iamgarlick personal page - To The Moon

iamgarlick

iamgarlick

No personal profile

15Follow

5Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-07-15

To the moon ?

The Big Crash Is Imminent

2021-07-15

$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$To the moon?

2021-07-06

To the moon!

2021-07-02

$BEST Inc(BEST)$To the moon pls

2021-07-01

$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$To the moon ?

2021-06-30

To the moon

Better Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin

2021-06-30

Moon

Tesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value

2021-06-24

$BEST Inc(BEST)$to the moon

2021-06-17

$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$?

2021-06-17

Up up up!

2021-06-14

Share

2021-06-14

$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$up!

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3576578945677616","uuid":"3576578945677616","gmtCreate":1613485089099,"gmtModify":1623683775456,"name":"iamgarlick","pinyin":"iamgarlick","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b073a07f77dbe6b3bec6b12311fde6bd","hatId":"ca_profile_frame_Mpy1eK","hatName":"","vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":5,"headSize":15,"tweetSize":12,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":2,"name":"无畏虎","nameTw":"無畏虎","represent":"初生牛犊","factor":"发布3条非转发主帖,1条获得他人回复或点赞","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":1,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.11.20","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-1","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Elite Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 30","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.08.11","exceedPercentage":"60.46%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"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":4,"currentWearingBadge":{"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":1,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.11.20","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"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":147274730,"gmtCreate":1626361592620,"gmtModify":1703758756524,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the moon ?","listText":"To the moon ?","text":"To the moon ?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/147274730","repostId":"1155093230","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1155093230","pubTimestamp":1626359281,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1155093230?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-15 22:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Big Crash Is Imminent","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1155093230","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nThe continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>The continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during the dot.com bubble in 2000.</li>\n <li>The bubble is relatively concentrated and doesn't necessarily pose threats to the market as a whole.</li>\n <li>While it is clear that there is a strong deviation from historical valuation norms, valuations could continue to rise (at least in the short term).</li>\n <li>This article is not meant as fear-mongering, and I may very possibly be wrong about my hypothesis.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>It seems that the talk about whether we are in another Tech bubble has been going on for many years. Articles and news calling for the 'crash of the decade' have been condemned as fear-mongering with little substance to them. After all, technology stocks kept on rising, and those who listened missed out on impressive gains. Now, generally speaking, neither have I been too worried about valuations in the best, as fundamentals towards Technology in our society are simply too strong.</p>\n<p>However, a lot has changed over the course of the pandemic, which has led me to rethink my perspective. As the global pandemic shut down economies around the world and caused substantial economic contraction, federal banks counteracted by injecting trillions of dollars into the economy in the form of stimulus checks, grants, loans, etc. As a result, fresh liquidity immediately reflected itself in stocks and other market instruments.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c688f97bd5e513daa2e0c76d5ace6a1c\" tg-width=\"1845\" tg-height=\"651\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>Throughout this article, I want to demonstrate a few graphs to strengthen my argument, with the chart above being the first one. The Nasdaq 100 is perhaps the most common index to track the technology market, although it only includes profitable and large-cap Tech stocks. On average, the index currently holds a Price to Sales ratio of 5.7x, levels that the Index last saw in early 2001 after the dot.com bubble began to bust.</p>\n<p>It is important to note that at the height of the bubble, the ratio stood at 7.5x, around 30% higher than it is right now. Still, the median valuation has been trailing significantly lower, at around 3.5x over the last 20 years. Of course, it can be argued that Technology deserves a higher valuation these days due to the increased use of Technology and perhaps higher growth rates. However, should Technology valuations be nearly 100% higher than just 5 years ago, in 2016, where Technology integration was pretty much at the same level as today?</p>\n<p>Profitability</p>\n<p>In recent years, unprofitable but growing companies have been favored over mature and profitable companies. Usually, rotations from Growth to Value or the other way around occur every 2-5 years, which is totally unsurprising. Historically, in terms of performance, there has been no significant difference in terms of returns on a risk-adjusted basis - it really does depend on the time period of investing. That said, in the last 5 years, growth outperformed value by a wide margin - by 105% to be exact. I derived this from the 5-year performance chart of Vanguard's Growth ETF vs. Vanguard's Value ETF. This compares with an expected anomaly of 5% annually or a 28% expected anomaly for a 5-year time period.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/02ae7e7ebc11fdc907d363cb5da38576\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"427\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Leuthold Group</span></p>\n<p>Unsurprisingly, the number and market value of unprofitable companies has skyrocketed throughout the last couple of years. Here, the total number of unprofitable firms has skyrocketed to over 200, while their combined value handily beats 2000 levels, reaching nearly $2.5 trillion (3 times higher than in 2000). Of course, there is more money in circulation today, so when accounting for the dollar's real value, they are at comparable levels. Again, either way you twist it, there is a significant anomaly in the value of unprofitable companies in the stock market.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5804bc535329d20e013417a7e3f95614\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"357\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: FT</span></p>\n<p>As a result, startups have utilized the opportunity to raise as much money as possible by going public. In total, nearly 900 companies in the U.S. have gone public in 2021, raising over $202 billion collectively. Before, the previous record was set in 2000, when around 600 companies rang the bell. What's even more frightening is the fact that a large portion of IPOs went public through special-purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). Many of these companies were acquired early on, with the only objective to go public as soon as possible. Here, various blank-check companies generate little or no revenues and face a rockier path to raising money through traditional IPOs.</p>\n<p>Today's Bubble</p>\n<p>Frankly, today's bubble is fundamentally different from the 2000 bubble, although there are striking similarities. Arguably, the dot.com bubble revolved purely around Internet stocks. Today, the bubble is much broader, ranging from old written-off industries to Consumer Tech, being concentrated on Cybersecurity. This makes sense, considering Cybersecurity is a quickly evolving industry with potentially billions of earnings for future winners in the space. The same applies to E-commerce, Fintech, Cloud Computing, Gene Editing, and other major future industries.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/68b42d04a15d16c506a4abf4feb58df0\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"518\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>This brings me to my next chart: High-flying stars of the early Internet era traded at similar multiples to cloud computing stars of today (when adjusted for monetary changes). However, early market leaders tend to lose competitive advantages in rising industries, in what someresearchersrefer to as \"First to Market First to Fail.\" Here, early entrants typically bury the greatest market and technological uncertainties.</p>\n<p>In other words, no one knows yet how our new industries will look like and how consumer trends will evolve. For instance, Facebook(NASDAQ:FB)was the 10th social networking company, Google(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL)the 12th search engine, etc. Thus, today's most promising companies are unlikely to be the most promising companies 10 years from now. It is therefore questionable if current valuations can be supported in the long term.</p>\n<p>This is where I want to introduce Cisco's(NASDAQ:CSCO)example from 1999. At the time, the dominating Internet company briefly became the world's mostvaluablecompany, boasting a market cap of $569 billion. Certainly, the market wasn't being crazy at the time, considering Cisco's impressive growth rates and a trillion dollars industry ahead that was changing the world. An extract from Cisco's annual report in 1999:</p>\n<blockquote>\n \"Cisco predicted that the Internet would change the way we work, live, play, and learn. For the fiscal year ending July 31, 1999, Cisco reported revenue of $12.15 billion, a 43 percent increase compared with revenue of $8.49 billion in fiscal 1998. Net income for the year was $2.10 billion or $0.62 per common share, compared with fiscal 1998 net income of $1.35 billion or $0.42 per common share. - CiscoAnnual Report1999\"\n</blockquote>\n<p>Now, at the height of Cisco's valuation, the stock was trading at around 35 times Price to Sales, which is comparable to today's valuations, considering gross margins and growth rates. As with every new industry, competition eventually took market share from Cisco and crushed growth rates, leading to a sequential 87% drop in its share price. Although shares somewhat recovered, Cisco is still trading some 33% below all-time highs 22 years later.</p>\n<p><b>\"Cisco Could Be Safest Net Play Around\" -Bloomberg 1999</b></p>\n<p>Again, that does not necessarily mean that the same will happen to today's stars. After all, early winners like Amazon(NASDAQ:AMZN)and Microsoft(NASDAQ:MSFT)eventually recovered and are now trading well above dot.com levels. However, it is quite unlikely that all of today's stars will also be tomorrow's stars.</p>\n<p>Inflation...</p>\n<p>Arguably, inflation serves as one of the biggest investment risks in today's market. It was somewhat expected that inflation would tick up once the economy starts to recover with consumer spending skyrocketing. In this regard, the consumer price index rose by 5.4% in June, the highest since August 2008. That is well above the 5% rise reported in May and higher than the 4.9% increase that economists initially forecast. This challenges the Federal Reserve's hopes that the burst of inflationary pressures accompanying the economic reopening will be of temporary nature. Earlier, investors and economists have scrutinized the Federal Reserve's aggressive fiscal and monetary policy.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f507c5687771a8a8de99a914be11665\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"411\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Twitter</span></p>\n<p>Fiscal and monetary policy usually serve as driving factors for the creation of bubbles and are simultaneously responsible for their destruction. For instance, in 2000, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates several times; these actions are believed to have caused the bursting of the dot-com bubble. Interestingly, after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, stocks initially rallied. If we draw comparisons, a similar price movement can be observed today in Tech stocks, particularly growth stocks. Here, prominent names have been rising by 50% or more since May, despite the Fedwarningof higher interest rates and the potential for 'significant declines' in asset prices as valuations continue to climb.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a305d90c1f4751d0267c01347a54a33\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>That said, Fed President Jim Bullard expects the first interest rate hike coming as soon as 2022, which would be even faster than the consensusexpectationfor the first increase to happen in 2023. Earlier in March, officials initially indicated that they see no increase happening until at least 2024. In other words, in a matter of months, the timeline for a rate hike has shifted forward by 2 years. Thus, the next few months will be crucial to determine which way the timeline will shift; for now, it appears that the prior date is more likely.</p>\n<p>What about Big Tech?