Profile - To The Moon

Novellim

Posts · 0Posts · 0
Following · 0Following · 0
Followers · 0Followers · 0

- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-03-18
  Wow
  Sorry, this post has been deleted
  1.45K Comment
  2
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-03-09
  Wao
  Dow 32,000? Why the index should be more than 1 million points higher
  Benchmark index has inherent quirks, such as not counting dividends, that have kept it from reaching
  Dow 32,000? Why the index should be more than 1 million points higher
  2.29K 1
  Like
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-03-09
  Wow
  Sorry, this post has been deleted
  1.54K Comment
  Like
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-03-09
  $GameStop(GME)$Wow
  2.22K 1
  5
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-02-24
  Wow
  Sorry, this post has been deleted
  2.11K 2
  2
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-02-12
  Wao
  Sorry, this post has been deleted
  2.23K 2
  1
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-02-09
  Wow
  Robinhood-GameStop saga could put spotlight on DC, Wall Street revolving door
  Robinhood has hired several former regulators in recent months As the financial services industry pr
  Robinhood-GameStop saga could put spotlight on DC, Wall Street revolving door
  1.83K 1
  1
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-02-09
  Great post
  These 12 lessons from the GameStop and AMC frenzy can help you make money trading stocks (or at least lose less)
  I can hear the cries from investors who racked up huge profits in GameStop or AMC Entertainment Hold
  These 12 lessons from the GameStop and AMC frenzy can help you make money trading stocks (or at least lose less)
  1.67K Comment
  2
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-02-08
  Wow
  Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us
  This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers
  Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us
  1.55K Comment
  Like
  Share
  Report
- NovellimNovellim
  ·2021-02-02
  Wow
  Ford to invest $1 billion to upgrade South Africa operations
  JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co will invest $1.05 billion in its South African manufacturing
  Ford to invest $1 billion to upgrade South Africa operations
  1.81K 1
  2
  Share
  Report

Most Discussed

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"3570489658408021","uuid":"3570489658408021","gmtCreate":1607395635205,"gmtModify":1612234446360,"name":"Novellim","pinyin":"novellim","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":3,"headSize":61,"tweetSize":0,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":2,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.03.08","exceedPercentage":"93.12%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.01.17","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-1","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Boss Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $100,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8dfc27c1ee0e25db1c93e9d0b641101","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f43908c142f8a33c78f5bdf0e2897488","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82165ff19cb8a786e8919f92acee5213","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"60.78%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-1","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Boss Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $100,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8dfc27c1ee0e25db1c93e9d0b641101","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f43908c142f8a33c78f5bdf0e2897488","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82165ff19cb8a786e8919f92acee5213","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"60.52%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":327185941,"gmtCreate":1616070307383,"gmtModify":1704790489558,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/327185941","repostId":"1134881378","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1449,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323984293,"gmtCreate":1615299302012,"gmtModify":1704780786957,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wao","listText":"Wao","text":"Wao","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323984293","repostId":"1158287133","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1158287133","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615298882,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1158287133?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-09 22:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Dow 32,000? Why the index should be more than 1 million points higher","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1158287133","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"Benchmark index has inherent quirks, such as not counting dividends, that have kept it from reaching","content":"<p>Benchmark index has inherent quirks, such as not counting dividends, that have kept it from reaching stratospheric levels</p>\n<p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average should be trading not near 32,000 but actually above 1.2 million.</p>\n<p>I am not making some wildly bullish prediction about the stock market in coming years. I am instead reporting where the Dow&nbsp;would be trading now if it had incorporated dividends that component companies have paid over the years, as well as other corporate actions that affect stock prices, such as stock dividends and rights issues.</p>\n<p>New&nbsp;research from the National Bureau of Economic Research&nbsp;calculates that had all such events been taken into account since Oct. 31, 1928, the Dow would have closed at 1,113,047 on Dec, 31, 2019. The Dow’s gain over the subsequent 15 months would propel its “true” value currently to more than 1.2 million.</p>\n<p>The study’s authors are John Shoven and Clemens Sialm, finance professors at Stanford University and the University of Texas at Austin, respectively, along with Jacky Lin and Genevieve Selden. The researchers tell a sordid tale of the Dow’s construction over the decades — a story that should be filed, along with sausage and legislation, in the category of “if you like it, don’t look too closely to how it is made.”</p>\n<p><b>Price-weighted</b></p>\n<p>One of the DJIA’s peculiarities is that it is a price-weighted index, which means that the contribution a stock makes to its performance is a function of how high- or low-priced it is. That makes no theoretical sense.</p>\n<p>Consider the highest-priced stock currently in the DJIA, which is UnitedHealth Group&nbsp;with a recent price of about $350 per share. It has a 7.3% weighting in the index, compared to just a 1.0% weighting for Cisco Systems,the lowest-priced stock in the Dow at close to $48 per share. As a result, Cisco would need to perform more than seven times better than United Health in order to have the same impact on the Dow’s overall return.</p>\n<p><b>Split adjustments</b></p>\n<p>One consequence of this price-weighting is that a stock split will have a big impact on a stock’s weight in the Dow, even though the split is an accounting entry with no real-world significance. Consider Apple,which last summer split its shares four-for-one. As a result of that split, the stock’s weight in the Dow instantly fell by three-quarters. This in fact ended up helping the Dow, since Apple stock has struggled since that split and is&nbsp;now in danger of entering into a bear market.</p>\n<p>Another of the Dow’s head-scratching idiosyncrasies is that in some early years it failed to adjust for stock splits for up to several months at a time. Yet another is that, in a number of those early years, split-adjustment factors were rounded to just one decimal point. According to the authors of this new study, this rounding led to discrepancies of as much as 0.4% on the occasion of each split — equivalent to more than 125 Dow points at today’s index level.</p>\n<p>Another peculiarity: The Dow treated stock dividends differently than stock splits, even though the two are functionally equivalent. According to the research’s authors, the Dow’s component stocks declared 105 stock dividends between them from 1928 through 2019, only 24 of which were reflected in the calculation of the Dow’s value.</p>\n<p><b>Dividends</b></p>\n<p>By the far the most consequential methodological decision that the Dow made over the years has been to omit dividends, Professor Sialm told me in an interview. Nearly half of the Dow’s long-term total return since 1928 has come from dividends.</p>\n<p>You might think that this heavy reliance on dividends is unique to the Dow, which is constructed from the bluest of blue-chip stocks that typically offer higher dividend yields. But what the researchers found for the Dow is also true for the U.S. stock market as a whole. Since 1871, according to data from Yale University’s Robert Shiller, the U.S. stock market’s price-only annualized return has been 4.6%, almost precisely half of the market’s 9.3% annualized return on a total-return basis. (See the chart below.)