Krc personal page - To The Moon

Krc

Krc

No personal profile

54Follow

5Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-06-15

$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$Holding

2021-06-22

Ok

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

2021-06-13

Yes

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-12

Thank you

Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?

04-22

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3586396868075586","uuid":"3586396868075586","gmtCreate":1623305909457,"gmtModify":1713795767625,"name":"Krc","pinyin":"krc","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c5ceab71416b120bab4604c0754b52a","hatId":"award-a6197a578fe7778e8d49a95ac425bcfc","hatName":"2024新年头像框-虎币抽奖","vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":5,"headSize":54,"tweetSize":5,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"init","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.03.12","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-2","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Master Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 100","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ad22cfbe2d05aa393b18e9226e4b0307","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36702e6ff3ffe46acafee66cc85273ca","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d52eb88fa385cf5abe2616ed63781765","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.01.30","exceedPercentage":"80.82%","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":"2021.12.21","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":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":11,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":298035499921704,"gmtCreate":1713791362441,"gmtModify":1713791366634,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/U11.SI\">$UOB(U11.SI)$&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/U11.SI\">$UOB(U11.SI)$&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;","text":"$UOB(U11.SI)$","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e6e0843c014eb096160004044a52ceca","width":"927","height":"1599"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/298035499921704","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":181,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129505197,"gmtCreate":1624376167919,"gmtModify":1703834969025,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129505197","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":187,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":187059437,"gmtCreate":1623731552429,"gmtModify":1704209848896,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AWX.SI\">$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$</a>Holding","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AWX.SI\">$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$</a>Holding","text":"$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$Holding","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/187059437","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":539,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":182598608,"gmtCreate":1623586108104,"gmtModify":1704206630099,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/182598608","repostId":"1148565686","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1148565686","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623514343,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1148565686?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-13 00:12","market":"us","language":"en","title":"This Is The Ultimate Warren Buffett Stock, But Should You Buy It?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1148565686","media":"investors","summary":"Warren Buffett is widely regarded as one of the greatest investors of all time. One way to share in his success is to invest in his firm,Berkshire Hathaway. Berkshire stock has cleared a buy zone, but is it a good buy for you now?Let's take a close look at the fundamental and technical performance of the ultimate Warren Buffett stock.Berkshire Hathaway is a conglomerate that owns some of America's most famous firms. It wholly owns the likes of Geico, Duracell, Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom and ","content":"<p>Warren Buffett is widely regarded as one of the greatest investors of all time. One way to share in his success is to invest in his firm,<b>Berkshire Hathaway</b>(BRKB). Berkshire stock has cleared a buy zone, but is it a good buy for you now? Let's take a close look at the fundamental and technical performance of the ultimate Warren Buffett stock.</p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway is a conglomerate that owns some of America's most famous firms. It wholly owns the likes of Geico, Duracell, Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom and railroad operator BNSF.</p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway is perhaps more famous for serving as an investment vehicle for Warren Buffett and his top lieutenant, Charlie Munger. Following their value investing philosophy,the company owns huge stakesin&nbsp;<b>American Express</b>(AXP),&nbsp;<b>Coca-Cola</b>(KO) and other heavy hitters.</p>\n<p>But the definition of a Warren Buffett stock has evolved in recent years.&nbsp;Warren Buffett became a big investor in airlines such as<b>Delta Air Lines</b>(DAL). But he was left to rue his decision to go against his own long-held views about that industry's lack of profitability. The move blew up in his face as airline stocks were decimated due to the global coronavirus pandemic.</p>\n<p>Under investment managers Todd Combs and Ted Weschler, Berkshire Hathaway has been increasingly sinking money into tech. It's taken large positions in established giants like<b>Apple</b>(AAPL), as well as younger companies like Brazilian payments company<b>StoneCo</b>(STNE) and new software IPO<b>Snowflake</b>(SNOW). Berkshire also snapped up a stake in<b>Amazon.com</b>(AMZN).</p>\n<p><b>Warren Buffett Anoints Successor</b></p>\n<p>One of the biggest questions around the future of Berkshire Hathaway in recent years was who would take over the mantle of CEO from Buffett.</p>\n<p>The Oracle of Omahahas finally gave the answer. He said Greg Abel, who runs the noninsurance businesses, will take over in his stead.</p>\n<p>\"The directors are in agreement that if something were to happen to me tonight, it would be Greg who'd take over tomorrow morning,\" the legendary investor told CNBC.</p>\n<p>Berkshire's Vice Chairman Charlie Munger dropped a massive hint during the&nbsp;company's annual meeting in Los Angeles, mentioning that \"Greg will keep the culture.\"</p>\n<p>Abel, 58, has been a Berkshire vice chairman since 2018, and had long been viewed by analysts as a possible successor. The Canadian is chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Energy. He has also been vice chairman of Berkshire's noninsurance operations since January 2018.</p>\n<p><b>Buffett Snaps Up Berkshire Stock</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway revealed in its Q1 earnings report that it had snapped up $6.6 billion more of its shares. It comesafter a record $27.4 billion in repurchaseslast year. This was down from the $9 billion in stock it had purchased in each of the previous two quarters however.</p>\n<p>After historically shying away from repurchases, Berkshire Hathaway stock has become one of Buffett's top purchases.&nbsp;Berkshire's aggressive share repurchases contrasts with the M&amp;A deals spun by the investor during and after the 2008 financial crash.