Ainazhang personal page - To The Moon

Ainazhang

No personal profile

9Follow

0Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-07-06

Hi

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-07-03

Hi

Suze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do

2021-06-30

Hi

Which of the 10 Most Talked About Reddit Stocks Is Worth a Buy?

2021-06-26

Reply

Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?

2021-06-26

Reply

Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?

2021-06-16

Reply

Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger

2021-06-16

Reply

Is Arrival Becoming A Short Squeeze Target? WallStreetBets Post Sends Shares Soaring

2021-06-16

Reply

Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":3586930975858321,"uuid":"3586930975858321","gmtCreate":1623837112009,"gmtModify":1623837112009,"name":"Ainazhang","pinyin":"ainazhang","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":9,"tweetSize":8,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":3,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[],"userBadgeCount":0,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":157124115,"gmtCreate":1625574190337,"gmtModify":1703744036793,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/157124115","repostId":"2149503553","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":30,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":152595686,"gmtCreate":1625307574445,"gmtModify":1703740285184,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/152595686","repostId":"1188153141","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1188153141","pubTimestamp":1625276221,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1188153141?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-03 09:37","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Suze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1188153141","media":"MoneyWise","summary":"As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for th","content":"<p>As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for the economy.</p>\n<p>That clash has worried investing experts, including Suze Orman, who's gone so far as to say she’s now preparing for an inevitable market crash.</p>\n<p>And a famous measurement popularized by Warren Buffett — known as the Buffett Indicator — shows Orman might be onto something.</p>\n<p>Here’s an explanation of where the concern is coming from and some techniques you can use tokeep your investment portfolio growingeven if the market goes south.</p>\n<p><b>What does Suze Orman think?</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be8dc3ad363faad96bc575a22235562d\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Mediapunch/Shutterstock</p>\n<p>Suze Orman has avidly watched the market for decades. She knows ups and downs are to be expected, but what she’s seeing happen with investment fads like GameStop has her concerned.</p>\n<p>“I don’t like what I see happening in the market right now,” Orman said in a video for CNBC. “The economy has been horrible, but the stock market has been going.”</p>\n<p>While investing is as easy now asusing a smartphone app, Orman is concerned about where we can go from these record highs.</p>\n<p>And even with stimulus checks, which are still going out, and the real estate market breaking its own records last year, Orman worries about what will come with the coronavirus — especially as new variants continue to pop up.</p>\n<p>What's more, she feels it’s just been too long since the last crash to stay this high much longer.</p>\n<p>“This reminds me of 2000 all over again,” Orman says.</p>\n<p><b>The Buffett Indicator</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44ada32ecadcc4581fed208f4f4e4d53\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Larry W Smith/EPA/Shutterstock</p>\n<p>One metric Warren Buffett uses to assess the market so regularly that it’s been named after him has been flashing red for long enough that market watchers are starting to wonder if it’s an outdated tool.</p>\n<p>But the Buffett Indicator, a measurement of the ratio of the stock market’s total value against U.S. economic output, continues to climb to previously unseen levels.</p>\n<p>And those in the know are wondering if it's a sign that we’re about to see a hard fall.</p>\n<p>How to prepare for a crash<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1ad912a6b4611d9e39b46d2851c78c9e\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Freedomz / Shutterstock</p>\n<p>Orman has three recommendations for setting up a simple investment strategy to help you successfully navigate any sharp turns in the market.</p>\n<p><b>1. Buy low</b></p>\n<p>Part of what upsets Orman so much about the furor over meme stocks like GameStop is it goes completely against the average investor’s interests.</p>\n<p>“All of you have your heads screwed on backwards,” she says. “All you want is for these markets to go up and up and up. What good is that going to do you?”</p>\n<p>She points out the only extra money most people have goes towardinvesting for retirementin their 401(k) or IRA plans.</p>\n<p>Because you probably don’t plan to touch that money for decades, the best long-term strategy is to buy low. That way, your dollar will go much further now, leaving plenty of room for growth over the next 20, 30 or 40 years.</p>\n<p><b>2. Invest on a schedule</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e4102f8a6d5002090743b1cbded32ef9\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">katjen / Shutterstock</p>\n<p>While she prefers to buy low, Orman doesn’t recommend you stop investing completely when the market goes up.</p>\n<p>She wants casual investors to not get caught up in the daily ups and downs of the market.</p>\n<p>In fact, cheering for downturns now may be your best bet at getting a larger piece of very profitable investments — like some lucky investors were able to do back in 2007 and 2008.</p>\n<p>“When the market went down, down, down you could buy things at nothing,” says Orman. “And now look at them 15 years later.”</p>\n<p>She suggests you set up a dollar-cost averaging strategy, which means you invest your money in equal portions at regular intervals, regardless of the market’s fluctuations.</p>\n<p>This kind of approach is easy to implement with any of the many investing apps currently available to DIY investors.</p>\n<p>There are even apps that willautomatically invest your spare changeby rounding up your debit and credit card purchases to the nearest dollar.</p>\n<p><b>3. Diversify with fractional shares</b></p>\n<p>To help weather dips in specific corners of the market, Orman suggests you diversify your investments — balance your portfolio with investments in many different types of assets and sectors of the economy.</p>\n<p>Orman particularly recommends fractional-share investing. This approach allows you to buy a slice of a share for a big-name company that you otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.</p>\n<p>With the help of apopular stock-trading tool, anyone at any budget can afford the fractional share strategy.</p>\n<p>“The sooner you begin, the more money you will have,” says Orman. “Just don’t stop, and when these markets go down, you should be so happy because your dollars find more shares.”</p>\n<p>“And the more shares you have, the more money you’ll have 20, 40, 50 years from now.”</p>\n<p><b>What else you can do</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e79c6fd1f8fa6e3a7c3a6c94f1e14b5\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">goodluz / Shutterstock</p>\n<p>Whether or not a big crash is around the corner, investors who are still decades out from retirement can make that work for them, Orman said in theCNBC video.</p>\n<p>First, prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Since the onset of the pandemic, Orman now recommends everyone have an emergency fund that can cover their expenses for a full year.</p>\n<p>Then, to set yourself up fora comfortable retirement, she suggests you opt for a Roth account, whether that’s a 401(k) or IRA.</p>\n<p>That will help you avoid paying tax when you take money out of your retirement account because your contributions to a Roth account are made after tax. Traditional IRAs, on the other hand, aren’t taxed when you make contributions, so you’ll end up paying later.</p>\n<p>If you find you need a little more guidance, working with aprofessional financial adviser, can help point you in the right direction so you can confidently ride out any market volatility.</p>\n<p>While everyone else is veering off course or overcorrecting, you’ll be firmly in the driver’s seat with your sunset years planned for.</p>","source":"lsy1621813427262","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>Suze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do</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\">\nSuze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-03 09:37 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/suze-orman-worries-market-crash-220000108.html><strong>MoneyWise</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for the economy.\nThat clash has worried investing experts, including Suze Orman, who's gone so far as to ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/suze-orman-worries-market-crash-220000108.html\">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",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/suze-orman-worries-market-crash-220000108.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1188153141","content_text":"As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for the economy.\nThat clash has worried investing experts, including Suze Orman, who's gone so far as to say she’s now preparing for an inevitable market crash.\nAnd a famous measurement popularized by Warren Buffett — known as the Buffett Indicator — shows Orman might be onto something.\nHere’s an explanation of where the concern is coming from and some techniques you can use tokeep your investment portfolio growingeven if the market goes south.\nWhat does Suze Orman think?\nMediapunch/Shutterstock\nSuze Orman has avidly watched the market for decades. She knows ups and downs are to be expected, but what she’s seeing happen with investment fads like GameStop has her concerned.\n“I don’t like what I see happening in the market right now,” Orman said in a video for CNBC. “The economy has been horrible, but the stock market has been going.”\nWhile investing is as easy now asusing a smartphone app, Orman is concerned about where we can go from these record highs.\nAnd even with stimulus checks, which are still going out, and the real estate market breaking its own records last year, Orman worries about what will come with the coronavirus — especially as new variants continue to pop up.\nWhat's more, she feels it’s just been too long since the last crash to stay this high much longer.\n“This reminds me of 2000 all over again,” Orman says.\nThe Buffett Indicator\nLarry W Smith/EPA/Shutterstock\nOne metric Warren Buffett uses to assess the market so regularly that it’s been named after him has been flashing red for long enough that market watchers are starting to wonder if it’s an outdated tool.\nBut the Buffett Indicator, a measurement of the ratio of the stock market’s total value against U.S. economic output, continues to climb to previously unseen levels.\nAnd those in the know are wondering if it's a sign that we’re about to see a hard fall.\nHow to prepare for a crashFreedomz / Shutterstock\nOrman has three recommendations for setting up a simple investment strategy to help you successfully navigate any sharp turns in the market.\n1. Buy low\nPart of what upsets Orman so much about the furor over meme stocks like GameStop is it goes completely against the average investor’s interests.\n“All of you have your heads screwed on backwards,” she says. “All you want is for these markets to go up and up and up. What good is that going to do you?”\nShe points out the only extra money most people have goes towardinvesting for retirementin their 401(k) or IRA plans.\nBecause you probably don’t plan to touch that money for decades, the best long-term strategy is to buy low. That way, your dollar will go much further now, leaving plenty of room for growth over the next 20, 30 or 40 years.\n2. Invest on a schedule\nkatjen / Shutterstock\nWhile she prefers to buy low, Orman doesn’t recommend you stop investing completely when the market goes up.\nShe wants casual investors to not get caught up in the daily ups and downs of the market.\nIn fact, cheering for downturns now may be your best bet at getting a larger piece of very profitable investments — like some lucky investors were able to do back in 2007 and 2008.\n“When the market went down, down, down you could buy things at nothing,” says Orman. “And now look at them 15 years later.”\nShe suggests you set up a dollar-cost averaging strategy, which means you invest your money in equal portions at regular intervals, regardless of the market’s fluctuations.\nThis kind of approach is easy to implement with any of the many investing apps currently available to DIY investors.\nThere are even apps that willautomatically invest your spare changeby rounding up your debit and credit card purchases to the nearest dollar.\n3. Diversify with fractional shares\nTo help weather dips in specific corners of the market, Orman suggests you diversify your investments — balance your portfolio with investments in many different types of assets and sectors of the economy.\nOrman particularly recommends fractional-share investing. This approach allows you to buy a slice of a share for a big-name company that you otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.\nWith the help of apopular stock-trading tool, anyone at any budget can afford the fractional share strategy.\n“The sooner you begin, the more money you will have,” says Orman. “Just don’t stop, and when these markets go down, you should be so happy because your dollars find more shares.”\n“And the more shares you have, the more money you’ll have 20, 40, 50 years from now.”\nWhat else you can do\ngoodluz / Shutterstock\nWhether or not a big crash is around the corner, investors who are still decades out from retirement can make that work for them, Orman said in theCNBC video.\nFirst, prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Since the onset of the pandemic, Orman now recommends everyone have an emergency fund that can cover their expenses for a full year.\nThen, to set yourself up fora comfortable retirement, she suggests you opt for a Roth account, whether that’s a 401(k) or IRA.\nThat will help you avoid paying tax when you take money out of your retirement account because your contributions to a Roth account are made after tax. Traditional IRAs, on the other hand, aren’t taxed when you make contributions, so you’ll end up paying later.