</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e99e55881bbacc9fb4c6753120044e2\" tg-width=\"1260\" tg-height=\"849\"></p>\n<p>Notice what this means for the near-term, given that the S&amp;P 500’sSPX,-0.54%current yield is just 1.5%. Assuming the future is like the past, and depending on the growth rate of dividends, this low yield points to an expected total return for the stock market from current levels of not much more than 3% annualized. That’s less than a percentage point greater than the&nbsp;10-year breakeven inflation rate.</p>\n<p><b>Could the future be different than the past?</b></p>\n<p>The bulls have a solid theoretical response to this otherwise dismal projection. According to a longstanding theory in finance, tracing to work in the 1960s by Franco Modigliani, who in 1985 would win the Nobel Prize in Economics, companies that pay out less in dividends should grow faster. That’s because they can reinvest in their own growth what they otherwise would have paid out to shareholders. A lower dividend yield therefore should translate into an accelerated earnings growth rate and a higher stock price.</p>\n<p>If so, stocks’ total return should not be affected by a lower dividend yield, since price appreciation would compensate by making a correspondingly greater contribution.</p>\n<p>Crucially, Modigliani advanced his theory when share repurchases did not play a big role in the stock market, and his theory may need to be modified to account for them. If companies take the money they save from paying out fewer dividends and spend it on repurchases instead of investing it in their future growth, then a lower dividend yield may not translate into accelerated subsequent earnings growth.</p>\n<p>Whether or not it does depends crucially on whether companies repurchase shares when they are undervalued. Their track record here over the past two decades is not encouraging.</p>\n<p>This means we can’t automatically assume that today’s low dividend yield will mean that, in coming years, price appreciation will constitute a greater proportion of stocks’ total return. In an email, Robert Arnott, founder of Research Affiliates, pointed out that dividends over the past two decades have represented just as big a proportion of stocks’ total return as in prior decades when dividend yields were much higher. For the 20 years through 2020, Arnott wrote, “the real return on stocks (S&amp;P 500) was 3.8%, of which dividend yield contributed exactly half.”</p>\n<p>To be sure, Sialm added, theory quickly gets complicated when trying to assess the interactions between dividends, price appreciation, and buybacks. There is no guarantee that price appreciation won’t make up for the market’s low current dividend yield. Nevertheless, he continued, it is likely that stock investors face an extended low-growth era.</p>","source":"market_watch","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>Dow 32,000? Why the index should be more than 1 million points higher</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\">\nDow 32,000? Why the index should be more than 1 million points higher\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-09 22:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dow-32-000-why-the-index-should-be-more-than-1-million-points-higher-11615248554?mod=home-page><strong>MarketWatch</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Benchmark index has inherent quirks, such as not counting dividends, that have kept it from reaching stratospheric levels\nThe Dow Jones Industrial Average should be trading not near 32,000 but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dow-32-000-why-the-index-should-be-more-than-1-million-points-higher-11615248554?mod=home-page\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/dow-32-000-why-the-index-should-be-more-than-1-million-points-higher-11615248554?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/599a65733b8245fcf7868668ef9ad712","article_id":"1158287133","content_text":"Benchmark index has inherent quirks, such as not counting dividends, that have kept it from reaching stratospheric levels\nThe Dow Jones Industrial Average should be trading not near 32,000 but actually above 1.2 million.\nI am not making some wildly bullish prediction about the stock market in coming years. I am instead reporting where the Dow would be trading now if it had incorporated dividends that component companies have paid over the years, as well as other corporate actions that affect stock prices, such as stock dividends and rights issues.\nNew research from the National Bureau of Economic Research calculates that had all such events been taken into account since Oct. 31, 1928, the Dow would have closed at 1,113,047 on Dec, 31, 2019. The Dow’s gain over the subsequent 15 months would propel its “true” value currently to more than 1.2 million.\nThe study’s authors are John Shoven and Clemens Sialm, finance professors at Stanford University and the University of Texas at Austin, respectively, along with Jacky Lin and Genevieve Selden. The researchers tell a sordid tale of the Dow’s construction over the decades — a story that should be filed, along with sausage and legislation, in the category of “if you like it, don’t look too closely to how it is made.”\nPrice-weighted\nOne of the DJIA’s peculiarities is that it is a price-weighted index, which means that the contribution a stock makes to its performance is a function of how high- or low-priced it is. That makes no theoretical sense.\nConsider the highest-priced stock currently in the DJIA, which is UnitedHealth Group with a recent price of about $350 per share. It has a 7.3% weighting in the index, compared to just a 1.0% weighting for Cisco Systems,the lowest-priced stock in the Dow at close to $48 per share. As a result, Cisco would need to perform more than seven times better than United Health in order to have the same impact on the Dow’s overall return.\nSplit adjustments\nOne consequence of this price-weighting is that a stock split will have a big impact on a stock’s weight in the Dow, even though the split is an accounting entry with no real-world significance. Consider Apple,which last summer split its shares four-for-one. As a result of that split, the stock’s weight in the Dow instantly fell by three-quarters. This in fact ended up helping the Dow, since Apple stock has struggled since that split and is now in danger of entering into a bear market.\nAnother of the Dow’s head-scratching idiosyncrasies is that in some early years it failed to adjust for stock splits for up to several months at a time. Yet another is that, in a number of those early years, split-adjustment factors were rounded to just one decimal point. According to the authors of this new study, this rounding led to discrepancies of as much as 0.4% on the occasion of each split — equivalent to more than 125 Dow points at today’s index level.\nAnother peculiarity: The Dow treated stock dividends differently than stock splits, even though the two are functionally equivalent. According to the research’s authors, the Dow’s component stocks declared 105 stock dividends between them from 1928 through 2019, only 24 of which were reflected in the calculation of the Dow’s value.\nDividends\nBy the far the most consequential methodological decision that the Dow made over the years has been to omit dividends, Professor Sialm told me in an interview. Nearly half of the Dow’s long-term total return since 1928 has come from dividends.\nYou might think that this heavy reliance on dividends is unique to the Dow, which is constructed from the bluest of blue-chip stocks that typically offer higher dividend yields. But what the researchers found for the Dow is also true for the U.S. stock market as a whole. Since 1871, according to data from Yale University’s Robert Shiller, the U.S. stock market’s price-only annualized return has been 4.6%, almost precisely half of the market’s 9.3% annualized return on a total-return basis. (See the chart below.)\n\nNotice what this means for the near-term, given that the S&P 500’sSPX,-0.54%current yield is just 1.5%. Assuming the future is like the past, and depending on the growth rate of dividends, this low yield points to an expected total return for the stock market from current levels of not much more than 3% annualized. That’s less than a percentage point greater than the 10-year breakeven inflation rate.\nCould the future be different than the past?\nThe bulls have a solid theoretical response to this otherwise dismal projection. According to a longstanding theory in finance, tracing to work in the 1960s by Franco Modigliani, who in 1985 would win the Nobel Prize in Economics, companies that pay out less in dividends should grow faster. That’s because they can reinvest in their own growth what they otherwise would have paid out to shareholders. A lower dividend yield therefore should translate into an accelerated earnings growth rate and a higher stock price.\nIf so, stocks’ total return should not be affected by a lower dividend yield, since price appreciation would compensate by making a correspondingly greater contribution.