</p>\n<p>While he has historically been reluctant to splurge on stock repurchases, he explained his change of heart in his latest annual letter to shareholders.</p>\n<p>\"The math of repurchases grinds away slowly, but can be powerful over time,\" he wrote. \"The process offers a simple way for investors to own an ever-expanding portion of exceptional businesses.\"</p>\n<p>Berkshire loosened rules for Buffett to buy back shares in 2018. With Berkshire steadfastly cautious on M&amp;A in recent years, investors have been clamoring for more repurchases.</p>\n<p><b>Berkshire Hathaway Tweaks Portfolio</b></p>\n<p>Warren Buffett took a huge stake in<b>Verizon</b>(VZ) stock while dumping JPMorgan (JPM) stock entirely, according to thefirm's latest regulatory filing.</p>\n<p>Its new Verizon stake is massive, with Berkshire paying $8.62 billion for 147 million shares. It now accounts for 3% of the portfolio, making it the No. 6 stock by number of shares held.</p>\n<p>Buffett also opened new stakes in<b>Chevron</b>(CVX),<b>Marsh &amp; McLennan</b>(MMC) and<b>EW Scripps</b>(SSP) in Q4.</p>\n<p>Berkshire dumped entirely<b>Pfizer</b>(PFE),<b>JPMorgan Chase</b>(JPM),<b>Barrick Gold</b>(GOLD),<b>M&amp;T Bank</b>(MTB) and<b>PNC Financial</b>(PNC).</p>\n<p>The conglomerate grew stakes by 117% in<b>T-Mobile</b>(TMUS), 34% in<b>Kroger</b>(KR), 28% in<b>Merck</b>(MRK), 20% in<b>AbbVie</b>(ABBV), 11% in<b>Bristol-Myers Squibb</b>(BMY), and 1% in<b>RH</b>(RH).</p>\n<p>Buffett cut Berkshire's stake in Apple stock by 6%. It remains the No. 1 stock in his portfolio by market value and No. 2 stock by number of shares held, at 10.6% of the portfolio. He kept an Amazon stake steady.</p>\n<p>During its most recent earnings report, the firm revealed it had sold $6.45 billion in stock in Q1 and bought $2.57 billion in stock.</p>\n<p><b>Warren Buffett Funds Media Deal</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway is a key backer in a deal disclosed Sept. 24 that will see TV station owner<b>E.W. Scripps</b>(SSP) purchase privately held cable network ION Media for $2.65 billion. The latter firm's flagship, ION Television, is a top 5-ranked U.S. general entertainment network.</p>\n<p>Warren Buffett's firm is snapping up $600 million of Scripps preferred shares to help fund the deal. Scripps stock surged on on the news.</p>\n<p>Berkshire will also receive a warrant that allows it to snap up up to 23.1 million more shares at a price of $13. This adds up to an additional investment of $300 million. Scripps' common shares currently trade at more than 21 each.</p>\n<p><b>Berkshire Hathaway Coronavirus Exposure</b></p>\n<p>As well as its status as an investment vehicle, Berkshire Hathaway is a conglomerate in its own right. It has interests in segments such as railroads, utilities and energy.</p>\n<p>Those sectors, along with other \"real economy\" companies that are Warren Buffett staples, have been hard hit by the coronavirus shutdowns and massive economic contraction. However they should benefit as the economy opens up again.</p>\n<p>Berkshire owns Geico, the No. 2 U.S. auto insurer after State Farm. Currently, states such as California are ordering insurers to give partial credits or refunds of premiums in lines such as private passenger automobile insurance.</p>\n<p>Berkshire also owns BNSF Railway Company, the largest freight railroad network in North America. Rail operators such as<b>Union Pacific</b>(UNP) and<b>CSX</b>(CSX) have seen business suffer during the pandemic. But rail operators and other transportation companies are seeing business pick up again.</p>\n<p>Other wholly owned businesses such as Dairy Queen and multilevel marketing company Pampered Chef also struggled during coronavirus restrictions, though those are easing.</p>\n<p><b>Warren Buffett's Big Gas Bill</b></p>\n<p>Warren Buffett has been criticized for the size of his cash pile. But last July he madehis biggest acquisition in yearswith a $10 billion deal for<b>Dominion Energy</b>'s (D) assets.</p>\n<p>Berkshire seized the chance to secure Dominion's gas pipeline network after the utility giant and<b>Duke Energy</b>(DUK) unexpectedly aborted plans to build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.</p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway Energy will buy about 7,700 miles of natural gas transmission pipelines and 900 billion cubic feet of gas storage. The all-cash deal includes $4 billion of equity and $5.7 billion of debt. It's set to close in the fourth quarter.</p>\n<p>\"We are very proud to be adding such a great portfolio of natural gas assets to our already strong energy business,\" Buffett said in a statement.</p>\n<p>Energy has been doing well so far in 2021. For example, the Vanguard Energy ETF (VDE) is up almost 40% since the start of the year.</p>\n<p><b>Berkshire Hathaway Stock Technical Analysis</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway stock is in a profit-taking zone after breaking out of aflat base, according toMarketSmith analysis. Theideal buy pointwas 235.09. Shares offered a follow-on buy point around 246 in late March after a test of the 10-week line, but are extended from here as well.</p>\n<p>It could go on to form a new base with an entry point of 295.18, it can continue to consolidate below this level.</p>\n<p>BRKB stock is well clear after pulling away from its50-day moving average, though the key technical benchmark is beginning to catch up. This is a positive sign for holders of the stock.</p>\n<p>Therelative strength lineof Berkshire Hathaway stock has been slippi8ng somewhat of late after a spell of progress that kicked off in mid-March. BRKB stock is outperforming in 2021. So far this year, it is up around 23%, which beats the broader S&amp;P 500's return of almost 13%.</p>\n<p>ItsIBD Composite Ratingnow sits at 69 out of 99. This is not ideal, but puts it in the top 31% of stocks tracked overall.</p>\n<p>Earnings are&nbsp; improving, with EPS accelerating for the past two quarters. However earnings have only grown by an average of 5% over the past three quarters, with coronavirus pandemic lockdowns having an impact.&nbsp;The CAN SLIM systemrecommends investors look for companies with average EPS growth of at least 25% over this time period.</p>\n<p>Wall Street is becoming more optimistic for Berkshire Hathaway earnings growth going forward. Analysts are projecting annual earnings will rise 24% 2021, before moderating to 7% growth in 2022.</p>\n<p><b>Warren Buffett Recommendation</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire stock had been lagging the S&amp;P 500 index since the end of 2018. Before that, BRKB stock at best moved with the market for a decade. An investor could have bought an index fund or ETF like the SPDR S&amp;P 500 ETF (SPY), and generated similar or higher returns with less stock-specific risk.</p>\n<p>\"In my view, for most people, the best thing to do is owning the S&amp;P 500 index fund, Buffett himself previously said at a Berkshire annual meeting. \"If you bet on America and sustain that position for decades, you'd do far better than buying Treasury securities, or far better than following people. Perhaps with a bias, I don't believe anyone knows what the market is going to do tomorrow, next week, next month, next year.\"</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, BRKB stock has been outperforming the S&amp;P 500 so far this year. It could now finally be set for a decent period of outperformance.</p>\n<p><b>Berkshire Hathaway Earnings Improve</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway earnings per share popped 27% in Q1, rising to $3.05. This was well clear of analyst views for EPS of $2.57. Its operating profit, which excludes some investment results, came in at $7 billion.