\nIf you find you need a little more guidance, working with aprofessional financial adviser, can help point you in the right direction so you can confidently ride out any market volatility.\nWhile everyone else is veering off course or overcorrecting, you’ll be firmly in the driver’s seat with your sunset years planned for.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":169,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":153755240,"gmtCreate":1625053459780,"gmtModify":1703734915719,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/153755240","repostId":"1150186389","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1150186389","pubTimestamp":1625044819,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1150186389?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-30 17:20","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Which of the 10 Most Talked About Reddit Stocks Is Worth a Buy?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1150186389","media":"InvestorPlace","summary":"Like all investments, there are good Reddit stocks, and bad ones\nSource: Marcus Krauss / Shutterstoc","content":"<p>Like all investments, there are good Reddit stocks, and bad ones</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/753e957cac964de085fbdea1b1aa30a1\" tg-width=\"1024\" tg-height=\"576\"><span>Source: Marcus Krauss / Shutterstock.com</span></p>\n<p>I must admit, when I was given this assignment my first thought was I’m the last guy to be talking about Reddit stocks. I think the attention being paid to Reddit and meme stocks is a bunch of hokum.</p>\n<p>The arguments abound whether the meme stock frenzy is&nbsp;a permanent part of the investing landscape.</p>\n<p>“This is not going to end well,” Former E*Trade CEO Karl Roessner told<i>CNBC</i>in early June while discussing the AMC rally. “I think historically we’ve seen this in the past, but I do believethis grouphas staying power.”</p>\n<p>However, if you’re a value investor, the mere presence of this kind of retail investor is music to your ears. While the sheep are out buying&nbsp;<b>GameStop</b>(NYSE:<b><u>GME</u></b>), you can pick up shares in some of America’s better companies that trade at a discount.</p>\n<p>That’s not easy when the&nbsp;Cyclically Adjusted PE Ratio&nbsp;(CAPE) of 38.11 is at the second-highest level on record — the highest was in December 1999 — with no end in sight to the multiple’s upward trajectory.</p>\n<p>With that in mind, I’ve rated the&nbsp;top 10 Reddit stocks— based on the number of comments made on r/WallStreetBets — from best to worst as a long-term buy:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>Tesla</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>TSLA</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>KB Home</b>(NYSE:<b><u>KBH</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>Palantir Technologies</b>(NYSE:<b><u>PLTR</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>Clean Energy Fuels</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>CLNE</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>BlackBerry</b>(NYSE:<b><u>BB</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>Workhorse Group</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>WKHS</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>AMC Entertainment</b>(NYSE:<b><u>AMC</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>ContextLogic</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>WISH</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>Globalstar</b>(NYSEAMERICAN:<b><u>GSAT</u></b>)</li>\n <li><b>Clover Health</b>(NASDAQ:<b><u>CLOV</u></b>)</li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>Tesla (TSLA)</b></p>\n<p>Say what you will about Elon Musk, but there’s no question he’s built one heck of a company. Soon, Tesla will have a fourth factory open in Berlin. Even though the original opening date of July 1 is no longer on the table due to myriad reasons, it will ultimately produce millions of electric vehicles (EVs) for willing European buyers.</p>\n<p>The company has added a&nbsp;battery cell production&nbsp;component to the plant outside Berlin. It will produce 500 million cells annually representing 50 gigawatt hours (GWh) of energy, 25% higher than&nbsp;<b>Volkswagen’s</b>(OTCMKTS:<b><u>VWAGY</u></b>) planned facility a couple hundred miles away.</p>\n<p>Across the pond in Texas, the company’s fifth so-called Gigafactory is getting closer to being ready for production. This plant will produce an updated version of the Model Y using “mega casting” technology to speed up the production process while delivering a lighter vehicle at the same time. It currently&nbsp;uses this technology&nbsp;at its plant in Shanghai.</p>\n<p>Tesla has afree cash flow (FCF) marginof 22.3% based on $35.94 billion in trailing-12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>KB Home (KBH)</b></p>\n<p>The largest homebuilders in America are having&nbsp;trouble keeping up with demand&nbsp;at the moment. At least for now, KB Home is meeting the demand from customers, 64% of which were first-time buyers in the latest quarter.</p>\n<p>“Operationally, our divisions are doing an&nbsp;excellent job&nbsp;of navigating this environment of demand strength and well-publicized supply chain constraints as we effectively balanced pace, price and starts to optimize our assets and manage our production,” said KB Home CEO Jeff Mezger in the Q2 2021 conference call.</p>\n<p>KB Home is so busy that the number of homes started in Q1 2021 and Q2 2021 was equivalent to 75% of the number of homes started for 2020. As a result, it expects to deliver $6 billion in housing revenue in 2021 at the midpoint of guidance, with operating margins between 11.5% and 12.0%.</p>\n<p>KB Home has anFCF margin of 6.5%based on $4.78 billion in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>Palantir Technologies (PLTR)</b></p>\n<p>Palantir has been a public company for less than a year. The provider of data analytics software platforms for government agencies, corporations, and other large institutions, sold no shares last September when directly listedon the NYSE.</p>\n<p>The reference price was $7.25. PLTR stock is up 277.7% through the start of June 29.</p>\n<p>Not only is it growing its business — in the latest quarter, itsU.S. commercial revenuegrew 72% year-over-year while its U.S. government revenue jumped 83% YOY — it is also busy investing in other tech companies looking to go public.</p>\n<p>For example, it has invested in six private investments in public equity (PIPE) in the past three months. These PIPEs are part of the ongoing interest in special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). Palantir invests&nbsp;in the PIPEs&nbsp;to gain financial returns and collaborate with these companies, which use its data analytic tools for their businesses.</p>\n<p>I’m not 100% sold on Palantir&nbsp;just yet, but it’s a good long-term buy compared to some of the Reddit stocks on this list.</p>\n<p>Palantir has anFCF margin of 9%based on $1.2 billion in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>Clean Energy Fuels</b><b>(</b><b>CLNE)</b></p>\n<p>Back in February,I recommended CLNE. At the time, it was trading around $12.97. It was one of seven stocks to buy under $20. As I write this, it’s just under $11, so it’s lost ground over the past four months.</p>\n<p>I liked Clean Energy for several reasons.</p>\n<p>First, it provides three kinds of natural gas fuel for commercial trucks: compressed (CNG), liquified (LNG), and renewable (RNG). It’s the only fuel provider to do so. Secondly, RNG fuel enables trucking companies to deliver their services while getting close to or achieving carbon negative status. Third, it’s got fueling stations in 43 states and Canada. Lastly, it’s got deep pockets.<b>Total</b>(OTCMKTS:<b><u>TTFNF</u></b>) owns 25% of its stock.</p>\n<p>Oh, and as I said in February, from an adjusted EBITDA basis (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), it makes money while also growing revenues at a steady pace.</p>\n<p>In the meantime, Clean Energy has anFCF margin of 24.2%based on $283 million in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>BlackBerry (BB)</b></p>\n<p>I can remember when&nbsp;President Barack Obama&nbsp;first entered the White House in January 2009. The BlackBerry was considered the cat’s meow when it came to mobile phones. By the time he left office in January 2017, it was in the dustbin of history.</p>\n<p>Now supplying security software to automobile manufacturers and other enterprises and governments worldwide — a research firm recently said its QNX software is installed in195 million vehicles&nbsp;worldwide — the Reddit crowd have taken to the Waterloo, Ontario-based tech company.</p>\n<p>Things have turned around for BlackBerry.</p>\n<p>At least, enough so to provide CEO John Chen with a handsome compensation package. Proxy advisory firm Glass Lewis recently blasted the company, suggesting its&nbsp;compensation plan&nbsp;had no relation to its overall corporate performance.</p>\n<p>As a result of the January Reddit rally, which saw BB stock move from $6.70 at the beginning of the month to a 52-week high of $28.77 by the end, Chen could receive as much as $206 million in cash and stock compensation from the long-term incentives issued in 2019.</p>\n<p>On a GAAP basis,BlackBerry still loses money. That said, the pivot it’s made to software has given it another shot at tech stardom. We’ll see if it gain regain its former glory from the Obama years.</p>\n<p>In the meantime, BlackBerry has anFCF margin of 9.3%based on $861 million in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>Workhorse Group (WKHS)</b></p>\n<p>The last time I wrote about Workhorse Group was in late April. At the time, it was trading around $12.50. I argued that if it got the&nbsp;backlog of 8,000&nbsp;commercial electric vehicle delivery trucks out the door over the next 12 to 24 months, it would have an ultra-low price-to-sales ratio of 4.2.</p>\n<p>Long story short, if it did, its stock would be worth more than $12.50.</p>\n<p>Well, on June 16, Workhorse&nbsp;officially protested&nbsp;the United States Postal Service awarding the estimated $6 billion contract to manufacture its next-generation delivery vehicle to&nbsp;<b>Oshkosh</b>(NYSE:<b><u>OSK</u></b>). The news pushed WKHS to $17.54 at the start of June 29.</p>\n<p><i>InvestorPlace’s</i>&nbsp;Dana Blankenhorn recently discussed Workhorse. He believes that the company was in the commercial EV game to&nbsp;ride on the coattails&nbsp;of big guns like&nbsp;<b>Ford</b>(NYSE:<b><u>F</u></b>) and&nbsp;<b>General Motors</b>(NYSE:<b><u>GM</u></b>). That’s not the craziest theory in the world.</p>\n<p>In the latest quarter, Workhorse delivered six trucks to customers and generated $521,000 in revenue. It plans to produce&nbsp;1,000 trucks&nbsp;in 2021. It will have to pick up the pace if it wants to reach that goal. In the meantime, investors can expect its quarterly losses to accelerate as we make our way through the year.</p>\n<p>Workhorse has an&nbsp;FCF margin of -5,320.2%&nbsp;based on $1.83 million in trailing 12-month revenue. It is for speculative investors only.</p>\n<p><b>AMC Entertainment (AMC)</b></p>\n<p>AMC is a stock that I’m conflicted about.</p>\n<p>On the one hand, I believe that Americans will return to movie theaters in large numbers come fall. That will likely return the chain to pre-Covid revenue numbers. On the other hand, it has a burdensome debt load.</p>\n<p>Despite using the Reddit surge to raise much-needed cash to repay some of this debt — on June 3, it announced it would sell 11.55 million shares at the market to bring in another&nbsp;$600 million— it still has&nbsp;$11.05 billion&nbsp;owed, or 37.6% of its vastly overvalued market capitalization of $29.4 billion.</p>\n<p>Former E*Trade CEO Karl Roessner appeared on&nbsp;<i>CNBC</i>&nbsp;in early June. While he&nbsp;commended AMC management&nbsp;for selling shares when prices were high, the company is not worth $28 billion.</p>\n<p>“Absent some serious strategic undertakings by that company, it’s still just not worth what it’s trading for right now,” Roessner stated.</p>\n<p>I couldn’t agree more.</p>\n<p>AMC has anFCF margin of -280%based on $449 million in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>ContextLogic (WISH)</b></p>\n<p>In February, I wrote an article about the e-commerce site with the headline“ContextLogic Has Nothing to Do With Retail”<i>.</i>I didn’t understand the composition of its board. It had no retail experience on its board to oversee the CEO.</p>\n<p>“If ContextLogic’s goal is to beat&nbsp;<b>Amazon</b>(NASDAQ:<b>AMZN</b>) at discount e-commerce apparel, its board of directors is a sure sign that’s not what it’s after,” I said.</p>\n<p>I finished the article by stating I didn’t get an inspirational vibe from Context Logic’s board of directors. In the four months since, WISH has lost 49% of its value and trades well below its&nbsp;IPO price&nbsp;of $24.</p>\n<p>ContextLogic has anFCF margin of -8%based on $2.87 billion in trailing 12-month revenue. I’m really not sure what Redditors see in this one.</p>\n<p><b>Globalstar (GSAT)</b></p>\n<p>Not everyone thinks the provider of mobile satellite services is a bad bet.</p>\n<p>B. Riley analyst Mike Crawford initiated coverage of Globalstar on June 21. The analyst gives it a “buy” rating and a&nbsp;$3.25 target price, double where it’s currently trading. He estimates that the company’s C-Band spectrum could be worth as much as $15 billion. Based on 1.79 billion shares outstanding, that’s $8.38 a share, considerably higher than the analyst’s target price.</p>\n<p>From where I sit, the fact that it’s currently trading at&nbsp;a price-to-sales ratio of 25.39&nbsp;and&nbsp;not making money&nbsp;on a GAAP basis makes it very hard for me to get behind the company.</p>\n<p>However, Globalstar does have one big ace up its sleeve.</p>\n<p>On page 87 of its&nbsp;2020 10-K, you will see that it had $1.8 billion in U.S. net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards with less than 1% expiring before 2025. It has an additional $200 million in foreign NOL carryforwards. So, should it start generating significant profits — that’s still very much up in the air — the loss carryforwards will shield the company’s earnings from taxes for the foreseeable future.</p>\n<p>Globalstar has anFCF margin of 18%based on $123 million in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>\n<p><b>Clover Health (CLOV)</b></p>\n<p>They say timing is everything.</p>\n<p>In early June, I wrote an article about the healthcare technology company, which uses data to provide healthcare plans for more than 130,000 Americans. At the time, I felt like there was a fair bit of&nbsp;upside resistance at $10.