\nCrucially, Modigliani advanced his theory when share repurchases did not play a big role in the stock market, and his theory may need to be modified to account for them. If companies take the money they save from paying out fewer dividends and spend it on repurchases instead of investing it in their future growth, then a lower dividend yield may not translate into accelerated subsequent earnings growth.\nWhether or not it does depends crucially on whether companies repurchase shares when they are undervalued. Their track record here over the past two decades is not encouraging.\nThis means we can’t automatically assume that today’s low dividend yield will mean that, in coming years, price appreciation will constitute a greater proportion of stocks’ total return. In an email, Robert Arnott, founder of Research Affiliates, pointed out that dividends over the past two decades have represented just as big a proportion of stocks’ total return as in prior decades when dividend yields were much higher. For the 20 years through 2020, Arnott wrote, “the real return on stocks (S&P 500) was 3.8%, of which dividend yield contributed exactly half.”\nTo be sure, Sialm added, theory quickly gets complicated when trying to assess the interactions between dividends, price appreciation, and buybacks. There is no guarantee that price appreciation won’t make up for the market’s low current dividend yield. Nevertheless, he continued, it is likely that stock investors face an extended low-growth era.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2293,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323984971,"gmtCreate":1615299275993,"gmtModify":1704780785987,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323984971","repostId":"2118648142","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1536,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323985518,"gmtCreate":1615299256034,"gmtModify":1704780785178,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GME\">$GameStop(GME)$</a>Wow","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GME\">$GameStop(GME)$</a>Wow","text":"$GameStop(GME)$Wow","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5ecb0cffbc544720c05b4ee215507086","width":"1284","height":"2223"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323985518","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2219,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":363443373,"gmtCreate":1614167491492,"gmtModify":1704888987773,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/363443373","repostId":"1109259264","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2113,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386934711,"gmtCreate":1613125250033,"gmtModify":1704878621511,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wao","listText":"Wao","text":"Wao","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/386934711","repostId":"2110904027","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":383873592,"gmtCreate":1612868608216,"gmtModify":1704875160046,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/383873592","repostId":"1186040929","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1186040929","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612861976,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1186040929?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-09 17:12","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Robinhood-GameStop saga could put spotlight on DC, Wall Street revolving door","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1186040929","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"Robinhood has hired several former regulators in recent months\nAs the financial services industry pr","content":"<p>Robinhood has hired several former regulators in recent months</p>\n<p>As the financial services industry prepares for congressional scrutiny in the coming weeks following the public outcry related to online broker Robinhood’s decision to restrict trading of GameStop Inc.&nbsp;and other stocks, the perception of a cozy relationship between financial regulators and the industry could once again come to the fore.</p>\n<p>Of particular interest will be regulators’ lack of action in recent years in reforming market structure issues — including payment for order flow, or the practice of market makers paying stockbrokers to route customer orders to them — as many of the former regulators responsible for such reforms are now working for firms in the industry that engage in and profit from the practice.</p>\n<p>“We’ve had festering problems for 12 years now of not addressing, acute, pressing market structure issues,” said James Cox, law professor at Duke University, who specializes in corporate and securities law.</p>\n<p>Cox said the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority should have done more in recent years to significantly&nbsp;rein in the practice of payment for order flow&nbsp;and to set new rules about the types of orders market makers and stock exchanges can accept from traders that can give them informational advantages over individual investors.</p>\n<p>Robinhood earned more than $190 million in revenue from payment for order flow in the fourth quarter of 2020,according to regulatory filings&nbsp;and made more such revenue per trade than competitors like E-Trade and Charles Schwab. Robinhood did not respond to requests for comment.</p>\n<p>Government watchdogs have long decried the practice of regulators leaving government to work for companies they once regulated, and Robinhood has been one of the most aggressive deployers of this tactic in recent months,hiring&nbsp;former SEC Commissioner Dan Gallagher to be its chief legal officer last May.</p>\n<p>In addition to Gallagher, the broker has recently brought on other SEC alums&nbsp;Lucas Moskowitz&nbsp;and Janet Broeckel, according to LinkedIn. It also brought in Andrew Ceresney, who served as the SEC’s director of the division of enforcement from 2013 to 2017, as outside counsel to help its&nbsp;ettle charges&nbsp;that it misled investors about the practice of payment for order flow and that it cost investors $34.1 million by failing to execute trades at the best price.</p>\n<p>Robinhood settled the matter after paying a $65 million fine, without admitting nor denying fault. The company said in December that “the settlement relates to historical practices that do not reflect Robinhood today” and that it is now fully transparent with customers about its revenue streams and vigilant about getting them the best prices on securities.</p>\n<p>“Firms understand that their business model requires a soft touch from regulators, and the best way to ensure that is to have financial connections with regulators associated with both political parties,” said Jeff Hauser, executive director of The Revolving Door Project, which aims to track corporate political influence.</p>\n<p>Citadel Securities, which paid more to Robinhood for order flow than any other firm in the fourth quarter of last year, has also been a landing place for former regulators. Stephan Luparello, former director of the trading and markets division, which oversees market structure issues, served as its general counsel since 2017. Citadel declined to comment for this article.</p>\n<p>Market structure issues, including payment for order flow, were last in the public spotlight in 2014, when former Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan held hearings on it and recommended regulators ban it.</p>\n<p>Regulators have made some reforms since then, with the SEC requiring brokers to provide greater disclosure of payment to order flow revenues, while Finra has stepped up enforcement against brokers who do not regularly analyze their orders to make sure customers, on average, get the best price and execution of their orders.</p>\n<p>But critics say they have not gone far enough, and that payment for order flow is a byproduct of a system of wasteful competition between market makers for information and faster access to the major stock exchanges.</p>\n<p>Peter Van Doren, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and editor of the journal Regulation, told MarketWatch that “the payments for order flow is part of this high-frequency trading system where there’s an arms race” to build faster trading systems ever closer to the major exchanges, in order to arbitrage slight differences in market prices and those listed on exchanges.</p>\n<p>He pointed to a study of activity on the London Stock Exchange, which showed that if market makers didn’t have to engage in this competition, they’d be able to provide prices that save investors $5 billion globally every year.</p>\n<p>Other experts, however, say that the lack of action on payment for order flow was simply because it’s not clear the practice harms individual investors. Indeed, the cost of individual trades and bid-ask spreads have come down dramatically in the thirty years that this practice has been around, Gabriel Rauterberg, an expert on capital markets at Michigan Law told MarketWatch.</p>\n<p>“It’s seems deeply weird that if you’re a retail trader, your order doesn’t go to a stock exchange, but that your broker gets paid to send it to a market maker,” he said, but added that this appearance of corruption is not backed up by evidence of retail traders being cheated on a large scale.