZN finished 2020 with $321.20 billion in assets as they grew by $189.89 billion (144.61%) over the past 3 years at an annual rate of 34.98%. FB finished 2020 with $159.32 billion in assets as they increased by $74.79 billion (88.49%) over the past 3 years at an annual rate of 23.88%.</p>\n<p>GOOGL finished 2020 with the 2ndlargest amount of assets valued at $319.62 billion as they grew by $122.32 billion (62%) at an average annual rate of 17.45%. NFLX finished 2020 with the least amount of assets of the FANG stocks with $39.28 billion which increased by $20.27 billion (106.60%) over the past 3 years at an average rate of 27.68%. In this category, AMZN is the clear winner as they had the largest total assets, the largest asset base increase over the past 3 years and the highest annual growth rate.</p>\n<p>AMZN: 1 Point for Total asset position and growth.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 4</li>\n <li>FB – 3</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2ee396359638fb5bc9857742cf5a829\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"373\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>Thereturn on asset ratiois critical because it indicates how much of a profit their assets can generate. Return on asset ratio is calculated by dividing net earnings by total assets. AMZN finished 2020 with $321.20 billion in total assets which generated $21.33 billion in net income. This is a return on asset ratio of 6.64%. FB generated $29.15 billion in net income off their $159.32 billion in assets in 2020 for a return on asset ratio of 18.29%.</p>\n<p>GOOGL generated $40.27 billion in net income from $319.62 billion in assets giving them a return on asset ratio of 12.60% in 2020. NFLX generated $2.76 billion in net income off their $39.28 billion in assets for 2020. In this category the point goes to FB as they have the superior return on asset ratio.</p>\n<p>FB: 1 Point for return on asset ratio.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 4</li>\n <li>FB – 4</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Sticking with the assets and liabilities, I look for how much long-term debt a company has on its balance sheet and if that liability can be eliminated on a moments notice. I tend to favor companies that have more liquidity in their cash and short-term investments than they carry in long-term debt.</p>\n<p>AMZN has $84.40 billion in cash and equivalents and $31.82 billion long-term debt. This creates a long-term debt to cash and equivalent ratio of 37.70%. AMZN could pay off their long-term debt tomorrow and still have 72.30% of their liquidity available. FB is an anomaly in this category as they haven’t carried long-term debt on their balance sheet since 2012. There aren’t many companies which have grown organically without taking on debt.</p>\n<p>With $61.95 billion in cash and cash equivalents on the books and zero long-term debt, FB is in a unique position. GOOGL finished 2020 with $12.83 billion in long-term debt and $136.70 billion in cash and equivalents creating a ratio of 9.39%. Of the FANG stocks, NFLX is the only company that’s long-term debt obligations exceeded their cash and equivalents on hand. NFLX finished 2020 with $8.21 billion in cash and equivalents and $15.81 billion in long-term debt for a ratio of 192.66%.</p>\n<p>I am calling this a tie between GOOGL and FB. While FB has carried $0 in long-term debt since 2012, GOOGL has carried less than 10% of its cash and equivalents on an annual basis since 2012. If GOOGL wanted to, they could pay their long-term debt tomorrow and have roughly double the cash and equivalents that FB does. The only reason I am not giving the full point to GOOGL is because FB has kept its balance sheet clean and incurs $0 in interest on $0 of long-term debt.</p>\n<p>GOOGL and FB: ½ point for Total Long-Term Debt to Total Cash and ST Investment Ratio.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 4</li>\n <li>FB – 4.5</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 1.5</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>I am always interested in how quickly a company is growing its total equity as this indicates the net worth of the company when all the liabilities are deducted from the assets. In 2020, AMZN had $93.40 billion in equity which was an increase of $65.70 billion (237.09%) over 3 years at an annual growth rate of 50.06%. FB finished 2020 with $128.29 billion in equity which was an increase of $53.94 billion (72.56%) at an annual growth rate of 20.08%.</p>\n<p>GOOGL finished 2020 with $222.54 billion in equity which grew by $70.04 billion (45.93%) over the past 3 years at an average growth rate of 13.45%. NFLX grew its equity to $11.07 billion in 2020 which was an increase of $7.48 billion (208.91%) over the past 3 years at an average annual rate of 45.64%.</p>\n<p>Even though AMZN increased its equity by 237.09% over the past 3 years, I am awarding GOOGL the point. At the end of 2017, GOOGL had $152.50 billion in equity which was 61.25% larger than AMZN’s total equity in 2020. GOOGL grew its equity by an additional $4.35 billion over the past 3 years compared to AMZN, while starting from a much larger position at the beginning of 2018. I have to give credit where credit is due and for GOOGL to grow its equity to $222.54 billion is something not many have achieved. Point GOOGL.</p>\n<p>GOOGL: 1 point for total equity growth.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 4</li>\n <li>FB – 4.5</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 2.5</li>\n <li>NFLX - 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/79b51ae16c48738035c4dbc5a1d639be\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"373\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>The next ratio I like to evaluate is the total equity to total asset ratio of a company. This allows me to see how much of a company's assets convert to equity while illustrating how efficiently the organization operates. Having limited liabilities is something every company should strive for. At the end of 2020 29.08% of AMZN’s assets converted to equity. FB had a total equity to asset ratio of 80.53% as there are limited liabilities on the balance sheet. GOOGL had the 2ndbest ratio as 69.63% of their assets convert into equity. At the end of 2020, NFLX had a ratio of 28.17% for equity to assets. I am giving this category to FB as they have converted just over 4/5thsof their assets to equity in the company.