</p>\n<p>The conglomerate's total revenue came in at $64.6 billion last quarter, which was also more than analysts expected.</p>\n<p>The firm's wheeling and dealing on the stock market also saw the firm turn in good gains, increasing approximately $4.69 billion last quarter. However the firm stresses that gains and losses in any particular quarter are \"usually meaningless.\" This fits in with Buffett's longer-term investment philosophy.</p>\n<p><b>Buffett's Cash Mountain Still Mighty</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire's cash pile grew to $145.4 billion in Q1 from $138.3 billion in Q4. It is creeping back up to record level it reached in the third quarter of last year. This has raised expectations that Buffett would make a big acquisition, but he has preferred to sit on the sidelines amid spiraling stock prices.</p>\n<p>Having such a large supply of cash protects the Warren Buffett stock during tough times. It also mean Berkshire Hathaway is able to deploy capital when desirable businesses become available for purchase.</p>\n<p>The more aggressive buying of Berkshire's own shares of late contrasts with Buffett's deals during and after the Great Recession. This indicates he believes that the latest economic downturn and recovery, so far, offer none of the bargains he has historically pounced on.</p>\n<p><b>Analyst Backs Berkshire Stock</b></p>\n<p>CFRA analyst Catherine Seifert is rating BRKB stock as a hold with a 295 price target. She pointed out the mixed nature of the firm's recent earnings report.</p>\n<p>\"Results reflected a doubling of underwriting profits and 12% higher rail/energy/utility profits, despite 13% lower in investment income,\" she said in a May 3 research note. \"We applaud the 33% rise in energy revenues amid contributions from an acquisition, but rail revenues declined fractionally and insurance premium growth of 4.3% lagged peers.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, she said the shares are currently \"fairly valued versus historical levels.\" The analyst also believes there could be changes afoot once he firm's legendary CEO steps down.</p>\n<p>\"We are disappointed climate change and diversity initiatives failed to be approved at the annual meeting, and think this increases the likelihood of activism in a post-Buffet era,\" she said.</p>\n<p><b>Difference Between BRKA Stock And BRKB Stock</b></p>\n<p>The most obvious difference between Berkshire Hathaway's A class and B class shares is the price. While — at over 200 a share — BRKB stock may be considered relatively expensive, BRKA stock is the most expensive on the market, currently trading near $430,000 a share.</p>\n<p>Warren Buffett decided to introduce the BRKB shares to allow investors to purchase stock directly. Big demand for Berkshire Hathaway stock forced less-moneyed players to plow cash into unit trusts or mutual funds that mirrored his company's holdings.</p>\n<p><b>Berkshire Hathaway Today</b></p>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway operates in four main sectors.</p>\n<p>Its insurance group is one of its biggest cash cows. One of the most famous jewels in the crown is Geico. Other parts of this business include multinational property/casualty and life/health reinsurance company General Re and Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance Group. The latter underwrites excess-of-loss reinsurance and quota-share coverage globally.</p>\n<p>Insurance operations are a big reason why Berkshire Hathaway earnings can be lumpy.</p>\n<p>Its Regulated Utility Business group includes Berkshire Hathaway Energy, formerly known as MidAmerican Energy. It also includes railway services arm BNSF, North America's largest freight railroad network.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the Manufacturing, Service &amp; Retailing group includes Acme Building Brands, Fruit of the Loom and Justin Brands. The likes of Buffalo News, Business Wire, Dairy Queen and NetJets fall under the service subsector. Retailers include See's Candies, Ben Bridge Jeweler, Helzberg Diamond Shops and Star Furniture.</p>\n<p>Finally, the Finance &amp; Financial Products segment includes: Hathaway Credit Corporation, transportation equipment and furniture leasing specialists XTRA and CORT, and BH Finance whose main interest is in proprietary investing strategies.</p>\n<p><b>Is Berkshire Hathaway Stock A Buy Now?</b></p>\n<p>While Berkshire Hathaway stock has been lagging the S&amp;P 500 index since late 2018, it has been handily outperforming in 2021. However, Berkshire stock is now well clear of its most recent buy zone. Investors keen on the stock could add it to their watchlist, and wait for a new buying opportunity to emerge.</p>\n<p>While its Composite Rating is still not up to scratch, it has improved on this front as well. This makes it an option worth watching for investors seeking to add to their portfolio a well established stock with a diversified portfolio of businesses.</p>\n<p>However, it is worth remember that, after a late-2018 burst, Berkshire Hathaway earnings growth has been modest and uneven. While Wall Street sees solid EPS growth ahead for Berkshire in 2021 and 2022, it still remains shy of the rates sought by CAN SLIM investors.</p>\n<p>Bottom line: Berkshire Hathaway stock is not a buy at the moment. Those interested in buying the ultimate Warren Buffett stock should add it to their watchlist, and wait to see if it forms a new base.</p>","source":"lsy1610449120050","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>This Is The Ultimate Warren Buffett Stock, But Should You Buy It?</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\">\nThis Is The Ultimate Warren Buffett Stock, But Should You Buy It?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-13 00:12 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.investors.com/research/berkshire-hathaway-stock-buy-now-warren-buffett-stock/?src=A00220><strong>investors</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Warren Buffett is widely regarded as one of the greatest investors of all time. One way to share in his success is to invest in his firm,Berkshire Hathaway(BRKB). Berkshire stock has cleared a buy ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.investors.com/research/berkshire-hathaway-stock-buy-now-warren-buffett-stock/?src=A00220\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"https://www.investors.com/research/berkshire-hathaway-stock-buy-now-warren-buffett-stock/?src=A00220","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1148565686","content_text":"Warren Buffett is widely regarded as one of the greatest investors of all time. One way to share in his success is to invest in his firm,Berkshire Hathaway(BRKB). Berkshire stock has cleared a buy zone, but is it a good buy for you now? Let's take a close look at the fundamental and technical performance of the ultimate Warren Buffett stock.\nBerkshire Hathaway is a conglomerate that owns some of America's most famous firms. It wholly owns the likes of Geico, Duracell, Dairy Queen, Fruit of the Loom and railroad operator BNSF.\nBerkshire Hathaway is perhaps more famous for serving as an investment vehicle for Warren Buffett and his top lieutenant, Charlie Munger. Following their value investing philosophy,the company owns huge stakesin American Express(AXP), Coca-Cola(KO) and other heavy hitters.\nBut the definition of a Warren Buffett stock has evolved in recent years. Warren Buffett became a big investor in airlines such asDelta Air Lines(DAL). But he was left to rue his decision to go against his own long-held views about that industry's lack of profitability. The move blew up in his face as airline stocks were decimated due to the global coronavirus pandemic.