</p>\n<p>Instead of regulators moving to ban the practice, which would cause widespread, costly disruption to the entire industry, regulators could mandate that brokers pass on all payment for order flow to their customers through price improvement, Rauterberg proposed.</p>\n<p>“Education doesn’t seem to alter people’s sense that there’s something unseemly about this,” he said. “Eliminating the appearance of a conflict of interest would go a long way for investor confidence.”</p>","source":"market_watch","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>Robinhood-GameStop saga could put spotlight on DC, Wall Street revolving door</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\">\nRobinhood-GameStop saga could put spotlight on DC, Wall Street revolving door\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-09 17:12 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/robinhood-gamestop-saga-could-put-spotlight-on-dc-wall-street-revolving-door-11612817586?mod=home-page><strong>MarketWatch</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Robinhood has hired several former regulators in recent months\nAs the financial services industry prepares for congressional scrutiny in the coming weeks following the public outcry related to online ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/robinhood-gamestop-saga-could-put-spotlight-on-dc-wall-street-revolving-door-11612817586?mod=home-page\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GME":"游戏驿站",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","AMC":"AMC院线",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/robinhood-gamestop-saga-could-put-spotlight-on-dc-wall-street-revolving-door-11612817586?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/599a65733b8245fcf7868668ef9ad712","article_id":"1186040929","content_text":"Robinhood has hired several former regulators in recent months\nAs the financial services industry prepares for congressional scrutiny in the coming weeks following the public outcry related to online broker Robinhood’s decision to restrict trading of GameStop Inc. and other stocks, the perception of a cozy relationship between financial regulators and the industry could once again come to the fore.\nOf particular interest will be regulators’ lack of action in recent years in reforming market structure issues — including payment for order flow, or the practice of market makers paying stockbrokers to route customer orders to them — as many of the former regulators responsible for such reforms are now working for firms in the industry that engage in and profit from the practice.\n“We’ve had festering problems for 12 years now of not addressing, acute, pressing market structure issues,” said James Cox, law professor at Duke University, who specializes in corporate and securities law.\nCox said the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority should have done more in recent years to significantly rein in the practice of payment for order flow and to set new rules about the types of orders market makers and stock exchanges can accept from traders that can give them informational advantages over individual investors.\nRobinhood earned more than $190 million in revenue from payment for order flow in the fourth quarter of 2020,according to regulatory filings and made more such revenue per trade than competitors like E-Trade and Charles Schwab. Robinhood did not respond to requests for comment.\nGovernment watchdogs have long decried the practice of regulators leaving government to work for companies they once regulated, and Robinhood has been one of the most aggressive deployers of this tactic in recent months,hiring former SEC Commissioner Dan Gallagher to be its chief legal officer last May.\nIn addition to Gallagher, the broker has recently brought on other SEC alums Lucas Moskowitz and Janet Broeckel, according to LinkedIn. It also brought in Andrew Ceresney, who served as the SEC’s director of the division of enforcement from 2013 to 2017, as outside counsel to help its ettle charges that it misled investors about the practice of payment for order flow and that it cost investors $34.1 million by failing to execute trades at the best price.\nRobinhood settled the matter after paying a $65 million fine, without admitting nor denying fault. The company said in December that “the settlement relates to historical practices that do not reflect Robinhood today” and that it is now fully transparent with customers about its revenue streams and vigilant about getting them the best prices on securities.\n“Firms understand that their business model requires a soft touch from regulators, and the best way to ensure that is to have financial connections with regulators associated with both political parties,” said Jeff Hauser, executive director of The Revolving Door Project, which aims to track corporate political influence.\nCitadel Securities, which paid more to Robinhood for order flow than any other firm in the fourth quarter of last year, has also been a landing place for former regulators. Stephan Luparello, former director of the trading and markets division, which oversees market structure issues, served as its general counsel since 2017. Citadel declined to comment for this article.\nMarket structure issues, including payment for order flow, were last in the public spotlight in 2014, when former Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan held hearings on it and recommended regulators ban it.\nRegulators have made some reforms since then, with the SEC requiring brokers to provide greater disclosure of payment to order flow revenues, while Finra has stepped up enforcement against brokers who do not regularly analyze their orders to make sure customers, on average, get the best price and execution of their orders.\nBut critics say they have not gone far enough, and that payment for order flow is a byproduct of a system of wasteful competition between market makers for information and faster access to the major stock exchanges.\nPeter Van Doren, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and editor of the journal Regulation, told MarketWatch that “the payments for order flow is part of this high-frequency trading system where there’s an arms race” to build faster trading systems ever closer to the major exchanges, in order to arbitrage slight differences in market prices and those listed on exchanges.\nHe pointed to a study of activity on the London Stock Exchange, which showed that if market makers didn’t have to engage in this competition, they’d be able to provide prices that save investors $5 billion globally every year.\nOther experts, however, say that the lack of action on payment for order flow was simply because it’s not clear the practice harms individual investors. Indeed, the cost of individual trades and bid-ask spreads have come down dramatically in the thirty years that this practice has been around, Gabriel Rauterberg, an expert on capital markets at Michigan Law told MarketWatch.\n“It’s seems deeply weird that if you’re a retail trader, your order doesn’t go to a stock exchange, but that your broker gets paid to send it to a market maker,” he said, but added that this appearance of corruption is not backed up by evidence of retail traders being cheated on a large scale.\nInstead of regulators moving to ban the practice, which would cause widespread, costly disruption to the entire industry, regulators could mandate that brokers pass on all payment for order flow to their customers through price improvement, Rauterberg proposed.\n“Education doesn’t seem to alter people’s sense that there’s something unseemly about this,” he said. “Eliminating the appearance of a conflict of interest would go a long way for investor confidence.”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"GME":0.9,"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1832,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":383879228,"gmtCreate":1612868535064,"gmtModify":1704875158104,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great post","listText":"Great post","text":"Great post","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/383879228","repostId":"1149038980","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149038980","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612864337,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1149038980?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-09 17:52","market":"us","language":"en","title":"These 12 lessons from the GameStop and AMC frenzy can help you make money trading stocks (or at least lose less)","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149038980","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"I can hear the cries from investors who racked up huge profits in GameStop or AMC Entertainment Hold","content":"<p>I can hear the cries from investors who racked up huge profits in GameStop&nbsp;or AMC Entertainment Holdings&nbsp;for a few hours or days, only to watch their gains evaporate.</p>\n<p>This coordinated bull raid was initiated by thousands of retail investors on Reddit, a popular website forum. We heard stories of fortunes made and lost. The ones we didn’t hear were from the folks in-between — small retail traders and investors who suffered thousands of dollars (or more) in losses.