</p>\n<p>While I wouldn’t buy the money-losing stock, a patient investor with a higher than average risk tolerance would be wise to buy around $9, or hopefully less. And then came the June 8 Reddit-induced short squeeze, doubling CLOV’s share price within hours.</p>\n<p>“By afternoon trading [June 8], Clover had already traded over&nbsp;650 million shares, 30 times more than its 30-day average volume of 22 million shares, according to FactSet,”<i>CNBC</i>‘s Yun Lireported. “By the closing bell on Wall Street, more than 720 million shares had changed hands.”</p>\n<p>CLOV stock closed June 7 trading at $11.92. By 4 p.m. the next day, it was over $22.</p>\n<p>In my article, I mentioned the investing lesson a 17-year-old learned about managing your expectations when playing with real money. I really hope he was able to sell his call options in the June surge. If not, the shares have still doubled from a month ago.</p>\n<p>Overall, it’s down slightly from its&nbsp;first day of trading&nbsp;on Jan. 8.</p>\n<p>Clover has anFCF margin of -24.2%based on $721 million in trailing 12-month revenue.</p>","source":"lsy1606302653667","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>Which of the 10 Most Talked About Reddit Stocks Is Worth a Buy?</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\">\nWhich of the 10 Most Talked About Reddit Stocks Is Worth a Buy?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-30 17:20 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://investorplace.com/2021/06/which-of-the-10-most-talked-about-reddit-stocks-is-worth-a-buy/><strong>InvestorPlace</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Like all investments, there are good Reddit stocks, and bad ones\nSource: Marcus Krauss / Shutterstock.com\nI must admit, when I was given this assignment my first thought was I’m the last guy to be ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/which-of-the-10-most-talked-about-reddit-stocks-is-worth-a-buy/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"CLNE":"Clean Energy Fuels Corp","CLOV":"Clover Health Corp","BB":"黑莓","WKHS":"Workhorse Group, Inc.","TSLA":"特斯拉","GSAT":"全球星","KBH":"KB Home","PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://investorplace.com/2021/06/which-of-the-10-most-talked-about-reddit-stocks-is-worth-a-buy/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1150186389","content_text":"Like all investments, there are good Reddit stocks, and bad ones\nSource: Marcus Krauss / Shutterstock.com\nI must admit, when I was given this assignment my first thought was I’m the last guy to be talking about Reddit stocks. I think the attention being paid to Reddit and meme stocks is a bunch of hokum.\nThe arguments abound whether the meme stock frenzy is a permanent part of the investing landscape.\n“This is not going to end well,” Former E*Trade CEO Karl Roessner toldCNBCin early June while discussing the AMC rally. “I think historically we’ve seen this in the past, but I do believethis grouphas staying power.”\nHowever, if you’re a value investor, the mere presence of this kind of retail investor is music to your ears. While the sheep are out buying GameStop(NYSE:GME), you can pick up shares in some of America’s better companies that trade at a discount.\nThat’s not easy when the Cyclically Adjusted PE Ratio (CAPE) of 38.11 is at the second-highest level on record — the highest was in December 1999 — with no end in sight to the multiple’s upward trajectory.\nWith that in mind, I’ve rated the top 10 Reddit stocks— based on the number of comments made on r/WallStreetBets — from best to worst as a long-term buy:\n\nTesla(NASDAQ:TSLA)\nKB Home(NYSE:KBH)\nPalantir Technologies(NYSE:PLTR)\nClean Energy Fuels(NASDAQ:CLNE)\nBlackBerry(NYSE:BB)\nWorkhorse Group(NASDAQ:WKHS)\nAMC Entertainment(NYSE:AMC)\nContextLogic(NASDAQ:WISH)\nGlobalstar(NYSEAMERICAN:GSAT)\nClover Health(NASDAQ:CLOV)\n\nTesla (TSLA)\nSay what you will about Elon Musk, but there’s no question he’s built one heck of a company. Soon, Tesla will have a fourth factory open in Berlin. Even though the original opening date of July 1 is no longer on the table due to myriad reasons, it will ultimately produce millions of electric vehicles (EVs) for willing European buyers.\nThe company has added a battery cell production component to the plant outside Berlin. It will produce 500 million cells annually representing 50 gigawatt hours (GWh) of energy, 25% higher than Volkswagen’s(OTCMKTS:VWAGY) planned facility a couple hundred miles away.\nAcross the pond in Texas, the company’s fifth so-called Gigafactory is getting closer to being ready for production. This plant will produce an updated version of the Model Y using “mega casting” technology to speed up the production process while delivering a lighter vehicle at the same time. It currently uses this technology at its plant in Shanghai.\nTesla has afree cash flow (FCF) marginof 22.3% based on $35.94 billion in trailing-12-month revenue.\nKB Home (KBH)\nThe largest homebuilders in America are having trouble keeping up with demand at the moment. At least for now, KB Home is meeting the demand from customers, 64% of which were first-time buyers in the latest quarter.\n“Operationally, our divisions are doing an excellent job of navigating this environment of demand strength and well-publicized supply chain constraints as we effectively balanced pace, price and starts to optimize our assets and manage our production,” said KB Home CEO Jeff Mezger in the Q2 2021 conference call.\nKB Home is so busy that the number of homes started in Q1 2021 and Q2 2021 was equivalent to 75% of the number of homes started for 2020. As a result, it expects to deliver $6 billion in housing revenue in 2021 at the midpoint of guidance, with operating margins between 11.5% and 12.0%.\nKB Home has anFCF margin of 6.5%based on $4.78 billion in trailing 12-month revenue.\nPalantir Technologies (PLTR)\nPalantir has been a public company for less than a year. The provider of data analytics software platforms for government agencies, corporations, and other large institutions, sold no shares last September when directly listedon the NYSE.\nThe reference price was $7.25. PLTR stock is up 277.7% through the start of June 29.\nNot only is it growing its business — in the latest quarter, itsU.S. commercial revenuegrew 72% year-over-year while its U.S. government revenue jumped 83% YOY — it is also busy investing in other tech companies looking to go public.\nFor example, it has invested in six private investments in public equity (PIPE) in the past three months. These PIPEs are part of the ongoing interest in special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). Palantir invests in the PIPEs to gain financial returns and collaborate with these companies, which use its data analytic tools for their businesses.\nI’m not 100% sold on Palantir just yet, but it’s a good long-term buy compared to some of the Reddit stocks on this list.\nPalantir has anFCF margin of 9%based on $1.2 billion in trailing 12-month revenue.\nClean Energy Fuels(CLNE)\nBack in February,I recommended CLNE. At the time, it was trading around $12.97. It was one of seven stocks to buy under $20. As I write this, it’s just under $11, so it’s lost ground over the past four months.\nI liked Clean Energy for several reasons.\nFirst, it provides three kinds of natural gas fuel for commercial trucks: compressed (CNG), liquified (LNG), and renewable (RNG). It’s the only fuel provider to do so. Secondly, RNG fuel enables trucking companies to deliver their services while getting close to or achieving carbon negative status. Third, it’s got fueling stations in 43 states and Canada. Lastly, it’s got deep pockets.Total(OTCMKTS:TTFNF) owns 25% of its stock.\nOh, and as I said in February, from an adjusted EBITDA basis (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), it makes money while also growing revenues at a steady pace.\nIn the meantime, Clean Energy has anFCF margin of 24.2%based on $283 million in trailing 12-month revenue.\nBlackBerry (BB)\nI can remember when President Barack Obama first entered the White House in January 2009. The BlackBerry was considered the cat’s meow when it came to mobile phones. By the time he left office in January 2017, it was in the dustbin of history.\nNow supplying security software to automobile manufacturers and other enterprises and governments worldwide — a research firm recently said its QNX software is installed in195 million vehicles worldwide — the Reddit crowd have taken to the Waterloo, Ontario-based tech company.\nThings have turned around for BlackBerry.\nAt least, enough so to provide CEO John Chen with a handsome compensation package. Proxy advisory firm Glass Lewis recently blasted the company, suggesting its compensation plan had no relation to its overall corporate performance.\nAs a result of the January Reddit rally, which saw BB stock move from $6.70 at the beginning of the month to a 52-week high of $28.77 by the end, Chen could receive as much as $206 million in cash and stock compensation from the long-term incentives issued in 2019.\nOn a GAAP basis,BlackBerry still loses money. That said, the pivot it’s made to software has given it another shot at tech stardom. We’ll see if it gain regain its former glory from the Obama years.\nIn the meantime, BlackBerry has anFCF margin of 9.3%based on $861 million in trailing 12-month revenue.\nWorkhorse Group (WKHS)\nThe last time I wrote about Workhorse Group was in late April. At the time, it was trading around $12.50. I argued that if it got the backlog of 8,000 commercial electric vehicle delivery trucks out the door over the next 12 to 24 months, it would have an ultra-low price-to-sales ratio of 4.2.\nLong story short, if it did, its stock would be worth more than $12.50.\nWell, on June 16, Workhorse officially protested the United States Postal Service awarding the estimated $6 billion contract to manufacture its next-generation delivery vehicle to Oshkosh(NYSE:OSK). The news pushed WKHS to $17.54 at the start of June 29.\nInvestorPlace’s Dana Blankenhorn recently discussed Workhorse. He believes that the company was in the commercial EV game to ride on the coattails of big guns like Ford(NYSE:F) and General Motors(NYSE:GM). That’s not the craziest theory in the world.\nIn the latest quarter, Workhorse delivered six trucks to customers and generated $521,000 in revenue. It plans to produce 1,000 trucks in 2021. It will have to pick up the pace if it wants to reach that goal. In the meantime, investors can expect its quarterly losses to accelerate as we make our way through the year.\nWorkhorse has an FCF margin of -5,320.2% based on $1.83 million in trailing 12-month revenue. It is for speculative investors only.\nAMC Entertainment (AMC)\nAMC is a stock that I’m conflicted about.\nOn the one hand, I believe that Americans will return to movie theaters in large numbers come fall. That will likely return the chain to pre-Covid revenue numbers. On the other hand, it has a burdensome debt load.\nDespite using the Reddit surge to raise much-needed cash to repay some of this debt — on June 3, it announced it would sell 11.55 million shares at the market to bring in another $600 million— it still has $11.05 billion owed, or 37.6% of its vastly overvalued market capitalization of $29.4 billion.\nFormer E*Trade CEO Karl Roessner appeared on CNBC in early June. While he commended AMC management for selling shares when prices were high, the company is not worth $28 billion.\n“Absent some serious strategic undertakings by that company, it’s still just not worth what it’s trading for right now,” Roessner stated.\nI couldn’t agree more.\nAMC has anFCF margin of -280%based on $449 million in trailing 12-month revenue.\nContextLogic (WISH)\nIn February, I wrote an article about the e-commerce site with the headline“ContextLogic Has Nothing to Do With Retail”.I didn’t understand the composition of its board. It had no retail experience on its board to oversee the CEO.\n“If ContextLogic’s goal is to beat Amazon(NASDAQ:AMZN) at discount e-commerce apparel, its board of directors is a sure sign that’s not what it’s after,” I said.\nI finished the article by stating I didn’t get an inspirational vibe from Context Logic’s board of directors. In the four months since, WISH has lost 49% of its value and trades well below its IPO price of $24.\nContextLogic has anFCF margin of -8%based on $2.87 billion in trailing 12-month revenue. I’m really not sure what Redditors see in this one.\nGlobalstar (GSAT)\nNot everyone thinks the provider of mobile satellite services is a bad bet.\nB. Riley analyst Mike Crawford initiated coverage of Globalstar on June 21. The analyst gives it a “buy” rating and a $3.25 target price, double where it’s currently trading. He estimates that the company’s C-Band spectrum could be worth as much as $15 billion. Based on 1.79 billion shares outstanding, that’s $8.38 a share, considerably higher than the analyst’s target price.\nFrom where I sit, the fact that it’s currently trading at a price-to-sales ratio of 25.39 and not making money on a GAAP basis makes it very hard for me to get behind the company.\nHowever, Globalstar does have one big ace up its sleeve.\nOn page 87 of its 2020 10-K, you will see that it had $1.8 billion in U.S. net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards with less than 1% expiring before 2025. It has an additional $200 million in foreign NOL carryforwards. So, should it start generating significant profits — that’s still very much up in the air — the loss carryforwards will shield the company’s earnings from taxes for the foreseeable future.\nGlobalstar has anFCF margin of 18%based on $123 million in trailing 12-month revenue.\nClover Health (CLOV)\nThey say timing is everything.\nIn early June, I wrote an article about the healthcare technology company, which uses data to provide healthcare plans for more than 130,000 Americans. At the time, I felt like there was a fair bit of upside resistance at $10.\nWhile I wouldn’t buy the money-losing stock, a patient investor with a higher than average risk tolerance would be wise to buy around $9, or hopefully less. And then came the June 8 Reddit-induced short squeeze, doubling CLOV’s share price within hours.\n“By afternoon trading [June 8], Clover had already traded over 650 million shares, 30 times more than its 30-day average volume of 22 million shares, according to FactSet,”CNBC‘s Yun Lireported. “By the closing bell on Wall Street, more than 720 million shares had changed hands.”\nCLOV stock closed June 7 trading at $11.92. By 4 p.m. the next day, it was over $22.\nIn my article, I mentioned the investing lesson a 17-year-old learned about managing your expectations when playing with real money. I really hope he was able to sell his call options in the June surge. If not, the shares have still doubled from a month ago.\nOverall, it’s down slightly from its first day of trading on Jan. 8.\nClover has anFCF margin of -24.2%based on $721 million in trailing 12-month revenue.