\nUnder investment managers Todd Combs and Ted Weschler, Berkshire Hathaway has been increasingly sinking money into tech. It's taken large positions in established giants likeApple(AAPL), as well as younger companies like Brazilian payments companyStoneCo(STNE) and new software IPOSnowflake(SNOW). Berkshire also snapped up a stake inAmazon.com(AMZN).\nWarren Buffett Anoints Successor\nOne of the biggest questions around the future of Berkshire Hathaway in recent years was who would take over the mantle of CEO from Buffett.\nThe Oracle of Omahahas finally gave the answer. He said Greg Abel, who runs the noninsurance businesses, will take over in his stead.\n\"The directors are in agreement that if something were to happen to me tonight, it would be Greg who'd take over tomorrow morning,\" the legendary investor told CNBC.\nBerkshire's Vice Chairman Charlie Munger dropped a massive hint during the company's annual meeting in Los Angeles, mentioning that \"Greg will keep the culture.\"\nAbel, 58, has been a Berkshire vice chairman since 2018, and had long been viewed by analysts as a possible successor. The Canadian is chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Energy. He has also been vice chairman of Berkshire's noninsurance operations since January 2018.\nBuffett Snaps Up Berkshire Stock\nBerkshire Hathaway revealed in its Q1 earnings report that it had snapped up $6.6 billion more of its shares. It comesafter a record $27.4 billion in repurchaseslast year. This was down from the $9 billion in stock it had purchased in each of the previous two quarters however.\nAfter historically shying away from repurchases, Berkshire Hathaway stock has become one of Buffett's top purchases. Berkshire's aggressive share repurchases contrasts with the M&A deals spun by the investor during and after the 2008 financial crash.\nWhile he has historically been reluctant to splurge on stock repurchases, he explained his change of heart in his latest annual letter to shareholders.\n\"The math of repurchases grinds away slowly, but can be powerful over time,\" he wrote. \"The process offers a simple way for investors to own an ever-expanding portion of exceptional businesses.\"\nBerkshire loosened rules for Buffett to buy back shares in 2018. With Berkshire steadfastly cautious on M&A in recent years, investors have been clamoring for more repurchases.\nBerkshire Hathaway Tweaks Portfolio\nWarren Buffett took a huge stake inVerizon(VZ) stock while dumping JPMorgan (JPM) stock entirely, according to thefirm's latest regulatory filing.\nIts new Verizon stake is massive, with Berkshire paying $8.62 billion for 147 million shares. It now accounts for 3% of the portfolio, making it the No. 6 stock by number of shares held.\nBuffett also opened new stakes inChevron(CVX),Marsh & McLennan(MMC) andEW Scripps(SSP) in Q4.\nBerkshire dumped entirelyPfizer(PFE),JPMorgan Chase(JPM),Barrick Gold(GOLD),M&T Bank(MTB) andPNC Financial(PNC).\nThe conglomerate grew stakes by 117% inT-Mobile(TMUS), 34% inKroger(KR), 28% inMerck(MRK), 20% inAbbVie(ABBV), 11% inBristol-Myers Squibb(BMY), and 1% inRH(RH).\nBuffett cut Berkshire's stake in Apple stock by 6%. It remains the No. 1 stock in his portfolio by market value and No. 2 stock by number of shares held, at 10.6% of the portfolio. He kept an Amazon stake steady.\nDuring its most recent earnings report, the firm revealed it had sold $6.45 billion in stock in Q1 and bought $2.57 billion in stock.\nWarren Buffett Funds Media Deal\nBerkshire Hathaway is a key backer in a deal disclosed Sept. 24 that will see TV station ownerE.W. Scripps(SSP) purchase privately held cable network ION Media for $2.65 billion. The latter firm's flagship, ION Television, is a top 5-ranked U.S. general entertainment network.\nWarren Buffett's firm is snapping up $600 million of Scripps preferred shares to help fund the deal. Scripps stock surged on on the news.\nBerkshire will also receive a warrant that allows it to snap up up to 23.1 million more shares at a price of $13. This adds up to an additional investment of $300 million. Scripps' common shares currently trade at more than 21 each.\nBerkshire Hathaway Coronavirus Exposure\nAs well as its status as an investment vehicle, Berkshire Hathaway is a conglomerate in its own right. It has interests in segments such as railroads, utilities and energy.\nThose sectors, along with other \"real economy\" companies that are Warren Buffett staples, have been hard hit by the coronavirus shutdowns and massive economic contraction. However they should benefit as the economy opens up again.\nBerkshire owns Geico, the No. 2 U.S. auto insurer after State Farm. Currently, states such as California are ordering insurers to give partial credits or refunds of premiums in lines such as private passenger automobile insurance.\nBerkshire also owns BNSF Railway Company, the largest freight railroad network in North America. Rail operators such asUnion Pacific(UNP) andCSX(CSX) have seen business suffer during the pandemic. But rail operators and other transportation companies are seeing business pick up again.\nOther wholly owned businesses such as Dairy Queen and multilevel marketing company Pampered Chef also struggled during coronavirus restrictions, though those are easing.\nWarren Buffett's Big Gas Bill\nWarren Buffett has been criticized for the size of his cash pile. But last July he madehis biggest acquisition in yearswith a $10 billion deal forDominion Energy's (D) assets.\nBerkshire seized the chance to secure Dominion's gas pipeline network after the utility giant andDuke Energy(DUK) unexpectedly aborted plans to build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.\nBerkshire Hathaway Energy will buy about 7,700 miles of natural gas transmission pipelines and 900 billion cubic feet of gas storage. The all-cash deal includes $4 billion of equity and $5.7 billion of debt. It's set to close in the fourth quarter.\n\"We are very proud to be adding such a great portfolio of natural gas assets to our already strong energy business,\" Buffett said in a statement.\nEnergy has been doing well so far in 2021. For example, the Vanguard Energy ETF (VDE) is up almost 40% since the start of the year.\nBerkshire Hathaway Stock Technical Analysis\nBerkshire Hathaway stock is in a profit-taking zone after breaking out of aflat base, according toMarketSmith analysis. Theideal buy pointwas 235.09. Shares offered a follow-on buy point around 246 in late March after a test of the 10-week line, but are extended from here as well.\nIt could go on to form a new base with an entry point of 295.18, it can continue to consolidate below this level.\nBRKB stock is well clear after pulling away from its50-day moving average, though the key technical benchmark is beginning to catch up. This is a positive sign for holders of the stock.\nTherelative strength lineof Berkshire Hathaway stock has been slippi8ng somewhat of late after a spell of progress that kicked off in mid-March. BRKB stock is outperforming in 2021. So far this year, it is up around 23%, which beats the broader S&P 500's return of almost 13%.\nItsIBD Composite Ratingnow sits at 69 out of 99. This is not ideal, but puts it in the top 31% of stocks tracked overall.\nEarnings are  improving, with EPS accelerating for the past two quarters. However earnings have only grown by an average of 5% over the past three quarters, with coronavirus pandemic lockdowns having an impact. The CAN SLIM systemrecommends investors look for companies with average EPS growth of at least 25% over this time period.