</p>\n<p>FB: 1 point for total equity to total asset ratio.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 4</li>\n <li>FB – 5.5</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 2.5</li>\n <li>NFLX - 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>The last category I am going to evaluate is each company's total equity to market cap ratio. This isn’t something everyone looks at but I like seeing the multiple the market is putting on a company's equity. FB and GOOGL are neck and neck with their equity to market cap multiple and % of equity to market cap, so I am going to split the point between the two. Both companies exceed AMZN and NFLX by a great deal in both categories and, due to the size of equity GOOGL has, I am calling it a tie.</p>\n<p>GOOGL and FB: ½ point for total equity to market cap ratio.</p>\n<p>Score:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>AMZN – 4</li>\n <li>FB – 6</li>\n <li>GOOGL – 3</li>\n <li>NFLX – 0</li>\n</ul>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p>FANG Balance Sheets and My Calculations:</p>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)</p>\n<p><b>1stplace goes to Facebook, 2ndplace Amazon and a close 3rdGoogle with Netflix not picking up a single point</b></p>\n<p>After analyzing 13 different categories from the income statement and balance sheet of the original FANG stocks, I have FB as my winner as they took the point in 5 categories and split 2 categories with GOOGL earing a ½ point in those.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/64b0e88f5189ef599714b9c5cc92a5fa\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"375\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>(Source: Steven Fiorillo)</p>\n<p><b>Conclusion</b></p>\n<p>I would be a buyer of AMZN, FB and GOOGL here as I believe they all present an investment opportunity for share appreciation. The goal of this article was to determine, if I had to pick one to invest in, which FANG stock would I go with. As a shareholder of AMZN, FB, GOOGL, it’s a question that I never contemplated. AMZN’s revenue and gross profit growth is massive, FB does an amazing job converting its revenue to gross profit and net income and GOOGL's net income and total equity growth is hard to match.</p>\n<p>In the end, FB looks like the best investment based on the numbers today, as they have the best margins, the lowest P/E ratio, the best return on assets and their equity multiple to market cap was slightly lower than GOOGL’s. The numbers always illustrate a story - it’s a matter of how you interpret the data. Based on the 13 categories I analyzed, FB presents the best opportunity at the current valuations.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","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>FANG: An In-Depth Comparison Of Amazon, Facebook, Google And Netflix Across 13 Categories</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\">\nFANG: An In-Depth Comparison Of Amazon, Facebook, Google And Netflix Across 13 Categories\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-18 21:48 GMT+8 <a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4414654-fang-in-depth-comparison-of-amazon-facebook-google-and-netflix-across-13-catagories><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nSeveral Seeking Alpha readers have reached out to me for an opinion about which FANG stock represents the best valuation for a new investment.\nI conducted a 13-category analysis across AMZN, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4414654-fang-in-depth-comparison-of-amazon-facebook-google-and-netflix-across-13-catagories\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","GOOGL":"谷歌A","NFLX":"奈飞","GOOG":"谷歌"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4414654-fang-in-depth-comparison-of-amazon-facebook-google-and-netflix-across-13-catagories","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1168097383","content_text":"Summary\n\nSeveral Seeking Alpha readers have reached out to me for an opinion about which FANG stock represents the best valuation for a new investment.\nI conducted a 13-category analysis across AMZN, FB, GOOGL, and NFLX's balance sheets and income statements to determine which is the most attractive today.\nMy finding were shocking as NFLX underperformed while AMZN, FB and GOOGL all present interesting cases.\nI formed my opinion around revenue growth, gross profit growth, net income growth, gross profit margin, net income conversion, return on asset ratio, etc.\n\nFANG which is the acronym for Facebook (FB), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Google (GOOGL) has been in the spotlight for years. I have written several articles onAMZNandFBand several Seeking Alpha readers have asked me if I had to choose one of the original FANG stocks to invest in which would it be? It’s a great question that I have never thought about. Putting the businesses aside I decided to tear through the numbers and form an opinion as my curiosity was now stimulated. All 4 companies have generated unbelievable returns for their shareholders over the years but the question isn’t about the past, it’s about the future.\nI am going to focus on the numbers and determine which company is growing at the quickest pace, who has the best margins and which company has the best ratios. My analysis will focus on the income statements and balance sheets from each company's financials at the end of fiscal year 2020. I am going to put AMZN, FB, GOOGL and NFLX head to head across 13 categories and award 1 point to the winner of each. In the end I will tally up the points and determine a winner based on my findings.\nFrom the income statement, I am going to evaluate each company's revenue growth, gross profit margin, net income growth, gross profit margin, net income conversion and their P/E ratios. On the balance sheets, I am going to compare their total cash and short-term investments, total asset position and growth, return on asset ratio, total long-term debt to total cash and short-term investment ratio, total equity growth, total equity to total asset ratio and each company's total equity to market cap ratio. For full transparency, I am a shareholder of AMZN, FB and GOOGL, but that will not affect my analysis as I am going strictly by the numbers.