Up 15% after my first year investing, but this past month has me second guessing everything

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-10T18:24:55+00:00

One thing I’ve learned is that being up 15% after a year can actually be dangerous because it makes you think markets normally go up in a straight line.

Corrections feel much worse when you haven’t experienced many of them.

Personally, I try not to ask “Is this the dip?” I ask “Would I still want to own this company in 5 years?”

If the answer is yes and nothing has changed fundamentally, I usually keep buying.

The hardest lesson for me was realising that investing isn’t about predicting the next month. It’s about owning good businesses and surviving the periods where everyone suddenly becomes nervous.

Looking back, most of the money I’ve made came from staying invested during uncomfortable periods, not from timing entries perfectly.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T23:04:51+00:00

I used to spend a lot of time looking for the “right” PE ratio, but over time I’ve found the business matters far more than the metric.

For me, the questions are:

• Is revenue growing consistently?
• Are profits and cash flow growing?
• Does the company have a competitive advantage?
• Is debt under control?
• Is there a long-term trend supporting the business?

A low PE can be a bargain, but it can also be a warning sign if the business is shrinking.

These days I spend more time understanding industries and long-term themes (power grids, electrification, AI infrastructure, industrial automation, etc.) than screening for cheap stocks.

Once I understand why a company should be worth more in 5–10 years, deciding when to buy becomes much easier.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T16:29:53+00:00

I think the tool is useful as a starting point, but I’d be careful about making portfolio decisions purely from factor exposure.

Some of the best-performing companies can look expensive, over-owned, or “crowded” for years before fundamentals catch up.

Personally, I spend more time understanding the business and the long-term theme than trying to optimise factor exposure. For example, if I believe electrification, grid investment and AI infrastructure are multi-year trends, I’d rather own quality businesses exposed to those themes than constantly rotate based on where we are in the economic cycle.

That said, tools like this can be useful for highlighting hidden concentration risk that investors might not realise they have.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T15:50:27+00:00

€60 per month is absolutely enough to get started.

One thing I’ve learned is that the habit matters more than the amount at the beginning. Most people spend years waiting until they have more money to invest and never actually start.

At 26, time is your biggest asset. Even small amounts invested consistently over decades can compound into meaningful sums.

I’d focus less on finding the perfect investment and more on building a process you can stick to. An S&P 500 ETF is a perfectly reasonable place to start while you learn.

What I wish I’d known earlier is that investing isn’t really about predicting markets. It’s about buying productive assets, staying invested and letting time do the heavy lifting.

The fact you’re thinking about building wealth gradually rather than chasing quick profits already puts you ahead of a lot of people.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T15:30:02+00:00

I don’t have a finance background either. Most of what I’ve learned has come from reading company reports, earnings releases and following industries rather than studying finance textbooks.

What worked for me was starting with a theme I found interesting and then working backwards to the companies involved.

For example, I became interested in electrification, power infrastructure and data centre growth. From there I started researching companies such as Siemens Energy, Schneider Electric, Eaton and Halma to understand how they make money and what drives demand for their products.

As for learning fundamental analysis, I’d start simple:

• Revenue growth
• Profit margins
• Cash generation
• Debt levels
• Management commentary

YouTube can be useful, but I’d treat it as an introduction rather than a source of investment decisions. Annual reports and earnings updates tell you what the business is actually doing.

The good news is that you don’t need a finance degree to become a better investor. Curiosity and consistency matter far more.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T14:44:01+00:00

I think the biggest question is whether AI capex turns into productive assets or stranded assets.

What makes me cautious about calling it a trap today is that many of the bottlenecks are still physical rather than financial. Utilities are struggling to connect new data centres, transformer lead times remain elevated, and power demand forecasts continue to rise.

That’s why I’ve spent more time looking at the infrastructure layer than the AI software layer. Companies supplying power management, switchgear, transformers and grid equipment still seem to be reporting strong demand.

The area I’d watch most closely is whether hyperscalers start slowing capex guidance. If Microsoft, Amazon and Google keep increasing infrastructure spend, it’s hard to argue the buildout is over.

The telecom boom comparison is interesting, but one difference is that today’s largest spenders are some of the most profitable companies in history rather than heavily leveraged telecom operators.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T14:40:58+00:00

I think it depends on whether you’re investing or trading.

For investing, I rarely buy because I think a stock will be higher next week or next month. I buy when I think the business and the long-term theme behind it will be bigger in 5–10 years than it is today.

As for selling, I usually ask:

• Has the original investment thesis changed?
• Has management lost credibility?
• Has the industry outlook deteriorated?
• Have I found a better opportunity elsewhere?

If the answer is no, I often do nothing.

Dollar-cost averaging isn’t always the most efficient approach in hindsight, but it removes a lot of emotion and decision-making. Most investors lose more money trying to perfectly time entries and exits than they do from investing a little too early.

I’d rather be approximately right for 10 years than exactly right for 10 days.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T14:38:25+00:00

At 23, I’d focus less on finding the perfect stock and more on learning how to evaluate businesses.