</p>\n<p>The question remains whether Big Tech stocks will be as severely affected during a notable pullback. Interestingly, except Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL)and Microsoft, FAANG members, including Facebook, Amazon, and Netflix(NASDAQ:NFLX), have been trailing behind in terms of performance, being reflected in the given valuations. Only Apple and Microsoft saw a notable valuation expansion in every significant metric out of the prominent Big Tech names. Here, Apple's P/E and P/S ratio nearly tripled over the last 5 years from 10x to 32x and 2.5x to 7.5x, respectively. These are historical valuation levels and dwarf the valuation expansions of Microsoft and Alphabet, which are supported by growing profitability over the years. However, it should be noticed that Apple's Price to Book Value disproportionately increased as a result of share buybacks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/596471096e40e42abea97e9ed5a0a6d6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"501\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>On the other hand, Facebook and Amazon observed no significant valuation expansion, which can be tied back to regulatory scrutiny and an overall rotation towards high-growth stocks. Thus, since their market betas are lower than other Tech stocks mentioned earlier, these stocks can serve as a safe haven, at least to some extent. However, an overall drop in the market will lead to short-term weakness in every Technology stock, undervalued or not. Nevertheless, stocks that have underperformed in the rally over the last five years are more likely to outperform during a downturn. Moreover, large Tech companies are less sensitive to higher inflation as they will earn higher interest on their cash reserves.</p>\n<p>So What?</p>\n<p>The stock market is always driven by two contradicting emotions: Fear and Optimism. Over the last couple of years, optimism has clearly dominated the Growth/Technology market, yielding impressive returns and widely outperforming stable but profitable companies. However, valuation growth exceeded business growth for many high-growth companies, making various stocks appear increasingly overvalued. While higher valuations can be supported by the acceleration of Technology in the future, striking similarities of the Tech bubble in 2000 make me increasingly cautious of today's market environment.</p>\n<p>Bubble or not, many graphs point to a significant anomaly in valuations, and it will be difficult for companies to justify these sorts of valuations in the long term. More importantly, a heating economy with rising inflation will pressure the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to prevent an economic contraction.</p>\n<p>Nonetheless, investors can protect themselves by rotating back into stable value stocks or Big Tech companies that have underperformed on a relative basis. The issue with every insurance is that you are only being paid in the case of a crash, quite literally. After all, valuations of high-growth stocks could continue rising and those not invested miss out on potential gains. Another viable option could be to rotate back into cash, but the same prior issue applies here. Even those who decide to short stocks have to be careful since an upside ceiling doesn't exist in the market.</p>\n<p>This is the point where I would like to address the risks of my thesis: First, inflation may stabilize quicker than expected, which would push a potential interest rate hike back to 2024 or later. In this case, money will continue to be cheap, which will support higher valuations and the growth market in general. Secondly, companies can scale somewhat faster today, making a historical valuation comparison to early years less relevant. Lastly, I could be underappreciating given growth rates and the ability of management to shake off competition in the long run. Still, given the various uncertainties around valuations, I am more fearful than optimistic at the moment.</p>\n<p>In either way, if you have a different opinion or any counterarguments to my thesis, I'm happy to hear about it in the comment section!</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>The Big Crash Is Imminent</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 Big Crash Is Imminent\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-15 22:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4439223-the-big-crash-is-imminent><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nThe continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during the dot.com bubble in 2000.\nThe bubble is relatively concentrated and doesn't necessarily pose ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4439223-the-big-crash-is-imminent\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4439223-the-big-crash-is-imminent","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1155093230","content_text":"Summary\n\nThe continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during the dot.com bubble in 2000.\nThe bubble is relatively concentrated and doesn't necessarily pose threats to the market as a whole.\nWhile it is clear that there is a strong deviation from historical valuation norms, valuations could continue to rise (at least in the short term).\nThis article is not meant as fear-mongering, and I may very possibly be wrong about my hypothesis.\n\nIt seems that the talk about whether we are in another Tech bubble has been going on for many years. Articles and news calling for the 'crash of the decade' have been condemned as fear-mongering with little substance to them. After all, technology stocks kept on rising, and those who listened missed out on impressive gains. Now, generally speaking, neither have I been too worried about valuations in the best, as fundamentals towards Technology in our society are simply too strong.\nHowever, a lot has changed over the course of the pandemic, which has led me to rethink my perspective. As the global pandemic shut down economies around the world and caused substantial economic contraction, federal banks counteracted by injecting trillions of dollars into the economy in the form of stimulus checks, grants, loans, etc. As a result, fresh liquidity immediately reflected itself in stocks and other market instruments.\nSource: Bloomberg\nThroughout this article, I want to demonstrate a few graphs to strengthen my argument, with the chart above being the first one. The Nasdaq 100 is perhaps the most common index to track the technology market, although it only includes profitable and large-cap Tech stocks. On average, the index currently holds a Price to Sales ratio of 5.7x, levels that the Index last saw in early 2001 after the dot.com bubble began to bust.\nIt is important to note that at the height of the bubble, the ratio stood at 7.5x, around 30% higher than it is right now. Still, the median valuation has been trailing significantly lower, at around 3.5x over the last 20 years. Of course, it can be argued that Technology deserves a higher valuation these days due to the increased use of Technology and perhaps higher growth rates. However, should Technology valuations be nearly 100% higher than just 5 years ago, in 2016, where Technology integration was pretty much at the same level as today?\nProfitability\nIn recent years, unprofitable but growing companies have been favored over mature and profitable companies. Usually, rotations from Growth to Value or the other way around occur every 2-5 years, which is totally unsurprising. Historically, in terms of performance, there has been no significant difference in terms of returns on a risk-adjusted basis - it really does depend on the time period of investing. That said, in the last 5 years, growth outperformed value by a wide margin - by 105% to be exact. I derived this from the 5-year performance chart of Vanguard's Growth ETF vs. Vanguard's Value ETF. This compares with an expected anomaly of 5% annually or a 28% expected anomaly for a 5-year time period.\nSource: Leuthold Group\nUnsurprisingly, the number and market value of unprofitable companies has skyrocketed throughout the last couple of years. Here, the total number of unprofitable firms has skyrocketed to over 200, while their combined value handily beats 2000 levels, reaching nearly $2.5 trillion (3 times higher than in 2000). Of course, there is more money in circulation today, so when accounting for the dollar's real value, they are at comparable levels. Again, either way you twist it, there is a significant anomaly in the value of unprofitable companies in the stock market.\nSource: FT\nAs a result, startups have utilized the opportunity to raise as much money as possible by going public. In total, nearly 900 companies in the U.S. have gone public in 2021, raising over $202 billion collectively. Before, the previous record was set in 2000, when around 600 companies rang the bell. What's even more frightening is the fact that a large portion of IPOs went public through special-purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). Many of these companies were acquired early on, with the only objective to go public as soon as possible. Here, various blank-check companies generate little or no revenues and face a rockier path to raising money through traditional IPOs.\nToday's Bubble\nFrankly, today's bubble is fundamentally different from the 2000 bubble, although there are striking similarities. Arguably, the dot.com bubble revolved purely around Internet stocks. Today, the bubble is much broader, ranging from old written-off industries to Consumer Tech, being concentrated on Cybersecurity. This makes sense, considering Cybersecurity is a quickly evolving industry with potentially billions of earnings for future winners in the space. The same applies to E-commerce, Fintech, Cloud Computing, Gene Editing, and other major future industries.\nData by YCharts\nThis brings me to my next chart: High-flying stars of the early Internet era traded at similar multiples to cloud computing stars of today (when adjusted for monetary changes). However, early market leaders tend to lose competitive advantages in rising industries, in what someresearchersrefer to as \"First to Market First to Fail.\" Here, early entrants typically bury the greatest market and technological uncertainties.\nIn other words, no one knows yet how our new industries will look like and how consumer trends will evolve. For instance, Facebook(NASDAQ:FB)was the 10th social networking company, Google(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL)the 12th search engine, etc. Thus, today's most promising companies are unlikely to be the most promising companies 10 years from now. It is therefore questionable if current valuations can be supported in the long term.\nThis is where I want to introduce Cisco's(NASDAQ:CSCO)example from 1999. At the time, the dominating Internet company briefly became the world's mostvaluablecompany, boasting a market cap of $569 billion. Certainly, the market wasn't being crazy at the time, considering Cisco's impressive growth rates and a trillion dollars industry ahead that was changing the world. An extract from Cisco's annual report in 1999:\n\n \"Cisco predicted that the Internet would change the way we work, live, play, and learn. For the fiscal year ending July 31, 1999, Cisco reported revenue of $12.15 billion, a 43 percent increase compared with revenue of $8.49 billion in fiscal 1998. Net income for the year was $2.10 billion or $0.62 per common share, compared with fiscal 1998 net income of $1.35 billion or $0.42 per common share. - CiscoAnnual Report1999\"\n\nNow, at the height of Cisco's valuation, the stock was trading at around 35 times Price to Sales, which is comparable to today's valuations, considering gross margins and growth rates. As with every new industry, competition eventually took market share from Cisco and crushed growth rates, leading to a sequential 87% drop in its share price. Although shares somewhat recovered, Cisco is still trading some 33% below all-time highs 22 years later.\n\"Cisco Could Be Safest Net Play Around\" -Bloomberg 1999\nAgain, that does not necessarily mean that the same will happen to today's stars. After all, early winners like Amazon(NASDAQ:AMZN)and Microsoft(NASDAQ:MSFT)eventually recovered and are now trading well above dot.com levels. However, it is quite unlikely that all of today's stars will also be tomorrow's stars.\nInflation...\nArguably, inflation serves as one of the biggest investment risks in today's market. It was somewhat expected that inflation would tick up once the economy starts to recover with consumer spending skyrocketing. In this regard, the consumer price index rose by 5.4% in June, the highest since August 2008. That is well above the 5% rise reported in May and higher than the 4.9% increase that economists initially forecast. This challenges the Federal Reserve's hopes that the burst of inflationary pressures accompanying the economic reopening will be of temporary nature. Earlier, investors and economists have scrutinized the Federal Reserve's aggressive fiscal and monetary policy.\nSource: Twitter\nFiscal and monetary policy usually serve as driving factors for the creation of bubbles and are simultaneously responsible for their destruction. For instance, in 2000, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates several times; these actions are believed to have caused the bursting of the dot-com bubble. Interestingly, after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, stocks initially rallied. If we draw comparisons, a similar price movement can be observed today in Tech stocks, particularly growth stocks. Here, prominent names have been rising by 50% or more since May, despite the Fedwarningof higher interest rates and the potential for 'significant declines' in asset prices as valuations continue to climb.