</p>\n<p>For those still holding GME or AMC, or for those eager to pounce on the next volatile meme stock, I offer the following advice based on personal experience and observations. These are the lessons you must know before you ever get involved in the stock or options market (or if you are holding a winning stock or option):</p>\n<p><b>1. Don’t sell stocks or options on products you don’t own:</b>The traders who lost the most money in GameStop and AMC were those who sold “naked” calls and puts (i.e. they sold options on stocks they didn’t own), or those who sold shares short (again, they sold shares on a stock they didn’t own). When using this extremely risky strategy, you can make a fortune if you’re right. If you’re wrong, the losses can be incalculable. In reality, some unwary traders lost tens of thousands of dollars last week on positions that cost a few thousand dollars. Once again, don’t sell anything naked unless you’re a professional, and in this case even the pros lost big on that risky bet.</p>\n<p><b>2. Sell at the “zero point.”</b>&nbsp; Here’s a rule I created: If you have huge gains that disappear and you are at the zero point (i.e. break-even), sell before you have real losses. It’s better to walk away at zero than with losses.</p>\n<p><b>3. Don’t be a stubborn seller:</b>Why is it so hard for most traders to walk away at the zero point? Stubbornness. Many traders made huge gains last week only to watch those profits disappear. They refused to sell because they hoped to make their money back. If holding options, that’s not going to happen. (If you bought at or near the high, your money is gone. If you hold a stock, plan to wait months or even years to recover. Stubborn stockholders often end up as “stuckholders.”</p>\n<p><b>4. Take the money and run:</b>When you are holding a stock or option position that brings outsized profits, either sell half of your holding or all of it — but get out. I call this “selling at extremes.” Sell something when the profits are beyond your wildest expectations. We all know the story of the gambler who wins big at the casino, but doesn’t leave the table until all his money is gone. Know when to walk away from the computer. Profits are fleeting, especially when volatility skyrockets.</p>\n<p><b>5.Trade small when making longshot trades (i.e. gambling):</b>GameStop and AMC were both big gambles, and for a time the trade worked if you were long. But if you bet wrong? I spoke to a few of these traders. One lost $8,000 on a single option contract. If he had traded his normal size (30 contracts), he told me, his losses would have been more than $240,000.</p>\n<p><b>6. Don’t expect this trading frenzy to keep happening:</b>It’s possible that a group of traders on the Reddit forum will band together for more bear- or bull raids. Except Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Fed Chair Jerome Powell are most likely creating new rules to prevent this from repeating. The Fed hates volatility and will do everything in its power to keep the markets calm. So once again, when you make big money on a trade, take the money as fast as you can — because you may not get the chance again.</p>\n<p><b>7. Stop bragging about how much money you made</b>: Many traders who won big immediately bragged on social media (and to their jealous friends) about how much money they made on this trade. Yet the euphoric feeling they had was temporary. It usually goes away after all the money is gone. The smart (and polite) traders took their gains and kept the win to themselves</p>\n<p><b>8. Use a time stop:</b>Time stops are not well-known or popular, but with fast-moving stocks (or when trading options), they are invaluable. In an extremely fast market, the traditional stop-limit order won’t get filled, as many of those meme-stock traders found out the hard way. Instead, after making a huge profit, set a day or time to sell. For example, you may sell the position by Friday no matter what (although selling at extremes is better — see Rule #4).</p>\n<p><b>9. Sell half or all of the position:</b>It’s never an easy decision to know when to sell. If you sell too early, it’s annoying to watch the stock go higher. Sell too late and you lose money. Selling half of your holding is a reasonable alternative, but you must be prepared to sell the other half if the position goes against you.</p>\n<p><b>10. Don’t seek revenge when you lose money on a stock:</b>It’s common for traders to seek revenge on a stock they lost money on. Do not fall for this emotional trap. If you lost money on a stock, let it go and move on.</p>\n<p><b>11. Trade small after you made or lost big:</b>If you’re feeling emotional about a stock, including feelings of anger or revenge, trade small. Many people who hit it big in the market can’t help but make bigger and bigger bets. Just like the gamblers at a casino, they keep trading until all their money is gone.</p>\n<p>You don’t think it can happen to you? One of the greatest speculators in the world, Jesse Livermore, made $100 million dollars in a single week in 1929. He then lost all of his money within five years. He should have moved most of his profits out of the market after his big win and traded small for the next year. Instead, he got reckless and lost it all.</p>\n<p><b>12. Don’t take on too much risk:</b>Never invest or trade with so much money that if you lost, you’d lose your house or 401(k). Brokers told me about clients who cleared out their retirement funds or took cash advances on their credit cards so they could buy GameStop and AMC. Some won, some lost, but many took on way too much risk.</p>\n<p><b>The meme-stock pyramid scheme</b></p>\n<p>Those who traded GameStop, AMC and other meme stocks thought they were trading, but they were actually participating in a gigantic pyramid scheme. Those who got in early and got out early probably did well. Those who entered late or held too long lost money.</p>\n<p>My advice: Review these 12 rules periodically. They are based on the experiences and the bad luck of thousands of other traders, including myself, who thought we were smarter than the market. In truth the market was smarter than us — because it always is.</p>","source":"market_watch","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>These 12 lessons from the GameStop and AMC frenzy can help you make money trading stocks (or at least lose less)</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\">\nThese 12 lessons from the GameStop and AMC frenzy can help you make money trading stocks (or at least lose less)\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-09 17:52 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/these-12-lessons-from-the-gamestop-and-amc-frenzy-can-help-you-make-money-trading-stocks-or-at-least-lose-less-11612771522?mod=home-page><strong>MarketWatch</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>I can hear the cries from investors who racked up huge profits in GameStop or AMC Entertainment Holdings for a few hours or days, only to watch their gains evaporate.\nThis coordinated bull raid was ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/these-12-lessons-from-the-gamestop-and-amc-frenzy-can-help-you-make-money-trading-stocks-or-at-least-lose-less-11612771522?mod=home-page\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","AMC":"AMC院线","GME":"游戏驿站"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/these-12-lessons-from-the-gamestop-and-amc-frenzy-can-help-you-make-money-trading-stocks-or-at-least-lose-less-11612771522?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/599a65733b8245fcf7868668ef9ad712","article_id":"1149038980","content_text":"I can hear the cries from investors who racked up huge profits in GameStop or AMC Entertainment Holdings for a few hours or days, only to watch their gains evaporate.\nThis coordinated bull raid was initiated by thousands of retail investors on Reddit, a popular website forum. We heard stories of fortunes made and lost. The ones we didn’t hear were from the folks in-between — small retail traders and investors who suffered thousands of dollars (or more) in losses.\nFor those still holding GME or AMC, or for those eager to pounce on the next volatile meme stock, I offer the following advice based on personal experience and observations. These are the lessons you must know before you ever get involved in the stock or options market (or if you are holding a winning stock or option):\n1. Don’t sell stocks or options on products you don’t own:The traders who lost the most money in GameStop and AMC were those who sold “naked” calls and puts (i.e. they sold options on stocks they didn’t own), or those who sold shares short (again, they sold shares on a stock they didn’t own). When using this extremely risky strategy, you can make a fortune if you’re right. If you’re wrong, the losses can be incalculable. In reality, some unwary traders lost tens of thousands of dollars last week on positions that cost a few thousand dollars. Once again, don’t sell anything naked unless you’re a professional, and in this case even the pros lost big on that risky bet.\n2. Sell at the “zero point.”  