\n(Source:Stockprice)\nA brief overview of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix’s 2020 numbers\nBefore I conduct the analysis, I want to build a financial profile for all of the readers.\nAMZN\n\nIncome Statement\nBalance Sheet\n\nFB\n\nIncome Statement\nBalance Sheet\n\nGOOGL\n\nIncome Statement\nBalance Sheet\n\nNFLX\n\nIncome Statement\nBalance Sheet\n\n(Source Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)\nAn in-depth analysis of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix’s Income Statements from the close of 2020\nIn the first category, I am looking at each company’s 3-year average revenue growth. AMZN grew its annual revenue by $208.20 billion (117.05%) over the last 3 fiscal years and has an average annual revenue growth rate of 29.67%. Over the same time period FB has grown their annual revenue by $45.31 billion (111.46%) and has an average annual growth rate of 28.52%. GOOGL has increased its revenue on an annual basis over this period by $71.67 billion (64.55%) and has an average annual growth rate of 18.16%.\nOver the past 3 fiscal years NFLX has increased its annual revenue by $13.30 billion (113.78%) and their average annual growth rate is 28.90%. Point AMZN as they increased their annual revenue by the largest amount, had the largest percentage increase and the highest 3-year annual revenue growth rate.\nAMZN: 1 Point for revenue growth.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 1\nFB – 0\nGOOGL – 0\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nRevenue is just one component of an income statement and a winner can’t be crowned simply by how much revenue they generate or how quickly their revenue is growing. Businesses are in the business of making money so it’s critical to identify how much of the revenue is flowing to the bottom line. At the end of the day, investors want to see profits so that’s where I am looking next.\nAMZN has grown its annual gross profit by $86.83 billion (131.69%) over the past 3 fiscal years at an average annual growth rate of 32.56%. Over the same time period, FB has increased its annual gross profit by $34.07 billion (96.80%) at an average annual growth rate of 25.42%. GOOGL has seen its average annual gross profit increase by $32.52 billion (49.83%) at an average annual rate of 14.50% over the past 3 fiscal years. NFLX saw the largest percentage increase as their gross profit increased by $6.06 billion (165.59%) at an average annual rate of 39.20% over this period.\nEven though NFLX had the largest percentage increase, I am giving the point to AMZN. While NFLX did grow their annual gross profit by 165.59%, they started from a much lower position. In fiscal year 2017 NFLX generated $3.66 billion in gross profit while AMZN produced $65.93 billion. Over the past 3 fiscal years AMZN grew its gross profit by an additional 1,433% than NFLX did. AMZN started from a much larger position, generated an additional $80.77 billion in gross profit than NFLX and had an average annual gross profit growth rate of 32.56%. Some may disagree but I am calling AMZN the winner here.\nAMZN: 1 Point for gross profit growth.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 2\nFB – 0\nGOOGL – 0\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nAfter all the expenses are deducted from the revenue, we’re left with the net income. Over the past 3 fiscal years, AMZN has increased its net income by $18.30 billion (603%) and has had an average net income growth rate of 110.41%. FB has increased their annual net income by $13.21 billion (82.92%) at an average growth rate of 26.68%. GOOGL has seen their annual net income over the same time period increase by $27.61 billion (218.03%) at an annual average growth rate of 57.24%. NFLX increased their annual net income by $2.20 billion (394.08%) at an average annual growth rate of 72.92%.\nThe same way I didn’t go with NFLX for gross income growth, I am not giving the point to AMZN here. Yes, they increased their net income over the past 3 fiscal years by 603.3% but they started from a much lower position and generated 212% more revenue than GOOGL. GOOGL generated $182.53 billion in total revenue and turned $40.27 billion into net income for 2020. While AMZN did have the largest percentage growth over the 3-year period and the highest average annual growth rate, GOOGL generated an additional $9.31 billion (151%) of new net income over the past three years than AMZN did while producing less than half of AMZN’s revenue. GOOGL is my winner for this category.\nGOOGL: 1 Point for net income growth.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 2\nFB – 0\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nNext, I am looking at the margins and gross income is first. If you readWarren Buffet and the Interpretation of Financial Statementson page 34 of the Kindle edition it says,\n\n As a very general rule (and there are exceptions): Companies with gross profit margins of 40% or better tend to be companies with some sort of durable competitive advantage. Companies with gross profit margins below 40% tend to be companies in highly competitive industries, where competition is hurting overall profit margins (there are exceptions here, too).\n\nOn the surface, the larger a company's gross profit margin is, the less their revenue costs to generate. I look at the gross profit margin because it tells me how much of a company's revenue goes directly to producing it and if they have a moat around their business. AMZN had a gross profit margin of 39.57% in 2020 and their 3-year average was 40.27%. FB had a gross profit margin of 80.58% in 2020 which is one of the largest I have ever seen.\nTo make sure this wasn’t an anomaly or a fluke, I went back further than 3 years. Over the past 3 years FB had an average gross profit margin of 81.92% and over the past 10 years their average gross profit margin was 82.28%. GOOGL generated a gross profit margin of 53.58% in 2020 and their 3-year gross profit margin average is 55.21%. In 2020 NFLX produced a gross profit margin of 38.88% and their 3-year average is 38.02%.