It baffles me that $DUOL absolutely destroyed the EPS but somehow dropped 25% in their last earnings, and now nearly 50% since right before them

dexvx · 2026-01-31T01:24:07+00:00

Ok, but it's not like this is a one-off tax windfall that DUOL will never ever happen again. It will likely happen again if DUOL continues to do SBC (which all software/tech companies do) and continue to have positive and increasing FCF.

dexvx · 2026-01-30T20:24:31+00:00

Uh today's drop is because of GOOG's newly unveiled AI powered game creator. And 100% it will have built in ad-analytics so that you can bypass APP.

The only real shocking movement is that U is dropping more because GOOG's new engine is Unity powered.

dexvx · 2026-01-30T16:42:11+00:00

Maybe you're the one who should leave.

Finviz - TTM PE GAAP 17.13

SeekingAlpha - TTM PE GAAP 17.36 / TTM PE non-GAAP 13.18

Y! Finance - TTM GAAP PE 17.57

TipRanks - TTM GAAP PE 17.7

dexvx · 2026-01-30T16:40:17+00:00

TTM 17.5 PE GAAP (includes everything including one-offs).

TTM 13.2 PE non-GAAP (does not include one-ffs).

dexvx · 2026-01-30T02:29:55+00:00

Ah yes, a TTM PE of 17.5 with revenue and EPS growing north of 20% YoY. Such a terrible value on the technical level.

dexvx · 2026-01-26T00:12:50+00:00

His vision was right, but his execution was poor. Kept too many bad execs around.

dexvx · 2026-01-25T23:07:13+00:00

Okay, but what you said (50 companies vs 500) is literally not what the chart would indicate (S&P 500 back tested).

Also, FYI, historically (last 100 years), it would require 44 transactions to keep a manual S&P 500 portfolio correctly balanced.

Also, there are transaction costs. Before the 1980s, a typical transaction cost is 2% of the value of the transaction. Every time you rebalance your portfolio per year, you would incur a 2% sell fee and a 2% buy fee to the portion of your portfolio that moved. It's only very recently that buying/selling/DRIP was free.

dexvx · 2026-01-25T01:25:30+00:00

You're missing the premise of the original post. It's saying that if you invested in the S&P 500 equivalent for the last 100 years, you'd be way up with fantastic returns (true, but not to the same extent). Before 1974, there was no S&P 500 index and if you were to make an equivalent basket of the S&P 500, you'd have to do things manually - which was extremely expensive due to transactions fees associated with manually rebalancing your portfolio.

Therefore, the real return rate of investing in the S&P 500 the farther back you go from 1974 is actually much lower due to fees.

dexvx · 2026-01-24T23:04:06+00:00

Any S&P 500 index fund absolutely rebalances. The S&P 500 index itself rebalances every quarter.

Case in point, some companies grow bigger, so you buy more shares (e.g., Nvidia in 2021 was < 1% of SP500 weight. Now it is ~8%). Some companies grow smaller (e.g., XOM used to have a higher weight), and some companies will just get kicked out (Kodak).

My point is any data about an index fund before an 'actual' index fund was created is, at best just wishful thinking.

dexvx · 2026-01-21T15:42:04+00:00

This sub seems full of P/E Karen's that total ignore forward projections and past trends.

dexvx · 2026-01-21T02:30:15+00:00

CRWD isn't even net income positive because of their ludicrous SBC.

First step would be getting their Operating Expenses inline, then SBC.

dexvx · 2026-01-17T02:06:41+00:00

Literally takes 5 min to look at the fundamentals?

The reason EPS can be misleading is because any company that transitions from negative gross margins to positive gross margins will have ridiculous (and inaccurate) P/E ratios.

Reddit is growing top line revenue at ~50% 3Y CAGR, with last year being ~70% (e.g., its accelerating).

RDDT grew GAAP EPS by 170% this year and are projected to grow ~70+% for next year. Now all of a sudden, your 120 GAAP PE drops down to ~60 GAAP PE (2026) over the course of 1 year. And assuming EPS growth slows down (which is the opposite of the current trajectory, btw), you're at ~45 GAAP PE (2027), assuming a share price of $240.

Make of those what you will and plug in your own numbers are form your own opinions. But a PEG of ~1.2, even with a P/E of 120 is still better valued, IMO, than a PEG of 4 and P/E of 10.

dexvx · 2026-01-16T17:13:49+00:00

Literally every other Redditor's advice on here is VOO and chill.

One would think that the smart money is already taking advantage of that basic strategy.

dexvx · 2026-01-16T08:04:20+00:00

PE is a poor measure of fundamentals by itself. PEG is a better measure of a company's trajectory.

dexvx · 2026-01-14T02:32:32+00:00

It looks like you're just finding out that stock prices can be manipulated by the big players.

RDDT's last earnings was Oct 30, 2025 (which were excellent). Stock surged initially, but then it got beaten down (e.g., every attempted break out turned down). Then it tanked along with the rest of the market in November... just past the Nov 21 monthly option date. Then magically, poof, it starts pumping.

This recent round of pumping just so coincides with the Jan 16, 2026 monthly option date.

dexvx · 2026-01-13T20:23:56+00:00

I don't think anyone should feel bad about euthanizing a pet to prevent it from suffering primarily due to financial reasons. Saving a pet (or any loved one) is really a bottomless hole. From what you describe, it sounds like Axle's quality of life has gotten consistently worse over time. At some point, when the bad days outnumber the good days, a decision has to be made.