Here’s a rule I created: If you have huge gains that disappear and you are at the zero point (i.e. break-even), sell before you have real losses. It’s better to walk away at zero than with losses.\n3. Don’t be a stubborn seller:Why is it so hard for most traders to walk away at the zero point? Stubbornness. Many traders made huge gains last week only to watch those profits disappear. They refused to sell because they hoped to make their money back. If holding options, that’s not going to happen. (If you bought at or near the high, your money is gone. If you hold a stock, plan to wait months or even years to recover. Stubborn stockholders often end up as “stuckholders.”\n4. Take the money and run:When you are holding a stock or option position that brings outsized profits, either sell half of your holding or all of it — but get out. I call this “selling at extremes.” Sell something when the profits are beyond your wildest expectations. We all know the story of the gambler who wins big at the casino, but doesn’t leave the table until all his money is gone. Know when to walk away from the computer. Profits are fleeting, especially when volatility skyrockets.\n5.Trade small when making longshot trades (i.e. gambling):GameStop and AMC were both big gambles, and for a time the trade worked if you were long. But if you bet wrong? I spoke to a few of these traders. One lost $8,000 on a single option contract. If he had traded his normal size (30 contracts), he told me, his losses would have been more than $240,000.\n6. Don’t expect this trading frenzy to keep happening:It’s possible that a group of traders on the Reddit forum will band together for more bear- or bull raids. Except Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Fed Chair Jerome Powell are most likely creating new rules to prevent this from repeating. The Fed hates volatility and will do everything in its power to keep the markets calm. So once again, when you make big money on a trade, take the money as fast as you can — because you may not get the chance again.\n7. Stop bragging about how much money you made: Many traders who won big immediately bragged on social media (and to their jealous friends) about how much money they made on this trade. Yet the euphoric feeling they had was temporary. It usually goes away after all the money is gone. The smart (and polite) traders took their gains and kept the win to themselves\n8. Use a time stop:Time stops are not well-known or popular, but with fast-moving stocks (or when trading options), they are invaluable. In an extremely fast market, the traditional stop-limit order won’t get filled, as many of those meme-stock traders found out the hard way. Instead, after making a huge profit, set a day or time to sell. For example, you may sell the position by Friday no matter what (although selling at extremes is better — see Rule #4).\n9. Sell half or all of the position:It’s never an easy decision to know when to sell. If you sell too early, it’s annoying to watch the stock go higher. Sell too late and you lose money. Selling half of your holding is a reasonable alternative, but you must be prepared to sell the other half if the position goes against you.\n10. Don’t seek revenge when you lose money on a stock:It’s common for traders to seek revenge on a stock they lost money on. Do not fall for this emotional trap. If you lost money on a stock, let it go and move on.\n11. Trade small after you made or lost big:If you’re feeling emotional about a stock, including feelings of anger or revenge, trade small. Many people who hit it big in the market can’t help but make bigger and bigger bets. Just like the gamblers at a casino, they keep trading until all their money is gone.\nYou don’t think it can happen to you? One of the greatest speculators in the world, Jesse Livermore, made $100 million dollars in a single week in 1929. He then lost all of his money within five years. He should have moved most of his profits out of the market after his big win and traded small for the next year. Instead, he got reckless and lost it all.\n12. Don’t take on too much risk:Never invest or trade with so much money that if you lost, you’d lose your house or 401(k). Brokers told me about clients who cleared out their retirement funds or took cash advances on their credit cards so they could buy GameStop and AMC. Some won, some lost, but many took on way too much risk.\nThe meme-stock pyramid scheme\nThose who traded GameStop, AMC and other meme stocks thought they were trading, but they were actually participating in a gigantic pyramid scheme. Those who got in early and got out early probably did well. Those who entered late or held too long lost money.\nMy advice: Review these 12 rules periodically. They are based on the experiences and the bad luck of thousands of other traders, including myself, who thought we were smarter than the market. In truth the market was smarter than us — because it always is.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"GME":0.9,"AMC":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1665,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":389502806,"gmtCreate":1612784273705,"gmtModify":1704874128942,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/389502806","repostId":"1195153829","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195153829","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612781502,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1195153829?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-08 18:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195153829","media":"Barrons","summary":"This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers","content":"<p><i>This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers and has been edited by Barron’s.</i></p>\n<p>What GameStop Taught Us</p>\n<p><i>The Weekly Speculator</i></p>\n<p><i>Marketfield Asset Management</i></p>\n<p>marketfield.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 4: After all is said and done, one of the most lasting effects of theGameStop(ticker: GME) episode will be to educate many market participants about the key role and ultimate power held by the clearing institution, the Depository Trust Company. One of the stranger aspects of the affair has been the attempt to paint it as some form of moral crusade, or an opportunity for the “little guy” to get even with Wall Street. The truth is that some large investors lost a great deal of money, while others were well rewarded, just as some small investors will have reaped life-changing sums while others will have lost funds that may prove to be equally impactful. In this sense, the market is a meritocracy, which isn’t quite the same as saying that it is always fair in delivering outcomes.</p>\n<p>What is also clear is that late January saw a very significant degrossing of levered hedge-fund investors, without causing a deep correction in the equity market. The S&amp;P 500 essentially respected support at the 50-day moving average, and didn’t need to move down to 3600, which we had set as a “worst case” target. The Nasdaq 100, Russell 2000, and MSCI Emerging Markets Index didn’t need to touch their corresponding trend support, and all three indexes managed to generate a positive return in January, unlike the S&amp;P 500, which registered a small loss. The subsequent bounce has been rapid and broad, as would be expected from a catalyst that was both technical and ephemeral in nature.</p>\n<p>That it is not a wholly positive or inconsequential affair. The long bull market is now showing signs of developing into a historic mania. This doesn’t mean that a market peak is imminent, but the normative process—whereby what is “appropriate” is ultimately influenced by extremes—means that the levels of risk being taken by the average investor are probably significantly higher than they were pre-Covid.</p>\n<p>—Michael Shaoul, Timothy Brackett</p>\n<p>Heigh-Ho Silver!</p>\n<p><i>The Aden Forecast Weekly Update</i></p>\n<p><i>The Aden Forecast</i></p>\n<p>adenforecast.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 4: Silver caught on fire by zipping up to the August highs near $30 on Monday during the Reddit buying frenzy. Silver was strong anyway, and it’s been holding up well, so whoever pegged silver knew what they were doing. Silver shares also got a big boost upward, and while they have since calmed down, it looks like volatility will stay with us. Silver has been holding above its 15-week moving average since December, and it’ll remain strong by staying above it at $25. The next milestone to surpass is the $30 level, the highs for this bull market. If clearly broken, another leg up will be underway. Keep your silver and silver share positions.</p>\n<p>—Mary Anne and Pamela Aden</p>\n<p>How to Play Oil’s Recent Rally</p>\n<p><i>Daily Insights</i></p>\n<p><i>BCA Research</i></p>\n<p><i>bcaresearch.com</i></p>\n<p>Feb 4: The recent oil rally will have consequences for asset prices beyond the energy market. While higher oil prices benefit oil exporters, they hurt the economies of oil importers, often with a lag.