|
Limit Up posted:"fundamental arbitrage". Limit Up posted:I like fundamentals and can go all day on that as well
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 04:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
dv6speed posted:I love this phrase. [fundamental arbitrage] Then surely you should love the concept of a stock selling for less than its net working capital. They do exist here and there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 05:41
|
|
|
Hobologist posted:Then surely you should love the concept of a stock selling for less than its net working capital. They do exist here and there. What I would love however, is an easier way to find them!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 05:47
|
|
|
dv6speed posted:Who doesn't love that? I don't care what kind of investor or trader you are... you will buy that one. It's pretty easy to find closed-end funds selling at significant discounts to their NAV, it's not exactly what you're talking about but it is an equity priced lower than the assets it represents.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 07:09
|
|
|
dv6speed posted:Who doesn't love that? I don't care what kind of investor or trader you are... you will buy that one. Well, in the words of Jeremy Clarkson, I've been on the Internet, and I found this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 07:31
|
|
|
Vanan posted:Is there anything out there like a "fantasy" trading simulator? I'd like to see if I can make good picks without actually risking money. http://www.updown.com is fantastic. There is even a goon group on there. The Noble Neckbeards Investment Club. On another note, does anyone else feel like shorting AAPL these days? I'm thinking the sales numbers for the iPad will be abysmal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 09:29
|
|
|
Jreedy88 posted:On another note, does anyone else feel like shorting AAPL these days? I'm thinking the sales numbers for the iPad will be abysmal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
Jreedy88 posted:On another note, does anyone else feel like shorting AAPL these days? I'm thinking the sales numbers for the iPad will be abysmal. But I won't be shorting them again- the amount of fanboys who will buy it no matter what is going to boost their sales. And you still have to worry about their continuously improving Macbook sales. The only time to reliably short them is right before the pre-announcement run up drops off
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 19:49
|
|
|
I've been reading a lot on technical analysis but trying to find these chart patterns makes me  Can you point me to some good fundamental analysis reading?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2010 20:02
|
|
|
so, anyone actually think AMSC is worth keeping for a long?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 17:26
|
|
|
Jreedy88 posted:On another note, does anyone else feel like shorting AAPL these days? I'm thinking the sales numbers for the iPad will be abysmal. Do remember how incredibly crappy the first ipod was? Don't worry, there should be a newer/better/cheaper ipad coming out just as soon as all the Apple "aficionados" have all scooped up theirs. Apple not be lazy, and I'm betting the current version won't stay that way for long... I'd need bigger cojones to short a company that made >1000% over the past decade, not to mention their hoards of cash and growing market share.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 17:56
|
|
|
Does anyone know of a fund that focuses on solid domestic companies that pay dividends (JNJ, GE, etc.), and that doesn't have insane load/fees?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
They are out there... never looked into them myself. If you already know exactly what type of companies you want, why not just buy the stocks yourself, save on loads/fees and collect the nice dividends as cash in your account?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2010 23:10
|
|
|
mcsuede posted:Does anyone know of a fund that focuses on solid domestic companies that pay dividends (JNJ, GE, etc.), and that doesn't have insane load/fees? ExxonMobil Corporation (XOM) 6.36% General Electric Company (GE) 3.30% J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) 3.13% AT&T, Inc. (T) 3.03% Bank of America Corporation (BAC) 2.78% Chevron Corporation (CVX) 2.68% Wells Fargo Company (WFC) 2.34% Pfizer Inc. (PFE) 2.12% Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) 1.68% Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) 1.63% There are like a billion indexes that track large cap value/dividend stocks, plenty of different ones to choose from.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 02:33
|
|
|
dv6speed posted:They are out there... never looked into them myself. Lower investment threshold for more diversification, same reason anyone buys funds. Also just doing a bit of anti-volatility planning/thinking. Edit: Actually Vanguard has two ETFs that fit my initial bill, garners further research. VYM and VIG. mcsuede fucked around with this message at 06:35 on Feb 8, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 06:23
|
|
|
PsychoAndy posted:Now I'm pissed at myself for covering my short in silver. For some reason I had it in my head that 15 was decent support for silver; totally wrong. Live and learn I guess. Limit Up posted:
Gold futures up 20 bucks. Silver up 42 cents. Some sick moves. I'd be happy with that cover  . Very nice trade Psycho.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 09:55
|
|
|
I haven't seen anyone post about it, but lumber futures have been exhibiting some unusual action for the past month, up 36.9% with large specs fueling the move.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 13:03
|
|
|
Would that have anything to do with rebuilding cities destroyed in Haiti?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 17:07
|
|
|