\nFB is the clear winner as they simply dominate AMZN, GOOGL and NFLX in this category. While AMZN and GOOGL generated more revenue and gross profit than FB, the margins are simply too large to ignore. FB isn’t a small company cornering the market on an obscure widget and generating $1 million dollars in revenue. In 2020 FB generated $85.97 billion in revenue, generated $69.27 billion in gross profit and had a gross profit margin of 80.58%. FB has held an average gross profit margin of over 80% for the past decade so this isn’t a fluke. Point FB.\nFB: 1 Point for gross profit margin.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 2\nFB – 1\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nMy next category is net income conversion rate, which is something people rarely discuss. This metric is one of the most important to me because it indicates exactly how much of a company's revenue becomes pure profit. As an investor, profits are extremely important to me. Companies with larger profits can erase liabilities, build their war chest, buy back stock, pay a dividend, expand into new business segments and invest more in their company.\nIn 2020 AMZN generated $21.33 billion in net income and had a net income conversion rate of 5.53%. FB produced $29.15 billion in net income and converted 33.90% of its revenue into net income. FB has an average net income conversion rate for the past 3 years of 33.22% and 26.70% for the past decade so this wasn’t an anomaly. GOOGL generated $40.27 billion in net income from their revenue giving them a net income conversion rate of 22.06% in 2020. NFLX was able to convert 11.05% of their revenue to net income in 2020.\nGOOGL did generate the most net income but they generated more than double the revenue than FB did in 2020. GOOGL had a net income conversion rate of 22.06% while FB’s was 33.90%. FB converts just over 1/3rdof their revenue into profit while GOOGL is working its way to converting 1/4thof their revenue. FB is the winner in the net income conversion category.\nFB: 1 Point for net income conversion.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 2\nFB – 2\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nThe last area I am going to evaluate, which I consider to be associated with the income statement, is the P/E ratio for each company. Investors use theP/E ratioto determine the market value of a stock compared to the company's earnings. The P/E ratio indicates how much investors are willing to pay per dollar of earnings. The P/E ratio is determined by dividing the current stock price by the earnings per share (EPS). After the market closed on 3/16/21, FB had the lowest P/E ratio at $27.40 with GOOGL taking 2ndwith $35.25. I am awarding FB the point as they have the lowest P/E ratio.\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)\nFB: 1 Point for P/E ratio.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 2\nFB – 3\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\nFANG Income Statements and My Calculations:\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)\nAn in-depth analysis of Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix’s Balance Sheets from the close of 2020\nCurrently based off of my income statement analysis, FB has racked up the most points taking 3 categories, AMZN is in 2ndwith 2 points, GOOGL is in 3rdwith 1 point and NFLX is yet to get on the board. Now I am going to analyze the balance sheets of the FANG’s and look at 7 specific categories which include:\n\nTotal cash and short-term investment position and growth\nTotal asset position and growth\nReturn on assets\nTotal equity growth\nTotal Long-Term Debt to Total Cash and ST Investment Ratio\nTotal equity to total asset ratio\nTotal equity to market cap ratio\n\nOne of the first things I look at is the total cash and short-term investments. When a company has a large amount of cash and highly liquid short-term investments, it indicates that they have a competitive advantage that is generating large amounts of profits. I always look at the trend over 3-5 years because an anomaly in this category could indicate a bond sale.\nAMZN finished 2020 with $84.40 billion in cash and short-term investments. Over the past 3 years AMZN’s liquidity position has grown by $53.41 billion, or 172.37%. Their annual average growth rate over the past 3 years was 39.97%. FB finished 2020 with $61.95 billion in cash and short-term investments. Over the past 3 years this position has grown by $20.24 billion, or 48.53%, with an average 3-year growth rate of 14.98%.\nOut of the FANG stocks GOOGL finished the year with the largest war chest as their cash and short-term investments grew to $136.70 billion. Over the past 3 years this stockpile has grown by $34.82 billion (34.18%) at an average 3-year annual rate of 10.34%. NFLX has the least amount of assets in this category as they ended 2020 with $8.21 billion in cash and short-term investments. NFLX has grown their pile of cash by $5.38 billion by 190.70% over the past 3 years at an average annual rate of 43.40%.\nWhile GOOGL had the largest stockpile and NFLX had the best % gains, I am awarding the point to AMZN. AMZN’s average growth rate was almost 4x while they generated 1.53x the amount of cash compared to GOOGL over the past 3 years.\nAMZN: 1 Point for total cash and short-term investment position and growth.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 3\nFB – 3\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nNext I am going to evaluate each of the FANG stocks total asset position and growth. A company's assets include everything of value from the cash stockpile, the patents to the property, plants and equipment. AMZN finished 2020 with $321.20 billion in assets as they grew by $189.89 billion (144.61%) over the past 3 years at an annual rate of 34.98%. FB finished 2020 with $159.32 billion in assets as they increased by $74.79 billion (88.49%) over the past 3 years at an annual rate of 23.88%.\nGOOGL finished 2020 with the 2ndlargest amount of assets valued at $319.62 billion as they grew by $122.32 billion (62%) at an average annual rate of 17.45%. NFLX finished 2020 with the least amount of assets of the FANG stocks with $39.28 billion which increased by $20.27 billion (106.60%) over the past 3 years at an average rate of 27.68%. In this category, AMZN is the clear winner as they had the largest total assets, the largest asset base increase over the past 3 years and the highest annual growth rate.\nAMZN: 1 Point for Total asset position and growth.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 4\nFB – 3\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nThereturn on asset ratiois critical because it indicates how much of a profit their assets can generate. Return on asset ratio is calculated by dividing net earnings by total assets. AMZN finished 2020 with $321.20 billion in total assets which generated $21.33 billion in net income. This is a return on asset ratio of 6.64%. FB generated $29.15 billion in net income off their $159.32 billion in assets in 2020 for a return on asset ratio of 18.29%.\nGOOGL generated $40.27 billion in net income from $319.62 billion in assets giving them a return on asset ratio of 12.60% in 2020. NFLX generated $2.76 billion in net income off their $39.28 billion in assets for 2020. In this category the point goes to FB as they have the superior return on asset ratio.\nFB: 1 Point for return on asset ratio.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 4\nFB – 4\nGOOGL – 1\nNFLX – 0\n\nSticking with the assets and liabilities, I look for how much long-term debt a company has on its balance sheet and if that liability can be eliminated on a moments notice. I tend to favor companies that have more liquidity in their cash and short-term investments than they carry in long-term debt.\nAMZN has $84.40 billion in cash and equivalents and $31.82 billion long-term debt. This creates a long-term debt to cash and equivalent ratio of 37.70%. AMZN could pay off their long-term debt tomorrow and still have 72.30% of their liquidity available. FB is an anomaly in this category as they haven’t carried long-term debt on their balance sheet since 2012. There aren’t many companies which have grown organically without taking on debt.\nWith $61.95 billion in cash and cash equivalents on the books and zero long-term debt, FB is in a unique position. GOOGL finished 2020 with $12.83 billion in long-term debt and $136.70 billion in cash and equivalents creating a ratio of 9.39%. Of the FANG stocks, NFLX is the only company that’s long-term debt obligations exceeded their cash and equivalents on hand. NFLX finished 2020 with $8.21 billion in cash and equivalents and $15.81 billion in long-term debt for a ratio of 192.66%.\nI am calling this a tie between GOOGL and FB. While FB has carried $0 in long-term debt since 2012, GOOGL has carried less than 10% of its cash and equivalents on an annual basis since 2012. If GOOGL wanted to, they could pay their long-term debt tomorrow and have roughly double the cash and equivalents that FB does. The only reason I am not giving the full point to GOOGL is because FB has kept its balance sheet clean and incurs $0 in interest on $0 of long-term debt.\nGOOGL and FB: ½ point for Total Long-Term Debt to Total Cash and ST Investment Ratio.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 4\nFB – 4.5\nGOOGL – 1.5\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nI am always interested in how quickly a company is growing its total equity as this indicates the net worth of the company when all the liabilities are deducted from the assets. In 2020, AMZN had $93.40 billion in equity which was an increase of $65.70 billion (237.09%) over 3 years at an annual growth rate of 50.06%. FB finished 2020 with $128.29 billion in equity which was an increase of $53.94 billion (72.56%) at an annual growth rate of 20.08%.\nGOOGL finished 2020 with $222.54 billion in equity which grew by $70.04 billion (45.93%) over the past 3 years at an average growth rate of 13.45%. NFLX grew its equity to $11.07 billion in 2020 which was an increase of $7.48 billion (208.91%) over the past 3 years at an average annual rate of 45.64%.\nEven though AMZN increased its equity by 237.09% over the past 3 years, I am awarding GOOGL the point. At the end of 2017, GOOGL had $152.50 billion in equity which was 61.25% larger than AMZN’s total equity in 2020. GOOGL grew its equity by an additional $4.35 billion over the past 3 years compared to AMZN, while starting from a much larger position at the beginning of 2018. I have to give credit where credit is due and for GOOGL to grow its equity to $222.54 billion is something not many have achieved. Point GOOGL.\nGOOGL: 1 point for total equity growth.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 4\nFB – 4.5\nGOOGL – 2.5\nNFLX - 0\n\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nThe next ratio I like to evaluate is the total equity to total asset ratio of a company. This allows me to see how much of a company's assets convert to equity while illustrating how efficiently the organization operates. Having limited liabilities is something every company should strive for. At the end of 2020 29.08% of AMZN’s assets converted to equity. FB had a total equity to asset ratio of 80.53% as there are limited liabilities on the balance sheet. GOOGL had the 2ndbest ratio as 69.63% of their assets convert into equity. At the end of 2020, NFLX had a ratio of 28.17% for equity to assets. I am giving this category to FB as they have converted just over 4/5thsof their assets to equity in the company.\nFB: 1 point for total equity to total asset ratio.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 4\nFB – 5.5\nGOOGL – 2.5\nNFLX - 0\n\nThe last category I am going to evaluate is each company's total equity to market cap ratio. This isn’t something everyone looks at but I like seeing the multiple the market is putting on a company's equity. FB and GOOGL are neck and neck with their equity to market cap multiple and % of equity to market cap, so I am going to split the point between the two. Both companies exceed AMZN and NFLX by a great deal in both categories and, due to the size of equity GOOGL has, I am calling it a tie.