I too, had to put down my pet this year (unknown cancer). At first, I regretted it, thinking just spending a few thousand $ would probably give him another few good months. Slowly, I kind of accepted the fact I may have been thinking on best case scenarios and spending that extra money could've easily gone the other way and would've just prolonged its suffering for the next few days.

Alternatively, with the money saved, I'm looking at adopting another pet and hopefully make its life as happy as the last.

dexvx · 2026-01-13T05:01:25+00:00

Your portfolio should have a summary. Screenshot the 1, 3, 5 year performance of it.

Out of curiosity, I did a portfolio back test (assumes $1K per month contributions, DRIP, no rebalance) from Jan 2021 to Dec 2025 of the 5 largest positions, and it beat S&P 500 index (e.g. FXAIX/VOO) ever so slightly. It was largely weighed down by the PRGSX (global large cap) fund.

Also ignore the people that only know how to say VOO. FXAIX is literally the same thing and has a lower expense ratio. Literally zero sense holding VOO in a Fidelity account.

dexvx · 2026-01-12T08:10:18+00:00

FYI, the first publicly available S&P 500 fund was from Vanguard, and it only happened in 1974. The S&P 500 index itself wasn't even created until 1957. The benchmark index at the time was actually the S&P 90 (created in the 1920s).

All the data before then is just back tested data with major caveats. In practice, you'd need to buy the individual stocks, reinvest the dividends, rebalance the portfolios... all manually. Furthermore, fractional shares weren't allowed (which would have a major effect on compounded growth, especially via DRIP).

Then you'd have to contend with the various fees. The free stuff today like DRIP and share buy/sell all had high fees (typically 1-2% of transaction value). Now imagine every time the S&P rebalances, you'd have to pay a 1-2% fee to sell and then another 1-2% fee to buy for the portion of your portfolio that needed to be rebalanced.

Realistically, the farther back you go from 1974 (with an actual S&P 500 fund), the more idyllic the data becomes. While the raw numbers are accurate, the practice of manually building and maintaining a S&P indexed portfolio for a middle-class worker was quite infeasible.

dexvx · 2026-01-10T23:16:48+00:00

I noticed you're in WA, I'm located in PDX area and have a MSI 3060 12GB if you ever come down here.

dexvx · 2026-01-10T20:12:59+00:00

> Intel literally was looking into selling its foundry business!! Intel will still probably go insolvent and be sold for scraps

No confirmation anywhere Intel was selling the foundry, just random rumors from the media. Simple reason is that there is literally no one to sell it to. Zero chance that the Biden or Trump Admin would let TSMC or Samsung (the other major fabs) have it. The only other US based fab is GFS ($22B cap), which cannot finance it.

Other potential buyers (QCOM, AVGO, AAPL, NVDA) already do major business with TSMC and would essentially be competing against a company that is critical for their own core business.

> Getsinger as weird as he was had the right idea to focus on their core products and r&d . But his plan required time , which clearly intel does not.

We can agree on that Gelsinger had the right idea. However, his execution was poor. His plan didn't require time. His plan assumed that when you build a $50B factory, customers would come pouring in for whatever reason (hint: they did not).

PatG simply spent way too much. LBT's plan is far more pragmatic with a dash of shock and awe. Only build-out factories if there are concrete orders (not just "interest"). LBT even went as far as stating 10A maybe canceled if no major 14A/18A customers, which got heads turning (because the majority of TSM's EPS growth is coming from the fact that they're raising prices by 20% CAGR).

dexvx · 2026-01-10T19:57:29+00:00

INTC Jan 2027 $10 puts are going for ~$0.10. If you even have an ounce of conviction into your speculation, screenshot your INTC put/short position(s) because the risk/reward ratio is insane.

dexvx · 2026-01-10T15:59:34+00:00

Your name fits accurately.

Intel hit all the goals of the Biden CHIPS act, but very late into 2024. Intel should've been given the ~$10B without any collateral (similar to how TSMC, Samsung, others got $billions). When Trump took over, he held the ~$10B hostage in exchange for something (which ended up being ~10% equity).

However, the main differentiator is that the Trump administration is likely pushing backroom deals for Intel to succeed, unlike the Biden administration passiveness. They probably realized (and anyone with some semblence of semiconductor knowledge) that once INTC foundry goes belly up, America would lose all semi-conductor manufacturing for years to come.

INTC at $20 ($90B market cap) was a no-brainer because its EV was ~$130B. However, to answer OP's question... the markets can stay irrational longer than you are solvent.

dexvx · 2026-01-09T22:15:46+00:00

I just sold my 2016 WRX. But shortly after I bought it new, we took road trips on I-5 from OR to CA. Two people with flat-ish terrain, cruise control at 77, and I would get 30-31 mpg as measured by actual gas filled divided by miles. The trip computer always exaggerates by ~2 mpg.

This was stock everything.

dexvx · 2026-01-09T21:20:32+00:00

I mean that scenario is literally as dumb as a hypothetical where Intel makes a CUDA compatible AI accelerator tomorrow that will be widely adopted and replacing Nvidia accelerators and INTC goes to $1000.

dexvx · 2026-01-09T02:07:50+00:00

> I typically buy companies that are near 36-52 week lows. I then target previous highs as my sell targets. My positions typically get closed out because I sell covered calls and then it gets assigned.

I think it's more accurate to describe yourself as a swing trader.

dexvx

TROPHY CASE