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":26,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":124011962,"gmtCreate":1624705899256,"gmtModify":1703843928953,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/124011962","repostId":"1108941456","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108941456","pubTimestamp":1624664800,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108941456?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-26 07:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108941456","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.At 26-64x this year's expected net profi","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.</li>\n <li>Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.</li>\n <li>I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bb49d385ec6d3044db2f4474cbb2c57\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>MagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Article Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Going with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.</p>\n<p><b>Are FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?</b></p>\n<p>Looking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at least<i>were</i>a good investment in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae2b8e2b9caf99f74c28bafc10a0a872\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"484\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>With gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.</p>\n<p>These factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2ef865eea7af4369048432a9c85d1d83\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"540\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>At 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from&nbsp;Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.</p>\n<p><b>What Investors Can Expect From Apple</b></p>\n<p>Apple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate&nbsp;in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Facebook</b></p>\n<p>Both Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fd8043ca75dcb2c38f5ffa427c8c0b9\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Facebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3d49e0007aa77608b2992a9fef2142d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6b16c9b3e2eac182d42686bcd8a98fc5\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"515\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>While Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.</p>\n<p>To sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>When we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6360514d097081c546a0ccacfbdc7af6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhat<i>smaller</i>net cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.</p>\n<p>All in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Netflix And Amazon</b></p>\n<p>Looking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.</p>\n<p>This huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ccc2536fa3cadf06639a89e0b211b9a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>AMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.</p>\n<p>Netflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d84f013051fbb00b6b488f5cfed66d4\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Netflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&amp;T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.</p>\n<p>Amazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.</p>\n<p><b>Which Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?</b></p>\n<p>Not every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.</p>\n<p>Alphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.</p>\n<p>Depending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-26 07:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108941456","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.\nI believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.\n\nMagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nGoing with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.\nAre FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?\nLooking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at leastwerea good investment in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nWith gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.\nThese factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:\nData by YCharts\nAt 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.\nWhat Investors Can Expect From Apple\nApple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.\nApple Versus Facebook\nBoth Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nFacebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:\nData by YCharts\nThe fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:\nData by YCharts\nWhile Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.\nTo sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.\nApple Versus Alphabet\nWhen we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.\nData by YCharts\nAlphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.\nNevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhatsmallernet cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.\nAll in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.\nApple Versus Netflix And Amazon\nLooking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.\nThis huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:\nData by YCharts\nAMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.\nNetflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:\nData by YCharts\nNetflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.\nAmazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.\nWhich Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?\nNot every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.\nAlphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.\nDepending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":70,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":124011091,"gmtCreate":1624705878813,"gmtModify":1703843928789,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/124011091","repostId":"1108941456","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108941456","pubTimestamp":1624664800,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108941456?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-26 07:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108941456","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.At 26-64x this year's expected net profi","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.</li>\n <li>Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.</li>\n <li>I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bb49d385ec6d3044db2f4474cbb2c57\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>MagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Article Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Going with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.</p>\n<p><b>Are FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?</b></p>\n<p>Looking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at least<i>were</i>a good investment in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae2b8e2b9caf99f74c28bafc10a0a872\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"484\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>With gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.</p>\n<p>These factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2ef865eea7af4369048432a9c85d1d83\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"540\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>At 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from&nbsp;Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.</p>\n<p><b>What Investors Can Expect From Apple</b></p>\n<p>Apple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate&nbsp;in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Facebook</b></p>\n<p>Both Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fd8043ca75dcb2c38f5ffa427c8c0b9\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Facebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3d49e0007aa77608b2992a9fef2142d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6b16c9b3e2eac182d42686bcd8a98fc5\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"515\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>While Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.</p>\n<p>To sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>When we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6360514d097081c546a0ccacfbdc7af6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhat<i>smaller</i>net cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.</p>\n<p>All in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Netflix And Amazon</b></p>\n<p>Looking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.</p>\n<p>This huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ccc2536fa3cadf06639a89e0b211b9a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>AMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.</p>\n<p>Netflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d84f013051fbb00b6b488f5cfed66d4\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Netflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&amp;T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.</p>\n<p>Amazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.</p>\n<p><b>Which Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?</b></p>\n<p>Not every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.</p>\n<p>Alphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.</p>\n<p>Depending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-26 07:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108941456","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.\nI believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.\n\nMagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nGoing with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.\nAre FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?\nLooking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at leastwerea good investment in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nWith gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.\nThese factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:\nData by YCharts\nAt 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.\nWhat Investors Can Expect From Apple\nApple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.\nApple Versus Facebook\nBoth Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nFacebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:\nData by YCharts\nThe fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:\nData by YCharts\nWhile Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.\nTo sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.\nApple Versus Alphabet\nWhen we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.\nData by YCharts\nAlphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.\nNevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhatsmallernet cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.\nAll in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.\nApple Versus Netflix And Amazon\nLooking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.\nThis huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:\nData by YCharts\nAMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.\nNetflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:\nData by YCharts\nNetflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.\nAmazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.\nWhich Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?\nNot every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.\nAlphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.\nDepending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":53,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169289174,"gmtCreate":1623837768798,"gmtModify":1703820952075,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/169289174","repostId":"1105866425","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105866425","pubTimestamp":1623837565,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105866425?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-16 17:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105866425","media":"bloomberg","summary":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually ","content":"<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.</p>\n<p>Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.</p>\n<p>At the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.</p>\n<p>But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.</p>\n<p>“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.</p>\n<p>Administration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.</p>\n<p>Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.</p>\n<p>The U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.</p>\n<p>Last month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.</p>\n<p>Days after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.</p>\n<p>Brainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.</p>\n<p>As cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.</p>\n<p>Early stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.</p>\n<p>“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/63a81696d4533f7e6c4d6bf3f651b8bc\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"604\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Breakdown of Tether’s Reserves</span></p>\n<p>Centre didn’t respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p>Other than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.</p>\n<p>For more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks</p>\n<p>One billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.</p>\n<p>The most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.</p>\n<p>“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger</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\">\nCrypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-16 17:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia><strong>bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105866425","content_text":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.\nAt the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.\nBut in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.\n“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.\nAdministration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.\nMassachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.\nThe U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.\nLast month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.\nDays after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.\nBrainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.\nAs cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.\nEarly stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.\n“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.\nBreakdown of Tether’s Reserves\nCentre didn’t respond to a request for comment.\nOther than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.\nFor more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks\nOne billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.\nThe most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.\n“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":18,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169280173,"gmtCreate":1623837730092,"gmtModify":1703820949627,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/169280173","repostId":"1122785578","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1122785578","pubTimestamp":1623836629,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1122785578?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-16 17:43","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Arrival Becoming A Short Squeeze Target? WallStreetBets Post Sends Shares Soaring","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1122785578","media":"benzinga","summary":"Arrival SA(NASDAQ:ARVL) shares are up over 11% in Wednesday's pre-market regular session after closi","content":"<p><b>Arrival SA</b>(NASDAQ:ARVL) shares are up over 11% in Wednesday's pre-market regular session&nbsp;after closing nearly 6% higher in the regular session a day prior.&nbsp;The surge comes in the aftermath of a&nbsp;poston Reddit investor forum r/WallStreetBets discussed short positions in the electric vehicle company.</p> \n<p><b>What Happened:</b>The post by user Trancify pointed out that there are 9.62 million registered shares shorted while Arrival has a float of 51.7 million.</p> \n<p>Trancify noted that the 9.62 million shorted number did not include Failure to Delivers (FTD) or “Naked Shorts”, which the poster said amounted to 1 million shares — citing Fintel data.</p> \n<p>Further, the post pointed out the discrepancy between the number of shares available for shorting and the actual number shorted.</p> \n<p><b>Why It Matters:</b>The poster hinted that someone has been buying or shorting 14,000 Arrival contracts per day and the open interest is reset each day implying the options are being exercised.</p> \n<p>“Short interest on $ARVL is massive, and interested parties seem to be betting on a PIPE unlock soon. They are paying over 100% for their borrow fee and could be forced to cover if the stock gains upward momentum. They appear to be manipulating the price and buying time through options contracts,” the post stated.</p> \n<p>WallStreetBets is best-known for short squeezes in stocks like&nbsp;<b>GameStop Corp</b>(NYSE:GME) and&nbsp;<b>AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc</b>(NYSE:AMC).</p> \n<p>On Tuesday, Arrival attracted 133 mentions on WallStreetBets. At press time,the most discussed names&nbsp;were&nbsp;<b>Clean Energy Fuels Corp</b>(NASDAQ:CLNE), AMC, and&nbsp;<b>ContextLogic Inc</b>(NASDAQ:WISH).</p>","source":"lsy1606299360108","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Arrival Becoming A Short Squeeze Target? WallStreetBets Post Sends Shares Soaring</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Arrival Becoming A Short Squeeze Target? WallStreetBets Post Sends Shares Soaring\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-16 17:43 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.benzinga.com/trading-ideas/long-ideas/21/06/21581910/is-arrival-becoming-a-short-squeeze-target-wallstreetbets-post-sends-shares-soaring><strong>benzinga</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Arrival SA(NASDAQ:ARVL) shares are up over 11% in Wednesday's pre-market regular session after closing nearly 6% higher in the regular session a day prior. The surge comes in the aftermath of a poston...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.benzinga.com/trading-ideas/long-ideas/21/06/21581910/is-arrival-becoming-a-short-squeeze-target-wallstreetbets-post-sends-shares-soaring\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"CLNE":"Clean Energy Fuels Corp","GME":"游戏驿站"},"source_url":"https://www.benzinga.com/trading-ideas/long-ideas/21/06/21581910/is-arrival-becoming-a-short-squeeze-target-wallstreetbets-post-sends-shares-soaring","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1122785578","content_text":"Arrival SA(NASDAQ:ARVL) shares are up over 11% in Wednesday's pre-market regular session after closing nearly 6% higher in the regular session a day prior. The surge comes in the aftermath of a poston Reddit investor forum r/WallStreetBets discussed short positions in the electric vehicle company.\nWhat Happened:The post by user Trancify pointed out that there are 9.62 million registered shares shorted while Arrival has a float of 51.7 million.\nTrancify noted that the 9.62 million shorted number did not include Failure to Delivers (FTD) or “Naked Shorts”, which the poster said amounted to 1 million shares — citing Fintel data.\nFurther, the post pointed out the discrepancy between the number of shares available for shorting and the actual number shorted.\nWhy It Matters:The poster hinted that someone has been buying or shorting 14,000 Arrival contracts per day and the open interest is reset each day implying the options are being exercised.\n“Short interest on $ARVL is massive, and interested parties seem to be betting on a PIPE unlock soon. They are paying over 100% for their borrow fee and could be forced to cover if the stock gains upward momentum. They appear to be manipulating the price and buying time through options contracts,” the post stated.\nWallStreetBets is best-known for short squeezes in stocks like GameStop Corp(NYSE:GME) and AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc(NYSE:AMC).\nOn Tuesday, Arrival attracted 133 mentions on WallStreetBets. At press time,the most discussed names were Clean Energy Fuels Corp(NASDAQ:CLNE), AMC, and ContextLogic Inc(NASDAQ:WISH).","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":162,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169217469,"gmtCreate":1623837713751,"gmtModify":1703820948978,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/169217469","repostId":"1105866425","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105866425","pubTimestamp":1623837565,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105866425?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-16 17:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105866425","media":"bloomberg","summary":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually ","content":"<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.</p>\n<p>Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.</p>\n<p>At the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.</p>\n<p>But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.</p>\n<p>“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.</p>\n<p>Administration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.</p>\n<p>Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.</p>\n<p>The U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.</p>\n<p>Last month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.</p>\n<p>Days after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.</p>\n<p>Brainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.</p>\n<p>As cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.</p>\n<p>Early stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.</p>\n<p>“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/63a81696d4533f7e6c4d6bf3f651b8bc\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"604\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Breakdown of Tether’s Reserves</span></p>\n<p>Centre didn’t respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p>Other than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.</p>\n<p>For more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks</p>\n<p>One billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.</p>\n<p>The most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.</p>\n<p>“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger</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\">\nCrypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-16 17:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia><strong>bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105866425","content_text":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.\nAt the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.\nBut in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.\n“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.\nAdministration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.\nMassachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.\nThe U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.\nLast month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.\nDays after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.\nBrainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.\nAs cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.\nEarly stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.\n“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.\nBreakdown of Tether’s Reserves\nCentre didn’t respond to a request for comment.\nOther than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.\nFor more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks\nOne billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.\nThe most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.\n“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":118,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":157124115,"gmtCreate":1625574190337,"gmtModify":1703744036793,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/157124115","repostId":"2149503553","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":30,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":152595686,"gmtCreate":1625307574445,"gmtModify":1703740285184,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/152595686","repostId":"1188153141","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1188153141","pubTimestamp":1625276221,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1188153141?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-03 09:37","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Suze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1188153141","media":"MoneyWise","summary":"As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for th","content":"<p>As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for the economy.</p>\n<p>That clash has worried investing experts, including Suze Orman, who's gone so far as to say she’s now preparing for an inevitable market crash.</p>\n<p>And a famous measurement popularized by Warren Buffett — known as the Buffett Indicator — shows Orman might be onto something.</p>\n<p>Here’s an explanation of where the concern is coming from and some techniques you can use tokeep your investment portfolio growingeven if the market goes south.</p>\n<p><b>What does Suze Orman think?</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/be8dc3ad363faad96bc575a22235562d\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Mediapunch/Shutterstock</p>\n<p>Suze Orman has avidly watched the market for decades. She knows ups and downs are to be expected, but what she’s seeing happen with investment fads like GameStop has her concerned.</p>\n<p>“I don’t like what I see happening in the market right now,” Orman said in a video for CNBC. “The economy has been horrible, but the stock market has been going.”</p>\n<p>While investing is as easy now asusing a smartphone app, Orman is concerned about where we can go from these record highs.</p>\n<p>And even with stimulus checks, which are still going out, and the real estate market breaking its own records last year, Orman worries about what will come with the coronavirus — especially as new variants continue to pop up.</p>\n<p>What's more, she feels it’s just been too long since the last crash to stay this high much longer.</p>\n<p>“This reminds me of 2000 all over again,” Orman says.</p>\n<p><b>The Buffett Indicator</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44ada32ecadcc4581fed208f4f4e4d53\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Larry W Smith/EPA/Shutterstock</p>\n<p>One metric Warren Buffett uses to assess the market so regularly that it’s been named after him has been flashing red for long enough that market watchers are starting to wonder if it’s an outdated tool.</p>\n<p>But the Buffett Indicator, a measurement of the ratio of the stock market’s total value against U.S. economic output, continues to climb to previously unseen levels.</p>\n<p>And those in the know are wondering if it's a sign that we’re about to see a hard fall.</p>\n<p>How to prepare for a crash<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1ad912a6b4611d9e39b46d2851c78c9e\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Freedomz / Shutterstock</p>\n<p>Orman has three recommendations for setting up a simple investment strategy to help you successfully navigate any sharp turns in the market.</p>\n<p><b>1. Buy low</b></p>\n<p>Part of what upsets Orman so much about the furor over meme stocks like GameStop is it goes completely against the average investor’s interests.</p>\n<p>“All of you have your heads screwed on backwards,” she says. “All you want is for these markets to go up and up and up. What good is that going to do you?”</p>\n<p>She points out the only extra money most people have goes towardinvesting for retirementin their 401(k) or IRA plans.</p>\n<p>Because you probably don’t plan to touch that money for decades, the best long-term strategy is to buy low. That way, your dollar will go much further now, leaving plenty of room for growth over the next 20, 30 or 40 years.</p>\n<p><b>2. Invest on a schedule</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e4102f8a6d5002090743b1cbded32ef9\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">katjen / Shutterstock</p>\n<p>While she prefers to buy low, Orman doesn’t recommend you stop investing completely when the market goes up.</p>\n<p>She wants casual investors to not get caught up in the daily ups and downs of the market.</p>\n<p>In fact, cheering for downturns now may be your best bet at getting a larger piece of very profitable investments — like some lucky investors were able to do back in 2007 and 2008.</p>\n<p>“When the market went down, down, down you could buy things at nothing,” says Orman. “And now look at them 15 years later.”</p>\n<p>She suggests you set up a dollar-cost averaging strategy, which means you invest your money in equal portions at regular intervals, regardless of the market’s fluctuations.