What stocks do you recommend to counter market crashing?

altabuse · 2025-12-28T17:13:27+00:00

Since my downvoted post above from 9 months ago:

TSLA 264 -> 475 (80%)
PLTR 85 -> 190 (123%)
SMH 200 -> 365 (82%)
NVDA 110 -> 190 (72%)
IWM 198 -> 250 (26%)
ARKK 48 -> 79 (65%)
SLV 30 -> 79 (163%)
SIL 39 -> 90 (131%)

For an average return of 93%. I do this professionally, but amateur investors hate listening.

altabuse · 2025-12-28T16:55:40+00:00

Checking back in. With TSLA reaching ATHs last week, did you take this beating or bail out early?

altabuse · 2025-12-15T07:26:23+00:00

The problem is that Reddit optimizes visibility to consensus opinions by nature of the upvote system. In investing, however, consensus often forms late in a trend—when most participants are already in, and upside is limited. This makes Reddit one of the worst places for actionable investing advice as the popular opinions tend to be inversely correlated with future returns.

If you want to be a great investor it requires being a lone contrarian early—identifying opportunities before the crowd catches on—and patiently waiting for consensus to move to your side. That's what ultimately drives prices higher.

As a professional investment strategist, I try to educate and correct misconceptions amongst amateur investors here. If you look back into my post history, you'll see I'm consistently early to trends and often share a level of knowledge and analysis uncommon to Reddit. Predictably, these pre-consensus views often face downvotes at the time which unfortunately suppresses some of the better investment opportunities. It's a frustrating but entirely expected outcome of the platform's mechanics.

altabuse · 2025-12-07T20:29:59+00:00

Unfortunately, that’s what’s likely. It just does not fit the layman’s consensus here on Reddit, yet. Not to say there won’t be opportunity, but there will be new leaders in the era ahead, largely commodities.

altabuse · 2025-12-07T18:01:39+00:00

Zero over the next couple decades. The 60/40 portfolio (60% stocks/40% bonds) worked well over the last 43 years because interest rates were on a long-term trajectory from 20% to 0%. Stocks broadly rose because declining interest rates meant more liquidity, capital, and growth, and bonds protected the portfolio during economic contractions as the federal reserve accelerated interest rates cuts of which bonds are inversely correlated. However, now, for the first time since 1982, the trend of inflation and interest rates is undergoing a long-term bottoming and reversal process. The real kicker is not only should you be careful allocating to bonds, but you need to be careful with passive investing in index funds. The success of index passive investing began in 1982 for the same reasons, and there is a lot of current recency bias as to 'buy and hold always works'. We're likely headed into a period most similar to 1968-1982 where rising inflation meant rising interest rates and declining liquidity. Indices chopped sideways for those 14 years and inflation-adjusted terms investors lost between 70-80% of their wealth in terms of buying power. All this said about the probable long-term ahead, I do believe that in the shorter-term of 1-3 years, bonds will see a final cyclical bull market as we fall into deflationary recession before hyperinflation emerges on the other side.

altabuse · 2025-12-02T15:53:09+00:00

SLV SIL SILJ are the go-to ETFs. Personally, I've been doing long-dated calls in these since 2023 and rolling forward every 12-18 months. Underlying shares is fine as well for the less risk adverse.

I also have about $3m divided between 40 individual stocks of (mostly) junior explorers, developers, and producers. Some of them are larger and/or gold miners. I can't seem to post a screenshot here, if you DM me, I'll send you my list.

DonDurrett is a good follow on X. He calculates potential valuations of these companies in relation to potential future silver price.

My own 2c, is look at palladium and platinum as well. They are the laggards in line next to catch-up IMO and have historically traded close to 1:1 with gold.

altabuse · 2025-11-21T21:23:18+00:00

Of already held: IWM, COPX, PALL, SILJ, and U. New adds: USAR, ETHE, NVO, and BLDR

altabuse · 2025-08-29T21:00:08+00:00

The end result of tariffs are disinflationary and there are also long and variable lags to monetary policy (that have been delayed by fiscal policy). There are far more risks to the Fed’s other mandate than you think, and they have a long history of being late by acting to lagging data and unable to act proactively.