\nWall Street is becoming more optimistic for Berkshire Hathaway earnings growth going forward. Analysts are projecting annual earnings will rise 24% 2021, before moderating to 7% growth in 2022.\nWarren Buffett Recommendation\nBerkshire stock had been lagging the S&P 500 index since the end of 2018. Before that, BRKB stock at best moved with the market for a decade. An investor could have bought an index fund or ETF like the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY), and generated similar or higher returns with less stock-specific risk.\n\"In my view, for most people, the best thing to do is owning the S&P 500 index fund, Buffett himself previously said at a Berkshire annual meeting. \"If you bet on America and sustain that position for decades, you'd do far better than buying Treasury securities, or far better than following people. Perhaps with a bias, I don't believe anyone knows what the market is going to do tomorrow, next week, next month, next year.\"\nNevertheless, BRKB stock has been outperforming the S&P 500 so far this year. It could now finally be set for a decent period of outperformance.\nBerkshire Hathaway Earnings Improve\nBerkshire Hathaway earnings per share popped 27% in Q1, rising to $3.05. This was well clear of analyst views for EPS of $2.57. Its operating profit, which excludes some investment results, came in at $7 billion.\nThe conglomerate's total revenue came in at $64.6 billion last quarter, which was also more than analysts expected.\nThe firm's wheeling and dealing on the stock market also saw the firm turn in good gains, increasing approximately $4.69 billion last quarter. However the firm stresses that gains and losses in any particular quarter are \"usually meaningless.\" This fits in with Buffett's longer-term investment philosophy.\nBuffett's Cash Mountain Still Mighty\nBerkshire's cash pile grew to $145.4 billion in Q1 from $138.3 billion in Q4. It is creeping back up to record level it reached in the third quarter of last year. This has raised expectations that Buffett would make a big acquisition, but he has preferred to sit on the sidelines amid spiraling stock prices.\nHaving such a large supply of cash protects the Warren Buffett stock during tough times. It also mean Berkshire Hathaway is able to deploy capital when desirable businesses become available for purchase.\nThe more aggressive buying of Berkshire's own shares of late contrasts with Buffett's deals during and after the Great Recession. This indicates he believes that the latest economic downturn and recovery, so far, offer none of the bargains he has historically pounced on.\nAnalyst Backs Berkshire Stock\nCFRA analyst Catherine Seifert is rating BRKB stock as a hold with a 295 price target. She pointed out the mixed nature of the firm's recent earnings report.\n\"Results reflected a doubling of underwriting profits and 12% higher rail/energy/utility profits, despite 13% lower in investment income,\" she said in a May 3 research note. \"We applaud the 33% rise in energy revenues amid contributions from an acquisition, but rail revenues declined fractionally and insurance premium growth of 4.3% lagged peers.\nNevertheless, she said the shares are currently \"fairly valued versus historical levels.\" The analyst also believes there could be changes afoot once he firm's legendary CEO steps down.\n\"We are disappointed climate change and diversity initiatives failed to be approved at the annual meeting, and think this increases the likelihood of activism in a post-Buffet era,\" she said.\nDifference Between BRKA Stock And BRKB Stock\nThe most obvious difference between Berkshire Hathaway's A class and B class shares is the price. While — at over 200 a share — BRKB stock may be considered relatively expensive, BRKA stock is the most expensive on the market, currently trading near $430,000 a share.\nWarren Buffett decided to introduce the BRKB shares to allow investors to purchase stock directly. Big demand for Berkshire Hathaway stock forced less-moneyed players to plow cash into unit trusts or mutual funds that mirrored his company's holdings.\nBerkshire Hathaway Today\nBerkshire Hathaway operates in four main sectors.\nIts insurance group is one of its biggest cash cows. One of the most famous jewels in the crown is Geico. Other parts of this business include multinational property/casualty and life/health reinsurance company General Re and Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance Group. The latter underwrites excess-of-loss reinsurance and quota-share coverage globally.\nInsurance operations are a big reason why Berkshire Hathaway earnings can be lumpy.\nIts Regulated Utility Business group includes Berkshire Hathaway Energy, formerly known as MidAmerican Energy. It also includes railway services arm BNSF, North America's largest freight railroad network.\nMeanwhile, the Manufacturing, Service & Retailing group includes Acme Building Brands, Fruit of the Loom and Justin Brands. The likes of Buffalo News, Business Wire, Dairy Queen and NetJets fall under the service subsector. Retailers include See's Candies, Ben Bridge Jeweler, Helzberg Diamond Shops and Star Furniture.\nFinally, the Finance & Financial Products segment includes: Hathaway Credit Corporation, transportation equipment and furniture leasing specialists XTRA and CORT, and BH Finance whose main interest is in proprietary investing strategies.\nIs Berkshire Hathaway Stock A Buy Now?\nWhile Berkshire Hathaway stock has been lagging the S&P 500 index since late 2018, it has been handily outperforming in 2021. However, Berkshire stock is now well clear of its most recent buy zone. Investors keen on the stock could add it to their watchlist, and wait for a new buying opportunity to emerge.\nWhile its Composite Rating is still not up to scratch, it has improved on this front as well. This makes it an option worth watching for investors seeking to add to their portfolio a well established stock with a diversified portfolio of businesses.\nHowever, it is worth remember that, after a late-2018 burst, Berkshire Hathaway earnings growth has been modest and uneven. While Wall Street sees solid EPS growth ahead for Berkshire in 2021 and 2022, it still remains shy of the rates sought by CAN SLIM investors.\nBottom line: Berkshire Hathaway stock is not a buy at the moment. Those interested in buying the ultimate Warren Buffett stock should add it to their watchlist, and wait to see if it forms a new base.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":178,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186851788,"gmtCreate":1623486572344,"gmtModify":1704204961599,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thank you","listText":"Thank you","text":"Thank you","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/186851788","repostId":"1147474880","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147474880","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470168,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1147474880?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147474880","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris","content":"<blockquote>\n Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n</blockquote>\n<p>I’ve had it.