</p>\n<p>This kind of approach is easy to implement with any of the many investing apps currently available to DIY investors.</p>\n<p>There are even apps that willautomatically invest your spare changeby rounding up your debit and credit card purchases to the nearest dollar.</p>\n<p><b>3. Diversify with fractional shares</b></p>\n<p>To help weather dips in specific corners of the market, Orman suggests you diversify your investments — balance your portfolio with investments in many different types of assets and sectors of the economy.</p>\n<p>Orman particularly recommends fractional-share investing. This approach allows you to buy a slice of a share for a big-name company that you otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.</p>\n<p>With the help of apopular stock-trading tool, anyone at any budget can afford the fractional share strategy.</p>\n<p>“The sooner you begin, the more money you will have,” says Orman. “Just don’t stop, and when these markets go down, you should be so happy because your dollars find more shares.”</p>\n<p>“And the more shares you have, the more money you’ll have 20, 40, 50 years from now.”</p>\n<p><b>What else you can do</b></p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e79c6fd1f8fa6e3a7c3a6c94f1e14b5\" tg-width=\"703\" tg-height=\"293\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">goodluz / Shutterstock</p>\n<p>Whether or not a big crash is around the corner, investors who are still decades out from retirement can make that work for them, Orman said in theCNBC video.</p>\n<p>First, prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Since the onset of the pandemic, Orman now recommends everyone have an emergency fund that can cover their expenses for a full year.</p>\n<p>Then, to set yourself up fora comfortable retirement, she suggests you opt for a Roth account, whether that’s a 401(k) or IRA.</p>\n<p>That will help you avoid paying tax when you take money out of your retirement account because your contributions to a Roth account are made after tax. Traditional IRAs, on the other hand, aren’t taxed when you make contributions, so you’ll end up paying later.</p>\n<p>If you find you need a little more guidance, working with aprofessional financial adviser, can help point you in the right direction so you can confidently ride out any market volatility.</p>\n<p>While everyone else is veering off course or overcorrecting, you’ll be firmly in the driver’s seat with your sunset years planned for.</p>","source":"lsy1621813427262","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>Suze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do</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\">\nSuze Orman worries about a market crash — here's what you should do\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-03 09:37 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/suze-orman-worries-market-crash-220000108.html><strong>MoneyWise</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for the economy.\nThat clash has worried investing experts, including Suze Orman, who's gone so far as to ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/suze-orman-worries-market-crash-220000108.html\">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",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/suze-orman-worries-market-crash-220000108.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1188153141","content_text":"As stock markets continue setting records, fallout from COVID-19 continues to create problems for the economy.\nThat clash has worried investing experts, including Suze Orman, who's gone so far as to say she’s now preparing for an inevitable market crash.\nAnd a famous measurement popularized by Warren Buffett — known as the Buffett Indicator — shows Orman might be onto something.\nHere’s an explanation of where the concern is coming from and some techniques you can use tokeep your investment portfolio growingeven if the market goes south.\nWhat does Suze Orman think?\nMediapunch/Shutterstock\nSuze Orman has avidly watched the market for decades. She knows ups and downs are to be expected, but what she’s seeing happen with investment fads like GameStop has her concerned.\n“I don’t like what I see happening in the market right now,” Orman said in a video for CNBC. “The economy has been horrible, but the stock market has been going.”\nWhile investing is as easy now asusing a smartphone app, Orman is concerned about where we can go from these record highs.\nAnd even with stimulus checks, which are still going out, and the real estate market breaking its own records last year, Orman worries about what will come with the coronavirus — especially as new variants continue to pop up.\nWhat's more, she feels it’s just been too long since the last crash to stay this high much longer.\n“This reminds me of 2000 all over again,” Orman says.\nThe Buffett Indicator\nLarry W Smith/EPA/Shutterstock\nOne metric Warren Buffett uses to assess the market so regularly that it’s been named after him has been flashing red for long enough that market watchers are starting to wonder if it’s an outdated tool.\nBut the Buffett Indicator, a measurement of the ratio of the stock market’s total value against U.S. economic output, continues to climb to previously unseen levels.\nAnd those in the know are wondering if it's a sign that we’re about to see a hard fall.\nHow to prepare for a crashFreedomz / Shutterstock\nOrman has three recommendations for setting up a simple investment strategy to help you successfully navigate any sharp turns in the market.\n1. Buy low\nPart of what upsets Orman so much about the furor over meme stocks like GameStop is it goes completely against the average investor’s interests.\n“All of you have your heads screwed on backwards,” she says. “All you want is for these markets to go up and up and up. What good is that going to do you?”\nShe points out the only extra money most people have goes towardinvesting for retirementin their 401(k) or IRA plans.\nBecause you probably don’t plan to touch that money for decades, the best long-term strategy is to buy low. That way, your dollar will go much further now, leaving plenty of room for growth over the next 20, 30 or 40 years.\n2. Invest on a schedule\nkatjen / Shutterstock\nWhile she prefers to buy low, Orman doesn’t recommend you stop investing completely when the market goes up.\nShe wants casual investors to not get caught up in the daily ups and downs of the market.\nIn fact, cheering for downturns now may be your best bet at getting a larger piece of very profitable investments — like some lucky investors were able to do back in 2007 and 2008.\n“When the market went down, down, down you could buy things at nothing,” says Orman. “And now look at them 15 years later.”\nShe suggests you set up a dollar-cost averaging strategy, which means you invest your money in equal portions at regular intervals, regardless of the market’s fluctuations.\nThis kind of approach is easy to implement with any of the many investing apps currently available to DIY investors.\nThere are even apps that willautomatically invest your spare changeby rounding up your debit and credit card purchases to the nearest dollar.\n3. Diversify with fractional shares\nTo help weather dips in specific corners of the market, Orman suggests you diversify your investments — balance your portfolio with investments in many different types of assets and sectors of the economy.\nOrman particularly recommends fractional-share investing. This approach allows you to buy a slice of a share for a big-name company that you otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford.\nWith the help of apopular stock-trading tool, anyone at any budget can afford the fractional share strategy.\n“The sooner you begin, the more money you will have,” says Orman. “Just don’t stop, and when these markets go down, you should be so happy because your dollars find more shares.”\n“And the more shares you have, the more money you’ll have 20, 40, 50 years from now.”\nWhat else you can do\ngoodluz / Shutterstock\nWhether or not a big crash is around the corner, investors who are still decades out from retirement can make that work for them, Orman said in theCNBC video.\nFirst, prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Since the onset of the pandemic, Orman now recommends everyone have an emergency fund that can cover their expenses for a full year.\nThen, to set yourself up fora comfortable retirement, she suggests you opt for a Roth account, whether that’s a 401(k) or IRA.\nThat will help you avoid paying tax when you take money out of your retirement account because your contributions to a Roth account are made after tax. Traditional IRAs, on the other hand, aren’t taxed when you make contributions, so you’ll end up paying later.\nIf you find you need a little more guidance, working with aprofessional financial adviser, can help point you in the right direction so you can confidently ride out any market volatility.\nWhile everyone else is veering off course or overcorrecting, you’ll be firmly in the driver’s seat with your sunset years planned for.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":169,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169280173,"gmtCreate":1623837730092,"gmtModify":1703820949627,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/169280173","repostId":"1122785578","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":162,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":124011091,"gmtCreate":1624705878813,"gmtModify":1703843928789,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/124011091","repostId":"1108941456","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108941456","pubTimestamp":1624664800,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108941456?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-26 07:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108941456","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.At 26-64x this year's expected net profi","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.</li>\n <li>Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.</li>\n <li>I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bb49d385ec6d3044db2f4474cbb2c57\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>MagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Article Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Going with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.</p>\n<p><b>Are FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?</b></p>\n<p>Looking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at least<i>were</i>a good investment in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae2b8e2b9caf99f74c28bafc10a0a872\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"484\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>With gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.</p>\n<p>These factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2ef865eea7af4369048432a9c85d1d83\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"540\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>At 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from&nbsp;Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.</p>\n<p><b>What Investors Can Expect From Apple</b></p>\n<p>Apple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate&nbsp;in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Facebook</b></p>\n<p>Both Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fd8043ca75dcb2c38f5ffa427c8c0b9\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Facebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3d49e0007aa77608b2992a9fef2142d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6b16c9b3e2eac182d42686bcd8a98fc5\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"515\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>While Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.</p>\n<p>To sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>When we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6360514d097081c546a0ccacfbdc7af6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhat<i>smaller</i>net cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.</p>\n<p>All in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Netflix And Amazon</b></p>\n<p>Looking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.</p>\n<p>This huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ccc2536fa3cadf06639a89e0b211b9a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>AMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.</p>\n<p>Netflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d84f013051fbb00b6b488f5cfed66d4\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Netflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&amp;T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.</p>\n<p>Amazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.</p>\n<p><b>Which Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?</b></p>\n<p>Not every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.</p>\n<p>Alphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.</p>\n<p>Depending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-26 07:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108941456","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.\nI believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.\n\nMagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nGoing with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.\nAre FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?\nLooking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at leastwerea good investment in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nWith gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.\nThese factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:\nData by YCharts\nAt 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.\nWhat Investors Can Expect From Apple\nApple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.\nApple Versus Facebook\nBoth Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nFacebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:\nData by YCharts\nThe fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:\nData by YCharts\nWhile Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.\nTo sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.\nApple Versus Alphabet\nWhen we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.\nData by YCharts\nAlphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.\nNevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhatsmallernet cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.\nAll in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.\nApple Versus Netflix And Amazon\nLooking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.