\nData by YCharts\nThat said, Fed President Jim Bullard expects the first interest rate hike coming as soon as 2022, which would be even faster than the consensusexpectationfor the first increase to happen in 2023. Earlier in March, officials initially indicated that they see no increase happening until at least 2024. In other words, in a matter of months, the timeline for a rate hike has shifted forward by 2 years. Thus, the next few months will be crucial to determine which way the timeline will shift; for now, it appears that the prior date is more likely.\nWhat about Big Tech?\nThe question remains whether Big Tech stocks will be as severely affected during a notable pullback. Interestingly, except Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL)and Microsoft, FAANG members, including Facebook, Amazon, and Netflix(NASDAQ:NFLX), have been trailing behind in terms of performance, being reflected in the given valuations. Only Apple and Microsoft saw a notable valuation expansion in every significant metric out of the prominent Big Tech names. Here, Apple's P/E and P/S ratio nearly tripled over the last 5 years from 10x to 32x and 2.5x to 7.5x, respectively. These are historical valuation levels and dwarf the valuation expansions of Microsoft and Alphabet, which are supported by growing profitability over the years. However, it should be noticed that Apple's Price to Book Value disproportionately increased as a result of share buybacks.\nData by YCharts\nOn the other hand, Facebook and Amazon observed no significant valuation expansion, which can be tied back to regulatory scrutiny and an overall rotation towards high-growth stocks. Thus, since their market betas are lower than other Tech stocks mentioned earlier, these stocks can serve as a safe haven, at least to some extent. However, an overall drop in the market will lead to short-term weakness in every Technology stock, undervalued or not. Nevertheless, stocks that have underperformed in the rally over the last five years are more likely to outperform during a downturn. Moreover, large Tech companies are less sensitive to higher inflation as they will earn higher interest on their cash reserves.\nSo What?\nThe stock market is always driven by two contradicting emotions: Fear and Optimism. Over the last couple of years, optimism has clearly dominated the Growth/Technology market, yielding impressive returns and widely outperforming stable but profitable companies. However, valuation growth exceeded business growth for many high-growth companies, making various stocks appear increasingly overvalued. While higher valuations can be supported by the acceleration of Technology in the future, striking similarities of the Tech bubble in 2000 make me increasingly cautious of today's market environment.\nBubble or not, many graphs point to a significant anomaly in valuations, and it will be difficult for companies to justify these sorts of valuations in the long term. More importantly, a heating economy with rising inflation will pressure the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to prevent an economic contraction.\nNonetheless, investors can protect themselves by rotating back into stable value stocks or Big Tech companies that have underperformed on a relative basis. The issue with every insurance is that you are only being paid in the case of a crash, quite literally. After all, valuations of high-growth stocks could continue rising and those not invested miss out on potential gains. Another viable option could be to rotate back into cash, but the same prior issue applies here. Even those who decide to short stocks have to be careful since an upside ceiling doesn't exist in the market.\nThis is the point where I would like to address the risks of my thesis: First, inflation may stabilize quicker than expected, which would push a potential interest rate hike back to 2024 or later. In this case, money will continue to be cheap, which will support higher valuations and the growth market in general. Secondly, companies can scale somewhat faster today, making a historical valuation comparison to early years less relevant. Lastly, I could be underappreciating given growth rates and the ability of management to shake off competition in the long run. Still, given the various uncertainties around valuations, I am more fearful than optimistic at the moment.\nIn either way, if you have a different opinion or any counterarguments to my thesis, I'm happy to hear about it in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":178,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":147273182,"gmtCreate":1626361394246,"gmtModify":1703758747726,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon?","text":"$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$To the moon?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/147273182","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":466,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":157826145,"gmtCreate":1625578558187,"gmtModify":1703744173170,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the moon!","listText":"To the moon!","text":"To the moon!","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e33bbf0dcd74b72e655bef7723e6805","width":"1125","height":"3336"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/157826145","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":120,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":156584842,"gmtCreate":1625230653486,"gmtModify":1703738905146,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>To the moon pls","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>To the moon pls","text":"$BEST Inc(BEST)$To the moon pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/156584842","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":151,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158672248,"gmtCreate":1625149402184,"gmtModify":1703737224559,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon ?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon ?","text":"$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$To the moon ?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/158672248","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":327,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":151352164,"gmtCreate":1625064888858,"gmtModify":1703735340139,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the moon&nbsp;","listText":"To the moon&nbsp;","text":"To the moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/151352164","repostId":"2147169298","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2147169298","pubTimestamp":1625064508,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2147169298?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-30 22:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2147169298","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"These two businesses are in the same industry but couldn't be more different.","content":"<p>The aerospace, rocket launching, and defense industries seem to be on the verge of a huge expansion over the coming decades. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have paved the way for this private \"space race,\" launching test rockets and satellites for businesses and the U.S. government. But there are plenty of other companies in this private space race. One is <b>Virgin Galactic</b> (NYSE:SPCE), which was started by Richard Branson in 2004 and went public through a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) in 2019. Another is <b>Lockheed Martin</b> (NYSE:LMT), the world's largest defense contractor.</p>\n<p>Which is a better buy: Virgin Galactic or Lockheed Martin? Let's take a look.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b5f0851439294a2ef253f90479b7d5b2\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"491\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Virgin Galactic</h2>\n<p>Virgin Galactic is trying to build a modern aerospace company with a focus on consumer trips. Its goal is to develop \"a new generation of space vehicles to open space for everyone,\" according to its website. It has manufactured and will continue to manufacture different spaceships, with a goal of targeting researchers and wealthy private individuals for sub-orbital flights. Each ticket costs $250 thousand, and the company has a total of&nbsp; approximately 600 Future Astronauts (what it calls customers who have booked future flights) at the end of the first quarter.</p>\n<p>One thing investors should note with Virgin Galactic is that it doesn't actually have a business yet. In Q1 it brought in $0 of revenue (yes, that number is correct), burned $50 million, and has a little over $600 million in cash on its balance sheet. That cash pile gives it a good cushion, at least for a few quarters, but it is likely that the company will need to raise more money in the coming years.</p>\n<p>It has typically done that by issuing stock. Since going public in 2019, its shares outstanding have gone up 179%. Virgin Galactic currently has a market cap of $12.8 billion. Since it doesn't have a business right now, there's not much to reference this market cap to, but it implies that investors should expect the company to do at least a few billion in sales and hundreds of millions in profits at some point.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4ab1895d73d79c678e757ad436915a12\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts.</span></p>\n<h2>Lockheed Martin</h2>\n<p>Lockheed Martin is an American defense, aerospace, security, and technology company that has been doing business for the U.S. government for decades. Its largest business comes from aeronautics (which includes things like fighter jets), but it also has large missile, mission systems, and space-business lines as well. In fact, Lockheed Martin was the company that designed a helicopter for NASA that could fly on Mars.</p>\n<p>The conglomerate is guiding for around $68 billion in sales and $8.9 billion in cash generated from operations this year. With a market cap of $106 billion, the stock has a forward price-to-operating-cash-flow (P/OCF) of 11.9. Lockheed also returns tons of cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Its dividend yield is 2.72%, and its share count has come down each of the last five years.</p>\n<h2>So which is the better buy?</h2>\n<p>After comparing these two stocks, I think it is clear which is better to own: Lockheed Martin. Virgin Galactic does not have an actual business right now, is hemorrhaging cash, and has seen its share count go up 179% in less than two years. At this time, buying shares in Virgin Galactic is not investing but speculating.</p>\n<p>Lockheed Martin, on the other hand, has a diversified business and the most reliable customer in the world (the U.S. government). Plus, it consistently returns cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. It might not have the hype of Virgin Galactic, whose shares seem to go up or down 10% a day, but Lockheed Martin is the better buy for long-term investors.</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>Better Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin</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\">\nBetter Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-30 22:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/30/better-buy-virgin-galactic-vs-lockheed-martin/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The aerospace, rocket launching, and defense industries seem to be on the verge of a huge expansion over the coming decades. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have paved the way for this private \"...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/30/better-buy-virgin-galactic-vs-lockheed-martin/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPCE":"维珍银河","LMT":"洛克希德马丁"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/30/better-buy-virgin-galactic-vs-lockheed-martin/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2147169298","content_text":"The aerospace, rocket launching, and defense industries seem to be on the verge of a huge expansion over the coming decades. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have paved the way for this private \"space race,\" launching test rockets and satellites for businesses and the U.S. government. But there are plenty of other companies in this private space race. One is Virgin Galactic (NYSE:SPCE), which was started by Richard Branson in 2004 and went public through a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) in 2019. Another is Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT), the world's largest defense contractor.\nWhich is a better buy: Virgin Galactic or Lockheed Martin? Let's take a look.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nVirgin Galactic\nVirgin Galactic is trying to build a modern aerospace company with a focus on consumer trips. Its goal is to develop \"a new generation of space vehicles to open space for everyone,\" according to its website. It has manufactured and will continue to manufacture different spaceships, with a goal of targeting researchers and wealthy private individuals for sub-orbital flights. Each ticket costs $250 thousand, and the company has a total of  approximately 600 Future Astronauts (what it calls customers who have booked future flights) at the end of the first quarter.\nOne thing investors should note with Virgin Galactic is that it doesn't actually have a business yet. In Q1 it brought in $0 of revenue (yes, that number is correct), burned $50 million, and has a little over $600 million in cash on its balance sheet. That cash pile gives it a good cushion, at least for a few quarters, but it is likely that the company will need to raise more money in the coming years.