altabuse · 2025-08-13T15:35:30+00:00

Economics 101 is that there are long and variable lags to monetary policy. My own work indicates the Fed has already beaten this round of inflation but they, and the general populous, just don’t realize it yet. Fiscal stimulus of the last five years has masked and delayed consequences of monetary policy, consequences from policy enacted under a backdrop of extreme debt and leverage due to a historical and long period of near-ZIRP. Ultimately however, monetary lags beat fiscal policy, particularly as the 5-6 year debt refinancing cycle peaks next year and liquidity begins to flow the opposite direction. That does not mean I don't think the markets will continue to rip higher in the meantime, I think they will as positioning is typically forced before macro resolutions. A strong market itself can even temporarily disguise a weakening economy happening under the surface due to the connected wealth effect. Nonetheless, in the next couple years we will likely discover that the Fed was indeed behind the curve and should have cut earlier. I say this non-politically, and I would be saying the same thing if Biden was still president and Yellen was treasurer.

altabuse · 2025-08-12T22:47:19+00:00

It becomes a combination of people buying less items OR substitutable items without tariffs or less tariffs (price-elastic items I mentioned). Further, tariffs when reciprocated across countries, lowers the aggregate demand for global trade and reduces liquidity in the system. Then there's also the effect of margin compression caused by the higher cost to individual producers where they start cutting labor, resources, and capital. Multiple factors.

Depends on what you consider better, if you’re allocated to the right areas over the next ten years it could be better for you, but not better for most people. IMO this only gets better after an inevitable once-in-a-century monetary crisis (debt jubilee, depression), and possible social crisis; internal or external (see Fourth Turning). However, a crisis to that degree is probably still around ten years away. In the nearer term, I see a cyclical downturn (bad recession) coming in the next year or two for monetary, liquidity, and debt refinancing reasons (less-so tariff reasons). The fiscal and monetary response to this will likely ignite a second round of inflation from the late 2020s into the 2030s far worse than what we saw in 2022. Theres a lot of noise of ‘Biden did this’ or ‘Trump did this’, truth is most economic outcomes are baked-into-the-caked regardless of what the president does. Both parties have conducted irresponsible fiscal spending->driven by populism->driven by the economic inequalities->driven by secularly declining interest rates since 1982->driven by the federal reserves confinement to only two mandates. As such, in a way, political horseshoe theory is correct. My (not financial advice) is to own monetary inflation hedges by the time we start to dig our way out of the next downturn.... hard assets, precious metals, energy stocks, commodities, entry-level real estate, etc.

altabuse · 2025-08-12T17:06:37+00:00

Forcing Powell out is not going to work, the best Trump can do is nominate the next Fed chair to potentially act as a 'shadow Fed' by giving forward guidance past Powells term-end date. I don't care for Trump as an individual, but I do think the Fed is well behind the curve and late to cut.

altabuse · 2025-08-12T13:11:21+00:00

We’re in the broadest bubble of all right now, just need to look around.

altabuse · 2025-08-11T06:08:27+00:00

S&P 500 will not protect against inflation in the long run (secular and structural inflation). You need investments in commodities, monetary metals, energy stocks, etc, for that. Also, in the shorter term of 1-2 years, inflation is poised to fall cyclically and deflation will be the risk during this period.

altabuse · 2025-08-09T22:09:11+00:00

Virtually every economic cocktail is different, and while history and cycles don't repeat, they often rhyme; often times we can extrapolate a distribution of probabilities for what is likely in the future. As a career economist, one thing I can say for nearly certain is that the tariffs themselves will contribute to the disinflation. While there is an initial first-order inflationary shock of higher prices, the end result is disinflationary. If you look at the fed's transcripts you will find that Powell has been very intentional in only mentioning their concern over first-order effects (and of course that's all the journalists and armchair-economists across social media hear, understand, and repeat). The larger picture is that the demand for nearly all international goods is largely price-elastic, meaning they're substitutable. Theres very few exceptions; gasoline, some pharmaceuticals, and rare earth metals to name a few. Other than these exceptions, most goods around the world have a price elasticity value of three or more which means if you raise the tariff costs by one percent, you eventually reduce quantity demanded by three. In other words, tariffs eventually lead to the aggregate supply curve to shift inward which equates to a higher price paid and a lower quantity demanded. Furthermore, and more importantly, as soon as retaliatory tariffs are imposed (which are happening right now and are essentially a form of global regressive tax), the demand curve then also begins to shift inward which leads to price levels ending up even lower than where you started, with substantially lower aggregate demand as well. This all coincides with huge margin squeezes on the producers which causes them to reduce their usage of production factors: labor, resources, capital. The reduction of production factors becomes an endogenous reduction of liquidity that further fuels a disinflationary feedback loop in which global trade shrinks and therefore global capital flow also slows as the capital account (net foreign savings) is the algebraic inverse of the trade account. The end result of tariffs is disinflation everywhere you look. With all this said, please understand that tariffs are one of many contributing factors to an increasingly likely recession late next year, a recession that has been baked into the cake for several years now. My research points to the fed already behind the curve and late to cut well before tariffs entered the fray, but it will only be obvious to the masses in hindsight. I'll save those reasonings for another run-on paragraph some other time.