\nThis huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:\nData by YCharts\nAMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.\nNetflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:\nData by YCharts\nNetflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.\nAmazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.\nWhich Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?\nNot every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.\nAlphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.\nDepending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":53,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169289174,"gmtCreate":1623837768798,"gmtModify":1703820952075,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/169289174","repostId":"1105866425","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105866425","pubTimestamp":1623837565,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105866425?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-16 17:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105866425","media":"bloomberg","summary":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually ","content":"<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.</p>\n<p>Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.</p>\n<p>At the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.</p>\n<p>But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.</p>\n<p>“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.</p>\n<p>Administration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.</p>\n<p>Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.</p>\n<p>The U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.</p>\n<p>Last month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.</p>\n<p>Days after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.</p>\n<p>Brainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.</p>\n<p>As cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.</p>\n<p>Early stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.</p>\n<p>“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/63a81696d4533f7e6c4d6bf3f651b8bc\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"604\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Breakdown of Tether’s Reserves</span></p>\n<p>Centre didn’t respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p>Other than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.</p>\n<p>For more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks</p>\n<p>One billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.</p>\n<p>The most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.</p>\n<p>“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger</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\">\nCrypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-16 17:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia><strong>bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105866425","content_text":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.\nAt the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.\nBut in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.\n“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.\nAdministration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.\nMassachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.\nThe U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.\nLast month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.\nDays after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.\nBrainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.\nAs cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.\nEarly stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.\n“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.\nBreakdown of Tether’s Reserves\nCentre didn’t respond to a request for comment.\nOther than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.\nFor more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks\nOne billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.\nThe most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.\n“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":18,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":169217469,"gmtCreate":1623837713751,"gmtModify":1703820948978,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/169217469","repostId":"1105866425","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105866425","pubTimestamp":1623837565,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105866425?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-16 17:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105866425","media":"bloomberg","summary":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually ","content":"<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.</p>\n<p>Their focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.</p>\n<p>At the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.</p>\n<p>But in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.</p>\n<p>“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.</p>\n<p>Administration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.</p>\n<p>Massachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.</p>\n<p>The U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.</p>\n<p>Last month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.</p>\n<p>Days after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.</p>\n<p>Brainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.</p>\n<p>As cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.</p>\n<p>Early stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.</p>\n<p>“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/63a81696d4533f7e6c4d6bf3f651b8bc\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"604\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Breakdown of Tether’s Reserves</span></p>\n<p>Centre didn’t respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p>Other than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.</p>\n<p>For more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks</p>\n<p>One billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.</p>\n<p>The most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.</p>\n<p>“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Crypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger</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\">\nCrypto Lode of $100 Billion Stirs U.S. Worry Over Hidden Danger\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-16 17:59 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia><strong>bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-16/crypto-lode-of-100-billion-stirs-u-s-worry-over-hidden-danger?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105866425","content_text":"Regulators are worried about hidden risks to investors and even the financial system stemming from a fast-growing corner of the crypto market meant to be immune from volatility.\nTheir focus is on so-called stablecoins, a form of cryptocurrency that has a fixed price, typically one dollar, and is backed by real-money reserves.\nAt the end of May, the total marketcapitalizationof stablecoins, which include ones offered by crypto firms Tether and Centre, broke $100 billion.\nBut in recent weeks, lawmakers and officials from theFederal Reserveand the administration have expressed alarm both in public and private that some consumers won’t actually be protected should one of the firms not have the backing they purport to have. They also say the growing size of stablecoins has created a situation where huge amounts of U.S. dollar-equivalent coins are being exchanged without touching the U.S. banking system, potentially blinding regulators to illicit finance.\n“They’re dangerous to both their users and, as they grow, to the broader financial system,” said Lev Menand, an academic fellow at Columbia Law School, in testimony to a Senate Banking subcommittee last week.\nAdministration officials have expressed concern to representatives of stablecoin issuers in recent weeks that consumers don’t understand that money held in a stablecoin isn’t protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and that, in some cases, they could potentially lose money on a stablecoin, according to a person familiar with the matter who requested anonymity to describe confidential discussions. The person said officials are also worried that criminals could use stablecoins to transfer money without having to touch a bank, meaning that they could avoid protections meant to catch money laundering and other illicit activity.\nMassachusetts Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren compared stablecoins to “wildcat notes” issued by poorly capitalized banks in the 19th century that later stuck many of their holders with large losses, speaking at a Senate Banking subcommitteehearinglast week. Warren said that if the Federal Reserve were to issue its own digital currency, consumers could get the benefits of a stablecoin without that kind of risk.\nThe U.S. and other nations are already considering launching their own digital currencies. Those coins, known as central bank digital currencies, would be direct competitors to stablecoins. Later this year, theFederal Reserve Bank of Bostonplans to publish research and open-source code showing technology that could underpin a digital dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said lawmakers will likely need to weigh in for the project to advance and that the process could take years.\nLast month, in astatementon the Fed’s progress in researching a CBDC, Powell said that stablecoins could pose risks to the financial system. “As stablecoins’ use increases, so must our attention to the appropriate regulatory and oversight framework,” Powell said.\nDays after Powell’s statement, Fed Governor Lael Brainard in aspeechgave her own warning, saying that widening use of stablecoins could fragment the financial system, potentially raising costs for U.S. households and businesses.\nBrainard and other Fed officials have warned that if privately-issued stablecoins become widely used, but consumers then lose confidence in them, it could result in the kind of “run on the bank” panic that threatens financial stability.\nAs cryptocurrency trading has exploded, so has the use of stablecoins. Right now, investors primarily use stablecoins as a place to park money on cryptocurrency exchanges without having to transfer cash back to their bank accounts. The largest by far, with a market capitalization of $62.6 billion, is Tether, which is incorporated in Hong Kong. U.S. Dollar Coin, or USDC, has a market value of $23.8 billion and was created by theCentre Consortium, a partnership between crypto payments firmCircle Internet Financial Inc.and U.S. crypto exchangeCoinbase Global Inc.\nEarly stablecoin controversies circled aroundTether International Ltd., which originally said its coins were completely backed by cash. In February, New York’s attorney generalsaidthe company for years didn’t actually have the cash it said it did and banned Tether from trading with New York residents. Now the company says Tether’s coin is backed not just by cash, but by assets including commercial paper, corporate bonds and precious metals. The Centre Consortium says each U.S. Dollar Coin is backed by a dollar held in a bank account.\n“Tether embraces transparency and regulation,” said Tether General Counsel Stuart Hoegner, in a statement, noting that the company is registered as a money-services business with the Treasury Department. Hoegner said Tether doesn’t currently accept U.S. customers and is pursuing audits for past years of Tether’s reserves. “We continue to look for avenues of regulation globally and are pursuing regimes in several countries,” he said.\nBreakdown of Tether’s Reserves\nCentre didn’t respond to a request for comment.\nOther than continuing work on a potential central bank digital currency and increasing what stablecoin firms have to disclose to consumers, it’s unclear what regulators can do to slow stablecoins’ rapid growth. Timothy Massad, former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, in a Mayop-edsaid theSecurities and Exchange Commissioncould regulate stablecoins in a similar way to money-market funds, which aren’t FDIC-insured and faced stress during the 2008 financial crisis.\nFor more:Crypto’sShadow Currency Surges Past Deposits of Most U.S. Banks\nOne billintroducedin Congress last year would require stablecoin issuers to have a banking charter and get approval from the Fed, among other agencies, though the bill is unlikely to become law.\nThe most immediate way that some stablecoins might come under attack is from enforcers, such as what happened with the New York attorney general, who could pursue issuers for lying to consumers, saidJosh Lipsky, director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. Lipsky said stablecoin issuers could eventually work in tandem with international governments’ projects to issue their own digital currencies but that the U.S. and others will have to develop regulations to ensure consumers aren’t hurt.\n“The way it’s marketed is that you’re getting a dollar, but stablecoins are not always that stable,” Lipsky said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":118,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":153755240,"gmtCreate":1625053459780,"gmtModify":1703734915719,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/153755240","repostId":"1150186389","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":26,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":124011962,"gmtCreate":1624705899256,"gmtModify":1703843928953,"author":{"id":"3586930975858321","authorId":"3586930975858321","name":"Ainazhang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Reply","listText":"Reply","text":"Reply","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/124011962","repostId":"1108941456","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108941456","pubTimestamp":1624664800,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108941456?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-26 07:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108941456","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.At 26-64x this year's expected net profi","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Apple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.</li>\n <li>Being a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.</li>\n <li>I believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8bb49d385ec6d3044db2f4474cbb2c57\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>MagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>Article Thesis</b></p>\n<p>Going with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.</p>\n<p><b>Are FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?