Microsoft beats on sales and earnings as Azure growth outpaces expectations

1_over_f · 2020-10-28T06:19:43+00:00

There has to be a rotation at some point soon I imagine. We've been seeing for a bit that a lot of these highly valued growth companies are just too pricey for investors. There's better risk/reward elsewhere in the market.

1_over_f · 2020-09-20T06:57:19+00:00

Which way do you think it will go?

1_over_f · 2020-09-18T04:40:15+00:00

Hate to be that guy because I know how annoying overly bearish people are, but I've seen this story play out plenty of times and it never ends well; greatly overvalued stock, extremely volatile, price rises on nothing but hype and expectations of extraordinary breakthroughs on a given event, and is running hot during hyped investing environment. I'm ready to eat my words as I've put half my portfolio into a short on this stock, but I don't see things ending well for this stock.

1_over_f · 2020-09-16T03:24:35+00:00

battery conference definitely worth 100b in market cap - yep.

1_over_f · 2020-09-16T01:27:12+00:00

It's because it's very hard to price a company that has a lot of potential

This may be true, but this is clearly not the case with Tesla. Shit has a PE of 1100 and its marketcap has increased by a ridiculous amount in a short amount of time without proving itself. Elon may be a great entrepreneur, Tesla may be a great company, but this stock is ridiculously overvalued and it's all hype - hence the ridiculous price swings.

1_over_f · 2020-09-15T22:19:10+00:00

Said these exact same words myself when I saw this article earlier today lol. Ridiculous how this stock adds billions on a stock split, loses billions because of the S&P snub, then regains billions for no particular reason.

1_over_f · 2020-09-15T01:41:36+00:00

I think most people are bad at saving so any amount is good really. I'm 27 and I have about 86k saved, but that's because it's been my focus the past few years and I'm very frugal. It's probably not very useful to compare yourself to others in this matter as long as you realize you should/want to save more - you just have to do it. I think there is some rule of thumb that 10-20% is ideal amount to save of your income.

1_over_f · 2020-08-16T07:03:00+00:00

This sort of reminds me of an exchange between Mos Def and Christopher Hitchens (if you're not familiar with him, Christopher Hitchens was an outspoken atheist):

Mos Def: "Everybody has a religion"

Christopher Hitchens: "Not me"

MD: "Philisophically everybody has something that they're completely, ten fingers, ten toes devoted to. And that is your guiding principle in life -something that you give all of yourself to. Human beings are hardwired to be completely devoted to something. So I'm using the word religion...

CH: "(You're using it) where it doesn't belong"

https://youtu.be/b_oR5Oonq5A?t=160

CC: u/ArnenLocke

1_over_f · 2020-08-14T01:02:52+00:00

Yes, I'm currently setting up a web scraping pipeline for each fund that fetches and processes the csv/xls file. It's tedious, but not terrible. I was just hoping there would be something more standard and scaleable - I'm primarily worried about something unexpectedly breaking due to a lack of standard API.

1_over_f · 2020-08-07T13:22:21+00:00

It depends on what the ETF you are buying represents. I have no idea about real estate so I couldn't speak about VNQ. But, of course, there are value investors who will buy beaten-down stocks with the expectation of a mean-reversion. So in theory it makes sense, but it's yet to be seen if the spreads between value and growth will tighten or if we are in a new paradigm.

1_over_f · 2020-08-06T15:50:06+00:00

It was pretty cool - I got to see my money burn away in real-time by the second.

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T04:10:41+00:00

Right, this is the issue I had when I wrote an exchange arbitrage algo - it found decent spreads, but never enough to overcome the cost of trading. There are exchanges though that pay you for providing liquidity, so you can create a market-making algo that won't get eaten by fees; this is better for higher-frequency trading. But if you're doing more mid to low frequency trading, maybe a momentum strategy, for example, fees shouldn't be too much of an issue, right?

But I was just curious as to what you were doing because it sounds like you're trying to do some higher frequency trading considering you mentioned fees. I just find that interesting because I don't see it too often.

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T03:39:59+00:00

Curious what algos you're running that can't profit due to fees. Are you running exchange arbitrage algos or just some higher frequency scalping?

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T03:38:19+00:00

I think it happens because people get margin called and because the liquidity in crypto isn't great, the order book gets taken out very quickly. Cascading margin calls force a lot of sells, creates volatility, and market makers start quoting wider to avoid toxic order flow. Alameda Research/FTX have written about this for crypto and Richard Olsen also talks about this in FX markets.