</p>\n<p>The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p>\n<p>If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p>\n<p>Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p>\n<p>You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p>\n<p>Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p>\n<p>An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p>\n<p>The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p>\n<p>He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p>\n<p>“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p>\n<p>Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p>\n<p>In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p>\n<p>However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p>\n<p>Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p>\n<p>If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p>\n<p>Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p>\n<p>I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p>\n<p>“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p>\n<p>I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p>\n<p>Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p>\n<p>Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p>\n<p>In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p>\n<p>The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p>\n<p>PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p>\n<p>Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p>\n<p>In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?</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\">\nInvestor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-12 11:56 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147474880","content_text":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.\nIf you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.\nWhenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.\nYou’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.\nOf course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%areinvestors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.\nAn investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.\nThe word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.\nNevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”\nHe wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)\n“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”\nGraham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.\nIn that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”\nHowever, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”\nMost investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.\nIf you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.\nTake speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.\nI think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.\n“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”\nI hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.\nCalling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.\nIna recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”\nIn her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.\nThe currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)\nPAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.\nMs. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”\nIn Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":276,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":187059437,"gmtCreate":1623731552429,"gmtModify":1704209848896,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AWX.SI\">$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$</a>Holding","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AWX.SI\">$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$</a>Holding","text":"$AEM HOLDINGS LTD(AWX.SI)$Holding","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/187059437","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":539,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129505197,"gmtCreate":1624376167919,"gmtModify":1703834969025,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/129505197","repostId":"1177499959","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1177499959","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624344919,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1177499959?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-22 14:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1177499959","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" spa","content":"<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"Tapering<i><b>is</b></i>Tightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.</p>\n<p>Elaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-&nbsp; writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"<b>fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"</b></p>\n<p>Or to paraphrase Lester Burnham,<b>\"it's all downhill from here\"...</b>and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"<b><i>the transition is incomplete.\"</i></b></p>\n<p>Highlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:<b>\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.</b>\"</p>\n<p>Furthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d95f296e4d1300cd3c95485a2333d270\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"571\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"</p>\n<blockquote>\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Nevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.</p>\n<p>While real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"<b>this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/670f9e23e34953726583276c32a7b3f9\" tg-width=\"843\" tg-height=\"445\"></p>\n<p>That said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.<b>This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.</b>Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.</p>\n<p>Wilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantially<b>before</b>Bernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"<i>perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"</i></p>\n<blockquote>\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n</blockquote>\n<p>The underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.</p>\n<p>Wrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,<b>monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - is</b><b><u>money supply growth</u></b><b>:</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>In a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,</i>\n <i><b>the primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.</b></i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Realizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"&nbsp; He explains:</p>\n<blockquote>\n <i>When money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).</i>\n</blockquote>\n<p>And visually:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392b34be32740b00458d59adb2bb80a6\" tg-width=\"852\" tg-height=\"486\"></p>\n<p>But wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).</p>\n<p>Taking Wilson's argument a step further,<b>M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economy</b><b><i>and</i></b><b>markets.</b>On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of February<b>but has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a&nbsp; more \"normal\" level of annual growth</b>— i.e., 7-8%</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd5f46571e7e27f9c00fed0a2d310a3c\" tg-width=\"610\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>More ominously, this also suggests<b>liquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.</b></p>\n<p>Finally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c77fa806a6775bc562b18346590d26c9\" tg-width=\"613\" tg-height=\"376\"></p>\n<p>Wilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.</p>\n<p>This to Wilson<b>\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"</b>and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).