</b></p>\n<p>Looking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at least<i>were</i>a good investment in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae2b8e2b9caf99f74c28bafc10a0a872\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"484\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>With gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.</p>\n<p>These factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2ef865eea7af4369048432a9c85d1d83\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"540\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>At 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from&nbsp;Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.</p>\n<p><b>What Investors Can Expect From Apple</b></p>\n<p>Apple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate&nbsp;in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Facebook</b></p>\n<p>Both Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fd8043ca75dcb2c38f5ffa427c8c0b9\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"433\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Facebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d3d49e0007aa77608b2992a9fef2142d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>The fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6b16c9b3e2eac182d42686bcd8a98fc5\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"515\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>While Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.</p>\n<p>To sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>When we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6360514d097081c546a0ccacfbdc7af6\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.</p>\n<p>Nevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhat<i>smaller</i>net cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.</p>\n<p>All in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.</p>\n<p><b>Apple Versus Netflix And Amazon</b></p>\n<p>Looking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.</p>\n<p>This huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6ccc2536fa3cadf06639a89e0b211b9a\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"481\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>AMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.</p>\n<p>Netflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d84f013051fbb00b6b488f5cfed66d4\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"450\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Netflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&amp;T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.</p>\n<p>Amazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.</p>\n<p><b>Which Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?</b></p>\n<p>Not every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.</p>\n<p>Alphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.</p>\n<p>Depending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Is Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIs Apple A Better Buy Than Other FAANG Stocks?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-26 07:46 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4436558-apple-better-buy-faang-stocks","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108941456","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple undoubtedly is a great company, with a strong brand, excellent margins, and fundamentals, a fortress balance sheet, and massive shareholder returns.\nBeing a great company does not mean that the stock must be a great buy. However, valuations are significantly higher than they were historically.\nI believe that some of the other FAANG stocks are better, while others are worse. AAPL seems like a solid, but not a spectacular investment at today's valuation.\n\nMagioreStock/iStock Editorial via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nGoing with FAANG stocks, i.e. Facebook (FB), Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), has been a winning trade in recent years, as those companies delivered strong gains for their owners. These companies do, however, differ quite a lot from each other in a range of metrics, including growth, valuation, and there are also differences when it comes to each company's specific risks and moat. Apple is the largest company of these in terms of profits and market capitalization, but that does not necessarily make it the best investment. In this report, we will take a look at how Apple compares versus the other FAANG members.\nAre FAANG Stocks A Good Investment?\nLooking back a couple of years, the answer is pretty clear that FAANG stocks at leastwerea good investment in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nWith gains of 200% to 460%, these five companies easily trounced the broad market's returns over the same time, and all led to hefty gains, at least tripling an investor's money in just five years. The factors that led to these strong gains do, at least partially, still exist today. Notably, these five companies are generating compelling earnings growth, have leadership positions in the markets they address, possess strong brands that are well-received by consumers, and seem to have strong, long-term-oriented leadership teams.\nThese factors are still in place today, which indicates that FAANG stocks could also be good investments in coming years, although investors should, even with high-quality companies, also consider a stock's valuation. Today, these companies do not look extremely cheap in most cases:\nData by YCharts\nAt 26-64x this year's expected net profits, FAANG stocks can't really be called bargains, although the above-average valuations are, at least to some degree, justified due to the above-average earnings growth that these companies do generate. In any case, I doubt that investors owning FAANG stocks today will see 200%-400%+ returns over the next five years, as this seems unlikely for each of these five stocks due to the combination of current valuations and expected earnings growth. This does, however, not mean that FAANG stocks must be bad investments or underperform the market. In fact, in recent articles, I showcased that solid or even quite attractive returns can be expected from Facebook,Amazon, and Apple, even though the 30%-50% annual returns are likely a thing of the past - that's just mathematics, as no stock can grow at that rate forever.\nWhat Investors Can Expect From Apple\nApple Inc. is not the highest-growth FAANG stock at all. Its growth has been solid but not spectacular in the recent past. This isn't a large surprise, as there is only a certain number of consumers that want to buy an iPhone or an iPad, and that amount can't grow by 50% a year for a very long time. Nevertheless, due to some market growth, some price increases, and growth from its services business, Apple should still be able to deliver sizeable revenue growth in the long run. New products such as the car project are a potential wildcard, but at least for the foreseeable future, this will not be a major profit center for the company. Apple also has a very ambitious shareholder return program, and its buybacks are an important factor for its future earnings per share growth. I believe that, overall, a high-single-digit earnings per share growth rate will be very much achievable for Apple in the long run. Combined with some multiple depression that I expect in coming years, as Apple will likely not trade at a high-20s earnings multiple forever, this gets me to a total return estimate in the 7% range. This is significantly less compared to what investors saw over the last couple of years, but on the other hand, 7% annual returns stemming from a strong, stable blue-chip stock such as Apple are not unattractive. I believe that some of the FAANG stocks could deliver stronger returns, primarily Alphabet and Facebook.\nApple Versus Facebook\nBoth Apple Inc. and Facebook have a great market position, but Facebook is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple. Apple has, in the smartphone industry, a market share of around 20%, although more in the higher-end segments. Facebook, for comparison, owns four out of the top five social media networks, with Facebook, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, and WhatsApp. Clearly, FB absolutely dominates its industry. Facebook's industry is also growing quicker than the hardware IT markets that Apple serves, which is why Facebook's growth was significantly higher than Apple's growth in the recent past:\nData by YCharts\nFacebook grew its revenue by well above 300% over the last five years, while Apple's revenue grew by a little less than 50%. When we look back at the total return chart at the beginning of this article and compare it to this revenue chart, we see that Apple's returns stemmed from multiple expansion to a large degree, whereas Facebook's stock actually got less expensive over the last five years. Facebook's business growth clearly outpaced its share price gains, which has made its shares less expensive. This also explains why Facebook, today, trades below the long-term median earnings multiple, whereas Apple's valuation is at the higher end of the historic range:\nData by YCharts\nThe fact that Facebook trades at a historic discount points to a solid entry price, whereas the same can't be said about Apple. On top of that, Facebook will also grow much faster in the future - at least if the analyst community is correct:\nData by YCharts\nWhile Apple is expected to see revenue growth of around 10% over the next two years, Facebook is expected to grow by 40% over the same time. Facebook's earnings per share growth estimate is also materially higher than that of Apple.\nTo sum things up, we can say that Facebook is growing much faster, is even more dominant in its industry compared to Apple, and its shares are trading at a discount compared to the historic average, whereas Apple's shares are historically expensive. This combination makes me believe that the total return outlook for Facebook is better compared to that of Apple.\nApple Versus Alphabet\nWhen we compare Apple to Alphabet, the comparison is relatively similar to what we just saw when comparing Applet to Facebook. Alphabet is a company that is growing quicker than Apple, and that can, to a large degree, be explained by its great market position and the higher market growth rate. Online advertising is a market that has been growing quicker than the tablet or smartphone market in recent years, and the same will, I believe, be true in the foreseeable future as well.\nData by YCharts\nAlphabet is forecasted to grow its revenue by more than 30% over the next two years, versus Apple's 10% growth. On top of that, at close to 20%, Alphabet is also expected to grow its earnings per share at a higher rate.\nNevertheless, despite its significantly better growth forecast, Alphabet isn't a lot more expensive compared to Apple. GOOG trades at 29x forward earnings, versus AAPL's 26x forward earnings multiple. Does it make sense for GOOG to trade at a premium of just 10%, while its expected growth is one and a half times as high as that of AAPL? You be the judge, but to me, it seems like the valuation looks better at Alphabet as long as we account for the stronger growth expectations. On top of that, with a net cash position of around $120 billion, Alphabet also has one of the best balance sheets in the world. Apple, for comparison, has a somewhatsmallernet cash position of $80 billion, although that still makes for a very strong balance sheet, of course.\nAll in all, we can summarize that Alphabet is growing faster today, is expected to grow significantly faster in the next two years and in the long run, has an even better balance sheet and a more dominant market position, and yet it trades at an earnings multiple that is only 10% higher than that of Apple. To me, Alphabet thus looks like the more attractive pick among these two at current prices.\nApple Versus Netflix And Amazon\nLooking at the last two remaining companies in the FAANG group, we see that, once again, AAPL is growing at a slower pace. Unless Facebook and Alphabet, however, both Netflix and Amazon are way more expensive than Apple.\nThis huge valuation premium offsets, at least to some degree, the higher expected growth, which is why I believe that Netflix and Amazon do not really seem like much better picks compared to Apple:\nData by YCharts\nAMZN and NFLX trade at PEG ratios of 1.8 and 1.9, which does not represent a clear discount compared to AAPL's valuation. On top of that, these two companies do not possess balance sheets that are as strong as that of Apple.\nNetflix, especially, looks significantly worse compared to the other FAANG members in terms of balance sheet strength and cash generation:\nData by YCharts\nNetflix is the only FAANG member with a meaningful net debt position, and its free cash flows are equal to just 1% of its market capitalization. Netflix grows fast, but to me, it seems doubtful whether the current valuation is justified. Considering that more and more companies are pushing into the streaming market, including Disney (DIS), Amazon, and AT&T(NYSE:T), more competition might hurt Netflix's margins in the future. NFLX thus seems like the worst pick among the five FAANG stocks to me, as it combines a high valuation, weak cash flows, and a somewhat uncertain competitive picture, and I think that is not fully negated by its strong growth alone.\nAmazon has a better market position than Netflix, a better balance sheet, and its valuation, relative to its growth, is a little lower than that of Netflix. I would rate Amazon as more or less equally attractive to Apple, although the two companies are quite different from each other in terms of growth, valuation, and shareholder returns.\nWhich Is The Best FAANG Stock To Buy?\nNot every investor has the same goals, thus the answer may be different depending on what you are looking for in a stock. To me, Apple seems like a solid, but outstanding pick at current prices - the business undoubtedly is strong, the balance sheet is great, shareholder returns are hefty, but the valuation seems stretched, especially when we consider how cheap shares were in the past.\nAlphabet and Facebook do seem like the best FAANG picks to me today, as they combine strong growth with valuations that are only marginally higher than that of Apple. On top of that, both Alphabet and Facebook dominate their markets. Amazon is a stock that I would rate as a solid investment at today's price, so more or less in line with AAPL, whereas Netflix seems like the weakest pick among these five to me.\nDepending on your time horizon, appetite for risk, etc. you may disagree, however - and that's perfectly fine. I'd be glad to hear your top picks and reasoning in the comment section!","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":70,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}