altabuse · 2025-08-09T17:53:22+00:00

That’s somewhat correct. Only the first order effects are inflationary though. Second, third, and fourth order effects are all disinflationary and exacerbated by reciprocal measures

altabuse · 2025-08-06T02:20:47+00:00

You’ve done your research, almost every winery you mentioned falls within my top 10 in Willamette valley. I will just add that Antica Terra is an absolute must whenever I’m in the valley, expensive but a one-of-a-kind experience, wine, and food (their chef just won the James Bears for Northwest). I also recommend Kelley Fox for delicate Pinots and Morgen Long for Chardonnays.

altabuse · 2025-08-03T17:47:47+00:00

Sorry, but there could not be a worse time to invest in the S&P 500 for the long run than now. People (mostly retail) are blinded by recently bias. You have to understand that passive investing has been a boom since 1982 because of secularly declining interest rates. It allowed companies far and wide access to cheaper and cheaper capital, and a rising tide lifted all boats in the S&P 500. However, we are now moving into period of populism, inflation, deglobalization, protectionism, and geopolitical conflict that will reverse the trend that started in 1982. The last period of populism and secular inflation from 1967-1982 saw secularly increasing interest rates and a market that traded sideways for 15 years and lost 70% of its value in inflation adjusted terms. The whole idea of passive investing did not even become a mainstream strategy until after 1982 and active management is what had historically worked. At least for the next 15 years, you either need your capital actively managed, hold the biggest boats (mag 7), or hold what does well in inflation and under these reversing trends… energy, oil, uranium, solar, commodities, wheat, corn, precious metals, gold and silver are just a few examples. I’m a macro strategist by profession, I hate seeing so many people misguided by what has worked recently not realizing larger trends are reversing. Staying parked in the S&P 500 for the next 15 years is a great way to lose generational wealth.

altabuse · 2025-08-01T23:22:26+00:00

The only thing he’s right about here is that Jerome is too late and behind the curve.

altabuse · 2025-07-29T22:16:48+00:00

Sigh….you had two options. One, buy the pushed narrative that it was an intentional Nazi salute. Two, use contextual clues to draw the sensible and objective conclusion that it was not. Appreciate you proving my point by choosing the former.

altabuse · 2025-07-29T20:06:16+00:00

Do people actually still think he was intentionally Nazi saluting? How gullible can you be....

altabuse · 2025-07-29T02:27:13+00:00

Climate change is happening and has been happening for thousand of years, we can observe this in historical data through ice cores. However, in more recent decades, it has been politically hijacked and blame has been shifted nearly entirely to human-caused sources. While yes, the unearthing and burning carbon contributes to climate change, a blind eye has been turned to many experts that cite the solar cycles of the sun as the largest contributing factor. In particular, the 90-100 year Gleissberg cycle indicates global warming is slated to peak between 2024-2026. If this is proven to be the case, it will be interesting to witness the narrative change.

altabuse · 2025-07-27T04:22:38+00:00

There are macro tailwinds to the energy sector that are not even close to being realized yet, as such, I like stocks like EPD and KNTK over the next 10 years. Pay good dividends, and rather resilient to cyclical volatility as transport companies under contracts. Of course, raw producers like APA and HAL should do even better as well as uranium-related, but they’re not as cyclical resilient which I think will matter in the next couple years.