mcsuede posted:Does anyone know of a fund that focuses on solid domestic companies that pay dividends (JNJ, GE, etc.), and that doesn't have insane load/fees? VDIGX (managed by Wellington and with a low expense ratio) is close to what you are looking for. For a passive option, VIG as you mentioned is a close proxy. Careful with VYM (high dividends do not mean stability). Bridgeway Blue Chip 35 (BRLIX) is another option. Also low expense ratio.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2010 23:06
|
|
|
Free Gucci Mane posted:Is short-selling really that much harder than just normal trading? Like take for example CDE, a mining company, that was up near 20 a month ago and has plunged steadily since. Would I be able to short-sell CDE shares while it was plunging--would my brokerage be able to loan shares or whatever to me and would people actually be willing to buy those shares? Interested to know if you did this. CDE down 8.57% today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 00:47
|
|
|
ElehemEare posted:Interested to know if you did this. CDE down 8.57% today. No I'm afraid I don't have a margin account with my actual broker right now so I'm just limited to imagining the money I could have earned  I'm surprised it's still dropping though, thought that it would've recovered a bit by now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 00:53
|
|
|
80k posted:VDIGX (managed by Wellington and with a low expense ratio) is close to what you are looking for. Thanks as always 80k, I'll look into those.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 02:11
|
|
|
lazybrain posted:Do remember how incredibly crappy the first ipod was? Don't worry, there should be a newer/better/cheaper ipad coming out just as soon as all the Apple "aficionados" have all scooped up theirs. Apple not be lazy, and I'm betting the current version won't stay that way for long... Thanks for this, and all the others who contributed to keep me from shorting it. Next concern: what to do about Toyota? Stay the hell away from it or throw some cash it for when the media lets it go and things get back to normal? There's also talk of a second recall coming on the Prius. Also: BRK.B: 14% annualized return over the past 20 years. With the 50-to-1 split there's a lot of interest here. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 05:01
|
|
|
Jreedy88 posted:Thanks for this, and all the others who contributed to keep me from shorting it. Next concern: what to do about Toyota? Stay the hell away from it or throw some cash it for when the media lets it go and things get back to normal? There's also talk of a second recall coming on the Prius. I can't comment on BRK.B because I don't understand it yet. Don't jump on TM right now. Calling bottoms is for suckers and if it recovers you'll have plenty of chances to buy on the way up. Long-only plays of the best names in the current market are sketchy, long-only plays in stocks trading 10% below their 200 day SMA is for people who hate money. If you feel that you absolutely must trade TM, play the vol. Depending on how things look at 11:00 tomorrow I may put on a Feb 75 straddle, but that's only because I'm a loving moron.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 06:48
|
|
|
Limit Up posted:
P/E is price over earnings per share. It can be shown as either trailing twelve months(ttm) or as a forward ratio. P/E ttm refers to price over EPS accumulated over the previous twelve months. Forward P/E refers to price over next year's anticipated earnings per share. Generally speaking, the higher the P/E, the more optimistic investors are about a company's future earnings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 07:12
|
|
|
TheChimney posted:P/E is price over earnings per share. It can be shown as either trailing twelve months(ttm) or as a forward ratio. P/E ttm refers to price over EPS accumulated over the previous twelve months. Forward P/E refers to price over next year's anticipated earnings per share. I have to assume that Limit Up is talking about the avoidance of value traps. P/E is correctly defined, but in terms of usefulness in valuation the canonical view is that it cannot be considered separately from growth. Damodaran of Damodaran on Valuation, one of the more useful toolbooks on valuation in my opinion, teaches us that the correct earnings multiple is essentially 1/(the market's required return on equity - expected growth rate of the company), both expressed as a decimal. This equation is simply the convergence of an infinite series of payments being discounted to present value. Many market participants like the PEG, or properly speaking P/E/G, but the problem is, as Damodaran notes, value, P/E, and G are not in a linear relationship, although for the values of P/E and G that are likely to be encountered in the real world this doesn't typically become an issue, particularly since PEG is commonly used for relative valuation. It is, however, his contention that no company can have a permanent growth rate higher than the growth of the GDP of the places it does business, otherwise it would just be endlessly expanding its niche and taking over more and more of the entire economy (see also Goldman Sachs.) There are slightly more complicated pricing models in his book that take into account. It is also important to consider that the earnings component is highly idiosyncratic and for most firms varies from year to year, and negative earnings makes a lot of these equations fall apart. For this reason, most value investors estimate a firm's "earnings power," by looking at a firm's earnings history over the length of at least a business cycle and, of course, apply their own perceptions of the business's prospects (consciously or not). For example, it has always annoyed me that many financial companies were grouped in the value category in 2006-7 simply on the basis of their low P/E ratios, when in reality the risks inherent in their operations simply could not justify a higher one. This has perhaps caused an undeserved tarnishing of the reputation of value investing. Join us fundamental guys. Do not be afraid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 08:42