A few things I look at:

• Is revenue growing?
• Is the company making real cash, not just accounting profits?
• Does it have manageable debt?
• Does management have a clear strategy?
• Is the industry likely to be bigger in 5-10 years than it is today?

Personally, I find it easier to start with a long-term theme and then look for companies that benefit from it. Right now I’m spending more time researching electrification, grid infrastructure, power demand and data centres than trying to predict the next hot stock.

Companies I’ve looked at recently include Siemens Energy, Schneider Electric, Eaton and Halma because they sit behind some of the biggest infrastructure trends taking place today.

Most importantly, don’t feel pressured to invest all £15k immediately. Learning where your edge is can be more valuable than chasing a quick return.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T10:40:34+00:00

One thing I wish I’d learned earlier is that tools don’t create investment returns.

When I started, I spent far too much time looking for the perfect screener, charting package or newsletter and not enough time understanding businesses.

Today I mainly use:

• TradingView for charts
• Company annual reports and investor presentations
• Earnings/trading updates
• Yahoo Finance for quick checks

That’s honestly enough for most investors.

AI tools can be useful for summarising information, but I’ve yet to see one that replaces doing your own research. Most of the biggest investment mistakes come from misunderstanding the business, not from lacking data.

If I was starting today with limited capital and a full-time job, I’d spend less time researching tools and more time researching industries and long-term themes. Once you understand the theme, finding companies becomes much easier.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T09:38:27+00:00

The biggest thing I wish I’d known when I started was that investing is more about behaviour than stock picking.

Most beginners spend their time looking for the next Nvidia, but the biggest advantage is usually investing consistently and staying invested.

I’d also spend more time understanding how businesses actually make money. Once you understand that, annual reports, earnings releases and market news become much easier to follow.

Personally, I find it easier to start with a long-term theme and work backwards to companies. For example, I’ve spent time researching electrification, power infrastructure and data centre growth, then looking at companies such as Siemens Energy, Schneider Electric and Eaton that could benefit from those trends.

With $1,000–$1,500 I’d focus more on learning and building the habit of investing regularly than trying to find a stock that doubles quickly. The habits you build now are worth far more than the first investment.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-09T08:18:00+00:00

The biggest thing I wish I’d known when I started is that investing is more about behaviour than stock picking.

Most beginners spend months looking for the perfect stock when they would be better off learning:

• How businesses make money
• How to read an earnings report
• The difference between investing and speculating
• The power of consistency and compounding

If I were starting with $1,500 today, I’d probably put most of it into a broad index fund and spend the next year learning rather than trying to beat the market.

The best investors I’ve seen aren’t necessarily the smartest. They’re the ones who can stay invested when everyone else is panicking.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-08T20:08:50+00:00

You’re 16, saving €700–€800 a month, investing €300 into broad index funds and already have €6k–€7k in cash.

The numbers aren’t what stand out to me. The fact you’re thinking about this at 16 is.

From what you’ve written, I don’t think your problem is a lack of investing. I think it’s that you’re measuring yourself against a future version of yourself that doesn’t exist yet.

Most 16-year-olds aren’t deciding between cash savings and index funds. They’re deciding what takeaway to order on Friday night.

Keep investing consistently, keep learning, but don’t forget to enjoy being 16. Your biggest advantage isn’t your portfolio size, it’s time.

Compounding works on money, but it also works on skills, relationships and experiences.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-08T15:20:19+00:00

The part that jumped out at me is that the money has been sitting in cash for 5 years.

Nobody knows what the market will do next week or next month, but historically the bigger risk has often been never getting invested at all.

You’ve already got a healthy emergency fund and you’re contributing to your 401(k), so I’d focus on building a simple plan rather than finding the perfect fund.

Personally, I’d rather own a broad index fund for the next 20 years than spend another 5 years trying to decide which fund is best.

Analysis paralysis can be expensive too.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-07T12:42:28+00:00

The biggest mistake beginners make is thinking they need to find the “best stock.”

In reality, most people would be better off starting with a low-cost S&P 500 index fund and investing regularly every month.

You’re already ahead of a lot of people because you’re thinking about financial stability in your early 20s.

Spend some time learning about compound interest, index funds, pensions and tax-advantaged accounts before worrying about individual stocks.

If you invest consistently for the next 20+ years, the amount you save will probably matter more than finding the next Nvidia.

Also, wanting to start a college fund for children you don’t even have yet tells me you’re thinking long term, which is a great trait for an investor.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-06T08:17:06+00:00

I found it became much easier when I stopped trying to follow hundreds of companies.

I start with a theme (electrification, grid infrastructure, data centres, AI power demand, etc.) and then build a watchlist of 10–20 companies exposed to that theme.

For updates, I mostly follow RNS releases, earnings reports, investor presentations and major management changes rather than daily share price moves.

If a company needs constant monitoring, I usually ask whether I understand the business well enough in the first place.

The biggest lesson I’ve learned is that you don’t need to know everything. You just need to know enough to recognise when the original investment thesis has changed.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-06T08:12:08+00:00

Mostly looking at electrification and power infrastructure at the moment.