\nGOOGL and FB: ½ point for total equity to market cap ratio.\nScore:\n\nAMZN – 4\nFB – 6\nGOOGL – 3\nNFLX – 0\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data source: Seeking Alpha)\nFANG Balance Sheets and My Calculations:\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo) (Data Source: Seeking Alpha)\n1stplace goes to Facebook, 2ndplace Amazon and a close 3rdGoogle with Netflix not picking up a single point\nAfter analyzing 13 different categories from the income statement and balance sheet of the original FANG stocks, I have FB as my winner as they took the point in 5 categories and split 2 categories with GOOGL earing a ½ point in those.\n\n(Source: Steven Fiorillo)\nConclusion\nI would be a buyer of AMZN, FB and GOOGL here as I believe they all present an investment opportunity for share appreciation. The goal of this article was to determine, if I had to pick one to invest in, which FANG stock would I go with. As a shareholder of AMZN, FB, GOOGL, it’s a question that I never contemplated. AMZN’s revenue and gross profit growth is massive, FB does an amazing job converting its revenue to gross profit and net income and GOOGL's net income and total equity growth is hard to match.\nIn the end, FB looks like the best investment based on the numbers today, as they have the best margins, the lowest P/E ratio, the best return on assets and their equity multiple to market cap was slightly lower than GOOGL’s. The numbers always illustrate a story - it’s a matter of how you interpret the data. Based on the 13 categories I analyzed, FB presents the best opportunity at the current valuations.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":419,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":327825424,"gmtCreate":1616077392668,"gmtModify":1704790648964,"author":{"id":"3572910972101152","authorId":"3572910972101152","name":"西红柿炒韭菜","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3572910972101152","authorIdStr":"3572910972101152"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Future is uncertain","listText":"Future is uncertain","text":"Future is uncertain","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327825424","repostId":"1162260876","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1162260876","pubTimestamp":1616070584,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1162260876?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-18 20:29","market":"us","language":"en","title":"2 Tech Stocks That Could Make You Rich","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1162260876","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"These tech companies are disrupting the status quo -- that could mean big gains for investors.\n\nAs t","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>These tech companies are disrupting the status quo -- that could mean big gains for investors.</b>\n</blockquote>\n<p>As time passes and technology changes, some well-established enterprises will fade from relevance as lesser-known start-ups rise in their place. The tricky part is finding those potentially life-changing investments early on.</p>\n<p>Fortunately, companies that achieve great success tend to havecertain traits in common. For instance, they are often first movers in emerging industries. That could mean developing a new product or tackling an old problem with a novel solution.</p>\n<p>Enterprises like<b>Lemonade</b>(NYSE:LMND)and<b>Arista Networks</b>(NYSE:ANET)check that box. Here's why investing in these two tech companies could make you rich.</p>\n<p><b>1. Lemonade: AI-powered insurance</b></p>\n<p>Lemonade is atech companythat sells insurance. Though its initial focus was on renters and homeowners policies, it entered the pet insurance andterm life insurancemarkets in 2020, and it plans to expand its portfolio again in 2021.</p>\n<p>Lemonade's digital approach to insurance differs dramatically from its rivals. While traditional insurers have agents who sell policies and handle claims, Lemonade automates these processes with AI-powered chatbots. In fact, the company uses artificial intelligence to improve virtually every aspect of its business: Marketing, underwriting, fraud detection, and the customer experience.</p>\n<p>So far, the results are encouraging. Lemonade's loss ratio dropped to 71% in 2020, meaning the company paid out $0.71 in claims for every $1 in earned premiums. That's a big improvement from its 161% loss ratio in 2017. More importantly, it puts Lemonade roughly in line with the top 20 property and casualty (P&C) insurance companies, which have an average loss ratio of roughly 72% in recent years.</p>\n<p>Likewise, Lemonade's sales and marketing expenses actually decreased 9% in 2020, but its customer base grew 56% and its premium per customer grew 20% during the same time period. In other words, Lemonade's AI-powered marketing is becoming more efficient.</p>\n<p>Moreover, the addition of new customers (and the rising premium per customer) have powered impressive growth in gross profit.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7fe9c0bb388bfcabfac1abcc4df7859f\" tg-width=\"788\" tg-height=\"130\">But Lemonade has one more trick up its sleeve. The company also purchases reinsurance (insurance for insurance companies) to make its business less volatile. While this strategy cuts into Lemonade's top line, it also stabilizes its gross margin -- in fact, management estimates that Lemonade's gross margin will vary by no more than 3% in 95 out of every 100 years. That type of consistency is impressive in an industry that can literally depend on the weather.</p>\n<p>Investors should be aware that Lemonade is much smaller than market-leading rivals like<b>Berkshire Hathaway</b>'s group of insurance brands and<b>Allstate</b>. But the insurance industry is enormous, generating over $5 trillion in annual premiums worldwide. That means Lemonade has a massive opportunity, and capturing even a few percentage points of that market would translate into tens of billions of dollars on the top line. Moreover, the company's AI-powered business should give it a long-term advantage over its rivals.