\nIt has typically done that by issuing stock. Since going public in 2019, its shares outstanding have gone up 179%. Virgin Galactic currently has a market cap of $12.8 billion. Since it doesn't have a business right now, there's not much to reference this market cap to, but it implies that investors should expect the company to do at least a few billion in sales and hundreds of millions in profits at some point.\nData by YCharts.\nLockheed Martin\nLockheed Martin is an American defense, aerospace, security, and technology company that has been doing business for the U.S. government for decades. Its largest business comes from aeronautics (which includes things like fighter jets), but it also has large missile, mission systems, and space-business lines as well. In fact, Lockheed Martin was the company that designed a helicopter for NASA that could fly on Mars.\nThe conglomerate is guiding for around $68 billion in sales and $8.9 billion in cash generated from operations this year. With a market cap of $106 billion, the stock has a forward price-to-operating-cash-flow (P/OCF) of 11.9. Lockheed also returns tons of cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Its dividend yield is 2.72%, and its share count has come down each of the last five years.\nSo which is the better buy?\nAfter comparing these two stocks, I think it is clear which is better to own: Lockheed Martin. Virgin Galactic does not have an actual business right now, is hemorrhaging cash, and has seen its share count go up 179% in less than two years. At this time, buying shares in Virgin Galactic is not investing but speculating.\nLockheed Martin, on the other hand, has a diversified business and the most reliable customer in the world (the U.S. government). Plus, it consistently returns cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. It might not have the hype of Virgin Galactic, whose shares seem to go up or down 10% a day, but Lockheed Martin is the better buy for long-term investors.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":205,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":151358550,"gmtCreate":1625064838970,"gmtModify":1703735337701,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Moon&nbsp;","listText":"Moon&nbsp;","text":"Moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/151358550","repostId":"1105779613","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105779613","pubTimestamp":1625062867,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1105779613?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-30 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105779613","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150. Competitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge. Few companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as Tesla Inc.-- and the lackluster run this year has done nothing to lessen it.To Piper Sandler & Co.’s Alexander Potter, the company’s potential dominance of the electric-car business warrants a $1,200 stock-price target, nearly double its $680.76 close on Tuesday. To Craig Irwin of Roth Capital Partners, as rivals move t","content":"<ul>\n <li>One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150</li>\n <li>Competitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Few companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as&nbsp;Tesla Inc.-- and the lackluster run this year has done nothing to lessen it.</p>\n<p>To&nbsp;Piper Sandler &amp; Co.’s Alexander Potter, the company’s potential dominance of the electric-car business&nbsp;warrants&nbsp;a $1,200 stock-price target, nearly double its $680.76 close on Tuesday. To Craig Irwin of Roth Capital Partners, as rivals move to pick off a head start that turned Tesla into the world’s most highly valued car company, the stock will sink to $150.</p>\n<p>The divergence illustrates the tension that has sent Tesla shares toward a 4% loss during the first half of the year even as rival automakers surged ahead. That’s a marked contrast to its more than 8-fold jump last year and reflects investors’ doubts about heady growth expectations for the company in the face of stronger competitive threats and signs of a sales slowdown in China.</p>\n<p>“For a long time Tesla was the only credible player in the high-quality EV market, and we are seeing that starting to change,” said JoAnne Feeney, portfolio manager atAdvisorsCapital Management, who said the company’s current valuation assumes it will become the biggest seller of cars in the U.S. “That seems to be an awful lot to ask.”</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb8f7a35e4b2bc516159737958ead3d4\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"675\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Tesla sold about half a million cars worldwide in 2020, accounting for a fraction of even the 14.5 million light vehicles sold in the U.S., and it’s facing threats from traditional automakers such as&nbsp;General Motors Co.,Ford Motor Co.&nbsp;and&nbsp;Volkswagen AG&nbsp;that are launching their own electric-vehicle lineups. In China, Tesla’s lead over other startups has already started to shrink, according to&nbsp;UBS Group AG&nbsp;analyst Patrick Hummel.</p>\n<p>That competition poses a separate challenge to the company’s bottom line: Tesla has profited from selling carbon-offset credits to other carmakers that haven’t met their emissions targets. But the more its rivals’ sales of electric vehicles take off, the more that source of revenue will drop.</p>\n<p>Yet Tesla’s stock-market valuation is based on the expectation of steep growth, giving it little room for error. It’s currently trading at more than 650 times earnings per share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That compares with a multiple of 30 for the S&amp;P 500 Index.</p>\n<p>“Tesla’s market valuation is vastly over optimistic, ignoring the over 500 EV models that will be on the road by the end of 2025,” said&nbsp;Roth Capital’s Irwin. “Tesla does not operate in a vacuum and many companies have better technology.”</p>\n<p>The company will be reporting second-quarter delivery figures later this week, a major catalyst that analysts and investors will be keenly watching.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6d2dd8d41a7f20e74bd44de1c344d6a0\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"675\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>But Tesla bulls are confident that the company’s valuation will be justified if it comes to dominate the industry, much like tech behemoths&nbsp;Alphabet Inc.,FaceBook Inc.&nbsp;and&nbsp;Amazon.com Inc&nbsp;.have come to lord over their’s.</p>\n<p>Others just see it as a pause for Tesla shares as investors come to terms with the surging valuation last year, when markets leaned heavily onto growth stocks as the pandemic shut down much of the global economy. That influx has started to shift this year in the so-called reflation trade, with funds moving back into stocks more likely to benefit from the recovery.</p>\n<p>Cathie Wood’s&nbsp;Ark Investment Management, which had a 0.6% stake in Tesla as of March 31 and is an ardent backer of the company, remains steadfast in its support despite the stock’s showing this year. Ark expects it to benefit from rising electric vehicle sales and sees even odds that it will deliver fully self-driven cars in four years.</p>\n<p>If all goes as planned? Ark forecasts the stock will reach $3,000 in 2025.</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>Tesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value</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\">\nTesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-30 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-30/tesla-stall-shows-wall-street-rift-on-stratospheric-stock-value?srnd=markets-vp><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150\nCompetitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge\n\nFew companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as Tesla Inc.-- and the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-30/tesla-stall-shows-wall-street-rift-on-stratospheric-stock-value?srnd=markets-vp\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-30/tesla-stall-shows-wall-street-rift-on-stratospheric-stock-value?srnd=markets-vp","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105779613","content_text":"One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150\nCompetitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge\n\nFew companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as Tesla Inc.-- and the lackluster run this year has done nothing to lessen it.\nTo Piper Sandler & Co.’s Alexander Potter, the company’s potential dominance of the electric-car business warrants a $1,200 stock-price target, nearly double its $680.76 close on Tuesday. To Craig Irwin of Roth Capital Partners, as rivals move to pick off a head start that turned Tesla into the world’s most highly valued car company, the stock will sink to $150.\nThe divergence illustrates the tension that has sent Tesla shares toward a 4% loss during the first half of the year even as rival automakers surged ahead. That’s a marked contrast to its more than 8-fold jump last year and reflects investors’ doubts about heady growth expectations for the company in the face of stronger competitive threats and signs of a sales slowdown in China.\n“For a long time Tesla was the only credible player in the high-quality EV market, and we are seeing that starting to change,” said JoAnne Feeney, portfolio manager atAdvisorsCapital Management, who said the company’s current valuation assumes it will become the biggest seller of cars in the U.S. “That seems to be an awful lot to ask.”\n\nTesla sold about half a million cars worldwide in 2020, accounting for a fraction of even the 14.5 million light vehicles sold in the U.S., and it’s facing threats from traditional automakers such as General Motors Co.,Ford Motor Co. and Volkswagen AG that are launching their own electric-vehicle lineups. In China, Tesla’s lead over other startups has already started to shrink, according to UBS Group AG analyst Patrick Hummel.\nThat competition poses a separate challenge to the company’s bottom line: Tesla has profited from selling carbon-offset credits to other carmakers that haven’t met their emissions targets. But the more its rivals’ sales of electric vehicles take off, the more that source of revenue will drop.\nYet Tesla’s stock-market valuation is based on the expectation of steep growth, giving it little room for error. It’s currently trading at more than 650 times earnings per share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That compares with a multiple of 30 for the S&P 500 Index.\n“Tesla’s market valuation is vastly over optimistic, ignoring the over 500 EV models that will be on the road by the end of 2025,” said Roth Capital’s Irwin. “Tesla does not operate in a vacuum and many companies have better technology.”\nThe company will be reporting second-quarter delivery figures later this week, a major catalyst that analysts and investors will be keenly watching.\n\nBut Tesla bulls are confident that the company’s valuation will be justified if it comes to dominate the industry, much like tech behemoths Alphabet Inc.,FaceBook Inc. and Amazon.com Inc .have come to lord over their’s.\nOthers just see it as a pause for Tesla shares as investors come to terms with the surging valuation last year, when markets leaned heavily onto growth stocks as the pandemic shut down much of the global economy. That influx has started to shift this year in the so-called reflation trade, with funds moving back into stocks more likely to benefit from the recovery.\nCathie Wood’s Ark Investment Management, which had a 0.6% stake in Tesla as of March 31 and is an ardent backer of the company, remains steadfast in its support despite the stock’s showing this year. Ark expects it to benefit from rising electric vehicle sales and sees even odds that it will deliver fully self-driven cars in four years.\nIf all goes as planned? Ark forecasts the stock will reach $3,000 in 2025.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":232,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121512252,"gmtCreate":1624474711376,"gmtModify":1703837832804,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>to the moon","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>to the moon","text":"$BEST Inc(BEST)$to the moon","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2d75cbdc288aa7786a9b7fd8e1b7e189","width":"1242","height":"2385"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121512252","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1138,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163362721,"gmtCreate":1623859988863,"gmtModify":1703821808877,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>?","text":"$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$?","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01226e7c1b3bc9cc8e6270c7819ca921","width":"1242","height":"2385"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/163362721","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":597,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163360185,"gmtCreate":1623859883647,"gmtModify":1703821800114,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Up up up!","listText":"Up up up!","text":"Up up up!","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c818a289bfc11432946ce89af733e64","width":"1125","height":"3417"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/163360185","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":322,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":185441470,"gmtCreate":1623669807590,"gmtModify":1704208217996,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Share","listText":"Share","text":"Share","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c75fb18a345f17177cc42fc134093f20","width":"1125","height":"3512"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/185441470","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":125,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":185449059,"gmtCreate":1623669653971,"gmtModify":1704208213880,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>up!","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>up!","text":"$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$up!","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/994ccb3baa7edc86872fd4c88a463193","width":"1242","height":"2385"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/185449059","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":129,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":163362721,"gmtCreate":1623859988863,"gmtModify":1703821808877,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>?","text":"$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$?","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/01226e7c1b3bc9cc8e6270c7819ca921","width":"1242","height":"2385"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/163362721","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":597,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":147273182,"gmtCreate":1626361394246,"gmtModify":1703758747726,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon?","text":"$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$To the moon?