</p>\n<p>A great example of these dynamics is China. The Chinese economy is a large oil importer; hence, rising oil prices act as a tax on Chinese growth. Moreover, Chinese A shares massively overweight tech stocks, which receive no benefit from higher energy prices. In fact, over the past four years, increasing Brent prices reliably lead to a decline in on-shore domestic markets by roughly three months. The current setup is reminiscent of early 2018. Back then, Chinese A shares had been rallying for a few months after oil prices had started to rally. Ultimately, a deceleration in Chinese growth and cautious policy making from Beijing resulted in a powerful selloff of Chinese equities. Today, Chinese growth is once again decelerating and Beijing is conducting some significant regulatory tightening, while the People’s Bank of China is draining liquidity. Thus, a significant correction in Chinese shares is likely this spring.</p>\n<p>A lower-octane strategy to play these dynamics is to go long United Kingdom equities relative to Germany’s while espousing the implicit currency exposure. German equities are extremely underweight energy, and Germany imports its entire oil consumption. Meanwhile, the U.K. benchmark is replete with energy stocks and the U.K. remains an oil producer, even if it imports some of its oil (rising Brent represents a comparatively smaller tax on the U.K. economy). As a side benefit, the pound is very cheap against the euro and the U.K.’s vaccination campaign is massively ahead of the eurozone’s, which could result in earlier economic dividends north of the Channel and hurt the euro/pound in the process.</p>\n<p>—Mathieu Savary and Team</p>\n<p>High-Yield Opportunities</p>\n<p><i>Carret Credit Insight</i></p>\n<p><i>Carret Asset Mangaement</i></p>\n<p>carret.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 3: At year-end 2020, the iBoxx High-Yield Index yielded 4.23%, an all-time low. Spreads also registered record tightness. Low yields aren’t a surprise as investors globally reach for income. The Federal Reserve has backstopped the “fallen angels,” allowing many high-yield (HY) companies to refinance at ever-lower rates and extend upcoming maturities for another day. Strong equity markets are forecasting an earnings rebound, and the vaccines will bring brighter days soon. We continue to find attractive values in the short/intermediate portion of the high-quality HY market.</p>\n<p>We want to share a recent academic study with you regarding the risk and returns in the HY bond market: George Mason Universityrecently publisheda report on HY bond-fund returns and volatility relative to equities (S&amp;P 500). Since 1990, the average HY bond fund has delivered average annualized returns of 7.1% with a volatility of 7.7%. Over the same time period, the S&amp;P 500 delivered an average annualized return of 7.8%, but with almost double the volatility of 14.5%. The conclusion: HY bonds have paid total returns near those of the U.S. stock market with half of the volatility. We believe the HY market will offer competitive returns in the decade ahead, as equity valuations have risen and Treasury yields have plummeted. Our ability to utilize busted convertibles, preferreds, and special-situation income investments enhances our cash-flow opportunities.</p>\n<p>—Jason R. Graybill, Neil D. Klein</p>\n<p>Emerging Markets Blast Off</p>\n<p><i>PCM Report</i></p>\n<p><i>Peak Capital Management</i></p>\n<p>pcmstrategies.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 1: So far, 2021 has been a good year for emerging-market equities. Year to date, theiShares MSCI Emerging Marketsexchange-traded fund (EEM) is higher by roughly 8%, compared to a gain of approximately 3% for theSPDR S&amp;P 500ETF (SPY). Ever since the financial crisis of 2008, emerging markets collectively have woefully lagged U.S. equities.</p>\n<p>What could propel the asset class higher in 20201 and beyond? In the long term, the likely catalyst is demographics. Developed markets such as the U.S. and Europe have aging populations, which could suggest lower productivity and gross-domestic-product growth over the next decade compared to emerging-market economies.</p>\n<p>In its most recent capital-markets report, JPMorgan projected GDP growth across emerging markets to be 3.9% in 2021, compared to 1.6% across developed markets. The report suggests China and India will drive GDP growth, and emerging markets’ productivity and human capital will gradually converge to developed-market levels.</p>\n<p>—Clint Pekrul</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us</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\">\nHere’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-08 18:51 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/gamestop-episode-offers-lessons-for-investors-51612572300?mod=RTA><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers and has been edited by Barron’s.\nWhat GameStop Taught Us\nThe Weekly Speculator\nMarketfield Asset ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/gamestop-episode-offers-lessons-for-investors-51612572300?mod=RTA\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","GME":"游戏驿站",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/gamestop-episode-offers-lessons-for-investors-51612572300?mod=RTA","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195153829","content_text":"This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers and has been edited by Barron’s.\nWhat GameStop Taught Us\nThe Weekly Speculator\nMarketfield Asset Management\nmarketfield.com\nFeb. 4: After all is said and done, one of the most lasting effects of theGameStop(ticker: GME) episode will be to educate many market participants about the key role and ultimate power held by the clearing institution, the Depository Trust Company. One of the stranger aspects of the affair has been the attempt to paint it as some form of moral crusade, or an opportunity for the “little guy” to get even with Wall Street. The truth is that some large investors lost a great deal of money, while others were well rewarded, just as some small investors will have reaped life-changing sums while others will have lost funds that may prove to be equally impactful. In this sense, the market is a meritocracy, which isn’t quite the same as saying that it is always fair in delivering outcomes.\nWhat is also clear is that late January saw a very significant degrossing of levered hedge-fund investors, without causing a deep correction in the equity market. The S&P 500 essentially respected support at the 50-day moving average, and didn’t need to move down to 3600, which we had set as a “worst case” target. The Nasdaq 100, Russell 2000, and MSCI Emerging Markets Index didn’t need to touch their corresponding trend support, and all three indexes managed to generate a positive return in January, unlike the S&P 500, which registered a small loss. The subsequent bounce has been rapid and broad, as would be expected from a catalyst that was both technical and ephemeral in nature.\nThat it is not a wholly positive or inconsequential affair. The long bull market is now showing signs of developing into a historic mania. This doesn’t mean that a market peak is imminent, but the normative process—whereby what is “appropriate” is ultimately influenced by extremes—means that the levels of risk being taken by the average investor are probably significantly higher than they were pre-Covid.\n—Michael Shaoul, Timothy Brackett\nHeigh-Ho Silver!\nThe Aden Forecast Weekly Update\nThe Aden Forecast\nadenforecast.com\nFeb. 4: Silver caught on fire by zipping up to the August highs near $30 on Monday during the Reddit buying frenzy. Silver was strong anyway, and it’s been holding up well, so whoever pegged silver knew what they were doing. Silver shares also got a big boost upward, and while they have since calmed down, it looks like volatility will stay with us. Silver has been holding above its 15-week moving average since December, and it’ll remain strong by staying above it at $25. The next milestone to surpass is the $30 level, the highs for this bull market. If clearly broken, another leg up will be underway. Keep your silver and silver share positions.\n—Mary Anne and Pamela Aden\nHow to Play Oil’s Recent Rally\nDaily Insights\nBCA Research\nbcaresearch.com\nFeb 4: The recent oil rally will have consequences for asset prices beyond the energy market. While higher oil prices benefit oil exporters, they hurt the economies of oil importers, often with a lag.\nA great example of these dynamics is China. The Chinese economy is a large oil importer; hence, rising oil prices act as a tax on Chinese growth. Moreover, Chinese A shares massively overweight tech stocks, which receive no benefit from higher energy prices. In fact, over the past four years, increasing Brent prices reliably lead to a decline in on-shore domestic markets by roughly three months. The current setup is reminiscent of early 2018. Back then, Chinese A shares had been rallying for a few months after oil prices had started to rally. Ultimately, a deceleration in Chinese growth and cautious policy making from Beijing resulted in a powerful selloff of Chinese equities. Today, Chinese growth is once again decelerating and Beijing is conducting some significant regulatory tightening, while the People’s Bank of China is draining liquidity. Thus, a significant correction in Chinese shares is likely this spring.