</p>\n<p><b>2. Arista Networks: Software-driven networking</b></p>\n<p>Arista provides networking solutions (switches and software) for data centers and enterprise campus environments. Since its inception, the company's software-driven approach to networking has differentiated it from<b>Cisco</b>and<b>Juniper Networks</b>. For example, rather than selling discrete routers like its rivals, Arista's software allows its R-Series switches to double as advanced routing platforms. This reduces cost and complexity for Arista's clients.</p>\n<p>As part of its enterprise portfolio, Arista launched its 750 series campus switch last November. This new product line offers 400 Gbps (gigabits per second) of total bandwidth -- five times more than the closest competitor -- and helps clients create fast, secure WiFi networks. Like all Arista hardware, these new switches are powered by merchant silicon rather than costly proprietary chips used by rivals.</p>\n<p>Arista's decision to use merchant silicon has been a big advantage for two reasons. First, it allows the company to launch new products quickly while still incorporating the latest chip technology. Second, it makes Arista more efficient than its rivals, because the company doesn't spend money to develop chips in-house. Ultimately, Arista can pass those savings on to customers, meaning its products come at a better price-to-performance ratio.</p>\n<p>Over the last decade, these advantages have helped Arista take significant market share in the high-speed data center switching market (10 Gbps and above). Meanwhile, Cisco's market share has trended downward, though the company is still the leader.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/db8a65fe6051b194a534671172a1615d\" tg-width=\"789\" tg-height=\"171\">In the coming years, the proliferation of connected devices (thinkInternet of Things) and computer-intensive applications (thinkartificial intelligence) will place more demand on data centers. That will create a need for more powerful networking solutions. As theleading providerof 100 Gbps and 400 Gbps switches, Arista is well-positioned to grow its top line quickly and continue taking market share.</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>2 Tech Stocks That Could Make You Rich</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\">\n2 Tech Stocks That Could Make You Rich\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-18 20:29 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/18/2-tech-stocks-that-could-make-you-rich/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>These tech companies are disrupting the status quo -- that could mean big gains for investors.\n\nAs time passes and technology changes, some well-established enterprises will fade from relevance as ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/18/2-tech-stocks-that-could-make-you-rich/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"ANET":"Arista Networks, Inc.","LMND":"Lemonade, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/18/2-tech-stocks-that-could-make-you-rich/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1162260876","content_text":"These tech companies are disrupting the status quo -- that could mean big gains for investors.\n\nAs time passes and technology changes, some well-established enterprises will fade from relevance as lesser-known start-ups rise in their place. The tricky part is finding those potentially life-changing investments early on.\nFortunately, companies that achieve great success tend to havecertain traits in common. For instance, they are often first movers in emerging industries. That could mean developing a new product or tackling an old problem with a novel solution.\nEnterprises likeLemonade(NYSE:LMND)andArista Networks(NYSE:ANET)check that box. Here's why investing in these two tech companies could make you rich.\n1. Lemonade: AI-powered insurance\nLemonade is atech companythat sells insurance. Though its initial focus was on renters and homeowners policies, it entered the pet insurance andterm life insurancemarkets in 2020, and it plans to expand its portfolio again in 2021.\nLemonade's digital approach to insurance differs dramatically from its rivals. While traditional insurers have agents who sell policies and handle claims, Lemonade automates these processes with AI-powered chatbots. In fact, the company uses artificial intelligence to improve virtually every aspect of its business: Marketing, underwriting, fraud detection, and the customer experience.\nSo far, the results are encouraging. Lemonade's loss ratio dropped to 71% in 2020, meaning the company paid out $0.71 in claims for every $1 in earned premiums. That's a big improvement from its 161% loss ratio in 2017. More importantly, it puts Lemonade roughly in line with the top 20 property and casualty (P&C) insurance companies, which have an average loss ratio of roughly 72% in recent years.\nLikewise, Lemonade's sales and marketing expenses actually decreased 9% in 2020, but its customer base grew 56% and its premium per customer grew 20% during the same time period. In other words, Lemonade's AI-powered marketing is becoming more efficient.\nMoreover, the addition of new customers (and the rising premium per customer) have powered impressive growth in gross profit.\nBut Lemonade has one more trick up its sleeve. The company also purchases reinsurance (insurance for insurance companies) to make its business less volatile. While this strategy cuts into Lemonade's top line, it also stabilizes its gross margin -- in fact, management estimates that Lemonade's gross margin will vary by no more than 3% in 95 out of every 100 years. That type of consistency is impressive in an industry that can literally depend on the weather.\nInvestors should be aware that Lemonade is much smaller than market-leading rivals likeBerkshire Hathaway's group of insurance brands andAllstate. But the insurance industry is enormous, generating over $5 trillion in annual premiums worldwide. That means Lemonade has a massive opportunity, and capturing even a few percentage points of that market would translate into tens of billions of dollars on the top line. Moreover, the company's AI-powered business should give it a long-term advantage over its rivals.