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/147273182","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":466,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":147274730,"gmtCreate":1626361592620,"gmtModify":1703758756524,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the moon ?","listText":"To the moon ?","text":"To the moon ?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/147274730","repostId":"1155093230","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1155093230","pubTimestamp":1626359281,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1155093230?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-15 22:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Big Crash Is Imminent","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1155093230","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nThe continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>The continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during the dot.com bubble in 2000.</li>\n <li>The bubble is relatively concentrated and doesn't necessarily pose threats to the market as a whole.</li>\n <li>While it is clear that there is a strong deviation from historical valuation norms, valuations could continue to rise (at least in the short term).</li>\n <li>This article is not meant as fear-mongering, and I may very possibly be wrong about my hypothesis.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>It seems that the talk about whether we are in another Tech bubble has been going on for many years. Articles and news calling for the 'crash of the decade' have been condemned as fear-mongering with little substance to them. After all, technology stocks kept on rising, and those who listened missed out on impressive gains. Now, generally speaking, neither have I been too worried about valuations in the best, as fundamentals towards Technology in our society are simply too strong.</p>\n<p>However, a lot has changed over the course of the pandemic, which has led me to rethink my perspective. As the global pandemic shut down economies around the world and caused substantial economic contraction, federal banks counteracted by injecting trillions of dollars into the economy in the form of stimulus checks, grants, loans, etc. As a result, fresh liquidity immediately reflected itself in stocks and other market instruments.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c688f97bd5e513daa2e0c76d5ace6a1c\" tg-width=\"1845\" tg-height=\"651\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Bloomberg</span></p>\n<p>Throughout this article, I want to demonstrate a few graphs to strengthen my argument, with the chart above being the first one. The Nasdaq 100 is perhaps the most common index to track the technology market, although it only includes profitable and large-cap Tech stocks. On average, the index currently holds a Price to Sales ratio of 5.7x, levels that the Index last saw in early 2001 after the dot.com bubble began to bust.</p>\n<p>It is important to note that at the height of the bubble, the ratio stood at 7.5x, around 30% higher than it is right now. Still, the median valuation has been trailing significantly lower, at around 3.5x over the last 20 years. Of course, it can be argued that Technology deserves a higher valuation these days due to the increased use of Technology and perhaps higher growth rates. However, should Technology valuations be nearly 100% higher than just 5 years ago, in 2016, where Technology integration was pretty much at the same level as today?</p>\n<p>Profitability</p>\n<p>In recent years, unprofitable but growing companies have been favored over mature and profitable companies. Usually, rotations from Growth to Value or the other way around occur every 2-5 years, which is totally unsurprising. Historically, in terms of performance, there has been no significant difference in terms of returns on a risk-adjusted basis - it really does depend on the time period of investing. That said, in the last 5 years, growth outperformed value by a wide margin - by 105% to be exact. I derived this from the 5-year performance chart of Vanguard's Growth ETF vs. Vanguard's Value ETF. This compares with an expected anomaly of 5% annually or a 28% expected anomaly for a 5-year time period.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/02ae7e7ebc11fdc907d363cb5da38576\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"427\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Leuthold Group</span></p>\n<p>Unsurprisingly, the number and market value of unprofitable companies has skyrocketed throughout the last couple of years. Here, the total number of unprofitable firms has skyrocketed to over 200, while their combined value handily beats 2000 levels, reaching nearly $2.5 trillion (3 times higher than in 2000). Of course, there is more money in circulation today, so when accounting for the dollar's real value, they are at comparable levels. Again, either way you twist it, there is a significant anomaly in the value of unprofitable companies in the stock market.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5804bc535329d20e013417a7e3f95614\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"357\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: FT</span></p>\n<p>As a result, startups have utilized the opportunity to raise as much money as possible by going public. In total, nearly 900 companies in the U.S. have gone public in 2021, raising over $202 billion collectively. Before, the previous record was set in 2000, when around 600 companies rang the bell. What's even more frightening is the fact that a large portion of IPOs went public through special-purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). Many of these companies were acquired early on, with the only objective to go public as soon as possible. Here, various blank-check companies generate little or no revenues and face a rockier path to raising money through traditional IPOs.</p>\n<p>Today's Bubble</p>\n<p>Frankly, today's bubble is fundamentally different from the 2000 bubble, although there are striking similarities. Arguably, the dot.com bubble revolved purely around Internet stocks. Today, the bubble is much broader, ranging from old written-off industries to Consumer Tech, being concentrated on Cybersecurity. This makes sense, considering Cybersecurity is a quickly evolving industry with potentially billions of earnings for future winners in the space. The same applies to E-commerce, Fintech, Cloud Computing, Gene Editing, and other major future industries.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/68b42d04a15d16c506a4abf4feb58df0\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"518\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>This brings me to my next chart: High-flying stars of the early Internet era traded at similar multiples to cloud computing stars of today (when adjusted for monetary changes). However, early market leaders tend to lose competitive advantages in rising industries, in what someresearchersrefer to as \"First to Market First to Fail.\" Here, early entrants typically bury the greatest market and technological uncertainties.</p>\n<p>In other words, no one knows yet how our new industries will look like and how consumer trends will evolve. For instance, Facebook(NASDAQ:FB)was the 10th social networking company, Google(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL)the 12th search engine, etc. Thus, today's most promising companies are unlikely to be the most promising companies 10 years from now. It is therefore questionable if current valuations can be supported in the long term.</p>\n<p>This is where I want to introduce Cisco's(NASDAQ:CSCO)example from 1999. At the time, the dominating Internet company briefly became the world's mostvaluablecompany, boasting a market cap of $569 billion. Certainly, the market wasn't being crazy at the time, considering Cisco's impressive growth rates and a trillion dollars industry ahead that was changing the world. An extract from Cisco's annual report in 1999:</p>\n<blockquote>\n \"Cisco predicted that the Internet would change the way we work, live, play, and learn. For the fiscal year ending July 31, 1999, Cisco reported revenue of $12.15 billion, a 43 percent increase compared with revenue of $8.49 billion in fiscal 1998. Net income for the year was $2.10 billion or $0.62 per common share, compared with fiscal 1998 net income of $1.35 billion or $0.42 per common share. - CiscoAnnual Report1999\"\n</blockquote>\n<p>Now, at the height of Cisco's valuation, the stock was trading at around 35 times Price to Sales, which is comparable to today's valuations, considering gross margins and growth rates. As with every new industry, competition eventually took market share from Cisco and crushed growth rates, leading to a sequential 87% drop in its share price. Although shares somewhat recovered, Cisco is still trading some 33% below all-time highs 22 years later.</p>\n<p><b>\"Cisco Could Be Safest Net Play Around\" -Bloomberg 1999</b></p>\n<p>Again, that does not necessarily mean that the same will happen to today's stars. After all, early winners like Amazon(NASDAQ:AMZN)and Microsoft(NASDAQ:MSFT)eventually recovered and are now trading well above dot.com levels. However, it is quite unlikely that all of today's stars will also be tomorrow's stars.</p>\n<p>Inflation...</p>\n<p>Arguably, inflation serves as one of the biggest investment risks in today's market. It was somewhat expected that inflation would tick up once the economy starts to recover with consumer spending skyrocketing. In this regard, the consumer price index rose by 5.4% in June, the highest since August 2008. That is well above the 5% rise reported in May and higher than the 4.9% increase that economists initially forecast. This challenges the Federal Reserve's hopes that the burst of inflationary pressures accompanying the economic reopening will be of temporary nature. Earlier, investors and economists have scrutinized the Federal Reserve's aggressive fiscal and monetary policy.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f507c5687771a8a8de99a914be11665\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"411\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Twitter</span></p>\n<p>Fiscal and monetary policy usually serve as driving factors for the creation of bubbles and are simultaneously responsible for their destruction. For instance, in 2000, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates several times; these actions are believed to have caused the bursting of the dot-com bubble. Interestingly, after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, stocks initially rallied. If we draw comparisons, a similar price movement can be observed today in Tech stocks, particularly growth stocks. Here, prominent names have been rising by 50% or more since May, despite the Fedwarningof higher interest rates and the potential for 'significant declines' in asset prices as valuations continue to climb.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a305d90c1f4751d0267c01347a54a33\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>That said, Fed President Jim Bullard expects the first interest rate hike coming as soon as 2022, which would be even faster than the consensusexpectationfor the first increase to happen in 2023. Earlier in March, officials initially indicated that they see no increase happening until at least 2024. In other words, in a matter of months, the timeline for a rate hike has shifted forward by 2 years. Thus, the next few months will be crucial to determine which way the timeline will shift; for now, it appears that the prior date is more likely.</p>\n<p>What about Big Tech?