</p>\n<p>Putting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is that<b>the market already knows it.</b>The bad news is that<b>a majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.</b>This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"</p>\n<p>And while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.</p>\n<p>We expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Forget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nForget Everything You Know: Morgan Stanley Reveals The Only Metric That Determines What The Market Will Do Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-22 14:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/forget-everything-you-know-morgan-stanley-reveals-only-metric-determines-what-market-will","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1177499959","content_text":"Traders of a certain age may recall that back in 2013, around the time the Fed's \"Taper Tantrum\" sparked a surge in yields and led to a risk asset selloff, a big (if entirely artificial) debate emerged within financial media, where the Fed muppets and their media puppets would argue that \"tapering is not tightening\" while anyone with half a brain realized knew that this was total BS.\nFast forward to today when Morgan Stanley's Michael Wilson opens up an old wound for clueless Fed apologists, saying in his latest Weekly Warm Up note that \"TaperingisTightening\"... but then adds that contrary to the market's shocked reaction to last week's Fed meeting, tightening actually began months ago.\nElaborating on this point, Wilson - who several months ago turned into Wall Street's most bearish strategist (again)-  writes this morning that while the Fed's pivot to \"begin\" the tightening discussion caught most by surprise, in reality markets began discounting this inevitable process months ago as price action had indicated. It's exactly this discounting of the coming tightening, that is what Michael Wilson's mid-cycle transition is all about, and as the strategist adds, \"fits nicely with our narrative for choppier equity markets and a 10-20% correction for the broader indices this year.\"\nOr to paraphrase Lester Burnham,\"it's all downhill from here\"...and as Wilson predicts, that won't change until M2 growth is done decelerating; or in other words, until the Fed unleashes another liquidity burst into the system \"the transition is incomplete.\"\nHighlights aside, Wilson then elaborates on each point, noting that while last week's Fed meeting brought more uncertainty to markets one thing is becoming more obvious:\"we are on the other side of the mountain with respect to monetary accommodation for this cycle.\"\nFurthermore, having repeatedlywarned that the US is now mid-cycle...\n... Wilson then takes a victory lap writing that what the Fed is doing is \"classic mid cycle transition behavior so investors really shouldn't be too surprised that the Fed would try to begin the long process of tightening.\"\n\n After all, the US economy is booming and expected to grow close to 10 percent this year in nominal terms, a feat last witnessed in 1984. Meanwhile, no matter what one's view is on inflation being transient or not, prices are up significantly and likely higher than what the Fed, or most others were expecting 6 months ago. In other words, the facts and data have changed; therefore, so should Fed policy.\n\nNevertheless, as discussed here extensively, markets reacted as if this was a complete shock with both bonds and stocks trading as if the Fed had hiked rates already (instead of leaving over $2TN in QE still on deck) after the Fed meeting. Starting with bonds, both nominal 10 year yields and breakevens fell significantly. However, breakevens fell more leaving 10 year real rates higher by almost 20 bps Wednesday afternoon.\nWhile real rates did settle back a bit on Thursday and Friday, they have formed what appears to be a very solid base from which they are likely to rise as the economy continues to recover and the Fed appropriately pivots. In Wilson's view, \"this looks very similar to 2013, the year after Peak Fed. Back then, Peak Fed was QE3 which was announced on September 12, 2012. This time Peak Fed was the announcement of Average Inflation Targeting last summer.\"\n\nThat said, there is one notable difference between the taper tantrum and today: in 2013 \"tapering\" QE was a novel concept to markets and it came more abruptly with Bernanke's surprise mention during his congressional testimony on May 22, 2013.This time, the markets understand what tapering is and see its arrival as inevitable as the economy recovers.Therefore, while the path higher for real rates is unlikely to be as dramatic as witnessed in 2013, it is still likely to be higher from here and that is a change that will affect all risk markets, including equities, in Morgan Stanley's view.\nWilson makes one final observation from the chart above, which is how real rates moved substantiallybeforeBernanke's testimony in May 2013, prompting Wilson to notes that \"perhaps it wasn't as much of a surprise as believed, at least to markets. We think it's the same situation today.\"\n\n In our view, the data has been so strong, it would be naive not to think the Fed wasn't moving closer to tapering over the past several months. In fact, the idea that the Fed hasn't been thinking and/or talking about it seems absurd. Surely the market understands this, making the events of the past week not so much of a surprise. It's all part of the mid cycle transition that has been ongoing for months and fits with the choppier price action and unstable market leadership we have been witnessing.\n\nThe underperformance of early cycle stocks is another classic signal the market \"gets it.\" Nevertheless, in talking with clients the past few days, this view is still out of consensus. Most haven't been ready for tighter monetary policy, nor did they think it's something they needed to worry about, until now.\nWrapping up the Fed \"surprise\" part of his note, Wilson writes that contrary to the FOMC shock,monetary tightening actually began months ago if one is looking at the right metric, which to the top Morgan Stanley equity strategist - who emerges as yet another closet Austrian - ismoney supply growth:\n\nIn a world where all of the major developed market central banks are stuck at the zero bound, or lower,\nthe primary metric that determines if monetary policy is getting more or less accommodative is Money Supply Growth.\n\nRealizing that to most Keynesian this will be a controversial statement to say the least, Wilson digs in and says that \"it's absolutely the case and financial markets seem to agree.\"  He explains:\n\nWhen money supply is accelerating, the more speculative / riskier assets tend to outperform and when it's decelerating these assets have more trouble. As noted here several times over the past few months, the Fed's balance sheet (M1) growth peaked in mid February and that coincided with a top in many of the most expensive/speculative stocks in the equity market just like the acceleration in the Fed's balance sheet in the prior 12 months contributed to their spectacular performance. Interestingly, the recently flattening out of the growth in M1 has coincided with more stability in these stocks, although they remain well below prior highs (Exhibit 2).\n\nAnd visually:\n\nBut wait there's more, and also an explanation why the Fed has made it virtually impossible to track the weekly change in M2 (the aggregate is now updated only monthly).