|
|
|
Most market participants use FCF before any of that EPS stuff too. See CRM & VMW for obvious examples.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 15:58
|
|
|
Jack posted:Most market participants use FCF before any of that EPS stuff too. See CRM & VMW for obvious examples. From what I understand, you shouldn't be to quick to dismiss relative valuation methods(comparing P/E, PEG, EV/EBITDA, and other ratios to competitors and industry averages to find relatively undervalued stocks) in favor of discounted cash flows. Tiny miscalculations in the discount rate or other inputs to a DCF model can have huge impacts on your valuation. Because of this, there are still quite a few managers and analysts who favor using multiples to value stocks. TheChimney fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Feb 9, 2010 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 20:57
|
|
|
double post
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 21:00
|
|
|
TheChimney posted:From what I understand, you shouldn't be to quick to dismiss relative valuation methods(comparing P/E, PEG, EV/EBITDA, and other ratios to competitors and industry averages to find relatively undervalued stocks) in favor of discounted cash flows. Tiny miscalculations in the discount rate or other inputs to a DCF model can have huge impacts on your valuation. Because of this, there are still quite a few managers and analysts who favor using multiples to value stocks. FCF, not DCF. FCF is said to be more useful than earnings; it is earnings plus depreciation and amortization minus capital expenditures, and relieves certain businesses of excessive depreciation charges. Qwest, for example, looks more attractive when you put back about $800 million in excessive depreciation every year. And I take the position that a multiple of earnings power is an absolute measure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2010 21:20
|
|
|
Hobologist posted:FCF, not DCF. FCF is said to be more useful than earnings; it is earnings plus depreciation and amortization minus capital expenditures, and relieves certain businesses of excessive depreciation charges. Qwest, for example, looks more attractive when you put back about $800 million in excessive depreciation every year. Sorry, whenever I have spoken about FCF with other it has been about forecasting FCF in the future and discounting them to present value. I agree with you that FCF are more useful than Earnings. As one of my professors says, "earnings is just an opinion, cash is a fact."
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 03:15
|
|
|
I decided a few days ago to go long on Sirius XM. I might have hopped on this bandwagon too late, but I don't think so. Pretty sure this stock is going to at least 1.00$. I don't think this qualifies as Penny Stock discussion given their market cap and their listing on NASDAQ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 04:28
|
|
|
I have a quick question on LEAPS options. Someone told me that LEAPS options are European style options but I can't find any information on that online. Do LEAPS behave like regular options or the European style?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 08:15
|
|
|
kholdstayr posted:I have a quick question on LEAPS options. Someone told me that LEAPS options are European style options but I can't find any information on that online. Do LEAPS behave like regular options or the European style? Depends on the underlying. In general options on indexes are European-style (though there are exceptions), options on equities are American-style.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 14:57
|
|
|
Duey posted:I decided a few days ago to go long on Sirius XM. I might have hopped on this bandwagon too late, but I don't think so. Pretty sure this stock is going to at least 1.00$ I may be listening to Octane right now, but I don't know that I'd want to click buy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 22:42
|
|
|
Duey posted:I decided a few days ago to go long on Sirius XM. I might have hopped on this bandwagon too late, but I don't think so. Pretty sure this stock is going to at least 1.00$. I don't think this qualifies as Penny Stock discussion given their market cap and their listing on NASDAQ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 23:25
|
|
|
Macrophage posted:I don't know if I'd want to go long on it. With Stern's contract renewal coming up it could become a very volatile stock Realistically he's not going to leave. You're right though that his negotiations will increase the volatility of it. But they got another year extension to prevent being de-listed and the stock has been moving upward for the last year or so. The stock is in what looks like a mild downtrend at the moment, but long term uptrend. I won't hold it for much more than a year though because of 2 things, their debt load is still pretty big, and they will have to replace those satellites soon. But they added 250,000+ subscribers in the 4Q and their earnings estimate for later this month looks good. So a lot of good, a lot of bad. It's a gamble, but I didn't put much of my portfolio down so, upside I make some money, downside I lose some.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 23:29
|
|
|
Duey posted:It's a gamble As long as you realize you are gambling and not investing. We should team up with PITR and make a "Gambling via the Market" thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2010 23:48
|
|
|
Is there a reason you guys don't have thinkorswim listed as recommended brokers? They are really great for trading options.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 00:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
ThinkorSwim is fantastic, if I was a bigger fish I'd use them absolutely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2010 01:10
|
|