</p>\n<p>The question remains whether Big Tech stocks will be as severely affected during a notable pullback. Interestingly, except Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL)and Microsoft, FAANG members, including Facebook, Amazon, and Netflix(NASDAQ:NFLX), have been trailing behind in terms of performance, being reflected in the given valuations. Only Apple and Microsoft saw a notable valuation expansion in every significant metric out of the prominent Big Tech names. Here, Apple's P/E and P/S ratio nearly tripled over the last 5 years from 10x to 32x and 2.5x to 7.5x, respectively. These are historical valuation levels and dwarf the valuation expansions of Microsoft and Alphabet, which are supported by growing profitability over the years. However, it should be noticed that Apple's Price to Book Value disproportionately increased as a result of share buybacks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/596471096e40e42abea97e9ed5a0a6d6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"501\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>On the other hand, Facebook and Amazon observed no significant valuation expansion, which can be tied back to regulatory scrutiny and an overall rotation towards high-growth stocks. Thus, since their market betas are lower than other Tech stocks mentioned earlier, these stocks can serve as a safe haven, at least to some extent. However, an overall drop in the market will lead to short-term weakness in every Technology stock, undervalued or not. Nevertheless, stocks that have underperformed in the rally over the last five years are more likely to outperform during a downturn. Moreover, large Tech companies are less sensitive to higher inflation as they will earn higher interest on their cash reserves.</p>\n<p>So What?</p>\n<p>The stock market is always driven by two contradicting emotions: Fear and Optimism. Over the last couple of years, optimism has clearly dominated the Growth/Technology market, yielding impressive returns and widely outperforming stable but profitable companies. However, valuation growth exceeded business growth for many high-growth companies, making various stocks appear increasingly overvalued. While higher valuations can be supported by the acceleration of Technology in the future, striking similarities of the Tech bubble in 2000 make me increasingly cautious of today's market environment.</p>\n<p>Bubble or not, many graphs point to a significant anomaly in valuations, and it will be difficult for companies to justify these sorts of valuations in the long term. More importantly, a heating economy with rising inflation will pressure the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to prevent an economic contraction.</p>\n<p>Nonetheless, investors can protect themselves by rotating back into stable value stocks or Big Tech companies that have underperformed on a relative basis. The issue with every insurance is that you are only being paid in the case of a crash, quite literally. After all, valuations of high-growth stocks could continue rising and those not invested miss out on potential gains. Another viable option could be to rotate back into cash, but the same prior issue applies here. Even those who decide to short stocks have to be careful since an upside ceiling doesn't exist in the market.</p>\n<p>This is the point where I would like to address the risks of my thesis: First, inflation may stabilize quicker than expected, which would push a potential interest rate hike back to 2024 or later. In this case, money will continue to be cheap, which will support higher valuations and the growth market in general. Secondly, companies can scale somewhat faster today, making a historical valuation comparison to early years less relevant. Lastly, I could be underappreciating given growth rates and the ability of management to shake off competition in the long run. Still, given the various uncertainties around valuations, I am more fearful than optimistic at the moment.</p>\n<p>In either way, if you have a different opinion or any counterarguments to my thesis, I'm happy to hear about it in the comment section!</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>The Big Crash Is Imminent</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 Big Crash Is Imminent\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-15 22:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4439223-the-big-crash-is-imminent><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nThe continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during the dot.com bubble in 2000.\nThe bubble is relatively concentrated and doesn't necessarily pose ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4439223-the-big-crash-is-imminent\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4439223-the-big-crash-is-imminent","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1155093230","content_text":"Summary\n\nThe continuous easing of monetary policy inflated various stocks to levels last seen during the dot.com bubble in 2000.\nThe bubble is relatively concentrated and doesn't necessarily pose threats to the market as a whole.\nWhile it is clear that there is a strong deviation from historical valuation norms, valuations could continue to rise (at least in the short term).\nThis article is not meant as fear-mongering, and I may very possibly be wrong about my hypothesis.\n\nIt seems that the talk about whether we are in another Tech bubble has been going on for many years. Articles and news calling for the 'crash of the decade' have been condemned as fear-mongering with little substance to them. After all, technology stocks kept on rising, and those who listened missed out on impressive gains. Now, generally speaking, neither have I been too worried about valuations in the best, as fundamentals towards Technology in our society are simply too strong.\nHowever, a lot has changed over the course of the pandemic, which has led me to rethink my perspective. As the global pandemic shut down economies around the world and caused substantial economic contraction, federal banks counteracted by injecting trillions of dollars into the economy in the form of stimulus checks, grants, loans, etc. As a result, fresh liquidity immediately reflected itself in stocks and other market instruments.\nSource: Bloomberg\nThroughout this article, I want to demonstrate a few graphs to strengthen my argument, with the chart above being the first one. The Nasdaq 100 is perhaps the most common index to track the technology market, although it only includes profitable and large-cap Tech stocks. On average, the index currently holds a Price to Sales ratio of 5.7x, levels that the Index last saw in early 2001 after the dot.com bubble began to bust.\nIt is important to note that at the height of the bubble, the ratio stood at 7.5x, around 30% higher than it is right now. Still, the median valuation has been trailing significantly lower, at around 3.5x over the last 20 years. Of course, it can be argued that Technology deserves a higher valuation these days due to the increased use of Technology and perhaps higher growth rates. However, should Technology valuations be nearly 100% higher than just 5 years ago, in 2016, where Technology integration was pretty much at the same level as today?\nProfitability\nIn recent years, unprofitable but growing companies have been favored over mature and profitable companies. Usually, rotations from Growth to Value or the other way around occur every 2-5 years, which is totally unsurprising. Historically, in terms of performance, there has been no significant difference in terms of returns on a risk-adjusted basis - it really does depend on the time period of investing. That said, in the last 5 years, growth outperformed value by a wide margin - by 105% to be exact. I derived this from the 5-year performance chart of Vanguard's Growth ETF vs. Vanguard's Value ETF. This compares with an expected anomaly of 5% annually or a 28% expected anomaly for a 5-year time period.\nSource: Leuthold Group\nUnsurprisingly, the number and market value of unprofitable companies has skyrocketed throughout the last couple of years. Here, the total number of unprofitable firms has skyrocketed to over 200, while their combined value handily beats 2000 levels, reaching nearly $2.5 trillion (3 times higher than in 2000). Of course, there is more money in circulation today, so when accounting for the dollar's real value, they are at comparable levels. Again, either way you twist it, there is a significant anomaly in the value of unprofitable companies in the stock market.\nSource: FT\nAs a result, startups have utilized the opportunity to raise as much money as possible by going public. In total, nearly 900 companies in the U.S. have gone public in 2021, raising over $202 billion collectively. Before, the previous record was set in 2000, when around 600 companies rang the bell. What's even more frightening is the fact that a large portion of IPOs went public through special-purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). Many of these companies were acquired early on, with the only objective to go public as soon as possible. Here, various blank-check companies generate little or no revenues and face a rockier path to raising money through traditional IPOs.\nToday's Bubble\nFrankly, today's bubble is fundamentally different from the 2000 bubble, although there are striking similarities. Arguably, the dot.com bubble revolved purely around Internet stocks. Today, the bubble is much broader, ranging from old written-off industries to Consumer Tech, being concentrated on Cybersecurity. This makes sense, considering Cybersecurity is a quickly evolving industry with potentially billions of earnings for future winners in the space. The same applies to E-commerce, Fintech, Cloud Computing, Gene Editing, and other major future industries.\nData by YCharts\nThis brings me to my next chart: High-flying stars of the early Internet era traded at similar multiples to cloud computing stars of today (when adjusted for monetary changes). However, early market leaders tend to lose competitive advantages in rising industries, in what someresearchersrefer to as \"First to Market First to Fail.\" Here, early entrants typically bury the greatest market and technological uncertainties.\nIn other words, no one knows yet how our new industries will look like and how consumer trends will evolve. For instance, Facebook(NASDAQ:FB)was the 10th social networking company, Google(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL)the 12th search engine, etc. Thus, today's most promising companies are unlikely to be the most promising companies 10 years from now. It is therefore questionable if current valuations can be supported in the long term.\nThis is where I want to introduce Cisco's(NASDAQ:CSCO)example from 1999. At the time, the dominating Internet company briefly became the world's mostvaluablecompany, boasting a market cap of $569 billion. Certainly, the market wasn't being crazy at the time, considering Cisco's impressive growth rates and a trillion dollars industry ahead that was changing the world. An extract from Cisco's annual report in 1999:\n\n \"Cisco predicted that the Internet would change the way we work, live, play, and learn. For the fiscal year ending July 31, 1999, Cisco reported revenue of $12.15 billion, a 43 percent increase compared with revenue of $8.49 billion in fiscal 1998. Net income for the year was $2.10 billion or $0.62 per common share, compared with fiscal 1998 net income of $1.35 billion or $0.42 per common share. - CiscoAnnual Report1999\"\n\nNow, at the height of Cisco's valuation, the stock was trading at around 35 times Price to Sales, which is comparable to today's valuations, considering gross margins and growth rates. As with every new industry, competition eventually took market share from Cisco and crushed growth rates, leading to a sequential 87% drop in its share price. Although shares somewhat recovered, Cisco is still trading some 33% below all-time highs 22 years later.\n\"Cisco Could Be Safest Net Play Around\" -Bloomberg 1999\nAgain, that does not necessarily mean that the same will happen to today's stars. After all, early winners like Amazon(NASDAQ:AMZN)and Microsoft(NASDAQ:MSFT)eventually recovered and are now trading well above dot.com levels. However, it is quite unlikely that all of today's stars will also be tomorrow's stars.\nInflation...\nArguably, inflation serves as one of the biggest investment risks in today's market. It was somewhat expected that inflation would tick up once the economy starts to recover with consumer spending skyrocketing. In this regard, the consumer price index rose by 5.4% in June, the highest since August 2008. That is well above the 5% rise reported in May and higher than the 4.9% increase that economists initially forecast. This challenges the Federal Reserve's hopes that the burst of inflationary pressures accompanying the economic reopening will be of temporary nature. Earlier, investors and economists have scrutinized the Federal Reserve's aggressive fiscal and monetary policy.\nSource: Twitter\nFiscal and monetary policy usually serve as driving factors for the creation of bubbles and are simultaneously responsible for their destruction. For instance, in 2000, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates several times; these actions are believed to have caused the bursting of the dot-com bubble. Interestingly, after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, stocks initially rallied. If we draw comparisons, a similar price movement can be observed today in Tech stocks, particularly growth stocks. Here, prominent names have been rising by 50% or more since May, despite the Fedwarningof higher interest rates and the potential for 'significant declines' in asset prices as valuations continue to climb.\nData by YCharts\nThat said, Fed President Jim Bullard expects the first interest rate hike coming as soon as 2022, which would be even faster than the consensusexpectationfor the first increase to happen in 2023. Earlier in March, officials initially indicated that they see no increase happening until at least 2024. In other words, in a matter of months, the timeline for a rate hike has shifted forward by 2 years. Thus, the next few months will be crucial to determine which way the timeline will shift; for now, it appears that the prior date is more likely.