\nTaking Wilson's argument a step further,M2 growth might be even more important to monitor than M1 because that's the net liquidity available to the economyandmarkets.On that front, the deceleration also began at the end of Februarybut has not yet flattened out and appears to have much further to fall to a  more \"normal\" level of annual growth— i.e., 7-8%\n\nMore ominously, this also suggestsliquidity is likely to tighten further from here whether the Fed's begins tapering later this year or next.\nFinally, when we look at M2 data on a global basis, we get the same picture.\n\nWilson concludes that even ahead of last week's \"shock\" FOMC, the market had already started to de-rate lower into a mid-cycle transition as Fed balance sheet growth has materially slowed. Meanwhile, M2 is slowing just as rapidly and has further to fall, especially when the Fed begins to taper later this year or early next. Finally, global money supply growth is also slowing from elevated levels and every major region is contributing.\nThis to Wilson\"looks reminiscent of 2014 and 2018 when markets went through a rolling correction of risky assets\"and he thinks 2021 will prove to be similar in that regard with the highest beta regions falling first (Kospi, China, Japan) and ending with the most defensive (US).\nPutting it all together, the MS strategist writes that \"tapering is tightening but the tightening process began with the rate of change in money supply growth. The good news is thatthe market already knows it.The bad news is thata majority of investors seem to be just catching on with the Fed's \"surprise\" announcement this past week.This means asset prices are far from done correcting as witnessed with the more cyclical, reflationary assets taking their turn the past few weeks.\"\nAnd while we completely agree with Wilson's newly discovered Austrian view of markets - funny how on a long enough timeline everyone turns Austrian - the real question is what will catalyze the next M2 boosting cycle, how high will it push stocks, and will the Fed be forced to come out and start buying equities this time after having nationalized the bond market back in 2020.\nWe expect that the answer will be revealed after the next 20% drop at which point all of the Fed's hawkishness will evaporate, and Powell (or his replacement Kashkari) will shift to an uber dovish mode as they prepare to unleash the final and biggest asset bubble of all...","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":187,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":182598608,"gmtCreate":1623586108104,"gmtModify":1704206630099,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/182598608","repostId":"1148565686","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":178,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186851788,"gmtCreate":1623486572344,"gmtModify":1704204961599,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thank you","listText":"Thank you","text":"Thank you","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/186851788","repostId":"1147474880","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147474880","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470168,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1147474880?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147474880","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris","content":"<blockquote>\n Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n</blockquote>\n<p>I’ve had it.</p>\n<p>The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p>\n<p>If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p>\n<p>Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p>\n<p>You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p>\n<p>Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p>\n<p>An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p>\n<p>The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p>\n<p>He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p>\n<p>“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p>\n<p>Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p>\n<p>In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p>\n<p>However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p>\n<p>Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p>\n<p>If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p>\n<p>Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p>\n<p>I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p>\n<p>“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p>\n<p>I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p>\n<p>Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p>\n<p>Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p>\n<p>In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p>\n<p>The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p>\n<p>PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p>\n<p>Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p>\n<p>In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?</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\">\nInvestor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-12 11:56 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147474880","content_text":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.\nIf you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.\nWhenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.\nYou’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.\nOf course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%areinvestors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.\nAn investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.\nThe word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.\nNevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”\nHe wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)\n“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”\nGraham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.\nIn that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”\nHowever, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”\nMost investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.\nIf you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.\nTake speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.\nI think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.\n“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”\nI hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.\nCalling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.\nIna recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”\nIn her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.\nThe currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)\nPAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.\nMs. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”\nIn Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":276,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":298035499921704,"gmtCreate":1713791362441,"gmtModify":1713791366634,"author":{"id":"3586396868075586","authorId":"3586396868075586","name":"Krc","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/ae56492512b9257f300bf33f37de6cab","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586396868075586","authorIdStr":"3586396868075586"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/U11.SI\">$UOB(U11.SI)$&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/U11.SI\">$UOB(U11.SI)$&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;","text":"$UOB(U11.SI)$","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e6e0843c014eb096160004044a52ceca","width":"927","height":"1599"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/298035499921704","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":181,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}