\nA lower-octane strategy to play these dynamics is to go long United Kingdom equities relative to Germany’s while espousing the implicit currency exposure. German equities are extremely underweight energy, and Germany imports its entire oil consumption. Meanwhile, the U.K. benchmark is replete with energy stocks and the U.K. remains an oil producer, even if it imports some of its oil (rising Brent represents a comparatively smaller tax on the U.K. economy). As a side benefit, the pound is very cheap against the euro and the U.K.’s vaccination campaign is massively ahead of the eurozone’s, which could result in earlier economic dividends north of the Channel and hurt the euro/pound in the process.\n—Mathieu Savary and Team\nHigh-Yield Opportunities\nCarret Credit Insight\nCarret Asset Mangaement\ncarret.com\nFeb. 3: At year-end 2020, the iBoxx High-Yield Index yielded 4.23%, an all-time low. Spreads also registered record tightness. Low yields aren’t a surprise as investors globally reach for income. The Federal Reserve has backstopped the “fallen angels,” allowing many high-yield (HY) companies to refinance at ever-lower rates and extend upcoming maturities for another day. Strong equity markets are forecasting an earnings rebound, and the vaccines will bring brighter days soon. We continue to find attractive values in the short/intermediate portion of the high-quality HY market.\nWe want to share a recent academic study with you regarding the risk and returns in the HY bond market: George Mason Universityrecently publisheda report on HY bond-fund returns and volatility relative to equities (S&P 500). Since 1990, the average HY bond fund has delivered average annualized returns of 7.1% with a volatility of 7.7%. Over the same time period, the S&P 500 delivered an average annualized return of 7.8%, but with almost double the volatility of 14.5%. The conclusion: HY bonds have paid total returns near those of the U.S. stock market with half of the volatility. We believe the HY market will offer competitive returns in the decade ahead, as equity valuations have risen and Treasury yields have plummeted. Our ability to utilize busted convertibles, preferreds, and special-situation income investments enhances our cash-flow opportunities.\n—Jason R. Graybill, Neil D. Klein\nEmerging Markets Blast Off\nPCM Report\nPeak Capital Management\npcmstrategies.com\nFeb. 1: So far, 2021 has been a good year for emerging-market equities. Year to date, theiShares MSCI Emerging Marketsexchange-traded fund (EEM) is higher by roughly 8%, compared to a gain of approximately 3% for theSPDR S&P 500ETF (SPY). Ever since the financial crisis of 2008, emerging markets collectively have woefully lagged U.S. equities.\nWhat could propel the asset class higher in 20201 and beyond? In the long term, the likely catalyst is demographics. Developed markets such as the U.S. and Europe have aging populations, which could suggest lower productivity and gross-domestic-product growth over the next decade compared to emerging-market economies.\nIn its most recent capital-markets report, JPMorgan projected GDP growth across emerging markets to be 3.9% in 2021, compared to 1.6% across developed markets. The report suggests China and India will drive GDP growth, and emerging markets’ productivity and human capital will gradually converge to developed-market levels.\n—Clint Pekrul","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"GME":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1546,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":315557526,"gmtCreate":1612267067065,"gmtModify":1704868948868,"author":{"id":"3570489658408021","authorId":"3570489658408021","name":"Novellim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/888dd07df6354f45acf31a4a24226b46","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3570489658408021","idStr":"3570489658408021"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/315557526","repostId":"1121523059","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1121523059","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612262282,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1121523059?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-02 18:38","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Ford to invest $1 billion to upgrade South Africa operations","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1121523059","media":"reuters","summary":"JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co will invest $1.05 billion in its South African manufacturing ","content":"<p>JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co will invest $1.05 billion in its South African manufacturing operations, including upgrades to expand production of its Ranger pickup truck, the U.S. automaker said on Tuesday.</p>\n<p>The investments aim to increase Ford’s installed capacity in South Africa from 168,000 to 200,000 vehicles, said Andrea Cavallaro, operations director of Ford’s International Market Group.</p>\n<p>“It’s the biggest investment in Ford’s 97-year history in South Africa and one of the largest ever in the local automotive industry,” he told an announcement event.</p>\n<p>The amount includes $683 million for technology upgrades and new facilities at its plant in Silverton, a suburb of the administrative capital Pretoria, and $365 million to upgrade tooling at major supplier factories.</p>\n<p>The expanded production will create 1,200 jobs with Ford in South Africa, increasing the local workforce to 5,500 employees, while adding an estimated 10,000 new jobs across the carmaker’s supplier network.</p>\n<p>Ford also aims to make the Silverton plant entirely energy self-sufficient and carbon neutral by 2024, Cavallaro said.</p>","source":"ltzww","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>Ford to invest $1 billion to upgrade South Africa operations</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\">\nFord to invest $1 billion to upgrade South Africa operations\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-02 18:38 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ford-motor-safrica/ford-to-invest-1-billion-to-upgrade-south-africa-operations-idUSKBN2A210U?il=0><strong>reuters</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co will invest $1.05 billion in its South African manufacturing operations, including upgrades to expand production of its Ranger pickup truck, the U.S. automaker ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ford-motor-safrica/ford-to-invest-1-billion-to-upgrade-south-africa-operations-idUSKBN2A210U?il=0\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9c7511e646b4f70e751ca585ab218a0","relate_stocks":{"F":"福特汽车"},"source_url":"https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ford-motor-safrica/ford-to-invest-1-billion-to-upgrade-south-africa-operations-idUSKBN2A210U?il=0","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1121523059","content_text":"JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co will invest $1.05 billion in its South African manufacturing operations, including upgrades to expand production of its Ranger pickup truck, the U.S. automaker said on Tuesday.\nThe investments aim to increase Ford’s installed capacity in South Africa from 168,000 to 200,000 vehicles, said Andrea Cavallaro, operations director of Ford’s International Market Group.\n“It’s the biggest investment in Ford’s 97-year history in South Africa and one of the largest ever in the local automotive industry,” he told an announcement event.\nThe amount includes $683 million for technology upgrades and new facilities at its plant in Silverton, a suburb of the administrative capital Pretoria, and $365 million to upgrade tooling at major supplier factories.\nThe expanded production will create 1,200 jobs with Ford in South Africa, increasing the local workforce to 5,500 employees, while adding an estimated 10,000 new jobs across the carmaker’s supplier network.\nFord also aims to make the Silverton plant entirely energy self-sufficient and carbon neutral by 2024, Cavallaro said.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"F":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1808,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3527667803686145","authorId":"3527667803686145","name":"社区成长助手","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2b7c7106b5c0c8b0037faa67439d898f","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3527667803686145","idStr":"3527667803686145"},"content":"Finally, when you first post [compare heart] [compare heart] post, you can get more exposure by related stocks or related topics. If you want to create high-quality articles, please checkGuidelines for Tiger Community Creation","text":"Finally, when you first post [compare heart] [compare heart] post, you can get more exposure by related stocks or related topics. If you want to create high-quality articles, please checkGuidelines for Tiger Community Creation","html":"Finally, when you first post [compare heart] [compare heart] post, you can get more exposure by related stocks or related topics. If you want to create high-quality articles, please checkGuidelines for Tiger Community Creation"}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":true}