\n2. Arista Networks: Software-driven networking\nArista provides networking solutions (switches and software) for data centers and enterprise campus environments. Since its inception, the company's software-driven approach to networking has differentiated it fromCiscoandJuniper Networks. For example, rather than selling discrete routers like its rivals, Arista's software allows its R-Series switches to double as advanced routing platforms. This reduces cost and complexity for Arista's clients.\nAs part of its enterprise portfolio, Arista launched its 750 series campus switch last November. This new product line offers 400 Gbps (gigabits per second) of total bandwidth -- five times more than the closest competitor -- and helps clients create fast, secure WiFi networks. Like all Arista hardware, these new switches are powered by merchant silicon rather than costly proprietary chips used by rivals.\nArista's decision to use merchant silicon has been a big advantage for two reasons. First, it allows the company to launch new products quickly while still incorporating the latest chip technology. Second, it makes Arista more efficient than its rivals, because the company doesn't spend money to develop chips in-house. Ultimately, Arista can pass those savings on to customers, meaning its products come at a better price-to-performance ratio.\nOver the last decade, these advantages have helped Arista take significant market share in the high-speed data center switching market (10 Gbps and above). Meanwhile, Cisco's market share has trended downward, though the company is still the leader.\nIn the coming years, the proliferation of connected devices (thinkInternet of Things) and computer-intensive applications (thinkartificial intelligence) will place more demand on data centers. That will create a need for more powerful networking solutions. As theleading providerof 100 Gbps and 400 Gbps switches, Arista is well-positioned to grow its top line quickly and continue taking market share.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":206,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":327823105,"gmtCreate":1616077190207,"gmtModify":1704790641353,"author":{"id":"3572910972101152","authorId":"3572910972101152","name":"西红柿炒韭菜","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b9f8219c333c72c3f3513aeb821744be","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3572910972101152","authorIdStr":"3572910972101152"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh too bad","listText":"Oh too bad","text":"Oh too bad","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327823105","repostId":"1198107390","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198107390","pubTimestamp":1616075055,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1198107390?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-18 21:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Lordstown Motors drops further after CEO appears in CNBC interview","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198107390","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"seekingalpha","content":"<p>(March 18) Lordstown Motors fell further in market trading, down about 10%, after CEO Steve Burns was interviewed on CNBC and after admitting lastnight that the company has received a request forinformation from the SEC.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bb3000e5d124375c34f7efe75931f342\" tg-width=\"678\" tg-height=\"498\"></p>\n<p>Burns, responding to a recentHindenburg short report, said the company has received non-binding preorders for its electric trucks.</p>\n<p>\"We've never said we had orders.\" Burns said on CNBC. \"We don't have a product yet. By definition we can't have orders.\"</p>\n<p>Burns further added:</p>\n<p>\"The preorders did exactly what they were supposed to do. Gauge interest. Nobody knew if fleets would buy an electric pickup truck. It was completely unknown science, no data around it.\"</p>\n<p>\"I don't think anybody thought we had actual orders. That's just not the nature of this business.\"</p>\n<p>Recall March 15, Lordstown Motors on track with production of Endurance all electric pickup truck in September 2021.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","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>Lordstown Motors drops further after CEO appears in CNBC interview</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\">\nLordstown Motors drops further after CEO appears in CNBC interview\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-18 21:44 GMT+8 <a href=https://seekingalpha.com/news/3674026-lordstown-motor-drops-further-after-ceo-appears-in-cnbc-interview><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>(March 18) Lordstown Motors fell further in market trading, down about 10%, after CEO Steve Burns was interviewed on CNBC and after admitting lastnight that the company has received a request ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/news/3674026-lordstown-motor-drops-further-after-ceo-appears-in-cnbc-interview\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/news/3674026-lordstown-motor-drops-further-after-ceo-appears-in-cnbc-interview","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1198107390","content_text":"(March 18) Lordstown Motors fell further in market trading, down about 10%, after CEO Steve Burns was interviewed on CNBC and after admitting lastnight that the company has received a request forinformation from the SEC.\n\nBurns, responding to a recentHindenburg short report, said the company has received non-binding preorders for its electric trucks.\n\"We've never said we had orders.\" Burns said on CNBC. \"We don't have a product yet. By definition we can't have orders.\"\nBurns further added:\n\"The preorders did exactly what they were supposed to do. Gauge interest. Nobody knew if fleets would buy an electric pickup truck. It was completely unknown science, no data around it.\"\n\"I don't think anybody thought we had actual orders. That's just not the nature of this business.\"\nRecall March 15, Lordstown Motors on track with production of Endurance all electric pickup truck in September 2021.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":298,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