\nWhat about Big Tech?\nThe question remains whether Big Tech stocks will be as severely affected during a notable pullback. Interestingly, except Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL)and Microsoft, FAANG members, including Facebook, Amazon, and Netflix(NASDAQ:NFLX), have been trailing behind in terms of performance, being reflected in the given valuations. Only Apple and Microsoft saw a notable valuation expansion in every significant metric out of the prominent Big Tech names. Here, Apple's P/E and P/S ratio nearly tripled over the last 5 years from 10x to 32x and 2.5x to 7.5x, respectively. These are historical valuation levels and dwarf the valuation expansions of Microsoft and Alphabet, which are supported by growing profitability over the years. However, it should be noticed that Apple's Price to Book Value disproportionately increased as a result of share buybacks.\nData by YCharts\nOn the other hand, Facebook and Amazon observed no significant valuation expansion, which can be tied back to regulatory scrutiny and an overall rotation towards high-growth stocks. Thus, since their market betas are lower than other Tech stocks mentioned earlier, these stocks can serve as a safe haven, at least to some extent. However, an overall drop in the market will lead to short-term weakness in every Technology stock, undervalued or not. Nevertheless, stocks that have underperformed in the rally over the last five years are more likely to outperform during a downturn. Moreover, large Tech companies are less sensitive to higher inflation as they will earn higher interest on their cash reserves.\nSo What?\nThe stock market is always driven by two contradicting emotions: Fear and Optimism. Over the last couple of years, optimism has clearly dominated the Growth/Technology market, yielding impressive returns and widely outperforming stable but profitable companies. However, valuation growth exceeded business growth for many high-growth companies, making various stocks appear increasingly overvalued. While higher valuations can be supported by the acceleration of Technology in the future, striking similarities of the Tech bubble in 2000 make me increasingly cautious of today's market environment.\nBubble or not, many graphs point to a significant anomaly in valuations, and it will be difficult for companies to justify these sorts of valuations in the long term. More importantly, a heating economy with rising inflation will pressure the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to prevent an economic contraction.\nNonetheless, investors can protect themselves by rotating back into stable value stocks or Big Tech companies that have underperformed on a relative basis. The issue with every insurance is that you are only being paid in the case of a crash, quite literally. After all, valuations of high-growth stocks could continue rising and those not invested miss out on potential gains. Another viable option could be to rotate back into cash, but the same prior issue applies here. Even those who decide to short stocks have to be careful since an upside ceiling doesn't exist in the market.\nThis is the point where I would like to address the risks of my thesis: First, inflation may stabilize quicker than expected, which would push a potential interest rate hike back to 2024 or later. In this case, money will continue to be cheap, which will support higher valuations and the growth market in general. Secondly, companies can scale somewhat faster today, making a historical valuation comparison to early years less relevant. Lastly, I could be underappreciating given growth rates and the ability of management to shake off competition in the long run. Still, given the various uncertainties around valuations, I am more fearful than optimistic at the moment.\nIn either way, if you have a different opinion or any counterarguments to my thesis, I'm happy to hear about it in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":178,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":156584842,"gmtCreate":1625230653486,"gmtModify":1703738905146,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>To the moon pls","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>To the moon pls","text":"$BEST Inc(BEST)$To the moon pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/156584842","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":151,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":151352164,"gmtCreate":1625064888858,"gmtModify":1703735340139,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the moon&nbsp;","listText":"To the moon&nbsp;","text":"To the moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/151352164","repostId":"2147169298","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2147169298","pubTimestamp":1625064508,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2147169298?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-30 22:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2147169298","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"These two businesses are in the same industry but couldn't be more different.","content":"<p>The aerospace, rocket launching, and defense industries seem to be on the verge of a huge expansion over the coming decades. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have paved the way for this private \"space race,\" launching test rockets and satellites for businesses and the U.S. government. But there are plenty of other companies in this private space race. One is <b>Virgin Galactic</b> (NYSE:SPCE), which was started by Richard Branson in 2004 and went public through a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) in 2019. Another is <b>Lockheed Martin</b> (NYSE:LMT), the world's largest defense contractor.</p>\n<p>Which is a better buy: Virgin Galactic or Lockheed Martin? Let's take a look.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b5f0851439294a2ef253f90479b7d5b2\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"491\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>Virgin Galactic</h2>\n<p>Virgin Galactic is trying to build a modern aerospace company with a focus on consumer trips. Its goal is to develop \"a new generation of space vehicles to open space for everyone,\" according to its website. It has manufactured and will continue to manufacture different spaceships, with a goal of targeting researchers and wealthy private individuals for sub-orbital flights. Each ticket costs $250 thousand, and the company has a total of&nbsp; approximately 600 Future Astronauts (what it calls customers who have booked future flights) at the end of the first quarter.</p>\n<p>One thing investors should note with Virgin Galactic is that it doesn't actually have a business yet. In Q1 it brought in $0 of revenue (yes, that number is correct), burned $50 million, and has a little over $600 million in cash on its balance sheet. That cash pile gives it a good cushion, at least for a few quarters, but it is likely that the company will need to raise more money in the coming years.</p>\n<p>It has typically done that by issuing stock. Since going public in 2019, its shares outstanding have gone up 179%. Virgin Galactic currently has a market cap of $12.8 billion. Since it doesn't have a business right now, there's not much to reference this market cap to, but it implies that investors should expect the company to do at least a few billion in sales and hundreds of millions in profits at some point.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4ab1895d73d79c678e757ad436915a12\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts.</span></p>\n<h2>Lockheed Martin</h2>\n<p>Lockheed Martin is an American defense, aerospace, security, and technology company that has been doing business for the U.S. government for decades. Its largest business comes from aeronautics (which includes things like fighter jets), but it also has large missile, mission systems, and space-business lines as well. In fact, Lockheed Martin was the company that designed a helicopter for NASA that could fly on Mars.</p>\n<p>The conglomerate is guiding for around $68 billion in sales and $8.9 billion in cash generated from operations this year. With a market cap of $106 billion, the stock has a forward price-to-operating-cash-flow (P/OCF) of 11.9. Lockheed also returns tons of cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Its dividend yield is 2.72%, and its share count has come down each of the last five years.</p>\n<h2>So which is the better buy?</h2>\n<p>After comparing these two stocks, I think it is clear which is better to own: Lockheed Martin. Virgin Galactic does not have an actual business right now, is hemorrhaging cash, and has seen its share count go up 179% in less than two years. At this time, buying shares in Virgin Galactic is not investing but speculating.</p>\n<p>Lockheed Martin, on the other hand, has a diversified business and the most reliable customer in the world (the U.S. government). Plus, it consistently returns cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. It might not have the hype of Virgin Galactic, whose shares seem to go up or down 10% a day, but Lockheed Martin is the better buy for long-term investors.</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>Better Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin</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\">\nBetter Buy: Virgin Galactic vs. Lockheed Martin\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-30 22:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/30/better-buy-virgin-galactic-vs-lockheed-martin/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The aerospace, rocket launching, and defense industries seem to be on the verge of a huge expansion over the coming decades. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have paved the way for this private \"...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/30/better-buy-virgin-galactic-vs-lockheed-martin/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPCE":"维珍银河","LMT":"洛克希德马丁"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/30/better-buy-virgin-galactic-vs-lockheed-martin/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2147169298","content_text":"The aerospace, rocket launching, and defense industries seem to be on the verge of a huge expansion over the coming decades. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin have paved the way for this private \"space race,\" launching test rockets and satellites for businesses and the U.S. government. But there are plenty of other companies in this private space race. One is Virgin Galactic (NYSE:SPCE), which was started by Richard Branson in 2004 and went public through a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) in 2019. Another is Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT), the world's largest defense contractor.\nWhich is a better buy: Virgin Galactic or Lockheed Martin? Let's take a look.\nImage source: Getty Images.\nVirgin Galactic\nVirgin Galactic is trying to build a modern aerospace company with a focus on consumer trips. Its goal is to develop \"a new generation of space vehicles to open space for everyone,\" according to its website. It has manufactured and will continue to manufacture different spaceships, with a goal of targeting researchers and wealthy private individuals for sub-orbital flights. Each ticket costs $250 thousand, and the company has a total of  approximately 600 Future Astronauts (what it calls customers who have booked future flights) at the end of the first quarter.\nOne thing investors should note with Virgin Galactic is that it doesn't actually have a business yet. In Q1 it brought in $0 of revenue (yes, that number is correct), burned $50 million, and has a little over $600 million in cash on its balance sheet. That cash pile gives it a good cushion, at least for a few quarters, but it is likely that the company will need to raise more money in the coming years.\nIt has typically done that by issuing stock. Since going public in 2019, its shares outstanding have gone up 179%. Virgin Galactic currently has a market cap of $12.8 billion. Since it doesn't have a business right now, there's not much to reference this market cap to, but it implies that investors should expect the company to do at least a few billion in sales and hundreds of millions in profits at some point.\nData by YCharts.\nLockheed Martin\nLockheed Martin is an American defense, aerospace, security, and technology company that has been doing business for the U.S. government for decades. Its largest business comes from aeronautics (which includes things like fighter jets), but it also has large missile, mission systems, and space-business lines as well. In fact, Lockheed Martin was the company that designed a helicopter for NASA that could fly on Mars.\nThe conglomerate is guiding for around $68 billion in sales and $8.9 billion in cash generated from operations this year. With a market cap of $106 billion, the stock has a forward price-to-operating-cash-flow (P/OCF) of 11.9. Lockheed also returns tons of cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Its dividend yield is 2.72%, and its share count has come down each of the last five years.\nSo which is the better buy?\nAfter comparing these two stocks, I think it is clear which is better to own: Lockheed Martin. Virgin Galactic does not have an actual business right now, is hemorrhaging cash, and has seen its share count go up 179% in less than two years. At this time, buying shares in Virgin Galactic is not investing but speculating.