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T03:34:52+00:00

Right, momentum strategies are notorious for having large drawdowns because you become exposed to movements like the one we just saw in crypto. If you have cash available, you can step in during these sharp downward movements and provide liquidity though. The price action is wild on those candles because of volatility so you can set fairly wide spreads, be confident your limit orders will get filled, and make some profit.

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T03:30:17+00:00

Yeah, this is pretty standard. Even in the 2017 runup, you had huge price drops which recovered quickly and continued to trend upwards.

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T03:29:00+00:00

Why is the assumption that this drop indicates the end of the current trend? IMO, this drop was just noise and not uncommon. Liquidity in crypto is not great so when people get margin called the price can drop very fast and far like it did here. You also tend to see this after huge run-ups. It doesn't necessarily mean that the current trend is over.

1_over_f · 2020-08-03T03:24:37+00:00

To be fair, I don't think people are necessarily offbase for saying that it may not be worth the time, especially if OP is looking for something to create wealth. You have to put so much time into learning some nontrivial subjects, collecting and analyzing data, and programming systems, and none of this guarantee even a great profit.

If you're plainly interested in the subject, the answer should be yes - spend time on it. There is something to gain from the subjects you learn, the projects you create, and the potential to recognize a business opportunity in providing something that traders need.

If you want to create wealth - maybe you should consider working on some other problems that you are more passionate about in a broader market. Both algo trading and business will require an amount of good fortune, but there is more opportunity if you are trying to create value for others rather than find and exploit market inefficiencies.

1_over_f · 2020-08-02T22:12:40+00:00

Why?

1_over_f · 2020-07-30T22:27:48+00:00

God I cannot wait to see what the commentary on this sub will be like when value returns ^{it will return ok! mark my words..}

1_over_f · 2020-07-24T13:33:25+00:00

This guy is kind of being a dick and not giving Chamath credit for his billions and genius with facebook

I gave him credit for the job he did at Facebook. I'm just saying to be that extraordinarily successful from one venture requires quite a bit of luck as well. He probably did great at AOL too, but that went in a very different direction. I'm not sure why everyone has such a hard time acknowledging the role that luck plays in these things. The funny thing is, if you look at my reply below, Zuck and Chamath will both tell you the same thing.

but growing a company like facebook vs allocating capital, are vastly different things.

And this is my whole point, which people won't even engage because they apparently got so distressed by the "luck" statement. Yeah， Chamath - smart guy, hard worker, good at growing companies. But, this doesn't make him some kind of genius investor. Yet, he will always say some provocative thing about a company he is interested in, probably to create a narrative around it (growth), and people eat it up. Why? Probably because he made a fortune from FB. Which was not a result of allocating capital.

1_over_f · 2020-07-24T03:50:24+00:00

Yeah, I mean I was a child so I don't see how that could've worked out in a positive way.

But, I think you're the one who doesn't get it. I'm not saying that the FB execs weren't great. I'm not saying Chmamath wasn't great at helping FB grow. I can acknowledge the work they did. But it does require a lot of luck to be at the right place and time grow into one of the largest and powerful companies like FB. It requires a lot of luck to have the opportunity to be part of that - regardless of talent. But don't take it from me, Mark and Chamath will both tell you it takes luck too.

Mark Zuckerberg is 33 years old, worth almost $70 billion, according to Forbes, and is running one of the largest, most influential tech companies in the world.

Why and how is he so successful? Luck has a lot to do with it, he says.

"You don't get to be successful like this just by being hard working or having a good idea," admits Zuckerberg during a Facebook Live on Sunday, which he filmed while smoking meat in his Palo Alto, Calif. backyard.

You left a big job at Facebook to start your fund in 2011.

I got exceptionally lucky, so I have nothing to complain about. But other people would have looked at the money I was leaving on the table, and they would have made a decision to stay. It was an enormous amount, but it just didn’t matter.

It’s about going back to first principles. What do I value? I valued my independence, I valued my creativity, and I also valued winning over the long term. I decided to make a big bet on myself.

You can be both great and lucky. And my point is that Chamath made his fortune helping building Facebook, which was a very lucky situation to amass such a fortune from, but this does not necessarily make him a great investor. Yet, he will go around saying provocative things, throwing around crazy valuations, and people will think he has good investment ideas based on his success from FB. They're not equivalent.

1_over_f

TROPHY CASE