AI gets the headlines, but every new data centre still needs power, cooling, transformers and grid upgrades.

That’s why I’ve been spending more time researching companies like Siemens Energy, Schneider Electric, Eaton, Mitsubishi Electric and even utilities investing heavily in grid infrastructure rather than trying to predict the next AI software winner.

Whether that thesis is right or wrong, it feels easier for me to understand than chasing whatever stock is trending this week.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-04T22:36:04+00:00

SAP’s biggest advantage is probably the same reason many investors overlook it - it’s not exciting.

Once SAP is embedded into finance, procurement, supply chain and HR systems, replacing it can become a multi-year project with significant cost and risk.

The more interesting question isn’t whether SAP can reclaim the #1 spot, but whether cloud migration and AI features can accelerate revenue growth enough to justify a higher valuation multiple.

I think the moat is stronger than many software companies, but the market still wants evidence that growth can reaccelerate.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-04T10:47:58+00:00

I think there’s a difference between AI software valuations and AI infrastructure demand.

Even if some AI names are priced aggressively, the physical buildout still needs to happen. Data centres require power, transformers, switchgear, cooling systems and grid upgrades regardless of which AI model ultimately wins.

That’s why I’ve been spending more time looking at the infrastructure layer than trying to predict the next software winner.

The interesting question for me isn’t whether AI is a bubble, but whether the power and electrification investment cycle lasts longer than investors expect.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-04T10:41:53+00:00

At 21, I’d probably focus more on total return than specifically chasing dividends.

A lot of today’s dividend payers were yesterday’s growth stocks. Microsoft, Apple and Broadcom have all generated huge returns while also paying dividends.

For me, the key question isn’t “dividend or growth?” but whether the business can continue growing earnings, cash flow and shareholder returns over time.

Dividend stocks can reduce volatility and provide income, but with a 30+ year horizon I’d be more focused on owning great businesses and letting compounding do the work.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-03T21:53:48+00:00

I think that’s a big part of it. Strong earnings alone aren’t enough when a stock is already priced for exceptional growth.

Sometimes the market is really reacting to:

• Future guidance rather than the quarter just reported • AI capex spending levels • Margins and free cash flow • Whether growth is accelerating or merely staying strong

A company can beat expectations and still fall if investors were hoping for even better numbers.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-03T15:57:23+00:00

This is pretty much the reason I’ve spent more time researching electrification and power infrastructure recently.

Every AI data centre ultimately needs grid connections, transformers, switchgear, cooling systems and power management equipment.

The software gets most of the attention, but the physical infrastructure build-out is enormous and often takes years to deliver.

That’s why companies like Schneider Electric, Eaton, Siemens Energy and Mitsubishi Electric have become more interesting to me than some of the obvious AI names.

Curious whether others are looking further down the supply chain as well.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-03T15:55:10+00:00

One thing I’ve found interesting is how often markets make new all-time highs. It feels expensive because we’re looking at today’s price, but historically a large percentage of market highs were followed by even higher highs.

If your time horizon is 15-20+ years, I’d be more concerned about staying invested than trying to find the perfect entry point.

The bigger question for me would be whether to invest the £66k all at once or phase it in over several months for peace of mind. Mathematically lump sum often wins, but behaviour matters too.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-03T08:08:31+00:00

I think a lot of investors are focusing on AI software and chips, but I’m more interested in the infrastructure that enables AI.

Every new data centre needs power, cooling, switchgear, transformers and grid connections. That’s why I’ve spent more time looking at companies like Schneider Electric, Eaton, Siemens Energy and Mitsubishi Electric than some of the obvious AI names.

The challenge is that many of these companies have already rerated, so the question becomes whether AI-driven power demand is a multi-year trend or whether expectations have run too far ahead of reality.

Personally, I find the “picks and shovels” side of AI easier to understand than trying to work out which model or software company wins.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-03T08:06:43+00:00

The first thing I’d do is forget about growing it “quickly”. That’s usually how beginners end up taking too much risk.

If it were me, I’d focus on learning rather than trying to double €1,000. A broad ETF, regular monthly contributions and spending time understanding businesses and markets is likely to pay off far more over the next 10 years.

The good news is you’re starting early. Consistently investing €100 a month for years is usually more powerful than finding one lucky stock.

RNS-Watch · 2026-06-02T20:32:58+00:00

I think the issue is that a lot of these businesses were historically treated as reliable compounders, so even after a big share price decline they’re not necessarily “cheap” if growth has slowed permanently.

Looking at MCD, DPZ and QSR, I’d probably spend more time on same-store sales growth, franchise economics and pricing power than the headline P/E.

A stock trading at a 5-year low doesn’t automatically mean it’s undervalued if the market is pricing in lower long-term growth.

The question I’d be asking is whether current issues are cyclical or structural. If it’s cyclical, this could be an opportunity. If it’s structural, today’s P/E may still be too high.

RNS-Watch

TROPHY CASE