\nLockheed Martin, on the other hand, has a diversified business and the most reliable customer in the world (the U.S. government). Plus, it consistently returns cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. It might not have the hype of Virgin Galactic, whose shares seem to go up or down 10% a day, but Lockheed Martin is the better buy for long-term investors.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":205,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":163360185,"gmtCreate":1623859883647,"gmtModify":1703821800114,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Up up up!","listText":"Up up up!","text":"Up up up!","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c818a289bfc11432946ce89af733e64","width":"1125","height":"3417"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/163360185","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":322,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158672248,"gmtCreate":1625149402184,"gmtModify":1703737224559,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon ?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>To the moon ?","text":"$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$To the moon ?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/158672248","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":327,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":151358550,"gmtCreate":1625064838970,"gmtModify":1703735337701,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Moon&nbsp;","listText":"Moon&nbsp;","text":"Moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/151358550","repostId":"1105779613","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105779613","pubTimestamp":1625062867,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1105779613?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-30 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105779613","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150. Competitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge. Few companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as Tesla Inc.-- and the lackluster run this year has done nothing to lessen it.To Piper Sandler & Co.’s Alexander Potter, the company’s potential dominance of the electric-car business warrants a $1,200 stock-price target, nearly double its $680.76 close on Tuesday. To Craig Irwin of Roth Capital Partners, as rivals move t","content":"<ul>\n <li>One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150</li>\n <li>Competitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Few companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as&nbsp;Tesla Inc.-- and the lackluster run this year has done nothing to lessen it.</p>\n<p>To&nbsp;Piper Sandler &amp; Co.’s Alexander Potter, the company’s potential dominance of the electric-car business&nbsp;warrants&nbsp;a $1,200 stock-price target, nearly double its $680.76 close on Tuesday. To Craig Irwin of Roth Capital Partners, as rivals move to pick off a head start that turned Tesla into the world’s most highly valued car company, the stock will sink to $150.</p>\n<p>The divergence illustrates the tension that has sent Tesla shares toward a 4% loss during the first half of the year even as rival automakers surged ahead. That’s a marked contrast to its more than 8-fold jump last year and reflects investors’ doubts about heady growth expectations for the company in the face of stronger competitive threats and signs of a sales slowdown in China.</p>\n<p>“For a long time Tesla was the only credible player in the high-quality EV market, and we are seeing that starting to change,” said JoAnne Feeney, portfolio manager atAdvisorsCapital Management, who said the company’s current valuation assumes it will become the biggest seller of cars in the U.S. “That seems to be an awful lot to ask.”</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fb8f7a35e4b2bc516159737958ead3d4\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"675\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Tesla sold about half a million cars worldwide in 2020, accounting for a fraction of even the 14.5 million light vehicles sold in the U.S., and it’s facing threats from traditional automakers such as&nbsp;General Motors Co.,Ford Motor Co.&nbsp;and&nbsp;Volkswagen AG&nbsp;that are launching their own electric-vehicle lineups. In China, Tesla’s lead over other startups has already started to shrink, according to&nbsp;UBS Group AG&nbsp;analyst Patrick Hummel.</p>\n<p>That competition poses a separate challenge to the company’s bottom line: Tesla has profited from selling carbon-offset credits to other carmakers that haven’t met their emissions targets. But the more its rivals’ sales of electric vehicles take off, the more that source of revenue will drop.</p>\n<p>Yet Tesla’s stock-market valuation is based on the expectation of steep growth, giving it little room for error. It’s currently trading at more than 650 times earnings per share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That compares with a multiple of 30 for the S&amp;P 500 Index.</p>\n<p>“Tesla’s market valuation is vastly over optimistic, ignoring the over 500 EV models that will be on the road by the end of 2025,” said&nbsp;Roth Capital’s Irwin. “Tesla does not operate in a vacuum and many companies have better technology.”</p>\n<p>The company will be reporting second-quarter delivery figures later this week, a major catalyst that analysts and investors will be keenly watching.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6d2dd8d41a7f20e74bd44de1c344d6a0\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"675\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>But Tesla bulls are confident that the company’s valuation will be justified if it comes to dominate the industry, much like tech behemoths&nbsp;Alphabet Inc.,FaceBook Inc.&nbsp;and&nbsp;Amazon.com Inc&nbsp;.have come to lord over their’s.</p>\n<p>Others just see it as a pause for Tesla shares as investors come to terms with the surging valuation last year, when markets leaned heavily onto growth stocks as the pandemic shut down much of the global economy. That influx has started to shift this year in the so-called reflation trade, with funds moving back into stocks more likely to benefit from the recovery.</p>\n<p>Cathie Wood’s&nbsp;Ark Investment Management, which had a 0.6% stake in Tesla as of March 31 and is an ardent backer of the company, remains steadfast in its support despite the stock’s showing this year. Ark expects it to benefit from rising electric vehicle sales and sees even odds that it will deliver fully self-driven cars in four years.</p>\n<p>If all goes as planned? Ark forecasts the stock will reach $3,000 in 2025.</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>Tesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value</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\">\nTesla Stall Shows Wall Street Rift on Stratospheric Stock Value\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-30 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-30/tesla-stall-shows-wall-street-rift-on-stratospheric-stock-value?srnd=markets-vp><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150\nCompetitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge\n\nFew companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as Tesla Inc.-- and the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-30/tesla-stall-shows-wall-street-rift-on-stratospheric-stock-value?srnd=markets-vp\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-30/tesla-stall-shows-wall-street-rift-on-stratospheric-stock-value?srnd=markets-vp","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105779613","content_text":"One analyst sees it rising to $1,200, another tumbling to $150\nCompetitive threats build after meteoric 2020 stock surge\n\nFew companies have been as polarizing on Wall Street as Tesla Inc.-- and the lackluster run this year has done nothing to lessen it.\nTo Piper Sandler & Co.’s Alexander Potter, the company’s potential dominance of the electric-car business warrants a $1,200 stock-price target, nearly double its $680.76 close on Tuesday. To Craig Irwin of Roth Capital Partners, as rivals move to pick off a head start that turned Tesla into the world’s most highly valued car company, the stock will sink to $150.\nThe divergence illustrates the tension that has sent Tesla shares toward a 4% loss during the first half of the year even as rival automakers surged ahead. That’s a marked contrast to its more than 8-fold jump last year and reflects investors’ doubts about heady growth expectations for the company in the face of stronger competitive threats and signs of a sales slowdown in China.\n“For a long time Tesla was the only credible player in the high-quality EV market, and we are seeing that starting to change,” said JoAnne Feeney, portfolio manager atAdvisorsCapital Management, who said the company’s current valuation assumes it will become the biggest seller of cars in the U.S. “That seems to be an awful lot to ask.”\n\nTesla sold about half a million cars worldwide in 2020, accounting for a fraction of even the 14.5 million light vehicles sold in the U.S., and it’s facing threats from traditional automakers such as General Motors Co.,Ford Motor Co. and Volkswagen AG that are launching their own electric-vehicle lineups. In China, Tesla’s lead over other startups has already started to shrink, according to UBS Group AG analyst Patrick Hummel.\nThat competition poses a separate challenge to the company’s bottom line: Tesla has profited from selling carbon-offset credits to other carmakers that haven’t met their emissions targets. But the more its rivals’ sales of electric vehicles take off, the more that source of revenue will drop.\nYet Tesla’s stock-market valuation is based on the expectation of steep growth, giving it little room for error. It’s currently trading at more than 650 times earnings per share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That compares with a multiple of 30 for the S&P 500 Index.\n“Tesla’s market valuation is vastly over optimistic, ignoring the over 500 EV models that will be on the road by the end of 2025,” said Roth Capital’s Irwin. “Tesla does not operate in a vacuum and many companies have better technology.”\nThe company will be reporting second-quarter delivery figures later this week, a major catalyst that analysts and investors will be keenly watching.\n\nBut Tesla bulls are confident that the company’s valuation will be justified if it comes to dominate the industry, much like tech behemoths Alphabet Inc.,FaceBook Inc. and Amazon.com Inc .have come to lord over their’s.\nOthers just see it as a pause for Tesla shares as investors come to terms with the surging valuation last year, when markets leaned heavily onto growth stocks as the pandemic shut down much of the global economy. That influx has started to shift this year in the so-called reflation trade, with funds moving back into stocks more likely to benefit from the recovery.\nCathie Wood’s Ark Investment Management, which had a 0.6% stake in Tesla as of March 31 and is an ardent backer of the company, remains steadfast in its support despite the stock’s showing this year. Ark expects it to benefit from rising electric vehicle sales and sees even odds that it will deliver fully self-driven cars in four years.\nIf all goes as planned? Ark forecasts the stock will reach $3,000 in 2025.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":232,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121512252,"gmtCreate":1624474711376,"gmtModify":1703837832804,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>to the moon","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEST\">$BEST Inc(BEST)$</a>to the moon","text":"$BEST Inc(BEST)$to the moon","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2d75cbdc288aa7786a9b7fd8e1b7e189","width":"1242","height":"2385"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/121512252","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1138,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":185441470,"gmtCreate":1623669807590,"gmtModify":1704208217996,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Share","listText":"Share","text":"Share","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c75fb18a345f17177cc42fc134093f20","width":"1125","height":"3512"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/185441470","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":125,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":157826145,"gmtCreate":1625578558187,"gmtModify":1703744173170,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"To the moon!","listText":"To the moon!","text":"To the moon!","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e33bbf0dcd74b72e655bef7723e6805","width":"1125","height":"3336"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/157826145","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":120,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":185449059,"gmtCreate":1623669653971,"gmtModify":1704208213880,"author":{"id":"3576578945677616","authorId":"3576578945677616","name":"iamgarlick","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/21d1c2191cec39292021a79dba0360ad","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3576578945677616","authorIdStr":"3576578945677616"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>up!","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOEV\">$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$</a>up!","text":"$Canoo Inc.(GOEV)$up!","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/994ccb3baa7edc86872fd4c88a463193","width":"1242","height":"2385"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/185449059","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":129,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}