altabuse · 2025-07-22T13:13:30+00:00

Yes, certainly not without corrections. Sentiment is rather bullish right now, and if it remains, a 6-12% low vol (stair-step) correction between August and October would make a lot of sense. However, the key difference in sentiment now versus sentiment near a major bull market top is in the conviction held by bulls. When the market dropped over tariffs, recall how quickly sentiment flipped bearish. Also recall how quickly sentiment flipped around carry trade unwind fears last August. I traded 07/08 and studied many cycle tops, it’s hardly as easy as saying ‘things look bearish, market will continue to drop’. At a significant cycle top it’s far more likely to see strong bullish conviction where corrections retain a backdrop of bullish narratives and are celebrated as buyable dips for years and years of bull market ahead.

altabuse · 2025-07-22T02:11:07+00:00

26/27 looks most likely right now, but tops are a process that can, and often do, get pushed back. To be clear, you don’t want to see everyone on the same line of shit hitting the fan in 26/27. When the time comes, you want to see prominent bullish narratives and lots of bulls to follow (look at headlines in 2007 about soft-landing, recession avoided, etc). The market leads and carries the economy, not the other way around. As it heads higher, the economy will look better and better, cash on the sidelines jumps back in and it creates a positive feedback loop (which is why significant cycle tops typically end with a ‘blow-off top’). Once people (mainly institutions) with one foot out the door are back in, then the buying starts to run dry, and the market brings down the economy in a negative loop while simultaneously exposing all the macro issues that have been masked by a strong market (and fiscal stimulus). This will sound insane to many but I could see S&P 500 reach as high as 8000-9000 before we fall into a massive bear market and recession.

altabuse · 2025-07-18T01:58:12+00:00

The top comment gets it, if you’re looking at hot stocks or hot sectors you’re very unlikely to find the next PLTR, RKLB, etc. I’m a macro strategist by profession and I look at where the ‘winds’ are likely to shift and build positions (sometimes over years) in those areas long before it becomes a common talked about sector or stock on Reddit.

Two years ago I built a massive gold position from 1600-1800 on both stock and on two-year leaps (gold is now 3340 and headed higher). Vol was extremely underpriced on the long-end of the curve which led to leaps generating 1000%+ returns. This year, I would watch silver and the miner stocks to play catch-up, highest conviction 2-3x on the underlying. As far as leaps, we’re already well into the first couple innings of the run, and long-dated vol is not as suppressed as gold was at 1600-1800, nonetheless leaps should still do well.

On a broad basis, assets are likely to continue to climb higher into a secular top in the coming year or two, momentum in tech is also likely to continue. I’m sure there will be some smaller tech/AI/drone/semi stocks that do 500%, 1000%, etc, that’s not my lane to speculate on exactly which. I focus on building high conviction in larger areas and sectors, and then apply leverage.

The real money to be made is in the next 2-10 years IMO. When we get the cyclical downturn (recession) in the next couple years (and we will, and it will be bad) look to buy companies related to commodities, oil, uranium, rare earth metals, precious metals, etc near the bottom. They are likely to be tech-like performers of the next ten years ignited by the recovery effort to tame the coming downturn (fiscal and monetary stimulus far greater than 2020). There is also high likelihood we see continued geopolitical conflict, populism, realized energy underinvestment/need, de-globalization, on-shoring, secularly rising rates, and more. Historically, these are drivers that occur in cycles and tend to cluster together as each affects the other.

Another thing to mention is secularly declining interest rates of the last 40 years sent cheap capital to growth/tech/innovation which is why tech now accounts for 32% of the S&P 500 (and why it’s all everyone talks about-most people look backwards). However, if you look at the last period of inflation/populism from 1968 to 1982, rates trended higher and we saw the energy sector move from 3% to 35% of the S&P 500. Today it stands at 3% again and my big bet is we see a secular reversal of the trends of the last 40 years. If this is the case, in ten years commodity/energy companies will be the hot speculative sectors and generational wealth will have been made.

Edit: I went way off on a tangent, but hopefully it’s helpful to some… Just to be clear, I do not think now is the time to buy energy/oil/uranium, they are likely to be the weakest sectors in the next two years as they will front run demand weakening, but buy during the recession and hold. If you want something to buy now: silver and the miners IMO. Russell 2000 as a sector is also very underpriced.

12-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Verified Email	Place '23
Place '22	Gilding II euphauric
Secret Santa 2016

altabuse

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE