YLYLYL personal page - To The Moon

YLYLYL

YLYLYL

No personal profile

25Follow

3Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-03-15

Can u have a like and comment pls

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-03-15

Can I have a like and comment pls

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-02-16

Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too

With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy

2021-03-17

Can I have a like and comment pls

Why These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday

2021-03-17

Can I have a like and comment pls

Zoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners

2021-03-10

Comment and like pls

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-03-16

Can I have a like and comment pls

How To Spot A Bubble

2021-03-09

Can I have some likes and comments pls

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-03-11

Help to comment and like pls

US Daylight Saving Time

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3574340444890290","uuid":"3574340444890290","gmtCreate":1611328467873,"gmtModify":1613106591860,"name":"YLYLYL","pinyin":"ylylyl","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":3,"headSize":25,"tweetSize":0,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.03.03","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-1","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Elite Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 30","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"60.63%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":4,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":324959253,"gmtCreate":1615955083972,"gmtModify":1704788896638,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and&nbsp;comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and&nbsp;comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324959253","repostId":"1140620694","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1140620694","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615953301,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1140620694?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-17 11:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1140620694","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.\nWhat happened\nIt was a terrib","content":"<p>It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.</p>\n<p><b>What happened</b></p>\n<p>It was a terrible Tuesday for most marijuana stocks, particularly the Canadian ones.<b>Tilray</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:TLRY)&nbsp;sank by nearly 12%, while its partner-to-be&nbsp;<b>Aphria</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:APHA)&nbsp;fell by 9%.<b>Canopy Growth</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:CGC),<b>Aurora Cannabis</b>&nbsp;(NYSE:ACB),<b>Organigram Holdings</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:OGI), and&nbsp;<b>HEXO</b>&nbsp;(NYSE:HEXO)&nbsp;were close behind, sliding at rates from 4% to 7%.</p>\n<p><b>So what</b></p>\n<p>If there's one thing investors despise, it's uncertainty. Tuesday's big question mark was New York, which is considered by many weed-watchers to be the next likely state to legalize recreational marijuana.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e57ae152cd078baebb7ec2593604d8\" tg-width=\"2000\" tg-height=\"1125\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.</span></p>\n<p>Yet on Tuesday, there were conflicting media reports about the state government's decision to flip the switch.</p>\n<p>The Albany-based&nbsp;<i>Times Union</i>, for example, published an article that day headlined \"Legislature nears deal on recreational marijuana legalization.\" Yet Marijuana Moment quoted state Senate majority leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins as saying negotiations over such legislation \"reached a little bit of an impasse.\"</p>\n<p><b>Now what</b></p>\n<p>Much of this uncertainty can be attributed to the usual political horse-trading that goes into any significant piece of legislation. Most sensible New Yorkers -- even the politicians -- realize that the state is facing a&nbsp;budgetary chasm&nbsp;and desperately needs good tax revenue sources.</p>\n<p>At the end of the day, for all the political noise, New York seems to be barreling straight toward recreational legalization. This might ultimately be the factor driving the prices of Canadian&nbsp;pot companies&nbsp;down; after all, it's their American peers that will be able to immediately pounce on the New York market, not them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-17 11:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/16/why-these-top-marijuana-stocks-got-slammed-today/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.\nWhat happened\nIt was a terrible Tuesday for most marijuana stocks, particularly the Canadian ones.Tilray (NASDAQ:TLRY) sank by ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/16/why-these-top-marijuana-stocks-got-slammed-today/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"APHA":"Aphria Inc.","CGC":"Canopy Growth Corporation","TLRY":"Tilray Inc.","OGI":"ORGANIGRAM HOLD","ACB":"奥罗拉大麻公司"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/16/why-these-top-marijuana-stocks-got-slammed-today/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1140620694","content_text":"It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.\nWhat happened\nIt was a terrible Tuesday for most marijuana stocks, particularly the Canadian ones.Tilray (NASDAQ:TLRY) sank by nearly 12%, while its partner-to-be Aphria (NASDAQ:APHA) fell by 9%.Canopy Growth (NASDAQ:CGC),Aurora Cannabis (NYSE:ACB),Organigram Holdings (NASDAQ:OGI), and HEXO (NYSE:HEXO) were close behind, sliding at rates from 4% to 7%.\nSo what\nIf there's one thing investors despise, it's uncertainty. Tuesday's big question mark was New York, which is considered by many weed-watchers to be the next likely state to legalize recreational marijuana.\nIMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.\nYet on Tuesday, there were conflicting media reports about the state government's decision to flip the switch.\nThe Albany-based Times Union, for example, published an article that day headlined \"Legislature nears deal on recreational marijuana legalization.\" Yet Marijuana Moment quoted state Senate majority leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins as saying negotiations over such legislation \"reached a little bit of an impasse.\"\nNow what\nMuch of this uncertainty can be attributed to the usual political horse-trading that goes into any significant piece of legislation. Most sensible New Yorkers -- even the politicians -- realize that the state is facing a budgetary chasm and desperately needs good tax revenue sources.\nAt the end of the day, for all the political noise, New York seems to be barreling straight toward recreational legalization. This might ultimately be the factor driving the prices of Canadian pot companies down; after all, it's their American peers that will be able to immediately pounce on the New York market, not them.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CGC":0.9,"ACB":0.9,"TLRY":0.9,"APHA":0.9,"OGI":0.9,"HEXO":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2443,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324950815,"gmtCreate":1615954974237,"gmtModify":1704788895503,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls&nbsp;","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls&nbsp;","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324950815","repostId":"2120972106","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2120972106","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615953662,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2120972106?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-17 12:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Zoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2120972106","media":"Insider Monkey","summary":"Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘","content":"<p>Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘Artisan Global Discovery Fund’ fourth quarter 2020 investor letter. A return of 16.95% was recorded by its Investor Class: APFDX, 17% by its Advisor Class: APDDX, and 17.05% by its Institutional Class: APHDX, in the fourth quarter of 2020, outperforming its MSCI All Country World benchmark that delivered a 14.68% return in the same period. You can view the fund’s top 5 holdings to have a peek at their top bets for 2021.</p>\n<p>Artisan Global Discovery Fund, in their Q4 2020 investor letter, mentioned <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a> Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM) and emphasized their views on the company. Zoom Video Communications, Inc. is a California-based communications technology company that currently has a $100.3 billion market capitalization. Since the beginning of the year, ZM delivered a 1.99% return, impressively extending its 12-month gains to 209.65%. As of March 15, 2021, the stock closed at $350 per share.</p>\n<p>Here is what Artisan Global Discovery Fund has to say about Zoom Video Communications, Inc. in their Q4 2020 investor letter:</p>\n<blockquote>\n \"Among our bottom contributors in Q4 was Zoom Video Communications. Shares of Zoom Video Communications were pressured amid the strong vaccine data released during the quarter. Furthermore, the company’s Q3 results, though incredibly strong, showed signs of deceleration from prior quarters’ torrid pace. While there will be a reduced need for some videoconferencing use cases on the other side of the pandemic, we believe there is a strong case to be made that the pandemic has prompted a permanent inflection in videoconferencing’s importance—given sustainably higher remote work arrangements, more online learning options and less business travel. Furthermore, the company’s dramatically expanded user base (up 485% YOY in Q3) positions it well to cross sell additional services, Zoom Phone in particular. The long-term future remains bright, but we acknowledge the near-term headwinds and have trimmed our position to a modest size.\"\n</blockquote>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3df6f4f5869e2d45f06c2e8c104114c5\" tg-width=\"750\" tg-height=\"500\"><span>Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock.com</span></p>\n<p>Our calculations show that Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM)&nbsp;does not belong in our list of the&nbsp;30 Most <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BPOPM\">Popular</a> Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As of the end of the fourth quarter of 2020, Zoom Video Communications, Inc. was in 59 hedge fund portfolios, compared to 56 funds in the third quarter. ZM delivered a -13.52% return in the past 3 months.</p>","source":"lsy1606273129822","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Zoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nZoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-17 12:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/zoom-zm-performed-poorly-but-long-term-future-remains-bright-says-artisan-partners-924876/><strong>Insider Monkey</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘Artisan Global Discovery Fund’ fourth quarter 2020 investor letter. A return of 16.95% was recorded ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/zoom-zm-performed-poorly-but-long-term-future-remains-bright-says-artisan-partners-924876/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"ZM":"Zoom"},"source_url":"https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/zoom-zm-performed-poorly-but-long-term-future-remains-bright-says-artisan-partners-924876/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2120972106","content_text":"Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘Artisan Global Discovery Fund’ fourth quarter 2020 investor letter. A return of 16.95% was recorded by its Investor Class: APFDX, 17% by its Advisor Class: APDDX, and 17.05% by its Institutional Class: APHDX, in the fourth quarter of 2020, outperforming its MSCI All Country World benchmark that delivered a 14.68% return in the same period. You can view the fund’s top 5 holdings to have a peek at their top bets for 2021.\nArtisan Global Discovery Fund, in their Q4 2020 investor letter, mentioned Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM) and emphasized their views on the company. Zoom Video Communications, Inc. is a California-based communications technology company that currently has a $100.3 billion market capitalization. Since the beginning of the year, ZM delivered a 1.99% return, impressively extending its 12-month gains to 209.65%. As of March 15, 2021, the stock closed at $350 per share.\nHere is what Artisan Global Discovery Fund has to say about Zoom Video Communications, Inc. in their Q4 2020 investor letter:\n\n \"Among our bottom contributors in Q4 was Zoom Video Communications. Shares of Zoom Video Communications were pressured amid the strong vaccine data released during the quarter. Furthermore, the company’s Q3 results, though incredibly strong, showed signs of deceleration from prior quarters’ torrid pace. While there will be a reduced need for some videoconferencing use cases on the other side of the pandemic, we believe there is a strong case to be made that the pandemic has prompted a permanent inflection in videoconferencing’s importance—given sustainably higher remote work arrangements, more online learning options and less business travel. Furthermore, the company’s dramatically expanded user base (up 485% YOY in Q3) positions it well to cross sell additional services, Zoom Phone in particular. The long-term future remains bright, but we acknowledge the near-term headwinds and have trimmed our position to a modest size.\"\n\nRoman Samborskyi/Shutterstock.com\nOur calculations show that Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM) does not belong in our list of the 30 Most Popular Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As of the end of the fourth quarter of 2020, Zoom Video Communications, Inc. was in 59 hedge fund portfolios, compared to 56 funds in the third quarter. ZM delivered a -13.52% return in the past 3 months.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"ZM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2331,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":325193400,"gmtCreate":1615871774900,"gmtModify":1704787746382,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/325193400","repostId":"1172271196","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1172271196","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615871336,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1172271196?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-16 13:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"How To Spot A Bubble","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1172271196","media":"Hussman Funds","summary":"Summary\n\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price b","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>The defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations.</li>\n <li>If we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical.</li>\n <li>One of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates.</li>\n <li>It's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks.</li>\n <li>To understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"</li>\n</ul>\n<blockquote>\n I can show, really precisely, that there are two warranted prices for a share. The one I prefer is based on such fundamentals as earnings and growth rates, but the bubble is rational in a certain sense. The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.- Nobel Laureate Franco Modigliani, New York Times, March 30, 2000\n</blockquote>\n<p>The word \"bubble\" is tossed around quite a bit in the financial markets, but it's rarely used correctly. See, the thing that defines a bubble isn't that valuations are extremely high, or that expected returns are extremely low. Instead, what defines a bubble is that investors drive valuations higher without simultaneously adjusting expectations for returns lower. That is, investors extrapolate past returns based on price behavior, even though those expectations are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows.</p>\n<p>In March 2000, at the height of the technology bubble, I noted: \"Over time, price/revenue ratios come back in line. Currently, that would imply an 83% plunge in tech stocks. If you understand values and market history, you know we're not joking.\" The following month, I discussed Modigliani's quote above, and detailed the dynamics he was describing. The collapse of the 2000 bubble would ultimately erase half the value of the S&amp;P 500, and would take the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 down an implausibly precise 83%.</p>\n<p>The defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations. If investors pay $150 today for a security that will deliver a single $100 payment a decade from now, but they also fully understand that they'll lose 4% annually on the deal, without extrapolating past gains into the future, then we might say the security is overvalued, and we might question why investors would accept that trade, but we can't call it a bubble.</p>\n<p>But if investors pay $150 today for that security, because they look back in the rear-view mirror, decide that it \"always goes up\" over time, and convince themselves that expected future returns are always positive, then you've got a bubble. Discounting the future $100 cash flow of the security using any positive expected return would produce a price less than $100. So the positive returns expected by investors are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows. The size of the bubble is the fraction of the market price that represents expectational \"hot air.\"</p>\n<p>Likewise, the willingness of investors to embrace \"passive investments\" like ETFs and asset-backed securities based on past performance, with little concern about the valuations, yields, or credit risk of the securities inside, is the very soap from which bubbles repeatedly emerge. Amid the current enthusiasm for special purpose acquisition companies (SPACS), investors might recall the bubble in \"incubators\" at the 2000 peak, the \"conglomerates\" of the late-1960s Go-Go bubble, and even the South Sea Company in the early 1700s, along with similar companies formed at the time \"for carrying on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is.\"</p>\n<p>If investors price the S&amp;P 500 at levels that are highly likely to produce negative returns for a decade, as they did in 1929 and 2000, and as I believe they are doing at present, yet investors continue to press stock prices higher on the expectation that they will provide historically normal levels of future return regardless of valuations, then you have the sort of inconsistency that defines a bubble.</p>\n<p>Likewise, if the expected return of a conventional passive investment mix is negative on a 10-12 year horizon (based on reliable valuation measures strongly correlated with actual subsequent returns over a century of market history), yet pension return assumptions remain locked near 7% annually, you've got a bubble, and most likely a future pension funding crisis, on your hands.</p>\n<p>This is how very bad things have repeatedly happened in the financial markets across history, enabled by what Galbraith called \"the extreme brevity of the financial memory.\"</p>\n<p>When Modigliani says that there are two \"warranted\" prices, he means that - at least in the short run - there are two ways that prices can fulfill the expectations of investors. In one case, investors have expectations about future returns, and those expectations are informed by the level of valuations. If prices rise, and expected cash flows haven't changed, investors recognize that future returns will be lower. In the \"bubble\" case, investors have high expectations about future returns, mainly based on past returns, and they act on those expectations by driving prices up further. So the expectation of additional price increases is simply reinforced. \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation.\"</p>\n<p>Only one of these prices is consistent, in that the rate of return expected by investors is also the rate of return that equates price with discounted future cash flows. The other price becomes increasingly detached from fundamentals, as a larger and larger fraction of the price represents hot air, and it ultimately collapses as the gap becomes untenably wide.</p>\n<p>During speculative segments of the market cycle, there's nothing that forces investors to recognize that higher valuations imply lower returns, or to change their expectation of high returns as far as the eye can see. That, of course, is why we use measures of market internals to gauge the inclination of investors toward speculation or risk-aversion. Valuation provides an enormous amount of information about likely long-term returns and potential market losses over the complete cycle. But valuation isn't a timing tool. In recent years, it hasn't even imposed a limit on speculative recklessness.</p>\n<p>Still, with each price advance, the actual long-term return implied by future cash flows - what investors will ultimately realize as those cash flows are delivered - collapses further, even while investors act on their delusion that long-term returns have nothing to do with price. Eventually, the bulk of the security price represents a bubble component, not the price that would actually need to exist in order for the long-term expectations of investors to be accurate.</p>\n<p>As I wrote at the 2000 market peak:</p>\n<blockquote>\n \"As long as investors focus on year-to-year returns and not discounted cash flow calculations, the bubble can continue to grow in self-reinforcing fashion. Investors anticipate a high return, and the price behavior reinforces the expectation. The true long-term return becomes increasingly detached from the long-term return imagined by investors, and the bubble component accounts for an increasingly large proportion of the total price.\"\n</blockquote>\n<p>By our most reliable measures, run-of-the-mill historical valuation norms are roughly 70% below current levels. I know you don't want to believe that.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/493c338076df85e2a04ebf892af4762f\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"713\"></p>\n<p>The trap door quietly swings open when valuations are extreme and market internals begin to deteriorate. That's the situation we've observed in our measures in recent weeks, with the initial deterioration largely driven by debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well.</p>\n<p><b>Valuations and discounted cash flows</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n Valuations measure the tradeoff between current prices and a very long-term stream of expected future cash flows. Every useful valuation ratio is just shorthand for that calculation. Every valuation ratio that fails that criterion is inferior, and you can show it in historical data.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., The Meaning of Valuation, December 2019\n</blockquote>\n<p>I've often noted that the denominator of every good valuation measure is just shorthand for the decades and decades of cash flows that the security is likely to deliver in the future. In fact, we always test the validity of the valuation measures we use by examining:</p>\n<p>a) how strongly the resulting valuation measures are correlated with actual subsequent total returns, and;</p>\n<p>b) how closely they replicate an explicit discounted cash flow analysis.</p>\n<p>Below, we'll examine a variety of valuation measures that offer some perspective on why I view the U.S. equity market as a bubble near the breaking point. Along the way, I'll point out some interesting features of valuations and their relationship with subsequent returns. If math gives you hives, feel free to skim over the small amount that I've included here and there.</p>\n<p>Consider first the relationship between valuations and subsequent returns. I'll state the following, which you can prove to yourself by toying around a bit with present value models: the logarithm of a good valuation measure should have an inverse and roughly linear relationship with the expected subsequent investment return.</p>\n<p>Here's a simple example of what this looks like.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d1e5bdf4391c9c91a8b9a051f6635116\" tg-width=\"819\" tg-height=\"708\"></p>\n<p>Here's what this looks like for MarketCap/GVA, our most reliable stock market valuation measure</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/485141919c853722522159d2e9d05e85\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"720\"></p>\n<p>During the past three decades, we've studied and introduced a broad range of valuation measures. Most can be calculated back to 1947. Some can be evaluated over a century or more. Across history, even in recent decades, we find that the valuation measures that are best correlated with actual subsequent returns are those with muted sensitivity to cyclical fluctuations in profit margins, and that behave largely like broad, market-wide price/revenue ratios.</p>\n<p>If we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical. Here's what this comparison looks like for the actual stream of dividends (including the impact of repurchases) delivered by the S&amp;P 500 since 1900, discounted at a fixed 10% rate (see the chart text for additional details).</p>\n<p>The reason we use a fixed rate of return is that a multiple of 1.0 is then, by definition, the level at which the S&amp;P 500 would have been priced for that particular level of expected return. Any deviation in the valuation multiple from 1.0 then gauges how far likely future returns are from that \"typical\" expected return. We're currently farther away from \"typical\" expected returns than at any moment in history, including the 1929 and 2000 market peaks.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e6f61d2794095c2545d0d2c130320e45\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"722\"></p>\n<p>One of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates. Now, it's certainly true that holding future cash flows constant, raising the price of an investment will lower the embedded rate of return, and vice versa. If you pay $32 today for $100 a decade from today, you can expect a 12% annual return. If you pay $82 for the same security, you can expect a 2% annual return. If you pay $100 today, you can expect nothing. So it's clearly true that holding future cash flows constant, a lower rate of return implies a higher level of valuation.</p>\n<p>The reason the statement \"low interest rates justify high valuations\" contributes to financial illiteracy is that the statement has been learned entirely out of context of the arithmetic. As a result, investors seem to imagine that, as long as high valuations can be \"justified,\" stocks can be expected to provide historically normal rates of return in the future. Likewise, investors seem to have no concept that if interest rates are low because growth rates are low, no valuation premium is \"justified\" for stocks, because the lower growth is already sufficient to bring future stock returns down to levels that are commensurate with the low level of interest rates.</p>\n<p>The truth is simple but uncomfortable. If interest rates are low and expected growth is held constant, higher valuations imply lower long-term returns. If interest rates are low because expected future growth is also low, higher valuations are not required. Long-term returns will be lower anyway. A valuation premium just makes future returns even worse.</p>\n<p>Saying that extremely low interest rates \"justify\" extremely high stock valuations is identical to saying that extremely low future returns on bonds \"justify\" extremely low future returns on stocks. I don't really think that's something Wall Street cares to clarify when it tells investors that stock market valuations are \"justified.\"</p>\n<p>Investment valuation is concerned with the relationship between three objects: the current price, the future cash flows, and the rate of return that connects the two like a string. The lower the current price and the higher the future cash flows, the steeper the string. The higher the current price and the lower the future cash flows, the flatter the string. Raise the current price above the future cash flows, and the string will point down instead of up. Given any two of these objects, you can calculate the third one.</p>\n<p>For example, if you want to estimate expected long-term returns, you need two objects: a) the current price and b) the expected stream of future cash flows. A good valuation ratio is just shorthand for those two objects, so you can estimate the long-term return directly from the level of valuation. Then, if you like, you can compare it with the level of interest rates. That comparison can be useful, because even when investors realize that high stock market valuations imply low long-term returns, it's not at all clear that they realize how low long-term return prospects have been driven.</p>\n<p>The chart below shows our estimate of expected 12-year S&amp;P 500 total returns over-and-above Treasury bond yields, across a century of market history. Compare this with the nearly useless drivel that Wall Street passes off as the \"equity risk premium\" (typically quoted as the S&amp;P 500 forward earnings yield minus the 10-year Treasury yield). Yes, you're reading the chart correctly. Given current valuations, we expect the total return of the S&amp;P 500 to underperform the lowly yield on Treasury bonds by roughly -6% annually over the coming 12-year period.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/42561963df9d259a93fe0d4f2502c13e\" tg-width=\"1024\" tg-height=\"577\"></p>\n<p>Many investors confuse the estimation of expected returns (which requires only expected cash flows and the observed price) with a different problem - the estimation of \"fair value.\" See, interest rates come into the picture when you have an expected stream of future cash flows and you want to calculate a \"fair\" current price. In that case, rather than picking an arbitrary rate of return from a hat, it's common to use the level of interest rates, plus some risk premium, as the expected long-term return (or discount rate, or capitalization rate). This sort of calculation can be super-sensitive to arbitrary choices.</p>\n<p>In particular, Wall Street loves to combine super-high growth rates, super-low discount rates, and super-long time horizons, which allows one to calculate a \"fair value\" that's as close to infinity as possible. The thing to remember is that whatever rate of return an analyst embeds into the fair value calculation is also the long-term rate of return you'll earn over time if you pay that price, assuming the future cash flows are delivered as expected.</p>\n<p>Among scores of measures we've evaluated or introduced over time, MarketCap/GVA (nonfinancial market capitalization to corporate gross value-added, including our estimate of foreign revenues) has the highest correlation with actual subsequent 10-12 year S&amp;P 500 total returns, followed by our Margin-Adjusted P/E (MAPE). I find it hilarious that the various valuation measures I've introduced over time are sometimes described as products of \"machine learning,\" \"data mining,\" and \"curve fitting\" when they are, in fact, just different versions of an apples-to-apples economy-wide price/revenue ratio.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75dac426a3ad2f3830f9dce50f7c0a1c\" tg-width=\"1265\" tg-height=\"712\"></p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 price/revenue ratio and nonfinancial market capitalization to GDP (the \"Buffett indicator\") also perform well, and better than earnings-based alternatives like price/forward earnings, the Fed Model, and even the Shiller CAPE. See, while earnings are necessary to generate long-term cash flows, they are also subject to fluctuations in profit margins (both cyclically and even from decade to decade) that turn out to be highly uninformative.</p>\n<p>Economically, fluctuations in profit margins are driven primarily by fluctuations in real unit labor costs. Because companies compete on the basis of realized after-tax profits rather than pre-tax profits, changes in tax policy also have far less durable impact on corporate profits than investors seem to imagine. While corporate profits got a tremendous boost last year from CARES spending (the deficit of one sector always emerges as the surplus of another), here's what the relationship between corporate profits and real unit labor costs looks like historically.</p>\n<p>Real unit labor costs are presented on an inverted left scale. The upward pressure on labor costs (observed as a plunge in the blue line) isn't particularly auspicious for future profits. Still, there's so much distortion in recent quarters that I'd consider the jury to be out on how much of this will be sustained.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3110e7d3c0468c39d343b20835566bcc\" tg-width=\"1157\" tg-height=\"652\"></p>\n<p>It's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks. But even for technology stocks, these assumptions should be made explicit and tested against history. You'll find that observable measures like price/revenue are still very serviceable. In fact, the extreme price/revenue multiples of technology stocks helped to inform my March 2000 projection of an 83% loss in that sector.</p>\n<p>As Benjamin Graham wrote, \"The habit of relating what is paid to what is being offered is an invaluable trait in investment. The more dependent the valuation becomes on anticipations of the future - and the less it is tied to a figure demonstrated by past performance - the more vulnerable it becomes to possible miscalculation and serious error.\"</p>\n<p>The current 5.19 price/revenue multiple for the Nasdaq 100, is the most extreme level since February 2001, which was followed by a 60% loss in the index (after it had already dropped in half). The situation is actually a bit worse than 2001 here. If one examines the largest components of the index, it becomes clear that their annual growth rates have declined substantially over time.</p>\n<p>As a result, a dollar of current revenues should arguably command a smaller multiple than a dollar of revenues might have during earlier periods of emerging growth. Yet even if one takes the Nasdaq 100 price/revenue ratio at face value, and even if one restricts attention to the bubble period since 2000, it's difficult to expect the Nasdaq to produce total returns over the coming decade much better than zero.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48dd88f74eaed48d53b237b4d0209d8e\" tg-width=\"963\" tg-height=\"542\"></p>\n<p>You don't really want to see what the same chart looks like for the S&amp;P 500.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/24f70ab683592ef20a8c6c75fc9bd1fc\" tg-width=\"963\" tg-height=\"543\"></p>\n<p>The same is true, unfortunately, for passive investment strategies. We presently estimate negative 12-year average annual total returns for a conventional passive investment mix invested 60% in the S&amp;P 500, 30% in Treasury bonds, and 10% in Treasury bills.</p>\n<p>In a 2019&nbsp;white paper, I detailed an approach to estimate a \"value-focused asset allocation\" by jointly considering prevailing stock market valuations and interest rates. It specifies an investment allocation based on which asset class is estimated to have the highest average annual expected return, adjusted for risk, to each point in a long-term investment horizon. That allocation can then be modified by a risk-management component, to adjust the exposure during segments of the market cycle where risk-aversion or speculation among market participants may temporarily drive valuations to depressed or elevated levels. The white paper includes numerous charts showing how this value-focused asset allocation has changed across market history, particularly at important peaks and troughs in the stock and bond markets.</p>\n<p>Along with those methods, I introduced our \"Endowment/spending multiple,\" which estimates the number of years of spending that a passive 60/30/10 investor requires up-front, in order to finance an expected 36-year stream of future inflation-adjusted spending. The idea here is that in a deeply undervalued market with high expected future returns, investors can finance a future stream of spending with far less than they require when valuations are extreme and prospective returns are low.</p>\n<p>You know you're in a bubble when funding a 36-year stream of expected inflation-adjusted spending requires over 38 years of money up-front.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1adff1ad0dbaa2737f60cb7589d206fb\" tg-width=\"1230\" tg-height=\"693\"></p>\n<p>In the chart below, the Endowment/spending multiple is presented on an inverted log scale (left), along with the actual subsequent average annual total return of a 60/30/10 portfolio mix (right scale). Needless to say, we adhere to investment disciplines that are intended to address problems like this.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1480e881b4d04ace81a96f31f6368796\" tg-width=\"1229\" tg-height=\"692\"></p>\n<p>As a testament to the breadth of this speculative episode, the median price/revenue ratio of S&amp;P 500 components now exceeds 3.3, easily a record, and extreme enough to provoke distress about the potential losses that innocent but poorly-informed investors may experience over the completion of this cycle.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ffe0cc33bdaf0695dacb7ae1d817edab\" tg-width=\"1110\" tg-height=\"625\"></p>\n<p>The next chart shows the median price/revenue ratio of S&amp;P 500 components sorted into 10 deciles by valuation. The chart is presented on log scale to allow each line to be compared with its own history. Each segment on the vertical axis represents a doubling of valuations. Notice that every single decile of S&amp;P 500 components is at record valuation extremes. Investors now rely on a permanently high plateau in these extremes.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb7c995e64e3c9cba85d6e0fc9124223\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"721\"></p>\n<p>It's interesting, but far less important, that the median price/earnings ratio of S&amp;P 500 components has also reached 32.4, the highest level in history. This compares with a median P/E of 19.4 at the 2000 market peak. The problem with P/E multiples, of course, is that they are substantially affected by earnings variability. In fact, prior to the current peak, the highest median P/E for the S&amp;P 500 was actually in March 2002, when the index was down 25% from the March 2000 bubble highs. That's because earnings were down far more by then, which boosted P/E ratios. Such is the danger of taking P/E multiples at face value.</p>\n<p>A crude but reasonably effective way to get around the cyclicality of earnings (but only for very broad indices), is to compare prices to the highest level of earnings achieved to-date. I introduced this metric back in 1998 as the price-to-peak-earnings ratio. The chart below shows a version of that. The blue line (left scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to GDP. The red line (right scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to the highest level of economy-wide U.S. profits to date. Investors have gotten themselves into trouble here.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a6630cf8302360e1b4645870051b21de\" tg-width=\"989\" tg-height=\"557\"></p>\n<p><b>What if valuations remain extreme forever?</b></p>\n<p>Probably the single most frequent question I've heard from investors over the past couple of years is \"What happens if valuations remain extreme forever?\" It's actually a version of the \"permanently high plateau\" that Irving Fisher disastrously projected in 1929. Still, recent years have produced enormous confidence among investors that the Federal Reserve's purchases of Treasury debt can permanently \"backstop\" the stock market.</p>\n<p>As I've detailed previously, quantitative easing supports the market only by creating zero interest hot potatoes that are uncomfortable for investors to hold (provided that they're inclined toward speculation), and that are impossible to get rid of in aggregate. Moreover, the Fed's purchases of corporate bonds during the pandemic were legally constrained to CARES funds provided by the Treasury, and ultimately amounted to $14 billion of bonds, in an economy with $11 trillion in corporate debt at $58 trillion in equity market capitalization.</p>\n<p>Suffice it to say that the \"Fed backstop\" is largely in the minds of investors, and relies almost exclusively on the psychological discomfort of holding low-yielding base money. Yet since perception can be indistinguishable from reality, particularly in the short run, it's important to entertain the question.</p>\n<p>My answer is that if the Fed is indeed able to maintain valuations at the highest levels in history, forever, stock prices would likely grow at roughly the same rate as nominal GDP. So figure 1.6% real structural growth plus 2% inflation gets you 3.6%. Let's call it 4%, which would match nominal GDP growth in both the 10-year and 20-year periods ending at the Q4 2019 economic peak, just before the pandemic. The first casualty of rising inflation is stock valuations, so it's not at all clear that assuming higher inflation would help stocks until valuations were roughly normalized, which would require consumer prices to roughly triple.</p>\n<p>The chart below is a reminder of how structural real GDP growth has progressed over recent decades (driven by demographic labor force growth and trend productivity), and the basis for that 1.6% figure for structural real GDP growth.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cf63b9b8f5f3b55136c8523d73e864f3\" tg-width=\"1131\" tg-height=\"637\"></p>\n<p>Sticking with 4% nominal growth, and adding a 1.5% dividend yield, a \"permanently high plateau\" in market valuations would imply S&amp;P 500 total returns of about 5.5% annually. Again, this assumes that valuations never retreat from levels that presently stand at about 3.6 times their historical norms. Simply allow them to retreat to 2.4 times their historical norms a decade from now - which would still keep valuations among the highest 10% in U.S. history - and the resulting 10-year total return would drop to about 1.3%. I think this would actually be the best-case scenario even in a permanently overvalued world.</p>\n<p>At elevated valuations, even very small changes in expected return imply enormous changes in prices. So it's unlikely that a period of much higher average valuations will escape the prospect of relatively high volatility. Rather than a 70% market decline, which would presently be required for the S&amp;P 500 to simply touch historically run-of-the-mill valuation norms, investors could expect rather frequent market losses in the 20-35% range, which is essentially what we've seen even over the past few years.</p>\n<p>All of that would be fine with us. We've adapted our discipline sufficiently (especially in late-2017) to tolerate the possibility of permanently sustained overvaluation. My impression is that the impact of those adaptations has become more evident as we've had greater opportunities to live into them. I can't say that I believe for a second that investors will actually be spared from a 50-70% loss in the S&amp;P 500 in the coming years, but again, it will be fine with us if the market never approaches historical valuation norms again. With the adaptations we introduced in late-2017, our discipline is flexible enough to navigate a bubble even without embracing its premise.</p>\n<p><b>An unusual overlap of high-risk conditions</b></p>\n<p>Returning to Modigliani, my impression is that the advance of recent years to the most extreme valuations in history reflects exactly the bubble dynamics he described, and I expect that it will also end as he described (though not necessarily in one fell swoop): \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.\"</p>\n<p>One of our internal gauges tracks the correlation of market conditions with certain high-risk features that have preceded steep market collapses - a collection of measures capturing valuations, internals, sentiment, leverage, overextension, and yield pressures. Only a handful of instances in history overlap pre-crash conditions as well as they do at present. The current overlap is actually quite similar to August 1987. Meanwhile, the correlation of current conditions with features typically observed at market lows is the most negative in history.</p>\n<p>If you want my opinion, I suspect that a near-vertical market plunge on the order of 25-35% is coming, probably quite shortly, most likely out of the blue, as in 1987, driven by nothing more than the sudden concerted effort of overextended investors to sell, and the need for a large price adjustment in order to induce scarce buyers to take the other side.</p>\n<p>As usual, no forecasts are necessary. We'll align our investment stance in response to the valuations and market action that we observe at each point in time. Still, it's of particular concern that these overlaps are occurring in the context of the most extreme valuations in history, along with strikingly dysfunctional pockets of illiquidity in many individual issues. This dysfunctional behavior isn't about any particular video game retailer. I suspect it's actually about some sort of fragility or segmentation in order-flow mechanisms, possibly coupled with poorly managed derivatives exposure.</p>\n<p>As I used to teach my students, show me a financial debacle, and I'll show you someone who had a leveraged, mismatched position that they were suddenly forced to close into an illiquid market.</p>\n<p>Though my concerns run far beyond the amount of leverage in the system, it isn't helpful that the amount of leverage in the U.S. equity markets is now easily the highest in history. Some observers are inclined to bring this figure down by dividing instead by the market capitalization of equities. But here's some useful arithmetic:</p>\n<p>Margin Debt/GDP = Margin Debt/Market Cap x Market Cap/GDP</p>\n<p>To say that margin debt to GDP is at the highest level in history is to say not only that stocks are heavily owned on margin, but that those stocks are also breathtakingly overvalued. That combination is particularly worrisome.</p>\n<blockquote>\n All crises have involved debt that, in one fashion or another, has become dangerously out of scale in relation to the underlying means of payment.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Short History of Financial Euphoria\n</blockquote>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc55dacbd5e01016cd9964422f941b0c\" tg-width=\"983\" tg-height=\"556\"></p>\n<p>The kind of event I'm suggesting would not bring valuations anywhere near historical valuation norms. Given current valuation extremes, it would be more like a palate cleanser. I have no particular expectation about what the next dish would be. In the event we do observe an abrupt market collapse, the Fed will undoubtedly respond with some new palliative. Whether or not it is effective will depend on the context of risk-aversion, inflation, credit risk, and other conditions at the time. The larger problem, as we've discussed, is that you can't \"save\" an overvalued asset by propping up its price. The value is in the future cash flows that will be delivered to investors over time. The elevated price only ensures that the long-term return between now and then will be dismal.</p>\n<p>Of course, nothing in our discipline relies on a market plunge. Given the combination of hypervaluation and divergent market internals (largely based on debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well), I do believe that the stock market remains in a \"trap door\" situation. Still, that view will change as market conditions change. We'll refrain from adopting or amplifying a negative outlook if our measures of market internals improve. That discipline has served us well even amid record highs. Again, no forecasts are required, nor does this opinion drive our current investment stance. I just think the correlation with historical pre-crash conditions is worth noting.</p>\n<blockquote>\n How little, it will perhaps be agreed, was either original or otherwise remarkable about this history. Prices driven up on the expectation that they would go up, the expectation realized by the resulting purchases. Then the inevitable reversal of these expectations because of some seemingly damaging event or development or perhaps merely because the supply of intellectually vulnerable buyers was exhausted. Whatever the reason (and it is unimportant), the absolute certainty is that this world ends not with a whimper but with a bang. And so on to the moment of mass disillusion and the crash. This last, it will now be sufficiently evident, never comes gently. It is always accompanied by a desperate and largely unsuccessful effort to get out.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John Kenneth Galbraith on the 1929 collapse\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>Valuations and investment duration</b></p>\n<p>To understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"</p>\n<p>Every security is a claim on a stream of future cash flows that can be expected to be delivered to the investor over time. While the concept of \"duration\" is most commonly used for bonds, it's actually applicable to any security, no matter how \"lumpy\" the stream of cash flows might be.</p>\n<p>If you don't like math, feel free to skim over the various equations and just read the pull quotes. I've provided the details just for completeness.</p>\n<p>The \"duration\" of a security can be defined in two ways.</p>\n<p>Investment horizon: the weighted average number of years it takes for the security to deliver its payments. For each period, you take the share of total present value represented by that year's payment, and multiply it by the number of years in the future the payment will be received. Add them all up. The result is the number of years from today (a weighted average) that the present value of your investment will be repaid. For example, the duration of a security that delivers a single payment a decade from now is simply 10 years.</p>\n<p>Elasticity: the percentage change in the security in response to a change in the underlying gross rate of return. Technically, elasticity is (-dP/P)/(dk/1+k). For example, suppose you own a security that will pay $100 a decade from now, and it's priced at $82.0348, for a 2% annual return. Now assume the expected return moves to 2.01%. The price would drop to $81.9544. Elasticity is (0.0804/82.0348)/(0.0001/1.02) = 10%</p>\n<p>It turns out that the \"duration\" of a security in years is identical to its \"duration\" in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that \"immunizes\" the investor against changes in expected returns over time. In other words, assuming you reinvest your cash flows over time, duration gives you a good idea of how long you have to hold the security in order for your ending wealth to be largely independent of the fluctuations that the security experiences over that horizon.</p>\n<p>If you know differentiation, can prove to yourself that the \"modified duration\" of the S&amp;P 500 is essentially the inverse of the dividend yield. The modified duration is just (-dP/P)/dk or Macaulay duration/(1+k).</p>\n<p>Consider P = D/(k-g). Differentiating with respect to k, dP/dk = -P/(k-g), so duration (-dP/P)/dk = P/D.</p>\n<p>Here's how to think about the link between valuations and duration. Presently, the dividend yield of the S&amp;P 500 is 1.48%. If the yield moves to 1.49%, holding dividends constant, prices drop by 1.48/1.49-1 = -0.67% on that 1 basis point move. Duration is just that sensitivity, defined for a 100 basis point move, which would be 67. It turns out that's also the weighted-average number of years from today that you'll receive your present value, if you invest today.</p>\n<p>Compare that to the typical situation over the past century, when the dividend yield of the S&amp;P 500 averaged about 3.7%. At normal valuations, a 1 basis point increase in the dividend yield would produce a price drop of 3.7/3.71-1 = 0.27%, implying a duration of 27 years.</p>\n<blockquote>\n It turns out that the 'duration' of a security in years is identical to its 'duration' in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that 'immunizes' the investor against changes in expected returns over time.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Historically, investors wishing to match the duration of their investment portfolio to the duration of their investment horizon could be reasonably comfortable holding 100% of their assets in stocks, provided they had an investment horizon of about 25-30 years. Presently, these investors would need an investment horizon closer to 65-70 years. They are currently holding sippy cups.</p>\n<p><b>Scarcity, usefulness, and value</b></p>\n<p>While we're on the subject of bubbles, I'll add a few comments on Bitcoin, just for fun. I'd write more, but my sides still hurt from laughing.</p>\n<p>Objects like tulip bulbs and Bitcoin differ from securities in that they do not deliver a stream of cash flows to the holder. Instead, what objects like tulips and currencies provide is a little stream of services over time, for example, as a perennial thing of beauty or as a means of payment. What people sometimes forget is that it is not just scarcity that defines the value of an object, but the stream of useful \"services\" that it provides (for some reason, nobody wants to buy my unique, limited edition, digitally-signed porcupine seat covers). The price of the object, and the stream of services it provides, should be commensurate.</p>\n<p>U.S. dollars, for example, have value primarily because they are tethered to the real economy by fiat (they legally must be accepted as a means of payment, as noted on the face of any dollar bill), and they represent the entire substrate of the banking system - nearly every payment that goes back and forth in the U.S. economy represents a transfer of base money. Base money (currency and bank reserves) provides billions of little \"services\" over time.</p>\n<p>With every transaction, reserves move electronically from bank to bank between one account holder and another. That combination of legal fiat and constant use as a substrate of the payments system is what gives money \"value.\" That value also means that the U.S. government essentially obtains revenue as \"seigniorage\" for producing the stuff. For those who imagine that governments are going to surrender that revenue in favor of using Bitcoin, I've got a non-fungible token to sell you.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/747b2ba31a8d94d85d374d12b13b3c96\" tg-width=\"665\" tg-height=\"718\"></p>\n<p>As I've noted before, blockchain is a brilliant algorithm, and I expect that it will have a great number of uses for secure transactions and inventory management. Bitcoin, however, is a token generated by an energy-inefficient, replicable blockchain app. Ultimately, its value rests on the capacity to provide transactions services, yet without fiat to require its use, and with strikingly narrow bandwidth - one block of roughly 2000 transactions every 10 minutes - that I expect will prove to be a wildly limiting feature. That's a problem in a world where speculators now value the stock of bitcoin at one-fifth the value of the entire U.S. monetary base.</p>\n<blockquote>\n If you think about how money is valued, it's clear that people accept it because they believe it will provide a claim on the future output of others. Of course, that expectation requires that future producers will also give away their output and accept the money, on the belief that yet other future producers will do the same. That expectation has to continue indefinitely. Like the question 'What holds up Atlas when Atlas holds up the world?' it's not enough to answer that he's standing on a turtle. It's got to be turtles all the way down. The value of money has an enormous psychological component.\"\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., Turtles All the Way Down, February 2019\n</blockquote>\n<p>Of course, Bitcoin may have a certain user base as a vehicle for money laundering and black market transactions, but that's an undesirable investment thesis. The vast majority of transactions are to exchange Bitcoin itself, though the New York Times did recently report that \"pornography, patio furniture, and an at-home coronavirus test are among the odd assortment of goods and services that people are purchasing with the cryptocurrency.\" So, basically, if your typical day consists of surfing porn on your patio while testing yourself for COVID, you're gonna want to look into Bitcoin.</p>\n<p>My largest concern is that people are actually forking over hard-earned savings in exchange for these tokens, which allows early \"miners\" to cash out. That's essentially the defining feature of a Ponzi scheme. Like all speculative bubbles that rely on increases in price, rather than cash flows generated by the production of value-added goods and services, Bitcoin isn't actually creating \"wealth.\" It's only creating the opportunity for wealth transfer, primarily from those who will end up holding the bag.</p>\n<p>Bitcoin has certain characteristics of base money in the sense that it's exchanged on an electronic ledger, but by design, transactions are limited to an average of about 2000 per block, with one block successfully validated, on average, every 10 minutes. In order to validate a transaction block, CPU farms across the world grind out terahashes of random SHA256 validation attempts in order to discover a sufficiently small binary that matches the cryptographic hash of the block.</p>\n<p>All of this \"mining\" burns up about as much energy as it takes to run a modest-sized country. Validating a block of transactions produces a reward to the miner (and dilution of the coinbase) of 6.25 Bitcoin per block, which currently works out to nearly $200 per transaction. Yet the value of the median transaction in Bitcoin is only about $1000 in the first place.</p>\n<p>There's a rather primitive regression analysis floating around (tagged as \"sophisticated\" by some observers who apparently go numb at the word \"logarithm\") that attempts to relate the log price of bitcoin to the log \"stock/flow\" ratio, as if it represents some mechanistic supply-demand relationship. Aside from the fact that the correlation between two diagonal lines is always about 0.9-something, I find that one can obtain a better fit just by regressing the log price of Bitcoin on the log ratio of block difficulty/block reward, which is basically a measure of how much energy one needs to waste in order to mine a new bitcoin.</p>\n<p>So the \"value\" of Bitcoin is partially linked to the backward-looking sunk cost of the energy wasted to mine these tokens. Still, I wouldn't dream of using this sort of \"model\" to trade an object whose \"value\" is primarily in the heads of speculators. Use it if you like. If you happen make money on it, feel free send me a check, preferably in U.S. dollars.</p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, this view of Bitcoin will be unpopular among those who associate holding Bitcoin with superpowers like laser eyes and diamond hands. \"Not surprised Hussman doesn't get Bitcoin. Few do.\" M'kay. Look, there's certainly a case to be made that a speculative mindset creates its own reality, and while it does, there's an opportunity to obtain wealth transfers from frantic late-comers who can no longer tolerate missing out. Tulips gonna tulip. Not my gig, thanks.</p>\n<blockquote>\n In the short run, it will be said to be an attack, motivated by either deficient understanding or uncontrolled envy, of the wonderful process of enrichment. Those involved with the speculation are experiencing an increase in wealth - getting rich or being further enriched. No one wishes to believe that this is fortuitous or undeserved; all wish to think that it is the result of their own superior insight or intuition. As long as they are in, they have a strong pecuniary commitment to belief in the unique personal intelligence that tells them there will be yet more. Accordingly, possession must be associated with some special genius. Speculation buys up, in a very practical way, the intelligence of those involved. Only after the speculative collapse does the truth emerge. What was thought to be unusual acuity turns out to be only a fortuitous and unfortunate association with the assets.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Brief History of Financial Euphoria\n</blockquote>","source":"lsy1615871319183","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>How To Spot A Bubble</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHow To Spot A Bubble\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-16 13:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210315/><strong>Hussman Funds</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations.\nIf we compare our most reliable valuation measures...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210315/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210315/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1172271196","content_text":"Summary\n\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations.\nIf we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical.\nOne of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates.\nIt's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks.\nTo understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"\n\n\n I can show, really precisely, that there are two warranted prices for a share. The one I prefer is based on such fundamentals as earnings and growth rates, but the bubble is rational in a certain sense. The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.- Nobel Laureate Franco Modigliani, New York Times, March 30, 2000\n\nThe word \"bubble\" is tossed around quite a bit in the financial markets, but it's rarely used correctly. See, the thing that defines a bubble isn't that valuations are extremely high, or that expected returns are extremely low. Instead, what defines a bubble is that investors drive valuations higher without simultaneously adjusting expectations for returns lower. That is, investors extrapolate past returns based on price behavior, even though those expectations are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows.\nIn March 2000, at the height of the technology bubble, I noted: \"Over time, price/revenue ratios come back in line. Currently, that would imply an 83% plunge in tech stocks. If you understand values and market history, you know we're not joking.\" The following month, I discussed Modigliani's quote above, and detailed the dynamics he was describing. The collapse of the 2000 bubble would ultimately erase half the value of the S&P 500, and would take the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 down an implausibly precise 83%.\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations. If investors pay $150 today for a security that will deliver a single $100 payment a decade from now, but they also fully understand that they'll lose 4% annually on the deal, without extrapolating past gains into the future, then we might say the security is overvalued, and we might question why investors would accept that trade, but we can't call it a bubble.\nBut if investors pay $150 today for that security, because they look back in the rear-view mirror, decide that it \"always goes up\" over time, and convince themselves that expected future returns are always positive, then you've got a bubble. Discounting the future $100 cash flow of the security using any positive expected return would produce a price less than $100. So the positive returns expected by investors are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows. The size of the bubble is the fraction of the market price that represents expectational \"hot air.\"\nLikewise, the willingness of investors to embrace \"passive investments\" like ETFs and asset-backed securities based on past performance, with little concern about the valuations, yields, or credit risk of the securities inside, is the very soap from which bubbles repeatedly emerge. Amid the current enthusiasm for special purpose acquisition companies (SPACS), investors might recall the bubble in \"incubators\" at the 2000 peak, the \"conglomerates\" of the late-1960s Go-Go bubble, and even the South Sea Company in the early 1700s, along with similar companies formed at the time \"for carrying on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is.\"\nIf investors price the S&P 500 at levels that are highly likely to produce negative returns for a decade, as they did in 1929 and 2000, and as I believe they are doing at present, yet investors continue to press stock prices higher on the expectation that they will provide historically normal levels of future return regardless of valuations, then you have the sort of inconsistency that defines a bubble.\nLikewise, if the expected return of a conventional passive investment mix is negative on a 10-12 year horizon (based on reliable valuation measures strongly correlated with actual subsequent returns over a century of market history), yet pension return assumptions remain locked near 7% annually, you've got a bubble, and most likely a future pension funding crisis, on your hands.\nThis is how very bad things have repeatedly happened in the financial markets across history, enabled by what Galbraith called \"the extreme brevity of the financial memory.\"\nWhen Modigliani says that there are two \"warranted\" prices, he means that - at least in the short run - there are two ways that prices can fulfill the expectations of investors. In one case, investors have expectations about future returns, and those expectations are informed by the level of valuations. If prices rise, and expected cash flows haven't changed, investors recognize that future returns will be lower. In the \"bubble\" case, investors have high expectations about future returns, mainly based on past returns, and they act on those expectations by driving prices up further. So the expectation of additional price increases is simply reinforced. \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation.\"\nOnly one of these prices is consistent, in that the rate of return expected by investors is also the rate of return that equates price with discounted future cash flows. The other price becomes increasingly detached from fundamentals, as a larger and larger fraction of the price represents hot air, and it ultimately collapses as the gap becomes untenably wide.\nDuring speculative segments of the market cycle, there's nothing that forces investors to recognize that higher valuations imply lower returns, or to change their expectation of high returns as far as the eye can see. That, of course, is why we use measures of market internals to gauge the inclination of investors toward speculation or risk-aversion. Valuation provides an enormous amount of information about likely long-term returns and potential market losses over the complete cycle. But valuation isn't a timing tool. In recent years, it hasn't even imposed a limit on speculative recklessness.\nStill, with each price advance, the actual long-term return implied by future cash flows - what investors will ultimately realize as those cash flows are delivered - collapses further, even while investors act on their delusion that long-term returns have nothing to do with price. Eventually, the bulk of the security price represents a bubble component, not the price that would actually need to exist in order for the long-term expectations of investors to be accurate.\nAs I wrote at the 2000 market peak:\n\n \"As long as investors focus on year-to-year returns and not discounted cash flow calculations, the bubble can continue to grow in self-reinforcing fashion. Investors anticipate a high return, and the price behavior reinforces the expectation. The true long-term return becomes increasingly detached from the long-term return imagined by investors, and the bubble component accounts for an increasingly large proportion of the total price.\"\n\nBy our most reliable measures, run-of-the-mill historical valuation norms are roughly 70% below current levels. I know you don't want to believe that.\n\nThe trap door quietly swings open when valuations are extreme and market internals begin to deteriorate. That's the situation we've observed in our measures in recent weeks, with the initial deterioration largely driven by debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well.\nValuations and discounted cash flows\n\n Valuations measure the tradeoff between current prices and a very long-term stream of expected future cash flows. Every useful valuation ratio is just shorthand for that calculation. Every valuation ratio that fails that criterion is inferior, and you can show it in historical data.\n\n\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., The Meaning of Valuation, December 2019\n\nI've often noted that the denominator of every good valuation measure is just shorthand for the decades and decades of cash flows that the security is likely to deliver in the future. In fact, we always test the validity of the valuation measures we use by examining:\na) how strongly the resulting valuation measures are correlated with actual subsequent total returns, and;\nb) how closely they replicate an explicit discounted cash flow analysis.\nBelow, we'll examine a variety of valuation measures that offer some perspective on why I view the U.S. equity market as a bubble near the breaking point. Along the way, I'll point out some interesting features of valuations and their relationship with subsequent returns. If math gives you hives, feel free to skim over the small amount that I've included here and there.\nConsider first the relationship between valuations and subsequent returns. I'll state the following, which you can prove to yourself by toying around a bit with present value models: the logarithm of a good valuation measure should have an inverse and roughly linear relationship with the expected subsequent investment return.\nHere's a simple example of what this looks like.\n\nHere's what this looks like for MarketCap/GVA, our most reliable stock market valuation measure\n\nDuring the past three decades, we've studied and introduced a broad range of valuation measures. Most can be calculated back to 1947. Some can be evaluated over a century or more. Across history, even in recent decades, we find that the valuation measures that are best correlated with actual subsequent returns are those with muted sensitivity to cyclical fluctuations in profit margins, and that behave largely like broad, market-wide price/revenue ratios.\nIf we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical. Here's what this comparison looks like for the actual stream of dividends (including the impact of repurchases) delivered by the S&P 500 since 1900, discounted at a fixed 10% rate (see the chart text for additional details).\nThe reason we use a fixed rate of return is that a multiple of 1.0 is then, by definition, the level at which the S&P 500 would have been priced for that particular level of expected return. Any deviation in the valuation multiple from 1.0 then gauges how far likely future returns are from that \"typical\" expected return. We're currently farther away from \"typical\" expected returns than at any moment in history, including the 1929 and 2000 market peaks.\n\nOne of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates. Now, it's certainly true that holding future cash flows constant, raising the price of an investment will lower the embedded rate of return, and vice versa. If you pay $32 today for $100 a decade from today, you can expect a 12% annual return. If you pay $82 for the same security, you can expect a 2% annual return. If you pay $100 today, you can expect nothing. So it's clearly true that holding future cash flows constant, a lower rate of return implies a higher level of valuation.\nThe reason the statement \"low interest rates justify high valuations\" contributes to financial illiteracy is that the statement has been learned entirely out of context of the arithmetic. As a result, investors seem to imagine that, as long as high valuations can be \"justified,\" stocks can be expected to provide historically normal rates of return in the future. Likewise, investors seem to have no concept that if interest rates are low because growth rates are low, no valuation premium is \"justified\" for stocks, because the lower growth is already sufficient to bring future stock returns down to levels that are commensurate with the low level of interest rates.\nThe truth is simple but uncomfortable. If interest rates are low and expected growth is held constant, higher valuations imply lower long-term returns. If interest rates are low because expected future growth is also low, higher valuations are not required. Long-term returns will be lower anyway. A valuation premium just makes future returns even worse.\nSaying that extremely low interest rates \"justify\" extremely high stock valuations is identical to saying that extremely low future returns on bonds \"justify\" extremely low future returns on stocks. I don't really think that's something Wall Street cares to clarify when it tells investors that stock market valuations are \"justified.\"\nInvestment valuation is concerned with the relationship between three objects: the current price, the future cash flows, and the rate of return that connects the two like a string. The lower the current price and the higher the future cash flows, the steeper the string. The higher the current price and the lower the future cash flows, the flatter the string. Raise the current price above the future cash flows, and the string will point down instead of up. Given any two of these objects, you can calculate the third one.\nFor example, if you want to estimate expected long-term returns, you need two objects: a) the current price and b) the expected stream of future cash flows. A good valuation ratio is just shorthand for those two objects, so you can estimate the long-term return directly from the level of valuation. Then, if you like, you can compare it with the level of interest rates. That comparison can be useful, because even when investors realize that high stock market valuations imply low long-term returns, it's not at all clear that they realize how low long-term return prospects have been driven.\nThe chart below shows our estimate of expected 12-year S&P 500 total returns over-and-above Treasury bond yields, across a century of market history. Compare this with the nearly useless drivel that Wall Street passes off as the \"equity risk premium\" (typically quoted as the S&P 500 forward earnings yield minus the 10-year Treasury yield). Yes, you're reading the chart correctly. Given current valuations, we expect the total return of the S&P 500 to underperform the lowly yield on Treasury bonds by roughly -6% annually over the coming 12-year period.\n\nMany investors confuse the estimation of expected returns (which requires only expected cash flows and the observed price) with a different problem - the estimation of \"fair value.\" See, interest rates come into the picture when you have an expected stream of future cash flows and you want to calculate a \"fair\" current price. In that case, rather than picking an arbitrary rate of return from a hat, it's common to use the level of interest rates, plus some risk premium, as the expected long-term return (or discount rate, or capitalization rate). This sort of calculation can be super-sensitive to arbitrary choices.\nIn particular, Wall Street loves to combine super-high growth rates, super-low discount rates, and super-long time horizons, which allows one to calculate a \"fair value\" that's as close to infinity as possible. The thing to remember is that whatever rate of return an analyst embeds into the fair value calculation is also the long-term rate of return you'll earn over time if you pay that price, assuming the future cash flows are delivered as expected.\nAmong scores of measures we've evaluated or introduced over time, MarketCap/GVA (nonfinancial market capitalization to corporate gross value-added, including our estimate of foreign revenues) has the highest correlation with actual subsequent 10-12 year S&P 500 total returns, followed by our Margin-Adjusted P/E (MAPE). I find it hilarious that the various valuation measures I've introduced over time are sometimes described as products of \"machine learning,\" \"data mining,\" and \"curve fitting\" when they are, in fact, just different versions of an apples-to-apples economy-wide price/revenue ratio.\n\nThe S&P 500 price/revenue ratio and nonfinancial market capitalization to GDP (the \"Buffett indicator\") also perform well, and better than earnings-based alternatives like price/forward earnings, the Fed Model, and even the Shiller CAPE. See, while earnings are necessary to generate long-term cash flows, they are also subject to fluctuations in profit margins (both cyclically and even from decade to decade) that turn out to be highly uninformative.\nEconomically, fluctuations in profit margins are driven primarily by fluctuations in real unit labor costs. Because companies compete on the basis of realized after-tax profits rather than pre-tax profits, changes in tax policy also have far less durable impact on corporate profits than investors seem to imagine. While corporate profits got a tremendous boost last year from CARES spending (the deficit of one sector always emerges as the surplus of another), here's what the relationship between corporate profits and real unit labor costs looks like historically.\nReal unit labor costs are presented on an inverted left scale. The upward pressure on labor costs (observed as a plunge in the blue line) isn't particularly auspicious for future profits. Still, there's so much distortion in recent quarters that I'd consider the jury to be out on how much of this will be sustained.\n\nIt's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks. But even for technology stocks, these assumptions should be made explicit and tested against history. You'll find that observable measures like price/revenue are still very serviceable. In fact, the extreme price/revenue multiples of technology stocks helped to inform my March 2000 projection of an 83% loss in that sector.\nAs Benjamin Graham wrote, \"The habit of relating what is paid to what is being offered is an invaluable trait in investment. The more dependent the valuation becomes on anticipations of the future - and the less it is tied to a figure demonstrated by past performance - the more vulnerable it becomes to possible miscalculation and serious error.\"\nThe current 5.19 price/revenue multiple for the Nasdaq 100, is the most extreme level since February 2001, which was followed by a 60% loss in the index (after it had already dropped in half). The situation is actually a bit worse than 2001 here. If one examines the largest components of the index, it becomes clear that their annual growth rates have declined substantially over time.\nAs a result, a dollar of current revenues should arguably command a smaller multiple than a dollar of revenues might have during earlier periods of emerging growth. Yet even if one takes the Nasdaq 100 price/revenue ratio at face value, and even if one restricts attention to the bubble period since 2000, it's difficult to expect the Nasdaq to produce total returns over the coming decade much better than zero.\n\nYou don't really want to see what the same chart looks like for the S&P 500.\n\nThe same is true, unfortunately, for passive investment strategies. We presently estimate negative 12-year average annual total returns for a conventional passive investment mix invested 60% in the S&P 500, 30% in Treasury bonds, and 10% in Treasury bills.\nIn a 2019 white paper, I detailed an approach to estimate a \"value-focused asset allocation\" by jointly considering prevailing stock market valuations and interest rates. It specifies an investment allocation based on which asset class is estimated to have the highest average annual expected return, adjusted for risk, to each point in a long-term investment horizon. That allocation can then be modified by a risk-management component, to adjust the exposure during segments of the market cycle where risk-aversion or speculation among market participants may temporarily drive valuations to depressed or elevated levels. The white paper includes numerous charts showing how this value-focused asset allocation has changed across market history, particularly at important peaks and troughs in the stock and bond markets.\nAlong with those methods, I introduced our \"Endowment/spending multiple,\" which estimates the number of years of spending that a passive 60/30/10 investor requires up-front, in order to finance an expected 36-year stream of future inflation-adjusted spending. The idea here is that in a deeply undervalued market with high expected future returns, investors can finance a future stream of spending with far less than they require when valuations are extreme and prospective returns are low.\nYou know you're in a bubble when funding a 36-year stream of expected inflation-adjusted spending requires over 38 years of money up-front.\n\nIn the chart below, the Endowment/spending multiple is presented on an inverted log scale (left), along with the actual subsequent average annual total return of a 60/30/10 portfolio mix (right scale). Needless to say, we adhere to investment disciplines that are intended to address problems like this.\n\nAs a testament to the breadth of this speculative episode, the median price/revenue ratio of S&P 500 components now exceeds 3.3, easily a record, and extreme enough to provoke distress about the potential losses that innocent but poorly-informed investors may experience over the completion of this cycle.\n\nThe next chart shows the median price/revenue ratio of S&P 500 components sorted into 10 deciles by valuation. The chart is presented on log scale to allow each line to be compared with its own history. Each segment on the vertical axis represents a doubling of valuations. Notice that every single decile of S&P 500 components is at record valuation extremes. Investors now rely on a permanently high plateau in these extremes.\n\nIt's interesting, but far less important, that the median price/earnings ratio of S&P 500 components has also reached 32.4, the highest level in history. This compares with a median P/E of 19.4 at the 2000 market peak. The problem with P/E multiples, of course, is that they are substantially affected by earnings variability. In fact, prior to the current peak, the highest median P/E for the S&P 500 was actually in March 2002, when the index was down 25% from the March 2000 bubble highs. That's because earnings were down far more by then, which boosted P/E ratios. Such is the danger of taking P/E multiples at face value.\nA crude but reasonably effective way to get around the cyclicality of earnings (but only for very broad indices), is to compare prices to the highest level of earnings achieved to-date. I introduced this metric back in 1998 as the price-to-peak-earnings ratio. The chart below shows a version of that. The blue line (left scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to GDP. The red line (right scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to the highest level of economy-wide U.S. profits to date. Investors have gotten themselves into trouble here.\n\nWhat if valuations remain extreme forever?\nProbably the single most frequent question I've heard from investors over the past couple of years is \"What happens if valuations remain extreme forever?\" It's actually a version of the \"permanently high plateau\" that Irving Fisher disastrously projected in 1929. Still, recent years have produced enormous confidence among investors that the Federal Reserve's purchases of Treasury debt can permanently \"backstop\" the stock market.\nAs I've detailed previously, quantitative easing supports the market only by creating zero interest hot potatoes that are uncomfortable for investors to hold (provided that they're inclined toward speculation), and that are impossible to get rid of in aggregate. Moreover, the Fed's purchases of corporate bonds during the pandemic were legally constrained to CARES funds provided by the Treasury, and ultimately amounted to $14 billion of bonds, in an economy with $11 trillion in corporate debt at $58 trillion in equity market capitalization.\nSuffice it to say that the \"Fed backstop\" is largely in the minds of investors, and relies almost exclusively on the psychological discomfort of holding low-yielding base money. Yet since perception can be indistinguishable from reality, particularly in the short run, it's important to entertain the question.\nMy answer is that if the Fed is indeed able to maintain valuations at the highest levels in history, forever, stock prices would likely grow at roughly the same rate as nominal GDP. So figure 1.6% real structural growth plus 2% inflation gets you 3.6%. Let's call it 4%, which would match nominal GDP growth in both the 10-year and 20-year periods ending at the Q4 2019 economic peak, just before the pandemic. The first casualty of rising inflation is stock valuations, so it's not at all clear that assuming higher inflation would help stocks until valuations were roughly normalized, which would require consumer prices to roughly triple.\nThe chart below is a reminder of how structural real GDP growth has progressed over recent decades (driven by demographic labor force growth and trend productivity), and the basis for that 1.6% figure for structural real GDP growth.\n\nSticking with 4% nominal growth, and adding a 1.5% dividend yield, a \"permanently high plateau\" in market valuations would imply S&P 500 total returns of about 5.5% annually. Again, this assumes that valuations never retreat from levels that presently stand at about 3.6 times their historical norms. Simply allow them to retreat to 2.4 times their historical norms a decade from now - which would still keep valuations among the highest 10% in U.S. history - and the resulting 10-year total return would drop to about 1.3%. I think this would actually be the best-case scenario even in a permanently overvalued world.\nAt elevated valuations, even very small changes in expected return imply enormous changes in prices. So it's unlikely that a period of much higher average valuations will escape the prospect of relatively high volatility. Rather than a 70% market decline, which would presently be required for the S&P 500 to simply touch historically run-of-the-mill valuation norms, investors could expect rather frequent market losses in the 20-35% range, which is essentially what we've seen even over the past few years.\nAll of that would be fine with us. We've adapted our discipline sufficiently (especially in late-2017) to tolerate the possibility of permanently sustained overvaluation. My impression is that the impact of those adaptations has become more evident as we've had greater opportunities to live into them. I can't say that I believe for a second that investors will actually be spared from a 50-70% loss in the S&P 500 in the coming years, but again, it will be fine with us if the market never approaches historical valuation norms again. With the adaptations we introduced in late-2017, our discipline is flexible enough to navigate a bubble even without embracing its premise.\nAn unusual overlap of high-risk conditions\nReturning to Modigliani, my impression is that the advance of recent years to the most extreme valuations in history reflects exactly the bubble dynamics he described, and I expect that it will also end as he described (though not necessarily in one fell swoop): \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.\"\nOne of our internal gauges tracks the correlation of market conditions with certain high-risk features that have preceded steep market collapses - a collection of measures capturing valuations, internals, sentiment, leverage, overextension, and yield pressures. Only a handful of instances in history overlap pre-crash conditions as well as they do at present. The current overlap is actually quite similar to August 1987. Meanwhile, the correlation of current conditions with features typically observed at market lows is the most negative in history.\nIf you want my opinion, I suspect that a near-vertical market plunge on the order of 25-35% is coming, probably quite shortly, most likely out of the blue, as in 1987, driven by nothing more than the sudden concerted effort of overextended investors to sell, and the need for a large price adjustment in order to induce scarce buyers to take the other side.\nAs usual, no forecasts are necessary. We'll align our investment stance in response to the valuations and market action that we observe at each point in time. Still, it's of particular concern that these overlaps are occurring in the context of the most extreme valuations in history, along with strikingly dysfunctional pockets of illiquidity in many individual issues. This dysfunctional behavior isn't about any particular video game retailer. I suspect it's actually about some sort of fragility or segmentation in order-flow mechanisms, possibly coupled with poorly managed derivatives exposure.\nAs I used to teach my students, show me a financial debacle, and I'll show you someone who had a leveraged, mismatched position that they were suddenly forced to close into an illiquid market.\nThough my concerns run far beyond the amount of leverage in the system, it isn't helpful that the amount of leverage in the U.S. equity markets is now easily the highest in history. Some observers are inclined to bring this figure down by dividing instead by the market capitalization of equities. But here's some useful arithmetic:\nMargin Debt/GDP = Margin Debt/Market Cap x Market Cap/GDP\nTo say that margin debt to GDP is at the highest level in history is to say not only that stocks are heavily owned on margin, but that those stocks are also breathtakingly overvalued. That combination is particularly worrisome.\n\n All crises have involved debt that, in one fashion or another, has become dangerously out of scale in relation to the underlying means of payment.\n\n\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Short History of Financial Euphoria\n\n\nThe kind of event I'm suggesting would not bring valuations anywhere near historical valuation norms. Given current valuation extremes, it would be more like a palate cleanser. I have no particular expectation about what the next dish would be. In the event we do observe an abrupt market collapse, the Fed will undoubtedly respond with some new palliative. Whether or not it is effective will depend on the context of risk-aversion, inflation, credit risk, and other conditions at the time. The larger problem, as we've discussed, is that you can't \"save\" an overvalued asset by propping up its price. The value is in the future cash flows that will be delivered to investors over time. The elevated price only ensures that the long-term return between now and then will be dismal.\nOf course, nothing in our discipline relies on a market plunge. Given the combination of hypervaluation and divergent market internals (largely based on debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well), I do believe that the stock market remains in a \"trap door\" situation. Still, that view will change as market conditions change. We'll refrain from adopting or amplifying a negative outlook if our measures of market internals improve. That discipline has served us well even amid record highs. Again, no forecasts are required, nor does this opinion drive our current investment stance. I just think the correlation with historical pre-crash conditions is worth noting.\n\n How little, it will perhaps be agreed, was either original or otherwise remarkable about this history. Prices driven up on the expectation that they would go up, the expectation realized by the resulting purchases. Then the inevitable reversal of these expectations because of some seemingly damaging event or development or perhaps merely because the supply of intellectually vulnerable buyers was exhausted. Whatever the reason (and it is unimportant), the absolute certainty is that this world ends not with a whimper but with a bang. And so on to the moment of mass disillusion and the crash. This last, it will now be sufficiently evident, never comes gently. It is always accompanied by a desperate and largely unsuccessful effort to get out.\n\n\n - John Kenneth Galbraith on the 1929 collapse\n\nValuations and investment duration\nTo understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"\nEvery security is a claim on a stream of future cash flows that can be expected to be delivered to the investor over time. While the concept of \"duration\" is most commonly used for bonds, it's actually applicable to any security, no matter how \"lumpy\" the stream of cash flows might be.\nIf you don't like math, feel free to skim over the various equations and just read the pull quotes. I've provided the details just for completeness.\nThe \"duration\" of a security can be defined in two ways.\nInvestment horizon: the weighted average number of years it takes for the security to deliver its payments. For each period, you take the share of total present value represented by that year's payment, and multiply it by the number of years in the future the payment will be received. Add them all up. The result is the number of years from today (a weighted average) that the present value of your investment will be repaid. For example, the duration of a security that delivers a single payment a decade from now is simply 10 years.\nElasticity: the percentage change in the security in response to a change in the underlying gross rate of return. Technically, elasticity is (-dP/P)/(dk/1+k). For example, suppose you own a security that will pay $100 a decade from now, and it's priced at $82.0348, for a 2% annual return. Now assume the expected return moves to 2.01%. The price would drop to $81.9544. Elasticity is (0.0804/82.0348)/(0.0001/1.02) = 10%\nIt turns out that the \"duration\" of a security in years is identical to its \"duration\" in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that \"immunizes\" the investor against changes in expected returns over time. In other words, assuming you reinvest your cash flows over time, duration gives you a good idea of how long you have to hold the security in order for your ending wealth to be largely independent of the fluctuations that the security experiences over that horizon.\nIf you know differentiation, can prove to yourself that the \"modified duration\" of the S&P 500 is essentially the inverse of the dividend yield. The modified duration is just (-dP/P)/dk or Macaulay duration/(1+k).\nConsider P = D/(k-g). Differentiating with respect to k, dP/dk = -P/(k-g), so duration (-dP/P)/dk = P/D.\nHere's how to think about the link between valuations and duration. Presently, the dividend yield of the S&P 500 is 1.48%. If the yield moves to 1.49%, holding dividends constant, prices drop by 1.48/1.49-1 = -0.67% on that 1 basis point move. Duration is just that sensitivity, defined for a 100 basis point move, which would be 67. It turns out that's also the weighted-average number of years from today that you'll receive your present value, if you invest today.\nCompare that to the typical situation over the past century, when the dividend yield of the S&P 500 averaged about 3.7%. At normal valuations, a 1 basis point increase in the dividend yield would produce a price drop of 3.7/3.71-1 = 0.27%, implying a duration of 27 years.\n\n It turns out that the 'duration' of a security in years is identical to its 'duration' in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that 'immunizes' the investor against changes in expected returns over time.\n\nHistorically, investors wishing to match the duration of their investment portfolio to the duration of their investment horizon could be reasonably comfortable holding 100% of their assets in stocks, provided they had an investment horizon of about 25-30 years. Presently, these investors would need an investment horizon closer to 65-70 years. They are currently holding sippy cups.\nScarcity, usefulness, and value\nWhile we're on the subject of bubbles, I'll add a few comments on Bitcoin, just for fun. I'd write more, but my sides still hurt from laughing.\nObjects like tulip bulbs and Bitcoin differ from securities in that they do not deliver a stream of cash flows to the holder. Instead, what objects like tulips and currencies provide is a little stream of services over time, for example, as a perennial thing of beauty or as a means of payment. What people sometimes forget is that it is not just scarcity that defines the value of an object, but the stream of useful \"services\" that it provides (for some reason, nobody wants to buy my unique, limited edition, digitally-signed porcupine seat covers). The price of the object, and the stream of services it provides, should be commensurate.\nU.S. dollars, for example, have value primarily because they are tethered to the real economy by fiat (they legally must be accepted as a means of payment, as noted on the face of any dollar bill), and they represent the entire substrate of the banking system - nearly every payment that goes back and forth in the U.S. economy represents a transfer of base money. Base money (currency and bank reserves) provides billions of little \"services\" over time.\nWith every transaction, reserves move electronically from bank to bank between one account holder and another. That combination of legal fiat and constant use as a substrate of the payments system is what gives money \"value.\" That value also means that the U.S. government essentially obtains revenue as \"seigniorage\" for producing the stuff. For those who imagine that governments are going to surrender that revenue in favor of using Bitcoin, I've got a non-fungible token to sell you.\n\nAs I've noted before, blockchain is a brilliant algorithm, and I expect that it will have a great number of uses for secure transactions and inventory management. Bitcoin, however, is a token generated by an energy-inefficient, replicable blockchain app. Ultimately, its value rests on the capacity to provide transactions services, yet without fiat to require its use, and with strikingly narrow bandwidth - one block of roughly 2000 transactions every 10 minutes - that I expect will prove to be a wildly limiting feature. That's a problem in a world where speculators now value the stock of bitcoin at one-fifth the value of the entire U.S. monetary base.\n\n If you think about how money is valued, it's clear that people accept it because they believe it will provide a claim on the future output of others. Of course, that expectation requires that future producers will also give away their output and accept the money, on the belief that yet other future producers will do the same. That expectation has to continue indefinitely. Like the question 'What holds up Atlas when Atlas holds up the world?' it's not enough to answer that he's standing on a turtle. It's got to be turtles all the way down. The value of money has an enormous psychological component.\"\n\n\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., Turtles All the Way Down, February 2019\n\nOf course, Bitcoin may have a certain user base as a vehicle for money laundering and black market transactions, but that's an undesirable investment thesis. The vast majority of transactions are to exchange Bitcoin itself, though the New York Times did recently report that \"pornography, patio furniture, and an at-home coronavirus test are among the odd assortment of goods and services that people are purchasing with the cryptocurrency.\" So, basically, if your typical day consists of surfing porn on your patio while testing yourself for COVID, you're gonna want to look into Bitcoin.\nMy largest concern is that people are actually forking over hard-earned savings in exchange for these tokens, which allows early \"miners\" to cash out. That's essentially the defining feature of a Ponzi scheme. Like all speculative bubbles that rely on increases in price, rather than cash flows generated by the production of value-added goods and services, Bitcoin isn't actually creating \"wealth.\" It's only creating the opportunity for wealth transfer, primarily from those who will end up holding the bag.\nBitcoin has certain characteristics of base money in the sense that it's exchanged on an electronic ledger, but by design, transactions are limited to an average of about 2000 per block, with one block successfully validated, on average, every 10 minutes. In order to validate a transaction block, CPU farms across the world grind out terahashes of random SHA256 validation attempts in order to discover a sufficiently small binary that matches the cryptographic hash of the block.\nAll of this \"mining\" burns up about as much energy as it takes to run a modest-sized country. Validating a block of transactions produces a reward to the miner (and dilution of the coinbase) of 6.25 Bitcoin per block, which currently works out to nearly $200 per transaction. Yet the value of the median transaction in Bitcoin is only about $1000 in the first place.\nThere's a rather primitive regression analysis floating around (tagged as \"sophisticated\" by some observers who apparently go numb at the word \"logarithm\") that attempts to relate the log price of bitcoin to the log \"stock/flow\" ratio, as if it represents some mechanistic supply-demand relationship. Aside from the fact that the correlation between two diagonal lines is always about 0.9-something, I find that one can obtain a better fit just by regressing the log price of Bitcoin on the log ratio of block difficulty/block reward, which is basically a measure of how much energy one needs to waste in order to mine a new bitcoin.\nSo the \"value\" of Bitcoin is partially linked to the backward-looking sunk cost of the energy wasted to mine these tokens. Still, I wouldn't dream of using this sort of \"model\" to trade an object whose \"value\" is primarily in the heads of speculators. Use it if you like. If you happen make money on it, feel free send me a check, preferably in U.S. dollars.\nUndoubtedly, this view of Bitcoin will be unpopular among those who associate holding Bitcoin with superpowers like laser eyes and diamond hands. \"Not surprised Hussman doesn't get Bitcoin. Few do.\" M'kay. Look, there's certainly a case to be made that a speculative mindset creates its own reality, and while it does, there's an opportunity to obtain wealth transfers from frantic late-comers who can no longer tolerate missing out. Tulips gonna tulip. Not my gig, thanks.\n\n In the short run, it will be said to be an attack, motivated by either deficient understanding or uncontrolled envy, of the wonderful process of enrichment. Those involved with the speculation are experiencing an increase in wealth - getting rich or being further enriched. No one wishes to believe that this is fortuitous or undeserved; all wish to think that it is the result of their own superior insight or intuition. As long as they are in, they have a strong pecuniary commitment to belief in the unique personal intelligence that tells them there will be yet more. Accordingly, possession must be associated with some special genius. Speculation buys up, in a very practical way, the intelligence of those involved. Only after the speculative collapse does the truth emerge. What was thought to be unusual acuity turns out to be only a fortuitous and unfortunate association with the assets.\n\n\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Brief History of Financial Euphoria","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3791,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":322196426,"gmtCreate":1615780199265,"gmtModify":1704786383794,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like and comment pls&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment pls&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/322196426","repostId":"1198328952","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1798,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":322196119,"gmtCreate":1615780146931,"gmtModify":1704786383309,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can u have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can u have a like and comment pls","text":"Can u have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/322196119","repostId":"1111036221","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2459,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3569982147441048","authorId":"3569982147441048","name":"Billie Lo","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2de8913068819a9735f0bb22ec7a5e72","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"authorIdStr":"3569982147441048","idStr":"3569982147441048"},"content":"Reply my comment Plz tq","text":"Reply my comment Plz tq","html":"Reply my comment Plz tq"}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":322198791,"gmtCreate":1615780115713,"gmtModify":1704786382502,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/322198791","repostId":"1110317271","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3048,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":321482355,"gmtCreate":1615461797877,"gmtModify":1704783067570,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like and comment pls","listText":"Like and comment pls","text":"Like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/321482355","repostId":"1148700766","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1148700766","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1615461584,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1148700766?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-11 19:19","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Dating app Bumble expects pent up demand","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1148700766","media":"Reuters","summary":"Bumble Inc on Wednesday said it expects pent up demand from people who had been avoiding dating in p","content":"<p>Bumble Inc on Wednesday said it expects pent up demand from people who had been avoiding dating in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic, after it reported a bigger-than-expected rise in fourth-quarter revenue.</p>\n<p>Dating apps have benefited from social distancing restrictions that made people yearn for company as casual gatherings with friends and family became a rarity.</p>\n<p>The company said it will build its friendship product Bumble BFF beyond its minimum viable offering as it expects friendships and platonic relationships at large to be a massive opportunity going forward.</p>\n<p>Texas-based Bumble expects current quarter revenue to be in the range of $163 million and $165 million.</p>\n<p>Bumble boasted of 12.7% of the U.S. dating market, with close to 5.5 million average monthly active users and 2.2 million downloads in the United States alone, during the quarter, according to data from analytics firm Apptopia.</p>\n<p>The company differentiates itself from competitors, biggest rival being Match Group’s Tinder, by allowing women to make the first move. It also has verticals like Bumble BFF and Bumble Bizz that are dedicated to make friendships and professional connection.</p>\n<p>Founded by Tinder co-founder Whitney Wolfe Herd, Bumble raised $2.2 billion in its initial public offering last month, following which Herd became the youngest female CEO to ever take a company public.</p>\n<p>Bumble, which operates two major apps Badoo and Bumble, posted a 31.1% rise in revenue to $165.6 million in the fourth quarter, first earnings report since it went public. Analysts on average had expected a revenue of $163.3 million, according to Refinitiv IBES data.</p>\n<p>Net loss widened to $26.1 million during the quarter, or 1 cent a share, from a net loss of $17.2 million a year ago.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Dating app Bumble expects pent up demand</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nDating app Bumble expects pent up demand\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-11 19:19</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Bumble Inc on Wednesday said it expects pent up demand from people who had been avoiding dating in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic, after it reported a bigger-than-expected rise in fourth-quarter revenue.</p>\n<p>Dating apps have benefited from social distancing restrictions that made people yearn for company as casual gatherings with friends and family became a rarity.</p>\n<p>The company said it will build its friendship product Bumble BFF beyond its minimum viable offering as it expects friendships and platonic relationships at large to be a massive opportunity going forward.</p>\n<p>Texas-based Bumble expects current quarter revenue to be in the range of $163 million and $165 million.</p>\n<p>Bumble boasted of 12.7% of the U.S. dating market, with close to 5.5 million average monthly active users and 2.2 million downloads in the United States alone, during the quarter, according to data from analytics firm Apptopia.</p>\n<p>The company differentiates itself from competitors, biggest rival being Match Group’s Tinder, by allowing women to make the first move. It also has verticals like Bumble BFF and Bumble Bizz that are dedicated to make friendships and professional connection.</p>\n<p>Founded by Tinder co-founder Whitney Wolfe Herd, Bumble raised $2.2 billion in its initial public offering last month, following which Herd became the youngest female CEO to ever take a company public.</p>\n<p>Bumble, which operates two major apps Badoo and Bumble, posted a 31.1% rise in revenue to $165.6 million in the fourth quarter, first earnings report since it went public. Analysts on average had expected a revenue of $163.3 million, according to Refinitiv IBES data.</p>\n<p>Net loss widened to $26.1 million during the quarter, or 1 cent a share, from a net loss of $17.2 million a year ago.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BMBL":"Bumble Inc."},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1148700766","content_text":"Bumble Inc on Wednesday said it expects pent up demand from people who had been avoiding dating in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic, after it reported a bigger-than-expected rise in fourth-quarter revenue.\nDating apps have benefited from social distancing restrictions that made people yearn for company as casual gatherings with friends and family became a rarity.\nThe company said it will build its friendship product Bumble BFF beyond its minimum viable offering as it expects friendships and platonic relationships at large to be a massive opportunity going forward.\nTexas-based Bumble expects current quarter revenue to be in the range of $163 million and $165 million.\nBumble boasted of 12.7% of the U.S. dating market, with close to 5.5 million average monthly active users and 2.2 million downloads in the United States alone, during the quarter, according to data from analytics firm Apptopia.\nThe company differentiates itself from competitors, biggest rival being Match Group’s Tinder, by allowing women to make the first move. It also has verticals like Bumble BFF and Bumble Bizz that are dedicated to make friendships and professional connection.\nFounded by Tinder co-founder Whitney Wolfe Herd, Bumble raised $2.2 billion in its initial public offering last month, following which Herd became the youngest female CEO to ever take a company public.\nBumble, which operates two major apps Badoo and Bumble, posted a 31.1% rise in revenue to $165.6 million in the fourth quarter, first earnings report since it went public. Analysts on average had expected a revenue of $163.3 million, according to Refinitiv IBES data.\nNet loss widened to $26.1 million during the quarter, or 1 cent a share, from a net loss of $17.2 million a year ago.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BMBL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1598,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":321482035,"gmtCreate":1615461741027,"gmtModify":1704783067247,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Help to comment and like pls","listText":"Help to comment and like pls","text":"Help to comment and like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/321482035","repostId":"1199156489","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199156489","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1615452861,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199156489?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-11 16:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"US Daylight Saving Time","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199156489","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"From 02:00 U.S. East time March 14(this Sunday),the North America region entered daylight saving tim","content":"<p>From&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;March&nbsp;14(this&nbsp;Sunday),the&nbsp;North America&nbsp;region&nbsp;entered&nbsp;daylight saving&nbsp;time,until&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;ends&nbsp;on&nbsp;November&nbsp;7,2021.</p><p>So,starting&nbsp;on&nbsp;Monday,March&nbsp;14,the&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;market&nbsp;will&nbsp;open&nbsp;and&nbsp;close&nbsp;one&nbsp;hour&nbsp;ahead&nbsp;of&nbsp;schedule&nbsp;during&nbsp;north&nbsp;american&nbsp;daylight saving time,i.e.,U.S.&nbsp;trading&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;changed&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30&nbsp;beijing&nbsp;time&nbsp;to&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;a.m.the&nbsp;next&nbsp;day,pre-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;16:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30,after-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;8:00.</p><p><b>What is daylight saving time?</b></p><p>The DST is the practice of moving clocks forward by one hour during summer months so that daylight lasts longer into evening. Most of North America and Europe follows the custom, while the majority of countries elsewhere do not.</p><p>Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and most of Arizona don’t observe daylight saving time. It’s incumbent to stick with the status quo.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>US Daylight Saving Time</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nUS Daylight Saving Time\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-11 16:54</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>From&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;March&nbsp;14(this&nbsp;Sunday),the&nbsp;North America&nbsp;region&nbsp;entered&nbsp;daylight saving&nbsp;time,until&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;ends&nbsp;on&nbsp;November&nbsp;7,2021.</p><p>So,starting&nbsp;on&nbsp;Monday,March&nbsp;14,the&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;market&nbsp;will&nbsp;open&nbsp;and&nbsp;close&nbsp;one&nbsp;hour&nbsp;ahead&nbsp;of&nbsp;schedule&nbsp;during&nbsp;north&nbsp;american&nbsp;daylight saving time,i.e.,U.S.&nbsp;trading&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;changed&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30&nbsp;beijing&nbsp;time&nbsp;to&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;a.m.the&nbsp;next&nbsp;day,pre-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;16:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30,after-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;8:00.</p><p><b>What is daylight saving time?</b></p><p>The DST is the practice of moving clocks forward by one hour during summer months so that daylight lasts longer into evening. Most of North America and Europe follows the custom, while the majority of countries elsewhere do not.</p><p>Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and most of Arizona don’t observe daylight saving time. It’s incumbent to stick with the status quo.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199156489","content_text":"From 02:00 U.S. East time March 14(this Sunday),the North America region entered daylight saving time,until 02:00 U.S. East time ends on November 7,2021.So,starting on Monday,March 14,the U.S. market will open and close one hour ahead of schedule during north american daylight saving time,i.e.,U.S. trading time will be changed to 21:30 beijing time to 04:00 a.m.the next day,pre-trade time will be 16:00 to 21:30,after-trade time will be 04:00 to 8:00.What is daylight saving time?The DST is the practice of moving clocks forward by one hour during summer months so that daylight lasts longer into evening. Most of North America and Europe follows the custom, while the majority of countries elsewhere do not.Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and most of Arizona don’t observe daylight saving time. It’s incumbent to stick with the status quo.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2558,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323673970,"gmtCreate":1615340878190,"gmtModify":1704781377581,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Comment and like pls&nbsp;","listText":"Comment and like pls&nbsp;","text":"Comment and like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323673970","repostId":"2118625319","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2795,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":329408030,"gmtCreate":1615264531520,"gmtModify":1704780313803,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have some likes and comments pls&nbsp;","listText":"Can I have some likes and comments pls&nbsp;","text":"Can I have some likes and comments pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/329408030","repostId":"1143436063","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2527,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":320684913,"gmtCreate":1615093108532,"gmtModify":1704778622932,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can i have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can i have a like and comment pls","text":"Can i have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/320684913","repostId":"1169596583","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1169596583","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1614958557,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1169596583?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-05 23:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Palantir plunged more than 13%","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1169596583","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"(March 5)&nbsp;Palantir plunged more than 13%.","content":"<p>(March 5)&nbsp;Palantir plunged more than 13%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13f756ec57cca85c31b6be070941d7c1\" tg-width=\"1059\" tg-height=\"499\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Palantir plunged more than 13%</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nPalantir plunged more than 13%\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-05 23:35</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(March 5)&nbsp;Palantir plunged more than 13%.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13f756ec57cca85c31b6be070941d7c1\" tg-width=\"1059\" tg-height=\"499\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc."},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1169596583","content_text":"(March 5) Palantir plunged more than 13%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PLTR":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":557,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":367111916,"gmtCreate":1614919542235,"gmtModify":1704776995190,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/367111916","repostId":"1102182306","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1102182306","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1614916086,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1102182306?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-05 11:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Making A List Of The Top Software Stocks To Watch Now? 4 Names To Know","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1102182306","media":"Nasdaq","summary":"Are These The Best Software Stocks To Have On Your Watchlist?The past year has been invigorating for","content":"<p>Are These The Best Software Stocks To Have On Your Watchlist?</p><p>The past year has been invigorating for&nbsp;software stocks&nbsp;on the stock market, to say the least. This comes as no surprise seeing as software is a vital tool for organizations of all sizes in this age. As a result, investors and software companies alike continue to see big gains. Moving forward, you might be wondering if the software industry can maintain its current momentum. Well, it is important to note that software is a part of the ever-evolving tech industry. Likewise, there are always innovations and refinements to be made over existing software. This coupled with countless applications for software across various industries bodes well for software investors.</p><p>For instance, Veeva Systems (NYSE: VEEV) caters to the cloud computing needs of the life sciences industry. Just this morning, it revealed that 90% of the biotech research companies it surveyed are looking to significantly improve research methods by adopting new digital strategies. Another example would be digital communications giant <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a> (NASDAQ: ZM). The company’s recent-quarter revenue skyrocketed by 369% year-over-year. But more importantly, it ended the quarter with a whopping $4.2 billion in cash on hand. The likes of which CFO Kelly Steckleberg mentioned would be put towards investing in capacity building and R&amp;D hiring. All this paired with the recent pullbacks could provide an interesting opportunity for investors to buy on the dip. As such, here are fourtop software stocksin the limelight now.</p><p>4 Top Software Stocks To Watch</p><ul><li><b>Microsoft Corporation</b>(NASDAQ: MSFT)</li><li><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EB\">Eventbrite Inc.</a></b>(NYSE: EB)</li><li><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SPLK\">Splunk Inc</a>.</b>(NASDAQ: SPLK)</li><li><b>Oracle Corporation</b>(NYSE: ORCL)</li></ul><p>Microsoft Corporation</p><p>It is hard to talk about software without mentioning software goliath Microsoft. After all, it is the company behind the leading office tool software in the world, Microsoft Office. Given its status as <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of thebig tech stocks, most investors would be watching MSFT stock in anticipation of the company’s latest moves. Nevertheless, Microsoft continues to make groundbreaking developments in the software space.</p><p>To begin with, Microsoft unveiled Microsoft Mesh, a seemingly new frontier in video communication. Simply put, Mesh is the company’s “mixed reality” upgrade to conventional virtual calls. Through a combination of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), users will supposedly be able to interact with others as if they were in the same room.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c68235cbdd1889e829494cf6168bec83\" tg-width=\"759\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Source: TD Ameritrade TOS</p><p>Now, Microsoft is offering it as both an application and a service via its cloud computing arm, Microsoft Azure. Speaking of Azure, Microsoft also expanded its services with Azure Arc hybrid and multi-cloud capabilities. Briefly, Azure Arc is a set of technologies that extend Azure’s services to “any infrastructure.” In practice, these upgrades give customers the flexibility and agility to innovate with Azure, anywhere. With Microsoft firing on all cylinders, could it be a good time to watch MSFT stock?</p><p>Eventbrite Inc.</p><p>Another software player in focus now would be global self-service ticketing and experience tech platform Eventbrite. The company operates an event management and ticketing website. Through its application software, users can browse, create, and promote local events. In terms of revenue, Eventbrite charges a fee to paid-event organizers in exchange for its online ticketing services. Moreover, the company caters to nearly <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a> million event creators across 180 countries. With most in-person events being canceled, you’d think that the company would be on the downtrend. However, its recent quarter fiscal posted last week suggests otherwise.</p><p>In it, the company saw its revenue increase by over 22% quarter-over-quarter. According to CEO Julia Hartz, Eventbrite’s users hosted 4.6 million events throughout 2020. Through Eventbrite, people continued to gather in inventive ways via virtual events, drive-ins, and socially distanced experiences.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/128f22262235ece45d047268235c6be1\" tg-width=\"762\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Source: TD Ameritrade TOS</p><p>If anything, this shows the resilience of the company even amidst these trying times. After you factor in improving pandemic conditions, things could be looking up for the company. Investors appear to think so as EB stock has surged by over 12% since these results were posted a week ago. Given all of this, will you be adding EB stock to your watchlist?</p><p>Splunk Inc.</p><p>Following that, we have big data analytics software company, Splunk. In brief, the company produces software for searching, monitoring, and analyzing machine-generated big data. Splunk does all this via its Data-to-Everything platform. For the most part, the company helps organizations gain actionable insights from their data regardless of scale. In the age of information, this would serve as a vital service for businesses looking to refine their business strategies. Accordingly, this would position Splunk to continue benefiting from the pandemic-fueled exposure it gained over the past year. Seeing as Splunk posted stellar figures in its fourth-quarter fiscal after yesterday’s closing bell, investors could be watching SPLK stock.</p><p>Diving right into it, the company raked in a total annual recurring revenue (ARR) of $2.36 billion for the quarter. This marks an impressive 41% year-over-year increase. Additionally, Splunk saw its cloud ARR surge by 83% over the same period. In terms of cloud revenue for fiscal 2021, the company posted a 77% increase compared to its fiscal year 2020. No doubt, Splunk continues to ride the boom in corporate cloud spending.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8c4aee1421659dfcebcf9ffe09d7e9c4\" tg-width=\"759\" tg-height=\"470\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Source: TD Ameritrade TOS</p><p>In closing, CFO Jason Child cites continuous cloud adoption as a driving force for Splunk’s long-term success. Time will tell if this holds to be true. For now, will you be keeping SPLK stock in your sights?</p><p>Oracle Corporation</p><p>Last but not least, we will be looking at software giant, Oracle. The company offers a suite of integrated applications and secure, autonomous infrastructure via its Oracle Cloud platform. Specifically, these applications help organizations by providing sales, marketing, human resources, finance, and manufacturing solutions. Notably, Oracle announced yesterday that its third-quarterearnings callwill be held next Wednesday after market close. This could place ORCL stock on investors’ radars.</p><p>For one thing, the company has had a busy month throughout February. For starters, it expanded its hybrid cloud portfolio earlier in the month with the Oracle Roving Edge Infrastructure. The upgrade means that customers can employ Oracle’s secure and scalable cloud services even “in the most remote areas of the world.” Subsequently, the company posted on two occasions regarding its clients in the healthcare sector. On February 11, it revealed that several leading healthcare organizations across the U.S. adopted its services.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/37a61353adeec0dab2147bcbf18a0e3f\" tg-width=\"758\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Source: TD Ameritrade TOS</p><p>According to Oracle, said clients cater to over 26 million Americans annually. Similarly, the company announced that Northwell Health, one of the largest New York health systems is also a client. Overall Oracle continues to expand its services while aiding the healthcare industry amidst the pandemic. Could it be wise to watch ORCL stock ahead of its earnings next week? Your guess is as good as mine.</p><p>The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.</p>","source":"lsy1603171495471","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Making A List Of The Top Software Stocks To Watch Now? 4 Names To Know</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nMaking A List Of The Top Software Stocks To Watch Now? 4 Names To Know\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-05 11:48 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/making-a-list-of-the-top-software-stocks-to-watch-now-4-names-to-know-2021-03-04><strong>Nasdaq</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Are These The Best Software Stocks To Have On Your Watchlist?The past year has been invigorating for software stocks on the stock market, to say the least. This comes as no surprise seeing as software...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/making-a-list-of-the-top-software-stocks-to-watch-now-4-names-to-know-2021-03-04\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"MSFT":"微软","SPLK":"Splunk Inc","ORCL":"甲骨文","EB":"Eventbrite Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/making-a-list-of-the-top-software-stocks-to-watch-now-4-names-to-know-2021-03-04","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1102182306","content_text":"Are These The Best Software Stocks To Have On Your Watchlist?The past year has been invigorating for software stocks on the stock market, to say the least. This comes as no surprise seeing as software is a vital tool for organizations of all sizes in this age. As a result, investors and software companies alike continue to see big gains. Moving forward, you might be wondering if the software industry can maintain its current momentum. Well, it is important to note that software is a part of the ever-evolving tech industry. Likewise, there are always innovations and refinements to be made over existing software. This coupled with countless applications for software across various industries bodes well for software investors.For instance, Veeva Systems (NYSE: VEEV) caters to the cloud computing needs of the life sciences industry. Just this morning, it revealed that 90% of the biotech research companies it surveyed are looking to significantly improve research methods by adopting new digital strategies. Another example would be digital communications giant Zoom (NASDAQ: ZM). The company’s recent-quarter revenue skyrocketed by 369% year-over-year. But more importantly, it ended the quarter with a whopping $4.2 billion in cash on hand. The likes of which CFO Kelly Steckleberg mentioned would be put towards investing in capacity building and R&D hiring. All this paired with the recent pullbacks could provide an interesting opportunity for investors to buy on the dip. As such, here are fourtop software stocksin the limelight now.4 Top Software Stocks To WatchMicrosoft Corporation(NASDAQ: MSFT)Eventbrite Inc.(NYSE: EB)Splunk Inc.(NASDAQ: SPLK)Oracle Corporation(NYSE: ORCL)Microsoft CorporationIt is hard to talk about software without mentioning software goliath Microsoft. After all, it is the company behind the leading office tool software in the world, Microsoft Office. Given its status as one of thebig tech stocks, most investors would be watching MSFT stock in anticipation of the company’s latest moves. Nevertheless, Microsoft continues to make groundbreaking developments in the software space.To begin with, Microsoft unveiled Microsoft Mesh, a seemingly new frontier in video communication. Simply put, Mesh is the company’s “mixed reality” upgrade to conventional virtual calls. Through a combination of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), users will supposedly be able to interact with others as if they were in the same room.Source: TD Ameritrade TOSNow, Microsoft is offering it as both an application and a service via its cloud computing arm, Microsoft Azure. Speaking of Azure, Microsoft also expanded its services with Azure Arc hybrid and multi-cloud capabilities. Briefly, Azure Arc is a set of technologies that extend Azure’s services to “any infrastructure.” In practice, these upgrades give customers the flexibility and agility to innovate with Azure, anywhere. With Microsoft firing on all cylinders, could it be a good time to watch MSFT stock?Eventbrite Inc.Another software player in focus now would be global self-service ticketing and experience tech platform Eventbrite. The company operates an event management and ticketing website. Through its application software, users can browse, create, and promote local events. In terms of revenue, Eventbrite charges a fee to paid-event organizers in exchange for its online ticketing services. Moreover, the company caters to nearly one million event creators across 180 countries. With most in-person events being canceled, you’d think that the company would be on the downtrend. However, its recent quarter fiscal posted last week suggests otherwise.In it, the company saw its revenue increase by over 22% quarter-over-quarter. According to CEO Julia Hartz, Eventbrite’s users hosted 4.6 million events throughout 2020. Through Eventbrite, people continued to gather in inventive ways via virtual events, drive-ins, and socially distanced experiences.Source: TD Ameritrade TOSIf anything, this shows the resilience of the company even amidst these trying times. After you factor in improving pandemic conditions, things could be looking up for the company. Investors appear to think so as EB stock has surged by over 12% since these results were posted a week ago. Given all of this, will you be adding EB stock to your watchlist?Splunk Inc.Following that, we have big data analytics software company, Splunk. In brief, the company produces software for searching, monitoring, and analyzing machine-generated big data. Splunk does all this via its Data-to-Everything platform. For the most part, the company helps organizations gain actionable insights from their data regardless of scale. In the age of information, this would serve as a vital service for businesses looking to refine their business strategies. Accordingly, this would position Splunk to continue benefiting from the pandemic-fueled exposure it gained over the past year. Seeing as Splunk posted stellar figures in its fourth-quarter fiscal after yesterday’s closing bell, investors could be watching SPLK stock.Diving right into it, the company raked in a total annual recurring revenue (ARR) of $2.36 billion for the quarter. This marks an impressive 41% year-over-year increase. Additionally, Splunk saw its cloud ARR surge by 83% over the same period. In terms of cloud revenue for fiscal 2021, the company posted a 77% increase compared to its fiscal year 2020. No doubt, Splunk continues to ride the boom in corporate cloud spending.Source: TD Ameritrade TOSIn closing, CFO Jason Child cites continuous cloud adoption as a driving force for Splunk’s long-term success. Time will tell if this holds to be true. For now, will you be keeping SPLK stock in your sights?Oracle CorporationLast but not least, we will be looking at software giant, Oracle. The company offers a suite of integrated applications and secure, autonomous infrastructure via its Oracle Cloud platform. Specifically, these applications help organizations by providing sales, marketing, human resources, finance, and manufacturing solutions. Notably, Oracle announced yesterday that its third-quarterearnings callwill be held next Wednesday after market close. This could place ORCL stock on investors’ radars.For one thing, the company has had a busy month throughout February. For starters, it expanded its hybrid cloud portfolio earlier in the month with the Oracle Roving Edge Infrastructure. The upgrade means that customers can employ Oracle’s secure and scalable cloud services even “in the most remote areas of the world.” Subsequently, the company posted on two occasions regarding its clients in the healthcare sector. On February 11, it revealed that several leading healthcare organizations across the U.S. adopted its services.Source: TD Ameritrade TOSAccording to Oracle, said clients cater to over 26 million Americans annually. Similarly, the company announced that Northwell Health, one of the largest New York health systems is also a client. Overall Oracle continues to expand its services while aiding the healthcare industry amidst the pandemic. Could it be wise to watch ORCL stock ahead of its earnings next week? Your guess is as good as mine.The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"ORCL":0.9,"SPLK":0.9,"EB":0.9,"MSFT":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":503,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":367113978,"gmtCreate":1614919475194,"gmtModify":1704776993404,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/367113978","repostId":"2117950085","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":471,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":364341530,"gmtCreate":1614818435420,"gmtModify":1704775581696,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls&nbsp;","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls&nbsp;","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/364341530","repostId":"1107788140","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107788140","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1614816795,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107788140?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-04 08:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Wall Street drops as high-flying tech stocks retreat","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107788140","media":"Reuters","summary":"(Reuters) - The Nasdaq ended sharply lower on Wednesday after investors sold high-flying technology ","content":"<p>(Reuters) - The Nasdaq ended sharply lower on Wednesday after investors sold high-flying technology shares and pivoted to sectors viewed as more likely to benefit from an economic recovery on the back of fiscal stimulus and vaccination programs.</p><p>Microsoft Corp, Apple Inc and Amazon.com Inc dropped more than 2%, weighing more than any other stocks on the S&amp;P 500.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 financial and industrial sector indexes reached intra-day record highs. Most other S&amp;P 500 sectors declined.</p><p>“Today is the perfect encapsulation of the big theme we’ve been seeing in the past couple of months: The vaccine rollout is going well and the economy improving, and that is sending yields and rate expectations higher, which is hurting growth stocks,” said Baird investment strategist Ross Mayfield, in Louisville, Kentucky.</p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 0.39% to end at 31,270.09 points, while the S&amp;P 500 lost 1.31% to 3,819.72.</p><p>The Nasdaq Composite dropped 2.7% to 12,997.75. That left it at its lowest since early January and reduced its gain in 2021 to less than 1%.</p><p>The U.S. economic recovery continued at a modest pace over the first weeks of this year, with businesses optimistic about the months to come and demand for housing “robust,” but only slow improvement in the job market, the Federal Reserve reported.</p><p>While the vaccine distribution is expected to help the economy, data showed U.S. private employers hired fewer workers than expected in February, suggesting the labor market was struggling to regain speed.</p><p>Another report showed U.S. services industry activity unexpectedly slowed in February amid winter storms, while a measure of prices paid by companies for inputs surged to the highest level in nearly 12-1/2 years.</p><p>The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield ticked up to 1.47%, pressuring areas of the market with high valuations. It was still off last week’s peak of above 1.61% that roiled stock markets as investors bet on rising inflation.</p><p>Rising interest rates disproportionately hurt high-growth tech companies because investors value them based on earnings expected years into the future, and high interest rates hurt the value of future earnings more than the value of earnings made in the short term.</p><p>“There is a definite headwind for equity markets if yields go above the 1.5% level with most investors keeping an eye on the pace of yield growth,” said Michael Stritch, chief investment officer at BMO Wealth Management.</p><p>President Joe Biden’s proposed $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill would phase out $1,400 payments to high-income Americans in a compromise with moderate Democratic senators, according to lawmakers and media reports.</p><p>Exxon Mobil Corp rose 0.8% after the oil major unveiled plans to grow dividends and curb spending with projections that were less bold than previous years.</p><p>Declining issues outnumbered advancing ones on the NYSE by a 1.31-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.95-to-1 ratio favored decliners.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 62 new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 284 new highs and 68 new lows.</p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 14 billion shares, compared with the 14.9 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Wall Street drops as high-flying tech stocks retreat</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWall Street drops as high-flying tech stocks retreat\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-04 08:13 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-drops-as-high-flying-tech-stocks-retreat-idUSKBN2AV1EG><strong>Reuters</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>(Reuters) - The Nasdaq ended sharply lower on Wednesday after investors sold high-flying technology shares and pivoted to sectors viewed as more likely to benefit from an economic recovery on the back...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-drops-as-high-flying-tech-stocks-retreat-idUSKBN2AV1EG\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果","AMZN":"亚马逊"},"source_url":"https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-street-drops-as-high-flying-tech-stocks-retreat-idUSKBN2AV1EG","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107788140","content_text":"(Reuters) - The Nasdaq ended sharply lower on Wednesday after investors sold high-flying technology shares and pivoted to sectors viewed as more likely to benefit from an economic recovery on the back of fiscal stimulus and vaccination programs.Microsoft Corp, Apple Inc and Amazon.com Inc dropped more than 2%, weighing more than any other stocks on the S&P 500.The S&P 500 financial and industrial sector indexes reached intra-day record highs. Most other S&P 500 sectors declined.“Today is the perfect encapsulation of the big theme we’ve been seeing in the past couple of months: The vaccine rollout is going well and the economy improving, and that is sending yields and rate expectations higher, which is hurting growth stocks,” said Baird investment strategist Ross Mayfield, in Louisville, Kentucky.The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 0.39% to end at 31,270.09 points, while the S&P 500 lost 1.31% to 3,819.72.The Nasdaq Composite dropped 2.7% to 12,997.75. That left it at its lowest since early January and reduced its gain in 2021 to less than 1%.The U.S. economic recovery continued at a modest pace over the first weeks of this year, with businesses optimistic about the months to come and demand for housing “robust,” but only slow improvement in the job market, the Federal Reserve reported.While the vaccine distribution is expected to help the economy, data showed U.S. private employers hired fewer workers than expected in February, suggesting the labor market was struggling to regain speed.Another report showed U.S. services industry activity unexpectedly slowed in February amid winter storms, while a measure of prices paid by companies for inputs surged to the highest level in nearly 12-1/2 years.The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield ticked up to 1.47%, pressuring areas of the market with high valuations. It was still off last week’s peak of above 1.61% that roiled stock markets as investors bet on rising inflation.Rising interest rates disproportionately hurt high-growth tech companies because investors value them based on earnings expected years into the future, and high interest rates hurt the value of future earnings more than the value of earnings made in the short term.“There is a definite headwind for equity markets if yields go above the 1.5% level with most investors keeping an eye on the pace of yield growth,” said Michael Stritch, chief investment officer at BMO Wealth Management.President Joe Biden’s proposed $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill would phase out $1,400 payments to high-income Americans in a compromise with moderate Democratic senators, according to lawmakers and media reports.Exxon Mobil Corp rose 0.8% after the oil major unveiled plans to grow dividends and curb spending with projections that were less bold than previous years.Declining issues outnumbered advancing ones on the NYSE by a 1.31-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.95-to-1 ratio favored decliners.The S&P 500 posted 62 new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 284 new highs and 68 new lows.Volume on U.S. exchanges was 14 billion shares, compared with the 14.9 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9,"AMZN":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":445,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":365260371,"gmtCreate":1614746693893,"gmtModify":1704774723676,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great","listText":"Great","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/365260371","repostId":"1169386190","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1169386190","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1614743782,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1169386190?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-03 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Making A List Of The Top Cryptocurrency Stocks To Watch? 4 Names To Know","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1169386190","media":"Nasdaq","summary":"Are These The Best Cryptocurrency Stocks For Your Watchlist?Sponsored LinksBuying a Mattress in Hong","content":"<p>Are These The Best Cryptocurrency Stocks For Your Watchlist?Sponsored LinksBuying a Mattress in Hong Kong? Check Out Our Shopping GuideSkyler Mattress</p>\n<p><b>Cryptocurrencies</b>have and continue to be a hot topic of discussion even as we enter March. Accordingly, investors looking to profit off this trend have flocked towards thetop cryptocurrency stocks. This would be thanks to the meteoric rise of Bitcoin. As a result, companies such as Marathon Digital Holdings (NASDAQ: MARA) that mine bitcoins are in the limelight now. Other cryptocurrencies making waves now would be Ethereum which has more than doubled in value year-to-date and Dogecoin. Particularly, the latter is up by over 1,000% year-to-date thanks to endorsements from Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) CEO Elon Musk. These figures seem impressive, yes, but the real question is how viable are cryptocurrencies in this age?</p>\n<p>According to Citibank (NYSE: C), Bitcoin may “become the currency of choice for international trade” one day. Evidently, we can see more mainstream companies beginning to adopt the cryptocurrency as a legitimate form of payment. For example, Tesla revealed plans to do so last month as it acquired $1.5 billion worth of bitcoins. Another major company that has already made this shift is Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT). At the same time, fintech players like PayPal (NASDAQ: PYPL) now facilitate Bitcoin-related transactions as well. Regardless, investors may not be too keen on investing directly into the currency, given its volatility. Instead, they would turn towards companies with financial interests in Bitcoin. Well, if you are among them, here are four to consider.</p>\n<p>Top Cryptocurrency Stocks To Watch This Week</p>\n<ul>\n <li><b>Future FinTech Group Inc.</b>(NASDAQ: FTFT)</li>\n <li><b>Riot Blockchain Inc.</b>(NASDAQ: RIOT)</li>\n <li><b>SOS Limited</b>(NYSE: SOS)</li>\n <li><b>MicroStrategy Inc.</b>(NASDAQ: MSTR)</li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>Future FinTech Group Inc.</b></p>\n<p>For starters, Future FinTech is a cryptocurrency company that is in focus now. In brief, it is a leading blockchain-based e-commerce business and fintech service, provider. The company’s main operations include a blockchain-based online shopping mall platform, a cross-border e-commerce platform, and a blockchain project incubator. Through all of this, Future FinTech develops blockchain tech and services.</p>\n<p>If anything, the company could be in a good position to benefit from the growing adoption of cryptocurrencies. As such, FTFT stock has more than tripled in value year-to-date. Aside from overall upward movement in the industry, the company also made a major announcement over the weekend.</p>\n<p>Notably, Future FinTech revealed that it signed an agreement with Sichuan Longma Electronic Technology (Longma). In detail, the company acquired a 60% equity interest in Longma’s subsidiary Sichuan Ticode Supply Chain Management (Ticode). Why does this matter? Well, Ticode offers financial services that focus on the supply chain industry. Primarily, this is in terms of electronic components, tech services, and supply chain data management. According to CEO Shanchun Huang, this would improve the value chain of Future FinTech’s fintech services. Given all of this, will you be watching FTFT stock?</p>\n<p><b>Riot Blockchain Inc.</b></p>\n<p>Following that, we will be looking at Colorado-based Bitcoin miner, Riot. For some context, the company focuses on building, supporting, and operating blockchain technology ecosystems. It is also one of the few NASDAQ-listed bitcoin mining companies in the U.S. at the moment. With the recent rise of Bitcoin, RIOT stock has also been on a tear. The company’s shares are currently sitting on gains of over 1,400% in the past six months. Nevertheless, Riot does not seem to be slowing down anytime soon.</p>\n<p>Just last month, the company made several key announcements. First off, Riot appointed Jason Les as its new CEO on February 8. Les brings over 7 years of experience as a Bitcoin miner and blockchain technology engineer. Admittedly, this move makes sense as Riot has been expanding its Bitcoin mining capabilities over the past year. Also, the company received over 2,000 next-generation cryptocurrency miners (Antminers) from bitcoin-mining tech company, Bitmain on February 11. This further enhanced the company’s mining capabilities with a mining fleet of over 11,500 Antminers.</p>\n<p>Moreover, the company mentioned that it has placed orders for another 26,100 Antminers. These will be fulfilled via scheduled monthly shipments through October 2021. According to Les, this means that Riot remains on schedule to triple its current mining capacity by Q4 2021. Given the company’s current momentum, will you be adding RIOT stock to your watchlist?</p>\n<p><b>SOS Limited</b></p>\n<p>SOS is an emerging blockchain-based and big data-driven marketing and solution provider. Together with other cryptocurrency stocks, SOS stock jumped by over 40% during intraday trading yesterday. For one thing, SOS is one of the newer players on the cryptocurrency scene. At the moment, the company is working to roll out its mining infrastructure. On top of that, it has plans to develop insurance and security management solutions for digital assets and cryptocurrencies. As with most assets, cryptocurrency owners would require a means of keeping things secure. Given SOS’s current trajectory it could help to fill this demand in the future. Not to mention, the company also serves several booming end markets via its marketing data arm. These include but are not limited to the cloud computing, Internet of Things, and artificial intelligence industries.</p>\n<p>In terms of cryptocurrency-related business, SOS provided a key update on its cloud crypto mining center last week. On Thursday, the company revealed that it entered into a definitive agreement with Leibodong Hydropower Station (Leibodong). With this agreement, Leibodong will provide SOS with electricity and house its crypto mining rigs for a term of three years. Having secured a location, SOS is now another step closer to setting up its cloud mining operations.</p>\n<p>Furthermore, the company also announced that it received 5,000 additional crypto mining rigs as well. Time will tell if SOS can make the most of its current mining infrastructure once it is set up. For now, would you consider watching SOS stock?</p>\n<p><b>MicroStrategy Inc.</b></p>\n<p>Another cryptocurrency player in the spotlight now would be MicroStrategy. In summary, the company offers business intelligence and cloud-based services. But, MSTR stock is on a tear now thanks to its growing Bitcoin reserves. Thanks to CEO Michael Saylor’s adamant belief in the cryptocurrency, MicroStrategy has become a go-to for many crypto investors. Subsequently, this would explain MSTR stock’s year-to-date gains of over 80%. In particular, after gaining by 4% yesterday, MicroStrategy made yet another purchase of bitcoins.</p>\n<p>Diving right into it, the company revealed that it had bought 328 bitcoins for $15 million in cash. All in all, this puts MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin count up to about 90,859, raising its total Bitcoin holdings above the $4 billion mark. Coupled with its earlier $1 billion investment into the cryptocurrency, I can see why crypto investors would be keen to invest in MSTR stock.</p>\n<p>According to Saylor, the company’s current reserve was purchased at a price of around $2.186 billion. Given Bitcoin’s current valuation, this would put the company at a profit around the $2 billion mark. This paired with its apparent move towards building a blockchain analytics team could bode well for MSTR stock moving forward. Would you agree?</p>","source":"lsy1603171495471","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Making A List Of The Top Cryptocurrency Stocks To Watch? 4 Names To Know</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nMaking A List Of The Top Cryptocurrency Stocks To Watch? 4 Names To Know\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-03 11:56 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/making-a-list-of-the-top-cryptocurrency-stocks-to-watch-4-names-to-know-2021-03-02><strong>Nasdaq</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Are These The Best Cryptocurrency Stocks For Your Watchlist?Sponsored LinksBuying a Mattress in Hong Kong? Check Out Our Shopping GuideSkyler Mattress\nCryptocurrencieshave and continue to be a hot ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/making-a-list-of-the-top-cryptocurrency-stocks-to-watch-4-names-to-know-2021-03-02\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/making-a-list-of-the-top-cryptocurrency-stocks-to-watch-4-names-to-know-2021-03-02","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1169386190","content_text":"Are These The Best Cryptocurrency Stocks For Your Watchlist?Sponsored LinksBuying a Mattress in Hong Kong? Check Out Our Shopping GuideSkyler Mattress\nCryptocurrencieshave and continue to be a hot topic of discussion even as we enter March. Accordingly, investors looking to profit off this trend have flocked towards thetop cryptocurrency stocks. This would be thanks to the meteoric rise of Bitcoin. As a result, companies such as Marathon Digital Holdings (NASDAQ: MARA) that mine bitcoins are in the limelight now. Other cryptocurrencies making waves now would be Ethereum which has more than doubled in value year-to-date and Dogecoin. Particularly, the latter is up by over 1,000% year-to-date thanks to endorsements from Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) CEO Elon Musk. These figures seem impressive, yes, but the real question is how viable are cryptocurrencies in this age?\nAccording to Citibank (NYSE: C), Bitcoin may “become the currency of choice for international trade” one day. Evidently, we can see more mainstream companies beginning to adopt the cryptocurrency as a legitimate form of payment. For example, Tesla revealed plans to do so last month as it acquired $1.5 billion worth of bitcoins. Another major company that has already made this shift is Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT). At the same time, fintech players like PayPal (NASDAQ: PYPL) now facilitate Bitcoin-related transactions as well. Regardless, investors may not be too keen on investing directly into the currency, given its volatility. Instead, they would turn towards companies with financial interests in Bitcoin. Well, if you are among them, here are four to consider.\nTop Cryptocurrency Stocks To Watch This Week\n\nFuture FinTech Group Inc.(NASDAQ: FTFT)\nRiot Blockchain Inc.(NASDAQ: RIOT)\nSOS Limited(NYSE: SOS)\nMicroStrategy Inc.(NASDAQ: MSTR)\n\nFuture FinTech Group Inc.\nFor starters, Future FinTech is a cryptocurrency company that is in focus now. In brief, it is a leading blockchain-based e-commerce business and fintech service, provider. The company’s main operations include a blockchain-based online shopping mall platform, a cross-border e-commerce platform, and a blockchain project incubator. Through all of this, Future FinTech develops blockchain tech and services.\nIf anything, the company could be in a good position to benefit from the growing adoption of cryptocurrencies. As such, FTFT stock has more than tripled in value year-to-date. Aside from overall upward movement in the industry, the company also made a major announcement over the weekend.\nNotably, Future FinTech revealed that it signed an agreement with Sichuan Longma Electronic Technology (Longma). In detail, the company acquired a 60% equity interest in Longma’s subsidiary Sichuan Ticode Supply Chain Management (Ticode). Why does this matter? Well, Ticode offers financial services that focus on the supply chain industry. Primarily, this is in terms of electronic components, tech services, and supply chain data management. According to CEO Shanchun Huang, this would improve the value chain of Future FinTech’s fintech services. Given all of this, will you be watching FTFT stock?\nRiot Blockchain Inc.\nFollowing that, we will be looking at Colorado-based Bitcoin miner, Riot. For some context, the company focuses on building, supporting, and operating blockchain technology ecosystems. It is also one of the few NASDAQ-listed bitcoin mining companies in the U.S. at the moment. With the recent rise of Bitcoin, RIOT stock has also been on a tear. The company’s shares are currently sitting on gains of over 1,400% in the past six months. Nevertheless, Riot does not seem to be slowing down anytime soon.\nJust last month, the company made several key announcements. First off, Riot appointed Jason Les as its new CEO on February 8. Les brings over 7 years of experience as a Bitcoin miner and blockchain technology engineer. Admittedly, this move makes sense as Riot has been expanding its Bitcoin mining capabilities over the past year. Also, the company received over 2,000 next-generation cryptocurrency miners (Antminers) from bitcoin-mining tech company, Bitmain on February 11. This further enhanced the company’s mining capabilities with a mining fleet of over 11,500 Antminers.\nMoreover, the company mentioned that it has placed orders for another 26,100 Antminers. These will be fulfilled via scheduled monthly shipments through October 2021. According to Les, this means that Riot remains on schedule to triple its current mining capacity by Q4 2021. Given the company’s current momentum, will you be adding RIOT stock to your watchlist?\nSOS Limited\nSOS is an emerging blockchain-based and big data-driven marketing and solution provider. Together with other cryptocurrency stocks, SOS stock jumped by over 40% during intraday trading yesterday. For one thing, SOS is one of the newer players on the cryptocurrency scene. At the moment, the company is working to roll out its mining infrastructure. On top of that, it has plans to develop insurance and security management solutions for digital assets and cryptocurrencies. As with most assets, cryptocurrency owners would require a means of keeping things secure. Given SOS’s current trajectory it could help to fill this demand in the future. Not to mention, the company also serves several booming end markets via its marketing data arm. These include but are not limited to the cloud computing, Internet of Things, and artificial intelligence industries.\nIn terms of cryptocurrency-related business, SOS provided a key update on its cloud crypto mining center last week. On Thursday, the company revealed that it entered into a definitive agreement with Leibodong Hydropower Station (Leibodong). With this agreement, Leibodong will provide SOS with electricity and house its crypto mining rigs for a term of three years. Having secured a location, SOS is now another step closer to setting up its cloud mining operations.\nFurthermore, the company also announced that it received 5,000 additional crypto mining rigs as well. Time will tell if SOS can make the most of its current mining infrastructure once it is set up. For now, would you consider watching SOS stock?\nMicroStrategy Inc.\nAnother cryptocurrency player in the spotlight now would be MicroStrategy. In summary, the company offers business intelligence and cloud-based services. But, MSTR stock is on a tear now thanks to its growing Bitcoin reserves. Thanks to CEO Michael Saylor’s adamant belief in the cryptocurrency, MicroStrategy has become a go-to for many crypto investors. Subsequently, this would explain MSTR stock’s year-to-date gains of over 80%. In particular, after gaining by 4% yesterday, MicroStrategy made yet another purchase of bitcoins.\nDiving right into it, the company revealed that it had bought 328 bitcoins for $15 million in cash. All in all, this puts MicroStrategy’s Bitcoin count up to about 90,859, raising its total Bitcoin holdings above the $4 billion mark. Coupled with its earlier $1 billion investment into the cryptocurrency, I can see why crypto investors would be keen to invest in MSTR stock.\nAccording to Saylor, the company’s current reserve was purchased at a price of around $2.186 billion. Given Bitcoin’s current valuation, this would put the company at a profit around the $2 billion mark. This paired with its apparent move towards building a blockchain analytics team could bode well for MSTR stock moving forward. Would you agree?","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":522,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":365287229,"gmtCreate":1614746546361,"gmtModify":1704774723030,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"..&nbsp;","listText":"..&nbsp;","text":"..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/365287229","repostId":"1102370044","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":635,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382432426,"gmtCreate":1613473793365,"gmtModify":1704880858572,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/382432426","repostId":"1108705396","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108705396","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1613469786,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1108705396?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-16 18:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108705396","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a doubl","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business)&nbsp;</b>The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington&nbsp;and millions of families were about to&nbsp;lose crucial benefits.</p>\n<p>Fast forward two months, and the&nbsp;economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.</p>\n<p>Economists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.</p>\n<p>The renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the&nbsp;health crisis is easing&nbsp;and Uncle Sam is&nbsp;coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.</p>\n<p>After supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.</p>\n<p>\"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.</p>\n<p>The turning point happened last month&nbsp;when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for&nbsp;President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.</p>\n<p><b>'Summer mini-boom'</b></p>\n<p>Before the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a&nbsp;forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.</p>\n<p>\"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.</p>\n<p>Oxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.</p>\n<p>Likewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"</p>\n<p>\"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.</p>\n<p>Indeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.</p>\n<p>The rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.</p>\n<p><b>Double-dip recession averted</b></p>\n<p>The Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.</p>\n<p>For months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.</p>\n<p>At the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.</p>\n<p>\"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.</p>\n<p>Slammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States&nbsp;added just 49,000 jobs in January.</p>\n<p>Jobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.</p>\n<p><b>Vaccines to the rescue</b></p>\n<p>But there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.</p>\n<p>Critically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.</p>\n<p>And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday&nbsp;that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.</p>\n<p>All of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.</p>\n<p>That's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants&nbsp;force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.</p>\n<p><b>Low-wage workers are still hurting badly</b></p>\n<p>Against this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.</p>\n<p>\"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"</p>\n<p>Doing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.</p>\n<p>Employment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.</p>\n<p>\"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.</p>\n<p>However, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.</p>\n<p>\"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.</p>\n<p><b>'Bring it on'</b></p>\n<p>Some economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington&nbsp;overheats the economy by injecting too much support.</p>\n<p>\"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.</p>\n<p>And that in turn would spook the&nbsp;red-hot stock market.</p>\n<p>Fed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.</p>\n<p>Citing \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.</p>\n<p>Zandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.</p>\n<p>\"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWith Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-16 18:03 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html><strong>CNN Business</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington and ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108705396","content_text":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington and millions of families were about to lose crucial benefits.\nFast forward two months, and the economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.\nEconomists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.\nThe renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the health crisis is easing and Uncle Sam is coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.\nAfter supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.\n\"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.\nThe turning point happened last month when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.\n'Summer mini-boom'\nBefore the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.\n\"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.\nOxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.\nLikewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"\n\"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.\nIndeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.\nThe rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.\nDouble-dip recession averted\nThe Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.\nFor months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.\nAt the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.\n\"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.\nSlammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States added just 49,000 jobs in January.\nJobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.\nVaccines to the rescue\nBut there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.\nCritically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.\nAnd Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.\nAll of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.\nThat's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.\nLow-wage workers are still hurting badly\nAgainst this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.\n\"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"\nDoing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.\nEmployment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.\n\"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.\nHowever, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.\n\"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.\n'Bring it on'\nSome economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington overheats the economy by injecting too much support.\n\"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.\nAnd that in turn would spook the red-hot stock market.\nFed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.\nCiting \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.\nZandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.\n\"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":629,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382368220,"gmtCreate":1613365213060,"gmtModify":1704880104026,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I get a comment and like pls","listText":"Can I get a comment and like pls","text":"Can I get a comment and like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/382368220","repostId":"2110904027","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":574,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386278610,"gmtCreate":1613191329930,"gmtModify":1704879364824,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/386278610","repostId":"2110200430","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":747,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386271738,"gmtCreate":1613191242924,"gmtModify":1704879363838,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574340444890290","idStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can u have a like pls","listText":"Can u have a like pls","text":"Can u have a like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/386271738","repostId":"2110904027","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":377,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":322196119,"gmtCreate":1615780146931,"gmtModify":1704786383309,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can u have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can u have a like and comment pls","text":"Can u have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/322196119","repostId":"1111036221","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2459,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3569982147441048","authorId":"3569982147441048","name":"Billie Lo","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2de8913068819a9735f0bb22ec7a5e72","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"idStr":"3569982147441048","authorIdStr":"3569982147441048"},"content":"Reply my comment Plz tq","text":"Reply my comment Plz tq","html":"Reply my comment Plz tq"}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":322198791,"gmtCreate":1615780115713,"gmtModify":1704786382502,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/322198791","repostId":"1110317271","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3048,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382432426,"gmtCreate":1613473793365,"gmtModify":1704880858572,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls. Follow for follow too","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/382432426","repostId":"1108705396","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108705396","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1613469786,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1108705396?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-16 18:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108705396","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a doubl","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business)&nbsp;</b>The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington&nbsp;and millions of families were about to&nbsp;lose crucial benefits.</p>\n<p>Fast forward two months, and the&nbsp;economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.</p>\n<p>Economists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.</p>\n<p>The renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the&nbsp;health crisis is easing&nbsp;and Uncle Sam is&nbsp;coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.</p>\n<p>After supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.</p>\n<p>\"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.</p>\n<p>The turning point happened last month&nbsp;when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for&nbsp;President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.</p>\n<p><b>'Summer mini-boom'</b></p>\n<p>Before the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a&nbsp;forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.</p>\n<p>\"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.</p>\n<p>Oxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.</p>\n<p>Likewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"</p>\n<p>\"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.</p>\n<p>Indeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.</p>\n<p>The rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.</p>\n<p><b>Double-dip recession averted</b></p>\n<p>The Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.</p>\n<p>For months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.</p>\n<p>At the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.</p>\n<p>\"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.</p>\n<p>Slammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States&nbsp;added just 49,000 jobs in January.</p>\n<p>Jobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.</p>\n<p><b>Vaccines to the rescue</b></p>\n<p>But there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.</p>\n<p>Critically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.</p>\n<p>And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday&nbsp;that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.</p>\n<p>All of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.</p>\n<p>That's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants&nbsp;force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.</p>\n<p><b>Low-wage workers are still hurting badly</b></p>\n<p>Against this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.</p>\n<p>\"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"</p>\n<p>Doing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.</p>\n<p>Employment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.</p>\n<p>\"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.</p>\n<p>However, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.</p>\n<p>\"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.</p>\n<p><b>'Bring it on'</b></p>\n<p>Some economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington&nbsp;overheats the economy by injecting too much support.</p>\n<p>\"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.</p>\n<p>And that in turn would spook the&nbsp;red-hot stock market.</p>\n<p>Fed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.</p>\n<p>Citing \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.</p>\n<p>Zandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.</p>\n<p>\"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>With Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWith Biden going big, Wall Street economists are growing bullish on the US economy\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-16 18:03 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html><strong>CNN Business</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington and ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/11/economy/economy-jobs-biden-stimulus/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108705396","content_text":"New York (CNN Business) The Covid-ravaged American economy was on the verge of slipping into a double-dip recession at the end of 2020. The pandemic was intensifying,gridlock paralyzed Washington and millions of families were about to lose crucial benefits.\nFast forward two months, and the economy is still struggling-- but confidence in the recovery is growing, rapidly.\nEconomists are swiftly upgrading their GDP and unemployment forecasts and pulling forward the date when the Federal Reserve will be able to lift rock-bottom interest rates. Goldman Sachs is predicting the US economy will grow at the fastest clip in more than three decades.\nThe renewed optimism is being driven by two major factors: the health crisis is easing and Uncle Sam is coming to the rescue with staggering amounts of aid-- hundreds of billions more than seemed to be in the cards just months ago.\nAfter supplying $4 trillion of relief last year, Washington is expected to pump in another $2 trillion of deficit-financed support in 2021, according to Moody's Analytics. That represents more than a quarter of annual US GDP.\n\"That is a lot of economic juice,\" Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told CNN Business.\nThe turning point happened last month when Democrats took narrow control of the US Senate by sweeping the runoff races in Georgia. That opened a path for President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, which features $1,400 stimulus checks, enhanced unemployment benefits and a $350 billion lifeline to state and local governments.\n'Summer mini-boom'\nBefore the Georgia elections, Zandi didn't think the US economy would return to full employment (a strong labor market with 4% unemployment) until the spring or summer of 2023. Now, he expects that achievement to happen next spring, echoing a forecast by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.\n\"Super-charged fiscal policy\" means the argument for the US economy growing faster than its peers \"seems to get stronger day-by-day,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a recent report to clients.\nOxford Economics chief US economist Gregory Daco is calling for a \"summer mini-boom\" in the United States and 5.9% GDP growth in 2021.\nLikewise, Jefferies economists say \"explosive income growth (courtesy of fiscal stimulus) is likely to propel US GDP 6.4% higher this year and nearly 5% next year.\"\n\"If anything, our forecast might be too conservative,\" Jefferies told clients in a recent note, pointing out that its view incorporates just $1 trillion of the Biden plan.\nIndeed, Goldman Sachs upgraded its 2021 GDP forecast to 6.8% earlier this week because the Wall Street bank now assumes additional fiscal relief of $1.5 trillion, up from $1.1 trillion previously. If Goldman's prediction comes true, it would be the fastest annual GDP growth for the United States since 1989,according to the St. Louis Fed.\nThe rosy GDP forecasts are well above what the Federal Reserve is calling for. In December, the Fed expected 2021 GDP growth of just 4.2% and said unemployment wouldn't slip below 4% until 2023.\nDouble-dip recession averted\nThe Fed tends to be conservative with its economic forecasts. And, crucially, the Fed forecast was released at a time when political dysfunction in DC was casting a shadow over the US economy.\nFor months, Republicans and Democrats tried and failed to reach a deal on extending crucial unemployment and eviction benefits scheduled to lapse and providing more forgivable loans to small businesses. And then when a deal was finally reached, former President Donald Trump threatened to blow it up.\nAt the last minute, Trump signed the $900 billion relief package into law, averting economic disaster.\n\"Without that, we would be in a double dip recession,\" said Zandi, the Moody's economist.\nSlammed by the pandemic, the US economy limped to the end of 2020 and started this year slowly. In December, employers cut jobs in for the first time since the spring. And the United States added just 49,000 jobs in January.\nJobless claims remain alarmingly high. Another 793,000 Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week alone. For context, that is above the worst levels of the Great Recession.\nVaccines to the rescue\nBut there are glimmers of hope on the pandemic. Although Covid deaths remain unthinkably high, hospitalizations and cases have retreated.\nCritically, the rollout of coronavirus vaccines is accelerating. Out of a total of 66 million vaccines distributed, about 70% have been administered, according to Morgan Stanley.\nAnd Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert,told NBC News Thursday that the United States may be able to vaccinate most Americans by the middle or end of summer.\nAll of this has allowed states including California, New York and New Jersey to relax health restrictions crushing restaurants and other small businesses.\nThat's not to say the pandemic is over. In fact,one risk is that new Covid-19 variants force US states and cities to once again tighten health restrictions.\nLow-wage workers are still hurting badly\nAgainst this backdrop, many economists are urging Washington to push ahead with plans for aggressive fiscal stimulus.\n\"Foot flat on the accelerator, please,\" Zandi, the Moody's economist said. \"Policymaking 101 says err on the side of doing too much, rather than too little.\"\nDoing too little risks worsening America's inequality problem. That's because this recession, more than prior ones, disproportionately hurt low-income workers in hard-hit sectors such as restaurants, childcare and hospitality.\nEmployment levels of low-wage workers (those making less than $27,000 per year) is still down more than 20%, according to the Opportunity Insights Economic tracker. By contrast, employment levels of those making more than $60,000 per year are above pre-crisis levels.\n\"Biden's team is unlikely to break out the champagne over reaching full employment if it isn't evident across income and racial groups,\" economists at Bank of America wrote in a report to clients.\nHowever, Danielle DiMartino Booth, a former Fed official who is now CEO of Quill Intelligence, worries the focus on providing income, instead of investing in infrastructure and reskilling workers, will make the country addicted to stimulus.\n\"The economy is going to turn into this dependent patient, always waiting for the next injection,\" Booth said.\n'Bring it on'\nSome economists, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, have warned there is a risk that Washington overheats the economy by injecting too much support.\n\"You could have quite the inflation scare in the next few months that will test the bond market and the Fed,\" Booth said.\nAnd that in turn would spook the red-hot stock market.\nFed watchers are moving up their timelines for when the central bank will be able to end its emergency policies.\nCiting \"signs of a firmer inflation outlook,\" Goldman Sachs now expects the Fed to start \"tapering\" its asset purchases in early 2022 and to raise interest rates in the first half of 2024.\nZandi isn't losing sleep over inflation, mostly because the United States is far from full employment.\n\"It's a vastly overstated worry,\" he said. \"Bring it on. Our biggest problem for more than a decade has been low inflation. Higher inflation would be a high-class problem to have.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":629,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324959253,"gmtCreate":1615955083972,"gmtModify":1704788896638,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and&nbsp;comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and&nbsp;comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324959253","repostId":"1140620694","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1140620694","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615953301,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1140620694?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-17 11:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1140620694","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.\nWhat happened\nIt was a terrib","content":"<p>It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.</p>\n<p><b>What happened</b></p>\n<p>It was a terrible Tuesday for most marijuana stocks, particularly the Canadian ones.<b>Tilray</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:TLRY)&nbsp;sank by nearly 12%, while its partner-to-be&nbsp;<b>Aphria</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:APHA)&nbsp;fell by 9%.<b>Canopy Growth</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:CGC),<b>Aurora Cannabis</b>&nbsp;(NYSE:ACB),<b>Organigram Holdings</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:OGI), and&nbsp;<b>HEXO</b>&nbsp;(NYSE:HEXO)&nbsp;were close behind, sliding at rates from 4% to 7%.</p>\n<p><b>So what</b></p>\n<p>If there's one thing investors despise, it's uncertainty. Tuesday's big question mark was New York, which is considered by many weed-watchers to be the next likely state to legalize recreational marijuana.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31e57ae152cd078baebb7ec2593604d8\" tg-width=\"2000\" tg-height=\"1125\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.</span></p>\n<p>Yet on Tuesday, there were conflicting media reports about the state government's decision to flip the switch.</p>\n<p>The Albany-based&nbsp;<i>Times Union</i>, for example, published an article that day headlined \"Legislature nears deal on recreational marijuana legalization.\" Yet Marijuana Moment quoted state Senate majority leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins as saying negotiations over such legislation \"reached a little bit of an impasse.\"</p>\n<p><b>Now what</b></p>\n<p>Much of this uncertainty can be attributed to the usual political horse-trading that goes into any significant piece of legislation. Most sensible New Yorkers -- even the politicians -- realize that the state is facing a&nbsp;budgetary chasm&nbsp;and desperately needs good tax revenue sources.</p>\n<p>At the end of the day, for all the political noise, New York seems to be barreling straight toward recreational legalization. This might ultimately be the factor driving the prices of Canadian&nbsp;pot companies&nbsp;down; after all, it's their American peers that will be able to immediately pounce on the New York market, not them.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy These Top Marijuana Stocks Got Slammed Tuesday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-17 11:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/16/why-these-top-marijuana-stocks-got-slammed-today/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.\nWhat happened\nIt was a terrible Tuesday for most marijuana stocks, particularly the Canadian ones.Tilray (NASDAQ:TLRY) sank by ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/16/why-these-top-marijuana-stocks-got-slammed-today/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"APHA":"Aphria Inc.","CGC":"Canopy Growth Corporation","TLRY":"Tilray Inc.","OGI":"ORGANIGRAM HOLD","ACB":"奥罗拉大麻公司"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/16/why-these-top-marijuana-stocks-got-slammed-today/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1140620694","content_text":"It's about what's happening in a potentially powerful marijuana state.\nWhat happened\nIt was a terrible Tuesday for most marijuana stocks, particularly the Canadian ones.Tilray (NASDAQ:TLRY) sank by nearly 12%, while its partner-to-be Aphria (NASDAQ:APHA) fell by 9%.Canopy Growth (NASDAQ:CGC),Aurora Cannabis (NYSE:ACB),Organigram Holdings (NASDAQ:OGI), and HEXO (NYSE:HEXO) were close behind, sliding at rates from 4% to 7%.\nSo what\nIf there's one thing investors despise, it's uncertainty. Tuesday's big question mark was New York, which is considered by many weed-watchers to be the next likely state to legalize recreational marijuana.\nIMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.\nYet on Tuesday, there were conflicting media reports about the state government's decision to flip the switch.\nThe Albany-based Times Union, for example, published an article that day headlined \"Legislature nears deal on recreational marijuana legalization.\" Yet Marijuana Moment quoted state Senate majority leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins as saying negotiations over such legislation \"reached a little bit of an impasse.\"\nNow what\nMuch of this uncertainty can be attributed to the usual political horse-trading that goes into any significant piece of legislation. Most sensible New Yorkers -- even the politicians -- realize that the state is facing a budgetary chasm and desperately needs good tax revenue sources.\nAt the end of the day, for all the political noise, New York seems to be barreling straight toward recreational legalization. This might ultimately be the factor driving the prices of Canadian pot companies down; after all, it's their American peers that will be able to immediately pounce on the New York market, not them.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CGC":0.9,"ACB":0.9,"TLRY":0.9,"APHA":0.9,"OGI":0.9,"HEXO":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2443,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":324950815,"gmtCreate":1615954974237,"gmtModify":1704788895503,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls&nbsp;","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls&nbsp;","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/324950815","repostId":"2120972106","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2120972106","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615953662,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2120972106?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-17 12:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Zoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2120972106","media":"Insider Monkey","summary":"Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘","content":"<p>Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘Artisan Global Discovery Fund’ fourth quarter 2020 investor letter. A return of 16.95% was recorded by its Investor Class: APFDX, 17% by its Advisor Class: APDDX, and 17.05% by its Institutional Class: APHDX, in the fourth quarter of 2020, outperforming its MSCI All Country World benchmark that delivered a 14.68% return in the same period. You can view the fund’s top 5 holdings to have a peek at their top bets for 2021.</p>\n<p>Artisan Global Discovery Fund, in their Q4 2020 investor letter, mentioned <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a> Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM) and emphasized their views on the company. Zoom Video Communications, Inc. is a California-based communications technology company that currently has a $100.3 billion market capitalization. Since the beginning of the year, ZM delivered a 1.99% return, impressively extending its 12-month gains to 209.65%. As of March 15, 2021, the stock closed at $350 per share.</p>\n<p>Here is what Artisan Global Discovery Fund has to say about Zoom Video Communications, Inc. in their Q4 2020 investor letter:</p>\n<blockquote>\n \"Among our bottom contributors in Q4 was Zoom Video Communications. Shares of Zoom Video Communications were pressured amid the strong vaccine data released during the quarter. Furthermore, the company’s Q3 results, though incredibly strong, showed signs of deceleration from prior quarters’ torrid pace. While there will be a reduced need for some videoconferencing use cases on the other side of the pandemic, we believe there is a strong case to be made that the pandemic has prompted a permanent inflection in videoconferencing’s importance—given sustainably higher remote work arrangements, more online learning options and less business travel. Furthermore, the company’s dramatically expanded user base (up 485% YOY in Q3) positions it well to cross sell additional services, Zoom Phone in particular. The long-term future remains bright, but we acknowledge the near-term headwinds and have trimmed our position to a modest size.\"\n</blockquote>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3df6f4f5869e2d45f06c2e8c104114c5\" tg-width=\"750\" tg-height=\"500\"><span>Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock.com</span></p>\n<p>Our calculations show that Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM)&nbsp;does not belong in our list of the&nbsp;30 Most <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BPOPM\">Popular</a> Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As of the end of the fourth quarter of 2020, Zoom Video Communications, Inc. was in 59 hedge fund portfolios, compared to 56 funds in the third quarter. ZM delivered a -13.52% return in the past 3 months.</p>","source":"lsy1606273129822","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Zoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nZoom Performed Poorly, but Long-Term Future Remains Bright Says Artisan Partners\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-17 12:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/zoom-zm-performed-poorly-but-long-term-future-remains-bright-says-artisan-partners-924876/><strong>Insider Monkey</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘Artisan Global Discovery Fund’ fourth quarter 2020 investor letter. A return of 16.95% was recorded ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/zoom-zm-performed-poorly-but-long-term-future-remains-bright-says-artisan-partners-924876/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"ZM":"Zoom"},"source_url":"https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/zoom-zm-performed-poorly-but-long-term-future-remains-bright-says-artisan-partners-924876/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2120972106","content_text":"Artisan Partners Limited Partnership, a high value-added investment management firm, published its ‘Artisan Global Discovery Fund’ fourth quarter 2020 investor letter. A return of 16.95% was recorded by its Investor Class: APFDX, 17% by its Advisor Class: APDDX, and 17.05% by its Institutional Class: APHDX, in the fourth quarter of 2020, outperforming its MSCI All Country World benchmark that delivered a 14.68% return in the same period. You can view the fund’s top 5 holdings to have a peek at their top bets for 2021.\nArtisan Global Discovery Fund, in their Q4 2020 investor letter, mentioned Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM) and emphasized their views on the company. Zoom Video Communications, Inc. is a California-based communications technology company that currently has a $100.3 billion market capitalization. Since the beginning of the year, ZM delivered a 1.99% return, impressively extending its 12-month gains to 209.65%. As of March 15, 2021, the stock closed at $350 per share.\nHere is what Artisan Global Discovery Fund has to say about Zoom Video Communications, Inc. in their Q4 2020 investor letter:\n\n \"Among our bottom contributors in Q4 was Zoom Video Communications. Shares of Zoom Video Communications were pressured amid the strong vaccine data released during the quarter. Furthermore, the company’s Q3 results, though incredibly strong, showed signs of deceleration from prior quarters’ torrid pace. While there will be a reduced need for some videoconferencing use cases on the other side of the pandemic, we believe there is a strong case to be made that the pandemic has prompted a permanent inflection in videoconferencing’s importance—given sustainably higher remote work arrangements, more online learning options and less business travel. Furthermore, the company’s dramatically expanded user base (up 485% YOY in Q3) positions it well to cross sell additional services, Zoom Phone in particular. The long-term future remains bright, but we acknowledge the near-term headwinds and have trimmed our position to a modest size.\"\n\nRoman Samborskyi/Shutterstock.com\nOur calculations show that Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZM) does not belong in our list of the 30 Most Popular Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As of the end of the fourth quarter of 2020, Zoom Video Communications, Inc. was in 59 hedge fund portfolios, compared to 56 funds in the third quarter. ZM delivered a -13.52% return in the past 3 months.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"ZM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2331,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":323673970,"gmtCreate":1615340878190,"gmtModify":1704781377581,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Comment and like pls&nbsp;","listText":"Comment and like pls&nbsp;","text":"Comment and like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/323673970","repostId":"2118625319","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2795,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":325193400,"gmtCreate":1615871774900,"gmtModify":1704787746382,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","listText":"Can I have a like and comment pls","text":"Can I have a like and comment pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/325193400","repostId":"1172271196","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1172271196","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615871336,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1172271196?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-16 13:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"How To Spot A Bubble","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1172271196","media":"Hussman Funds","summary":"Summary\n\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price b","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>The defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations.</li>\n <li>If we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical.</li>\n <li>One of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates.</li>\n <li>It's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks.</li>\n <li>To understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"</li>\n</ul>\n<blockquote>\n I can show, really precisely, that there are two warranted prices for a share. The one I prefer is based on such fundamentals as earnings and growth rates, but the bubble is rational in a certain sense. The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.- Nobel Laureate Franco Modigliani, New York Times, March 30, 2000\n</blockquote>\n<p>The word \"bubble\" is tossed around quite a bit in the financial markets, but it's rarely used correctly. See, the thing that defines a bubble isn't that valuations are extremely high, or that expected returns are extremely low. Instead, what defines a bubble is that investors drive valuations higher without simultaneously adjusting expectations for returns lower. That is, investors extrapolate past returns based on price behavior, even though those expectations are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows.</p>\n<p>In March 2000, at the height of the technology bubble, I noted: \"Over time, price/revenue ratios come back in line. Currently, that would imply an 83% plunge in tech stocks. If you understand values and market history, you know we're not joking.\" The following month, I discussed Modigliani's quote above, and detailed the dynamics he was describing. The collapse of the 2000 bubble would ultimately erase half the value of the S&amp;P 500, and would take the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 down an implausibly precise 83%.</p>\n<p>The defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations. If investors pay $150 today for a security that will deliver a single $100 payment a decade from now, but they also fully understand that they'll lose 4% annually on the deal, without extrapolating past gains into the future, then we might say the security is overvalued, and we might question why investors would accept that trade, but we can't call it a bubble.</p>\n<p>But if investors pay $150 today for that security, because they look back in the rear-view mirror, decide that it \"always goes up\" over time, and convince themselves that expected future returns are always positive, then you've got a bubble. Discounting the future $100 cash flow of the security using any positive expected return would produce a price less than $100. So the positive returns expected by investors are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows. The size of the bubble is the fraction of the market price that represents expectational \"hot air.\"</p>\n<p>Likewise, the willingness of investors to embrace \"passive investments\" like ETFs and asset-backed securities based on past performance, with little concern about the valuations, yields, or credit risk of the securities inside, is the very soap from which bubbles repeatedly emerge. Amid the current enthusiasm for special purpose acquisition companies (SPACS), investors might recall the bubble in \"incubators\" at the 2000 peak, the \"conglomerates\" of the late-1960s Go-Go bubble, and even the South Sea Company in the early 1700s, along with similar companies formed at the time \"for carrying on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is.\"</p>\n<p>If investors price the S&amp;P 500 at levels that are highly likely to produce negative returns for a decade, as they did in 1929 and 2000, and as I believe they are doing at present, yet investors continue to press stock prices higher on the expectation that they will provide historically normal levels of future return regardless of valuations, then you have the sort of inconsistency that defines a bubble.</p>\n<p>Likewise, if the expected return of a conventional passive investment mix is negative on a 10-12 year horizon (based on reliable valuation measures strongly correlated with actual subsequent returns over a century of market history), yet pension return assumptions remain locked near 7% annually, you've got a bubble, and most likely a future pension funding crisis, on your hands.</p>\n<p>This is how very bad things have repeatedly happened in the financial markets across history, enabled by what Galbraith called \"the extreme brevity of the financial memory.\"</p>\n<p>When Modigliani says that there are two \"warranted\" prices, he means that - at least in the short run - there are two ways that prices can fulfill the expectations of investors. In one case, investors have expectations about future returns, and those expectations are informed by the level of valuations. If prices rise, and expected cash flows haven't changed, investors recognize that future returns will be lower. In the \"bubble\" case, investors have high expectations about future returns, mainly based on past returns, and they act on those expectations by driving prices up further. So the expectation of additional price increases is simply reinforced. \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation.\"</p>\n<p>Only one of these prices is consistent, in that the rate of return expected by investors is also the rate of return that equates price with discounted future cash flows. The other price becomes increasingly detached from fundamentals, as a larger and larger fraction of the price represents hot air, and it ultimately collapses as the gap becomes untenably wide.</p>\n<p>During speculative segments of the market cycle, there's nothing that forces investors to recognize that higher valuations imply lower returns, or to change their expectation of high returns as far as the eye can see. That, of course, is why we use measures of market internals to gauge the inclination of investors toward speculation or risk-aversion. Valuation provides an enormous amount of information about likely long-term returns and potential market losses over the complete cycle. But valuation isn't a timing tool. In recent years, it hasn't even imposed a limit on speculative recklessness.</p>\n<p>Still, with each price advance, the actual long-term return implied by future cash flows - what investors will ultimately realize as those cash flows are delivered - collapses further, even while investors act on their delusion that long-term returns have nothing to do with price. Eventually, the bulk of the security price represents a bubble component, not the price that would actually need to exist in order for the long-term expectations of investors to be accurate.</p>\n<p>As I wrote at the 2000 market peak:</p>\n<blockquote>\n \"As long as investors focus on year-to-year returns and not discounted cash flow calculations, the bubble can continue to grow in self-reinforcing fashion. Investors anticipate a high return, and the price behavior reinforces the expectation. The true long-term return becomes increasingly detached from the long-term return imagined by investors, and the bubble component accounts for an increasingly large proportion of the total price.\"\n</blockquote>\n<p>By our most reliable measures, run-of-the-mill historical valuation norms are roughly 70% below current levels. I know you don't want to believe that.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/493c338076df85e2a04ebf892af4762f\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"713\"></p>\n<p>The trap door quietly swings open when valuations are extreme and market internals begin to deteriorate. That's the situation we've observed in our measures in recent weeks, with the initial deterioration largely driven by debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well.</p>\n<p><b>Valuations and discounted cash flows</b></p>\n<blockquote>\n Valuations measure the tradeoff between current prices and a very long-term stream of expected future cash flows. Every useful valuation ratio is just shorthand for that calculation. Every valuation ratio that fails that criterion is inferior, and you can show it in historical data.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., The Meaning of Valuation, December 2019\n</blockquote>\n<p>I've often noted that the denominator of every good valuation measure is just shorthand for the decades and decades of cash flows that the security is likely to deliver in the future. In fact, we always test the validity of the valuation measures we use by examining:</p>\n<p>a) how strongly the resulting valuation measures are correlated with actual subsequent total returns, and;</p>\n<p>b) how closely they replicate an explicit discounted cash flow analysis.</p>\n<p>Below, we'll examine a variety of valuation measures that offer some perspective on why I view the U.S. equity market as a bubble near the breaking point. Along the way, I'll point out some interesting features of valuations and their relationship with subsequent returns. If math gives you hives, feel free to skim over the small amount that I've included here and there.</p>\n<p>Consider first the relationship between valuations and subsequent returns. I'll state the following, which you can prove to yourself by toying around a bit with present value models: the logarithm of a good valuation measure should have an inverse and roughly linear relationship with the expected subsequent investment return.</p>\n<p>Here's a simple example of what this looks like.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d1e5bdf4391c9c91a8b9a051f6635116\" tg-width=\"819\" tg-height=\"708\"></p>\n<p>Here's what this looks like for MarketCap/GVA, our most reliable stock market valuation measure</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/485141919c853722522159d2e9d05e85\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"720\"></p>\n<p>During the past three decades, we've studied and introduced a broad range of valuation measures. Most can be calculated back to 1947. Some can be evaluated over a century or more. Across history, even in recent decades, we find that the valuation measures that are best correlated with actual subsequent returns are those with muted sensitivity to cyclical fluctuations in profit margins, and that behave largely like broad, market-wide price/revenue ratios.</p>\n<p>If we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical. Here's what this comparison looks like for the actual stream of dividends (including the impact of repurchases) delivered by the S&amp;P 500 since 1900, discounted at a fixed 10% rate (see the chart text for additional details).</p>\n<p>The reason we use a fixed rate of return is that a multiple of 1.0 is then, by definition, the level at which the S&amp;P 500 would have been priced for that particular level of expected return. Any deviation in the valuation multiple from 1.0 then gauges how far likely future returns are from that \"typical\" expected return. We're currently farther away from \"typical\" expected returns than at any moment in history, including the 1929 and 2000 market peaks.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e6f61d2794095c2545d0d2c130320e45\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"722\"></p>\n<p>One of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates. Now, it's certainly true that holding future cash flows constant, raising the price of an investment will lower the embedded rate of return, and vice versa. If you pay $32 today for $100 a decade from today, you can expect a 12% annual return. If you pay $82 for the same security, you can expect a 2% annual return. If you pay $100 today, you can expect nothing. So it's clearly true that holding future cash flows constant, a lower rate of return implies a higher level of valuation.</p>\n<p>The reason the statement \"low interest rates justify high valuations\" contributes to financial illiteracy is that the statement has been learned entirely out of context of the arithmetic. As a result, investors seem to imagine that, as long as high valuations can be \"justified,\" stocks can be expected to provide historically normal rates of return in the future. Likewise, investors seem to have no concept that if interest rates are low because growth rates are low, no valuation premium is \"justified\" for stocks, because the lower growth is already sufficient to bring future stock returns down to levels that are commensurate with the low level of interest rates.</p>\n<p>The truth is simple but uncomfortable. If interest rates are low and expected growth is held constant, higher valuations imply lower long-term returns. If interest rates are low because expected future growth is also low, higher valuations are not required. Long-term returns will be lower anyway. A valuation premium just makes future returns even worse.</p>\n<p>Saying that extremely low interest rates \"justify\" extremely high stock valuations is identical to saying that extremely low future returns on bonds \"justify\" extremely low future returns on stocks. I don't really think that's something Wall Street cares to clarify when it tells investors that stock market valuations are \"justified.\"</p>\n<p>Investment valuation is concerned with the relationship between three objects: the current price, the future cash flows, and the rate of return that connects the two like a string. The lower the current price and the higher the future cash flows, the steeper the string. The higher the current price and the lower the future cash flows, the flatter the string. Raise the current price above the future cash flows, and the string will point down instead of up. Given any two of these objects, you can calculate the third one.</p>\n<p>For example, if you want to estimate expected long-term returns, you need two objects: a) the current price and b) the expected stream of future cash flows. A good valuation ratio is just shorthand for those two objects, so you can estimate the long-term return directly from the level of valuation. Then, if you like, you can compare it with the level of interest rates. That comparison can be useful, because even when investors realize that high stock market valuations imply low long-term returns, it's not at all clear that they realize how low long-term return prospects have been driven.</p>\n<p>The chart below shows our estimate of expected 12-year S&amp;P 500 total returns over-and-above Treasury bond yields, across a century of market history. Compare this with the nearly useless drivel that Wall Street passes off as the \"equity risk premium\" (typically quoted as the S&amp;P 500 forward earnings yield minus the 10-year Treasury yield). Yes, you're reading the chart correctly. Given current valuations, we expect the total return of the S&amp;P 500 to underperform the lowly yield on Treasury bonds by roughly -6% annually over the coming 12-year period.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/42561963df9d259a93fe0d4f2502c13e\" tg-width=\"1024\" tg-height=\"577\"></p>\n<p>Many investors confuse the estimation of expected returns (which requires only expected cash flows and the observed price) with a different problem - the estimation of \"fair value.\" See, interest rates come into the picture when you have an expected stream of future cash flows and you want to calculate a \"fair\" current price. In that case, rather than picking an arbitrary rate of return from a hat, it's common to use the level of interest rates, plus some risk premium, as the expected long-term return (or discount rate, or capitalization rate). This sort of calculation can be super-sensitive to arbitrary choices.</p>\n<p>In particular, Wall Street loves to combine super-high growth rates, super-low discount rates, and super-long time horizons, which allows one to calculate a \"fair value\" that's as close to infinity as possible. The thing to remember is that whatever rate of return an analyst embeds into the fair value calculation is also the long-term rate of return you'll earn over time if you pay that price, assuming the future cash flows are delivered as expected.</p>\n<p>Among scores of measures we've evaluated or introduced over time, MarketCap/GVA (nonfinancial market capitalization to corporate gross value-added, including our estimate of foreign revenues) has the highest correlation with actual subsequent 10-12 year S&amp;P 500 total returns, followed by our Margin-Adjusted P/E (MAPE). I find it hilarious that the various valuation measures I've introduced over time are sometimes described as products of \"machine learning,\" \"data mining,\" and \"curve fitting\" when they are, in fact, just different versions of an apples-to-apples economy-wide price/revenue ratio.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75dac426a3ad2f3830f9dce50f7c0a1c\" tg-width=\"1265\" tg-height=\"712\"></p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 price/revenue ratio and nonfinancial market capitalization to GDP (the \"Buffett indicator\") also perform well, and better than earnings-based alternatives like price/forward earnings, the Fed Model, and even the Shiller CAPE. See, while earnings are necessary to generate long-term cash flows, they are also subject to fluctuations in profit margins (both cyclically and even from decade to decade) that turn out to be highly uninformative.</p>\n<p>Economically, fluctuations in profit margins are driven primarily by fluctuations in real unit labor costs. Because companies compete on the basis of realized after-tax profits rather than pre-tax profits, changes in tax policy also have far less durable impact on corporate profits than investors seem to imagine. While corporate profits got a tremendous boost last year from CARES spending (the deficit of one sector always emerges as the surplus of another), here's what the relationship between corporate profits and real unit labor costs looks like historically.</p>\n<p>Real unit labor costs are presented on an inverted left scale. The upward pressure on labor costs (observed as a plunge in the blue line) isn't particularly auspicious for future profits. Still, there's so much distortion in recent quarters that I'd consider the jury to be out on how much of this will be sustained.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3110e7d3c0468c39d343b20835566bcc\" tg-width=\"1157\" tg-height=\"652\"></p>\n<p>It's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks. But even for technology stocks, these assumptions should be made explicit and tested against history. You'll find that observable measures like price/revenue are still very serviceable. In fact, the extreme price/revenue multiples of technology stocks helped to inform my March 2000 projection of an 83% loss in that sector.</p>\n<p>As Benjamin Graham wrote, \"The habit of relating what is paid to what is being offered is an invaluable trait in investment. The more dependent the valuation becomes on anticipations of the future - and the less it is tied to a figure demonstrated by past performance - the more vulnerable it becomes to possible miscalculation and serious error.\"</p>\n<p>The current 5.19 price/revenue multiple for the Nasdaq 100, is the most extreme level since February 2001, which was followed by a 60% loss in the index (after it had already dropped in half). The situation is actually a bit worse than 2001 here. If one examines the largest components of the index, it becomes clear that their annual growth rates have declined substantially over time.</p>\n<p>As a result, a dollar of current revenues should arguably command a smaller multiple than a dollar of revenues might have during earlier periods of emerging growth. Yet even if one takes the Nasdaq 100 price/revenue ratio at face value, and even if one restricts attention to the bubble period since 2000, it's difficult to expect the Nasdaq to produce total returns over the coming decade much better than zero.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/48dd88f74eaed48d53b237b4d0209d8e\" tg-width=\"963\" tg-height=\"542\"></p>\n<p>You don't really want to see what the same chart looks like for the S&amp;P 500.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/24f70ab683592ef20a8c6c75fc9bd1fc\" tg-width=\"963\" tg-height=\"543\"></p>\n<p>The same is true, unfortunately, for passive investment strategies. We presently estimate negative 12-year average annual total returns for a conventional passive investment mix invested 60% in the S&amp;P 500, 30% in Treasury bonds, and 10% in Treasury bills.</p>\n<p>In a 2019&nbsp;white paper, I detailed an approach to estimate a \"value-focused asset allocation\" by jointly considering prevailing stock market valuations and interest rates. It specifies an investment allocation based on which asset class is estimated to have the highest average annual expected return, adjusted for risk, to each point in a long-term investment horizon. That allocation can then be modified by a risk-management component, to adjust the exposure during segments of the market cycle where risk-aversion or speculation among market participants may temporarily drive valuations to depressed or elevated levels. The white paper includes numerous charts showing how this value-focused asset allocation has changed across market history, particularly at important peaks and troughs in the stock and bond markets.</p>\n<p>Along with those methods, I introduced our \"Endowment/spending multiple,\" which estimates the number of years of spending that a passive 60/30/10 investor requires up-front, in order to finance an expected 36-year stream of future inflation-adjusted spending. The idea here is that in a deeply undervalued market with high expected future returns, investors can finance a future stream of spending with far less than they require when valuations are extreme and prospective returns are low.</p>\n<p>You know you're in a bubble when funding a 36-year stream of expected inflation-adjusted spending requires over 38 years of money up-front.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1adff1ad0dbaa2737f60cb7589d206fb\" tg-width=\"1230\" tg-height=\"693\"></p>\n<p>In the chart below, the Endowment/spending multiple is presented on an inverted log scale (left), along with the actual subsequent average annual total return of a 60/30/10 portfolio mix (right scale). Needless to say, we adhere to investment disciplines that are intended to address problems like this.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1480e881b4d04ace81a96f31f6368796\" tg-width=\"1229\" tg-height=\"692\"></p>\n<p>As a testament to the breadth of this speculative episode, the median price/revenue ratio of S&amp;P 500 components now exceeds 3.3, easily a record, and extreme enough to provoke distress about the potential losses that innocent but poorly-informed investors may experience over the completion of this cycle.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ffe0cc33bdaf0695dacb7ae1d817edab\" tg-width=\"1110\" tg-height=\"625\"></p>\n<p>The next chart shows the median price/revenue ratio of S&amp;P 500 components sorted into 10 deciles by valuation. The chart is presented on log scale to allow each line to be compared with its own history. Each segment on the vertical axis represents a doubling of valuations. Notice that every single decile of S&amp;P 500 components is at record valuation extremes. Investors now rely on a permanently high plateau in these extremes.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb7c995e64e3c9cba85d6e0fc9124223\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"721\"></p>\n<p>It's interesting, but far less important, that the median price/earnings ratio of S&amp;P 500 components has also reached 32.4, the highest level in history. This compares with a median P/E of 19.4 at the 2000 market peak. The problem with P/E multiples, of course, is that they are substantially affected by earnings variability. In fact, prior to the current peak, the highest median P/E for the S&amp;P 500 was actually in March 2002, when the index was down 25% from the March 2000 bubble highs. That's because earnings were down far more by then, which boosted P/E ratios. Such is the danger of taking P/E multiples at face value.</p>\n<p>A crude but reasonably effective way to get around the cyclicality of earnings (but only for very broad indices), is to compare prices to the highest level of earnings achieved to-date. I introduced this metric back in 1998 as the price-to-peak-earnings ratio. The chart below shows a version of that. The blue line (left scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to GDP. The red line (right scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to the highest level of economy-wide U.S. profits to date. Investors have gotten themselves into trouble here.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a6630cf8302360e1b4645870051b21de\" tg-width=\"989\" tg-height=\"557\"></p>\n<p><b>What if valuations remain extreme forever?</b></p>\n<p>Probably the single most frequent question I've heard from investors over the past couple of years is \"What happens if valuations remain extreme forever?\" It's actually a version of the \"permanently high plateau\" that Irving Fisher disastrously projected in 1929. Still, recent years have produced enormous confidence among investors that the Federal Reserve's purchases of Treasury debt can permanently \"backstop\" the stock market.</p>\n<p>As I've detailed previously, quantitative easing supports the market only by creating zero interest hot potatoes that are uncomfortable for investors to hold (provided that they're inclined toward speculation), and that are impossible to get rid of in aggregate. Moreover, the Fed's purchases of corporate bonds during the pandemic were legally constrained to CARES funds provided by the Treasury, and ultimately amounted to $14 billion of bonds, in an economy with $11 trillion in corporate debt at $58 trillion in equity market capitalization.</p>\n<p>Suffice it to say that the \"Fed backstop\" is largely in the minds of investors, and relies almost exclusively on the psychological discomfort of holding low-yielding base money. Yet since perception can be indistinguishable from reality, particularly in the short run, it's important to entertain the question.</p>\n<p>My answer is that if the Fed is indeed able to maintain valuations at the highest levels in history, forever, stock prices would likely grow at roughly the same rate as nominal GDP. So figure 1.6% real structural growth plus 2% inflation gets you 3.6%. Let's call it 4%, which would match nominal GDP growth in both the 10-year and 20-year periods ending at the Q4 2019 economic peak, just before the pandemic. The first casualty of rising inflation is stock valuations, so it's not at all clear that assuming higher inflation would help stocks until valuations were roughly normalized, which would require consumer prices to roughly triple.</p>\n<p>The chart below is a reminder of how structural real GDP growth has progressed over recent decades (driven by demographic labor force growth and trend productivity), and the basis for that 1.6% figure for structural real GDP growth.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cf63b9b8f5f3b55136c8523d73e864f3\" tg-width=\"1131\" tg-height=\"637\"></p>\n<p>Sticking with 4% nominal growth, and adding a 1.5% dividend yield, a \"permanently high plateau\" in market valuations would imply S&amp;P 500 total returns of about 5.5% annually. Again, this assumes that valuations never retreat from levels that presently stand at about 3.6 times their historical norms. Simply allow them to retreat to 2.4 times their historical norms a decade from now - which would still keep valuations among the highest 10% in U.S. history - and the resulting 10-year total return would drop to about 1.3%. I think this would actually be the best-case scenario even in a permanently overvalued world.</p>\n<p>At elevated valuations, even very small changes in expected return imply enormous changes in prices. So it's unlikely that a period of much higher average valuations will escape the prospect of relatively high volatility. Rather than a 70% market decline, which would presently be required for the S&amp;P 500 to simply touch historically run-of-the-mill valuation norms, investors could expect rather frequent market losses in the 20-35% range, which is essentially what we've seen even over the past few years.</p>\n<p>All of that would be fine with us. We've adapted our discipline sufficiently (especially in late-2017) to tolerate the possibility of permanently sustained overvaluation. My impression is that the impact of those adaptations has become more evident as we've had greater opportunities to live into them. I can't say that I believe for a second that investors will actually be spared from a 50-70% loss in the S&amp;P 500 in the coming years, but again, it will be fine with us if the market never approaches historical valuation norms again. With the adaptations we introduced in late-2017, our discipline is flexible enough to navigate a bubble even without embracing its premise.</p>\n<p><b>An unusual overlap of high-risk conditions</b></p>\n<p>Returning to Modigliani, my impression is that the advance of recent years to the most extreme valuations in history reflects exactly the bubble dynamics he described, and I expect that it will also end as he described (though not necessarily in one fell swoop): \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.\"</p>\n<p>One of our internal gauges tracks the correlation of market conditions with certain high-risk features that have preceded steep market collapses - a collection of measures capturing valuations, internals, sentiment, leverage, overextension, and yield pressures. Only a handful of instances in history overlap pre-crash conditions as well as they do at present. The current overlap is actually quite similar to August 1987. Meanwhile, the correlation of current conditions with features typically observed at market lows is the most negative in history.</p>\n<p>If you want my opinion, I suspect that a near-vertical market plunge on the order of 25-35% is coming, probably quite shortly, most likely out of the blue, as in 1987, driven by nothing more than the sudden concerted effort of overextended investors to sell, and the need for a large price adjustment in order to induce scarce buyers to take the other side.</p>\n<p>As usual, no forecasts are necessary. We'll align our investment stance in response to the valuations and market action that we observe at each point in time. Still, it's of particular concern that these overlaps are occurring in the context of the most extreme valuations in history, along with strikingly dysfunctional pockets of illiquidity in many individual issues. This dysfunctional behavior isn't about any particular video game retailer. I suspect it's actually about some sort of fragility or segmentation in order-flow mechanisms, possibly coupled with poorly managed derivatives exposure.</p>\n<p>As I used to teach my students, show me a financial debacle, and I'll show you someone who had a leveraged, mismatched position that they were suddenly forced to close into an illiquid market.</p>\n<p>Though my concerns run far beyond the amount of leverage in the system, it isn't helpful that the amount of leverage in the U.S. equity markets is now easily the highest in history. Some observers are inclined to bring this figure down by dividing instead by the market capitalization of equities. But here's some useful arithmetic:</p>\n<p>Margin Debt/GDP = Margin Debt/Market Cap x Market Cap/GDP</p>\n<p>To say that margin debt to GDP is at the highest level in history is to say not only that stocks are heavily owned on margin, but that those stocks are also breathtakingly overvalued. That combination is particularly worrisome.</p>\n<blockquote>\n All crises have involved debt that, in one fashion or another, has become dangerously out of scale in relation to the underlying means of payment.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Short History of Financial Euphoria\n</blockquote>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc55dacbd5e01016cd9964422f941b0c\" tg-width=\"983\" tg-height=\"556\"></p>\n<p>The kind of event I'm suggesting would not bring valuations anywhere near historical valuation norms. Given current valuation extremes, it would be more like a palate cleanser. I have no particular expectation about what the next dish would be. In the event we do observe an abrupt market collapse, the Fed will undoubtedly respond with some new palliative. Whether or not it is effective will depend on the context of risk-aversion, inflation, credit risk, and other conditions at the time. The larger problem, as we've discussed, is that you can't \"save\" an overvalued asset by propping up its price. The value is in the future cash flows that will be delivered to investors over time. The elevated price only ensures that the long-term return between now and then will be dismal.</p>\n<p>Of course, nothing in our discipline relies on a market plunge. Given the combination of hypervaluation and divergent market internals (largely based on debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well), I do believe that the stock market remains in a \"trap door\" situation. Still, that view will change as market conditions change. We'll refrain from adopting or amplifying a negative outlook if our measures of market internals improve. That discipline has served us well even amid record highs. Again, no forecasts are required, nor does this opinion drive our current investment stance. I just think the correlation with historical pre-crash conditions is worth noting.</p>\n<blockquote>\n How little, it will perhaps be agreed, was either original or otherwise remarkable about this history. Prices driven up on the expectation that they would go up, the expectation realized by the resulting purchases. Then the inevitable reversal of these expectations because of some seemingly damaging event or development or perhaps merely because the supply of intellectually vulnerable buyers was exhausted. Whatever the reason (and it is unimportant), the absolute certainty is that this world ends not with a whimper but with a bang. And so on to the moment of mass disillusion and the crash. This last, it will now be sufficiently evident, never comes gently. It is always accompanied by a desperate and largely unsuccessful effort to get out.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John Kenneth Galbraith on the 1929 collapse\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>Valuations and investment duration</b></p>\n<p>To understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"</p>\n<p>Every security is a claim on a stream of future cash flows that can be expected to be delivered to the investor over time. While the concept of \"duration\" is most commonly used for bonds, it's actually applicable to any security, no matter how \"lumpy\" the stream of cash flows might be.</p>\n<p>If you don't like math, feel free to skim over the various equations and just read the pull quotes. I've provided the details just for completeness.</p>\n<p>The \"duration\" of a security can be defined in two ways.</p>\n<p>Investment horizon: the weighted average number of years it takes for the security to deliver its payments. For each period, you take the share of total present value represented by that year's payment, and multiply it by the number of years in the future the payment will be received. Add them all up. The result is the number of years from today (a weighted average) that the present value of your investment will be repaid. For example, the duration of a security that delivers a single payment a decade from now is simply 10 years.</p>\n<p>Elasticity: the percentage change in the security in response to a change in the underlying gross rate of return. Technically, elasticity is (-dP/P)/(dk/1+k). For example, suppose you own a security that will pay $100 a decade from now, and it's priced at $82.0348, for a 2% annual return. Now assume the expected return moves to 2.01%. The price would drop to $81.9544. Elasticity is (0.0804/82.0348)/(0.0001/1.02) = 10%</p>\n<p>It turns out that the \"duration\" of a security in years is identical to its \"duration\" in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that \"immunizes\" the investor against changes in expected returns over time. In other words, assuming you reinvest your cash flows over time, duration gives you a good idea of how long you have to hold the security in order for your ending wealth to be largely independent of the fluctuations that the security experiences over that horizon.</p>\n<p>If you know differentiation, can prove to yourself that the \"modified duration\" of the S&amp;P 500 is essentially the inverse of the dividend yield. The modified duration is just (-dP/P)/dk or Macaulay duration/(1+k).</p>\n<p>Consider P = D/(k-g). Differentiating with respect to k, dP/dk = -P/(k-g), so duration (-dP/P)/dk = P/D.</p>\n<p>Here's how to think about the link between valuations and duration. Presently, the dividend yield of the S&amp;P 500 is 1.48%. If the yield moves to 1.49%, holding dividends constant, prices drop by 1.48/1.49-1 = -0.67% on that 1 basis point move. Duration is just that sensitivity, defined for a 100 basis point move, which would be 67. It turns out that's also the weighted-average number of years from today that you'll receive your present value, if you invest today.</p>\n<p>Compare that to the typical situation over the past century, when the dividend yield of the S&amp;P 500 averaged about 3.7%. At normal valuations, a 1 basis point increase in the dividend yield would produce a price drop of 3.7/3.71-1 = 0.27%, implying a duration of 27 years.</p>\n<blockquote>\n It turns out that the 'duration' of a security in years is identical to its 'duration' in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that 'immunizes' the investor against changes in expected returns over time.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Historically, investors wishing to match the duration of their investment portfolio to the duration of their investment horizon could be reasonably comfortable holding 100% of their assets in stocks, provided they had an investment horizon of about 25-30 years. Presently, these investors would need an investment horizon closer to 65-70 years. They are currently holding sippy cups.</p>\n<p><b>Scarcity, usefulness, and value</b></p>\n<p>While we're on the subject of bubbles, I'll add a few comments on Bitcoin, just for fun. I'd write more, but my sides still hurt from laughing.</p>\n<p>Objects like tulip bulbs and Bitcoin differ from securities in that they do not deliver a stream of cash flows to the holder. Instead, what objects like tulips and currencies provide is a little stream of services over time, for example, as a perennial thing of beauty or as a means of payment. What people sometimes forget is that it is not just scarcity that defines the value of an object, but the stream of useful \"services\" that it provides (for some reason, nobody wants to buy my unique, limited edition, digitally-signed porcupine seat covers). The price of the object, and the stream of services it provides, should be commensurate.</p>\n<p>U.S. dollars, for example, have value primarily because they are tethered to the real economy by fiat (they legally must be accepted as a means of payment, as noted on the face of any dollar bill), and they represent the entire substrate of the banking system - nearly every payment that goes back and forth in the U.S. economy represents a transfer of base money. Base money (currency and bank reserves) provides billions of little \"services\" over time.</p>\n<p>With every transaction, reserves move electronically from bank to bank between one account holder and another. That combination of legal fiat and constant use as a substrate of the payments system is what gives money \"value.\" That value also means that the U.S. government essentially obtains revenue as \"seigniorage\" for producing the stuff. For those who imagine that governments are going to surrender that revenue in favor of using Bitcoin, I've got a non-fungible token to sell you.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/747b2ba31a8d94d85d374d12b13b3c96\" tg-width=\"665\" tg-height=\"718\"></p>\n<p>As I've noted before, blockchain is a brilliant algorithm, and I expect that it will have a great number of uses for secure transactions and inventory management. Bitcoin, however, is a token generated by an energy-inefficient, replicable blockchain app. Ultimately, its value rests on the capacity to provide transactions services, yet without fiat to require its use, and with strikingly narrow bandwidth - one block of roughly 2000 transactions every 10 minutes - that I expect will prove to be a wildly limiting feature. That's a problem in a world where speculators now value the stock of bitcoin at one-fifth the value of the entire U.S. monetary base.</p>\n<blockquote>\n If you think about how money is valued, it's clear that people accept it because they believe it will provide a claim on the future output of others. Of course, that expectation requires that future producers will also give away their output and accept the money, on the belief that yet other future producers will do the same. That expectation has to continue indefinitely. Like the question 'What holds up Atlas when Atlas holds up the world?' it's not enough to answer that he's standing on a turtle. It's got to be turtles all the way down. The value of money has an enormous psychological component.\"\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., Turtles All the Way Down, February 2019\n</blockquote>\n<p>Of course, Bitcoin may have a certain user base as a vehicle for money laundering and black market transactions, but that's an undesirable investment thesis. The vast majority of transactions are to exchange Bitcoin itself, though the New York Times did recently report that \"pornography, patio furniture, and an at-home coronavirus test are among the odd assortment of goods and services that people are purchasing with the cryptocurrency.\" So, basically, if your typical day consists of surfing porn on your patio while testing yourself for COVID, you're gonna want to look into Bitcoin.</p>\n<p>My largest concern is that people are actually forking over hard-earned savings in exchange for these tokens, which allows early \"miners\" to cash out. That's essentially the defining feature of a Ponzi scheme. Like all speculative bubbles that rely on increases in price, rather than cash flows generated by the production of value-added goods and services, Bitcoin isn't actually creating \"wealth.\" It's only creating the opportunity for wealth transfer, primarily from those who will end up holding the bag.</p>\n<p>Bitcoin has certain characteristics of base money in the sense that it's exchanged on an electronic ledger, but by design, transactions are limited to an average of about 2000 per block, with one block successfully validated, on average, every 10 minutes. In order to validate a transaction block, CPU farms across the world grind out terahashes of random SHA256 validation attempts in order to discover a sufficiently small binary that matches the cryptographic hash of the block.</p>\n<p>All of this \"mining\" burns up about as much energy as it takes to run a modest-sized country. Validating a block of transactions produces a reward to the miner (and dilution of the coinbase) of 6.25 Bitcoin per block, which currently works out to nearly $200 per transaction. Yet the value of the median transaction in Bitcoin is only about $1000 in the first place.</p>\n<p>There's a rather primitive regression analysis floating around (tagged as \"sophisticated\" by some observers who apparently go numb at the word \"logarithm\") that attempts to relate the log price of bitcoin to the log \"stock/flow\" ratio, as if it represents some mechanistic supply-demand relationship. Aside from the fact that the correlation between two diagonal lines is always about 0.9-something, I find that one can obtain a better fit just by regressing the log price of Bitcoin on the log ratio of block difficulty/block reward, which is basically a measure of how much energy one needs to waste in order to mine a new bitcoin.</p>\n<p>So the \"value\" of Bitcoin is partially linked to the backward-looking sunk cost of the energy wasted to mine these tokens. Still, I wouldn't dream of using this sort of \"model\" to trade an object whose \"value\" is primarily in the heads of speculators. Use it if you like. If you happen make money on it, feel free send me a check, preferably in U.S. dollars.</p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, this view of Bitcoin will be unpopular among those who associate holding Bitcoin with superpowers like laser eyes and diamond hands. \"Not surprised Hussman doesn't get Bitcoin. Few do.\" M'kay. Look, there's certainly a case to be made that a speculative mindset creates its own reality, and while it does, there's an opportunity to obtain wealth transfers from frantic late-comers who can no longer tolerate missing out. Tulips gonna tulip. Not my gig, thanks.</p>\n<blockquote>\n In the short run, it will be said to be an attack, motivated by either deficient understanding or uncontrolled envy, of the wonderful process of enrichment. Those involved with the speculation are experiencing an increase in wealth - getting rich or being further enriched. No one wishes to believe that this is fortuitous or undeserved; all wish to think that it is the result of their own superior insight or intuition. As long as they are in, they have a strong pecuniary commitment to belief in the unique personal intelligence that tells them there will be yet more. Accordingly, possession must be associated with some special genius. Speculation buys up, in a very practical way, the intelligence of those involved. Only after the speculative collapse does the truth emerge. What was thought to be unusual acuity turns out to be only a fortuitous and unfortunate association with the assets.\n</blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Brief History of Financial Euphoria\n</blockquote>","source":"lsy1615871319183","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>How To Spot A Bubble</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHow To Spot A Bubble\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-16 13:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210315/><strong>Hussman Funds</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations.\nIf we compare our most reliable valuation measures...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210315/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc210315/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1172271196","content_text":"Summary\n\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations.\nIf we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical.\nOne of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates.\nIt's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks.\nTo understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"\n\n\n I can show, really precisely, that there are two warranted prices for a share. The one I prefer is based on such fundamentals as earnings and growth rates, but the bubble is rational in a certain sense. The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.- Nobel Laureate Franco Modigliani, New York Times, March 30, 2000\n\nThe word \"bubble\" is tossed around quite a bit in the financial markets, but it's rarely used correctly. See, the thing that defines a bubble isn't that valuations are extremely high, or that expected returns are extremely low. Instead, what defines a bubble is that investors drive valuations higher without simultaneously adjusting expectations for returns lower. That is, investors extrapolate past returns based on price behavior, even though those expectations are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows.\nIn March 2000, at the height of the technology bubble, I noted: \"Over time, price/revenue ratios come back in line. Currently, that would imply an 83% plunge in tech stocks. If you understand values and market history, you know we're not joking.\" The following month, I discussed Modigliani's quote above, and detailed the dynamics he was describing. The collapse of the 2000 bubble would ultimately erase half the value of the S&P 500, and would take the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 down an implausibly precise 83%.\nThe defining feature of a bubble is inconsistency between expected returns based on price behavior and expected returns based on valuations. If investors pay $150 today for a security that will deliver a single $100 payment a decade from now, but they also fully understand that they'll lose 4% annually on the deal, without extrapolating past gains into the future, then we might say the security is overvalued, and we might question why investors would accept that trade, but we can't call it a bubble.\nBut if investors pay $150 today for that security, because they look back in the rear-view mirror, decide that it \"always goes up\" over time, and convince themselves that expected future returns are always positive, then you've got a bubble. Discounting the future $100 cash flow of the security using any positive expected return would produce a price less than $100. So the positive returns expected by investors are inconsistent with the returns that would equate price with discounted cash flows. The size of the bubble is the fraction of the market price that represents expectational \"hot air.\"\nLikewise, the willingness of investors to embrace \"passive investments\" like ETFs and asset-backed securities based on past performance, with little concern about the valuations, yields, or credit risk of the securities inside, is the very soap from which bubbles repeatedly emerge. Amid the current enthusiasm for special purpose acquisition companies (SPACS), investors might recall the bubble in \"incubators\" at the 2000 peak, the \"conglomerates\" of the late-1960s Go-Go bubble, and even the South Sea Company in the early 1700s, along with similar companies formed at the time \"for carrying on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know what it is.\"\nIf investors price the S&P 500 at levels that are highly likely to produce negative returns for a decade, as they did in 1929 and 2000, and as I believe they are doing at present, yet investors continue to press stock prices higher on the expectation that they will provide historically normal levels of future return regardless of valuations, then you have the sort of inconsistency that defines a bubble.\nLikewise, if the expected return of a conventional passive investment mix is negative on a 10-12 year horizon (based on reliable valuation measures strongly correlated with actual subsequent returns over a century of market history), yet pension return assumptions remain locked near 7% annually, you've got a bubble, and most likely a future pension funding crisis, on your hands.\nThis is how very bad things have repeatedly happened in the financial markets across history, enabled by what Galbraith called \"the extreme brevity of the financial memory.\"\nWhen Modigliani says that there are two \"warranted\" prices, he means that - at least in the short run - there are two ways that prices can fulfill the expectations of investors. In one case, investors have expectations about future returns, and those expectations are informed by the level of valuations. If prices rise, and expected cash flows haven't changed, investors recognize that future returns will be lower. In the \"bubble\" case, investors have high expectations about future returns, mainly based on past returns, and they act on those expectations by driving prices up further. So the expectation of additional price increases is simply reinforced. \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation.\"\nOnly one of these prices is consistent, in that the rate of return expected by investors is also the rate of return that equates price with discounted future cash flows. The other price becomes increasingly detached from fundamentals, as a larger and larger fraction of the price represents hot air, and it ultimately collapses as the gap becomes untenably wide.\nDuring speculative segments of the market cycle, there's nothing that forces investors to recognize that higher valuations imply lower returns, or to change their expectation of high returns as far as the eye can see. That, of course, is why we use measures of market internals to gauge the inclination of investors toward speculation or risk-aversion. Valuation provides an enormous amount of information about likely long-term returns and potential market losses over the complete cycle. But valuation isn't a timing tool. In recent years, it hasn't even imposed a limit on speculative recklessness.\nStill, with each price advance, the actual long-term return implied by future cash flows - what investors will ultimately realize as those cash flows are delivered - collapses further, even while investors act on their delusion that long-term returns have nothing to do with price. Eventually, the bulk of the security price represents a bubble component, not the price that would actually need to exist in order for the long-term expectations of investors to be accurate.\nAs I wrote at the 2000 market peak:\n\n \"As long as investors focus on year-to-year returns and not discounted cash flow calculations, the bubble can continue to grow in self-reinforcing fashion. Investors anticipate a high return, and the price behavior reinforces the expectation. The true long-term return becomes increasingly detached from the long-term return imagined by investors, and the bubble component accounts for an increasingly large proportion of the total price.\"\n\nBy our most reliable measures, run-of-the-mill historical valuation norms are roughly 70% below current levels. I know you don't want to believe that.\n\nThe trap door quietly swings open when valuations are extreme and market internals begin to deteriorate. That's the situation we've observed in our measures in recent weeks, with the initial deterioration largely driven by debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well.\nValuations and discounted cash flows\n\n Valuations measure the tradeoff between current prices and a very long-term stream of expected future cash flows. Every useful valuation ratio is just shorthand for that calculation. Every valuation ratio that fails that criterion is inferior, and you can show it in historical data.\n\n\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., The Meaning of Valuation, December 2019\n\nI've often noted that the denominator of every good valuation measure is just shorthand for the decades and decades of cash flows that the security is likely to deliver in the future. In fact, we always test the validity of the valuation measures we use by examining:\na) how strongly the resulting valuation measures are correlated with actual subsequent total returns, and;\nb) how closely they replicate an explicit discounted cash flow analysis.\nBelow, we'll examine a variety of valuation measures that offer some perspective on why I view the U.S. equity market as a bubble near the breaking point. Along the way, I'll point out some interesting features of valuations and their relationship with subsequent returns. If math gives you hives, feel free to skim over the small amount that I've included here and there.\nConsider first the relationship between valuations and subsequent returns. I'll state the following, which you can prove to yourself by toying around a bit with present value models: the logarithm of a good valuation measure should have an inverse and roughly linear relationship with the expected subsequent investment return.\nHere's a simple example of what this looks like.\n\nHere's what this looks like for MarketCap/GVA, our most reliable stock market valuation measure\n\nDuring the past three decades, we've studied and introduced a broad range of valuation measures. Most can be calculated back to 1947. Some can be evaluated over a century or more. Across history, even in recent decades, we find that the valuation measures that are best correlated with actual subsequent returns are those with muted sensitivity to cyclical fluctuations in profit margins, and that behave largely like broad, market-wide price/revenue ratios.\nIf we compare our most reliable valuation measures with the valuation measures that one would obtain from a proper long-term discounted cash flow analysis, we find that they're nearly identical. Here's what this comparison looks like for the actual stream of dividends (including the impact of repurchases) delivered by the S&P 500 since 1900, discounted at a fixed 10% rate (see the chart text for additional details).\nThe reason we use a fixed rate of return is that a multiple of 1.0 is then, by definition, the level at which the S&P 500 would have been priced for that particular level of expected return. Any deviation in the valuation multiple from 1.0 then gauges how far likely future returns are from that \"typical\" expected return. We're currently farther away from \"typical\" expected returns than at any moment in history, including the 1929 and 2000 market peaks.\n\nOne of the unfortunate bits of financial illiteracy that Wall Street has pushed into the heads of investors is the idea that extreme valuations are \"justified\" by low interest rates. Now, it's certainly true that holding future cash flows constant, raising the price of an investment will lower the embedded rate of return, and vice versa. If you pay $32 today for $100 a decade from today, you can expect a 12% annual return. If you pay $82 for the same security, you can expect a 2% annual return. If you pay $100 today, you can expect nothing. So it's clearly true that holding future cash flows constant, a lower rate of return implies a higher level of valuation.\nThe reason the statement \"low interest rates justify high valuations\" contributes to financial illiteracy is that the statement has been learned entirely out of context of the arithmetic. As a result, investors seem to imagine that, as long as high valuations can be \"justified,\" stocks can be expected to provide historically normal rates of return in the future. Likewise, investors seem to have no concept that if interest rates are low because growth rates are low, no valuation premium is \"justified\" for stocks, because the lower growth is already sufficient to bring future stock returns down to levels that are commensurate with the low level of interest rates.\nThe truth is simple but uncomfortable. If interest rates are low and expected growth is held constant, higher valuations imply lower long-term returns. If interest rates are low because expected future growth is also low, higher valuations are not required. Long-term returns will be lower anyway. A valuation premium just makes future returns even worse.\nSaying that extremely low interest rates \"justify\" extremely high stock valuations is identical to saying that extremely low future returns on bonds \"justify\" extremely low future returns on stocks. I don't really think that's something Wall Street cares to clarify when it tells investors that stock market valuations are \"justified.\"\nInvestment valuation is concerned with the relationship between three objects: the current price, the future cash flows, and the rate of return that connects the two like a string. The lower the current price and the higher the future cash flows, the steeper the string. The higher the current price and the lower the future cash flows, the flatter the string. Raise the current price above the future cash flows, and the string will point down instead of up. Given any two of these objects, you can calculate the third one.\nFor example, if you want to estimate expected long-term returns, you need two objects: a) the current price and b) the expected stream of future cash flows. A good valuation ratio is just shorthand for those two objects, so you can estimate the long-term return directly from the level of valuation. Then, if you like, you can compare it with the level of interest rates. That comparison can be useful, because even when investors realize that high stock market valuations imply low long-term returns, it's not at all clear that they realize how low long-term return prospects have been driven.\nThe chart below shows our estimate of expected 12-year S&P 500 total returns over-and-above Treasury bond yields, across a century of market history. Compare this with the nearly useless drivel that Wall Street passes off as the \"equity risk premium\" (typically quoted as the S&P 500 forward earnings yield minus the 10-year Treasury yield). Yes, you're reading the chart correctly. Given current valuations, we expect the total return of the S&P 500 to underperform the lowly yield on Treasury bonds by roughly -6% annually over the coming 12-year period.\n\nMany investors confuse the estimation of expected returns (which requires only expected cash flows and the observed price) with a different problem - the estimation of \"fair value.\" See, interest rates come into the picture when you have an expected stream of future cash flows and you want to calculate a \"fair\" current price. In that case, rather than picking an arbitrary rate of return from a hat, it's common to use the level of interest rates, plus some risk premium, as the expected long-term return (or discount rate, or capitalization rate). This sort of calculation can be super-sensitive to arbitrary choices.\nIn particular, Wall Street loves to combine super-high growth rates, super-low discount rates, and super-long time horizons, which allows one to calculate a \"fair value\" that's as close to infinity as possible. The thing to remember is that whatever rate of return an analyst embeds into the fair value calculation is also the long-term rate of return you'll earn over time if you pay that price, assuming the future cash flows are delivered as expected.\nAmong scores of measures we've evaluated or introduced over time, MarketCap/GVA (nonfinancial market capitalization to corporate gross value-added, including our estimate of foreign revenues) has the highest correlation with actual subsequent 10-12 year S&P 500 total returns, followed by our Margin-Adjusted P/E (MAPE). I find it hilarious that the various valuation measures I've introduced over time are sometimes described as products of \"machine learning,\" \"data mining,\" and \"curve fitting\" when they are, in fact, just different versions of an apples-to-apples economy-wide price/revenue ratio.\n\nThe S&P 500 price/revenue ratio and nonfinancial market capitalization to GDP (the \"Buffett indicator\") also perform well, and better than earnings-based alternatives like price/forward earnings, the Fed Model, and even the Shiller CAPE. See, while earnings are necessary to generate long-term cash flows, they are also subject to fluctuations in profit margins (both cyclically and even from decade to decade) that turn out to be highly uninformative.\nEconomically, fluctuations in profit margins are driven primarily by fluctuations in real unit labor costs. Because companies compete on the basis of realized after-tax profits rather than pre-tax profits, changes in tax policy also have far less durable impact on corporate profits than investors seem to imagine. While corporate profits got a tremendous boost last year from CARES spending (the deficit of one sector always emerges as the surplus of another), here's what the relationship between corporate profits and real unit labor costs looks like historically.\nReal unit labor costs are presented on an inverted left scale. The upward pressure on labor costs (observed as a plunge in the blue line) isn't particularly auspicious for future profits. Still, there's so much distortion in recent quarters that I'd consider the jury to be out on how much of this will be sustained.\n\nIt's undoubtedly true that profit margins, expected growth, and other factors have an effect on future deliverable cash flows and the valuations that investors place on stocks. But even for technology stocks, these assumptions should be made explicit and tested against history. You'll find that observable measures like price/revenue are still very serviceable. In fact, the extreme price/revenue multiples of technology stocks helped to inform my March 2000 projection of an 83% loss in that sector.\nAs Benjamin Graham wrote, \"The habit of relating what is paid to what is being offered is an invaluable trait in investment. The more dependent the valuation becomes on anticipations of the future - and the less it is tied to a figure demonstrated by past performance - the more vulnerable it becomes to possible miscalculation and serious error.\"\nThe current 5.19 price/revenue multiple for the Nasdaq 100, is the most extreme level since February 2001, which was followed by a 60% loss in the index (after it had already dropped in half). The situation is actually a bit worse than 2001 here. If one examines the largest components of the index, it becomes clear that their annual growth rates have declined substantially over time.\nAs a result, a dollar of current revenues should arguably command a smaller multiple than a dollar of revenues might have during earlier periods of emerging growth. Yet even if one takes the Nasdaq 100 price/revenue ratio at face value, and even if one restricts attention to the bubble period since 2000, it's difficult to expect the Nasdaq to produce total returns over the coming decade much better than zero.\n\nYou don't really want to see what the same chart looks like for the S&P 500.\n\nThe same is true, unfortunately, for passive investment strategies. We presently estimate negative 12-year average annual total returns for a conventional passive investment mix invested 60% in the S&P 500, 30% in Treasury bonds, and 10% in Treasury bills.\nIn a 2019 white paper, I detailed an approach to estimate a \"value-focused asset allocation\" by jointly considering prevailing stock market valuations and interest rates. It specifies an investment allocation based on which asset class is estimated to have the highest average annual expected return, adjusted for risk, to each point in a long-term investment horizon. That allocation can then be modified by a risk-management component, to adjust the exposure during segments of the market cycle where risk-aversion or speculation among market participants may temporarily drive valuations to depressed or elevated levels. The white paper includes numerous charts showing how this value-focused asset allocation has changed across market history, particularly at important peaks and troughs in the stock and bond markets.\nAlong with those methods, I introduced our \"Endowment/spending multiple,\" which estimates the number of years of spending that a passive 60/30/10 investor requires up-front, in order to finance an expected 36-year stream of future inflation-adjusted spending. The idea here is that in a deeply undervalued market with high expected future returns, investors can finance a future stream of spending with far less than they require when valuations are extreme and prospective returns are low.\nYou know you're in a bubble when funding a 36-year stream of expected inflation-adjusted spending requires over 38 years of money up-front.\n\nIn the chart below, the Endowment/spending multiple is presented on an inverted log scale (left), along with the actual subsequent average annual total return of a 60/30/10 portfolio mix (right scale). Needless to say, we adhere to investment disciplines that are intended to address problems like this.\n\nAs a testament to the breadth of this speculative episode, the median price/revenue ratio of S&P 500 components now exceeds 3.3, easily a record, and extreme enough to provoke distress about the potential losses that innocent but poorly-informed investors may experience over the completion of this cycle.\n\nThe next chart shows the median price/revenue ratio of S&P 500 components sorted into 10 deciles by valuation. The chart is presented on log scale to allow each line to be compared with its own history. Each segment on the vertical axis represents a doubling of valuations. Notice that every single decile of S&P 500 components is at record valuation extremes. Investors now rely on a permanently high plateau in these extremes.\n\nIt's interesting, but far less important, that the median price/earnings ratio of S&P 500 components has also reached 32.4, the highest level in history. This compares with a median P/E of 19.4 at the 2000 market peak. The problem with P/E multiples, of course, is that they are substantially affected by earnings variability. In fact, prior to the current peak, the highest median P/E for the S&P 500 was actually in March 2002, when the index was down 25% from the March 2000 bubble highs. That's because earnings were down far more by then, which boosted P/E ratios. Such is the danger of taking P/E multiples at face value.\nA crude but reasonably effective way to get around the cyclicality of earnings (but only for very broad indices), is to compare prices to the highest level of earnings achieved to-date. I introduced this metric back in 1998 as the price-to-peak-earnings ratio. The chart below shows a version of that. The blue line (left scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to GDP. The red line (right scale) shows the ratio of total U.S. equity market capitalization to the highest level of economy-wide U.S. profits to date. Investors have gotten themselves into trouble here.\n\nWhat if valuations remain extreme forever?\nProbably the single most frequent question I've heard from investors over the past couple of years is \"What happens if valuations remain extreme forever?\" It's actually a version of the \"permanently high plateau\" that Irving Fisher disastrously projected in 1929. Still, recent years have produced enormous confidence among investors that the Federal Reserve's purchases of Treasury debt can permanently \"backstop\" the stock market.\nAs I've detailed previously, quantitative easing supports the market only by creating zero interest hot potatoes that are uncomfortable for investors to hold (provided that they're inclined toward speculation), and that are impossible to get rid of in aggregate. Moreover, the Fed's purchases of corporate bonds during the pandemic were legally constrained to CARES funds provided by the Treasury, and ultimately amounted to $14 billion of bonds, in an economy with $11 trillion in corporate debt at $58 trillion in equity market capitalization.\nSuffice it to say that the \"Fed backstop\" is largely in the minds of investors, and relies almost exclusively on the psychological discomfort of holding low-yielding base money. Yet since perception can be indistinguishable from reality, particularly in the short run, it's important to entertain the question.\nMy answer is that if the Fed is indeed able to maintain valuations at the highest levels in history, forever, stock prices would likely grow at roughly the same rate as nominal GDP. So figure 1.6% real structural growth plus 2% inflation gets you 3.6%. Let's call it 4%, which would match nominal GDP growth in both the 10-year and 20-year periods ending at the Q4 2019 economic peak, just before the pandemic. The first casualty of rising inflation is stock valuations, so it's not at all clear that assuming higher inflation would help stocks until valuations were roughly normalized, which would require consumer prices to roughly triple.\nThe chart below is a reminder of how structural real GDP growth has progressed over recent decades (driven by demographic labor force growth and trend productivity), and the basis for that 1.6% figure for structural real GDP growth.\n\nSticking with 4% nominal growth, and adding a 1.5% dividend yield, a \"permanently high plateau\" in market valuations would imply S&P 500 total returns of about 5.5% annually. Again, this assumes that valuations never retreat from levels that presently stand at about 3.6 times their historical norms. Simply allow them to retreat to 2.4 times their historical norms a decade from now - which would still keep valuations among the highest 10% in U.S. history - and the resulting 10-year total return would drop to about 1.3%. I think this would actually be the best-case scenario even in a permanently overvalued world.\nAt elevated valuations, even very small changes in expected return imply enormous changes in prices. So it's unlikely that a period of much higher average valuations will escape the prospect of relatively high volatility. Rather than a 70% market decline, which would presently be required for the S&P 500 to simply touch historically run-of-the-mill valuation norms, investors could expect rather frequent market losses in the 20-35% range, which is essentially what we've seen even over the past few years.\nAll of that would be fine with us. We've adapted our discipline sufficiently (especially in late-2017) to tolerate the possibility of permanently sustained overvaluation. My impression is that the impact of those adaptations has become more evident as we've had greater opportunities to live into them. I can't say that I believe for a second that investors will actually be spared from a 50-70% loss in the S&P 500 in the coming years, but again, it will be fine with us if the market never approaches historical valuation norms again. With the adaptations we introduced in late-2017, our discipline is flexible enough to navigate a bubble even without embracing its premise.\nAn unusual overlap of high-risk conditions\nReturning to Modigliani, my impression is that the advance of recent years to the most extreme valuations in history reflects exactly the bubble dynamics he described, and I expect that it will also end as he described (though not necessarily in one fell swoop): \"The expectation of growth produces the growth, which confirms the expectation; people will buy it because it went up. But once you are convinced that it is not growing anymore, nobody wants to hold a stock because it is overvalued. Everybody wants to get out and it collapses, beyond the fundamentals.\"\nOne of our internal gauges tracks the correlation of market conditions with certain high-risk features that have preceded steep market collapses - a collection of measures capturing valuations, internals, sentiment, leverage, overextension, and yield pressures. Only a handful of instances in history overlap pre-crash conditions as well as they do at present. The current overlap is actually quite similar to August 1987. Meanwhile, the correlation of current conditions with features typically observed at market lows is the most negative in history.\nIf you want my opinion, I suspect that a near-vertical market plunge on the order of 25-35% is coming, probably quite shortly, most likely out of the blue, as in 1987, driven by nothing more than the sudden concerted effort of overextended investors to sell, and the need for a large price adjustment in order to induce scarce buyers to take the other side.\nAs usual, no forecasts are necessary. We'll align our investment stance in response to the valuations and market action that we observe at each point in time. Still, it's of particular concern that these overlaps are occurring in the context of the most extreme valuations in history, along with strikingly dysfunctional pockets of illiquidity in many individual issues. This dysfunctional behavior isn't about any particular video game retailer. I suspect it's actually about some sort of fragility or segmentation in order-flow mechanisms, possibly coupled with poorly managed derivatives exposure.\nAs I used to teach my students, show me a financial debacle, and I'll show you someone who had a leveraged, mismatched position that they were suddenly forced to close into an illiquid market.\nThough my concerns run far beyond the amount of leverage in the system, it isn't helpful that the amount of leverage in the U.S. equity markets is now easily the highest in history. Some observers are inclined to bring this figure down by dividing instead by the market capitalization of equities. But here's some useful arithmetic:\nMargin Debt/GDP = Margin Debt/Market Cap x Market Cap/GDP\nTo say that margin debt to GDP is at the highest level in history is to say not only that stocks are heavily owned on margin, but that those stocks are also breathtakingly overvalued. That combination is particularly worrisome.\n\n All crises have involved debt that, in one fashion or another, has become dangerously out of scale in relation to the underlying means of payment.\n\n\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Short History of Financial Euphoria\n\n\nThe kind of event I'm suggesting would not bring valuations anywhere near historical valuation norms. Given current valuation extremes, it would be more like a palate cleanser. I have no particular expectation about what the next dish would be. In the event we do observe an abrupt market collapse, the Fed will undoubtedly respond with some new palliative. Whether or not it is effective will depend on the context of risk-aversion, inflation, credit risk, and other conditions at the time. The larger problem, as we've discussed, is that you can't \"save\" an overvalued asset by propping up its price. The value is in the future cash flows that will be delivered to investors over time. The elevated price only ensures that the long-term return between now and then will be dismal.\nOf course, nothing in our discipline relies on a market plunge. Given the combination of hypervaluation and divergent market internals (largely based on debt securities, but with increasing divergences in equities as well), I do believe that the stock market remains in a \"trap door\" situation. Still, that view will change as market conditions change. We'll refrain from adopting or amplifying a negative outlook if our measures of market internals improve. That discipline has served us well even amid record highs. Again, no forecasts are required, nor does this opinion drive our current investment stance. I just think the correlation with historical pre-crash conditions is worth noting.\n\n How little, it will perhaps be agreed, was either original or otherwise remarkable about this history. Prices driven up on the expectation that they would go up, the expectation realized by the resulting purchases. Then the inevitable reversal of these expectations because of some seemingly damaging event or development or perhaps merely because the supply of intellectually vulnerable buyers was exhausted. Whatever the reason (and it is unimportant), the absolute certainty is that this world ends not with a whimper but with a bang. And so on to the moment of mass disillusion and the crash. This last, it will now be sufficiently evident, never comes gently. It is always accompanied by a desperate and largely unsuccessful effort to get out.\n\n\n - John Kenneth Galbraith on the 1929 collapse\n\nValuations and investment duration\nTo understand why extreme valuations imply high volatility, and require extremely long investment horizons, it's useful to consider the concept of \"duration.\"\nEvery security is a claim on a stream of future cash flows that can be expected to be delivered to the investor over time. While the concept of \"duration\" is most commonly used for bonds, it's actually applicable to any security, no matter how \"lumpy\" the stream of cash flows might be.\nIf you don't like math, feel free to skim over the various equations and just read the pull quotes. I've provided the details just for completeness.\nThe \"duration\" of a security can be defined in two ways.\nInvestment horizon: the weighted average number of years it takes for the security to deliver its payments. For each period, you take the share of total present value represented by that year's payment, and multiply it by the number of years in the future the payment will be received. Add them all up. The result is the number of years from today (a weighted average) that the present value of your investment will be repaid. For example, the duration of a security that delivers a single payment a decade from now is simply 10 years.\nElasticity: the percentage change in the security in response to a change in the underlying gross rate of return. Technically, elasticity is (-dP/P)/(dk/1+k). For example, suppose you own a security that will pay $100 a decade from now, and it's priced at $82.0348, for a 2% annual return. Now assume the expected return moves to 2.01%. The price would drop to $81.9544. Elasticity is (0.0804/82.0348)/(0.0001/1.02) = 10%\nIt turns out that the \"duration\" of a security in years is identical to its \"duration\" in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that \"immunizes\" the investor against changes in expected returns over time. In other words, assuming you reinvest your cash flows over time, duration gives you a good idea of how long you have to hold the security in order for your ending wealth to be largely independent of the fluctuations that the security experiences over that horizon.\nIf you know differentiation, can prove to yourself that the \"modified duration\" of the S&P 500 is essentially the inverse of the dividend yield. The modified duration is just (-dP/P)/dk or Macaulay duration/(1+k).\nConsider P = D/(k-g). Differentiating with respect to k, dP/dk = -P/(k-g), so duration (-dP/P)/dk = P/D.\nHere's how to think about the link between valuations and duration. Presently, the dividend yield of the S&P 500 is 1.48%. If the yield moves to 1.49%, holding dividends constant, prices drop by 1.48/1.49-1 = -0.67% on that 1 basis point move. Duration is just that sensitivity, defined for a 100 basis point move, which would be 67. It turns out that's also the weighted-average number of years from today that you'll receive your present value, if you invest today.\nCompare that to the typical situation over the past century, when the dividend yield of the S&P 500 averaged about 3.7%. At normal valuations, a 1 basis point increase in the dividend yield would produce a price drop of 3.7/3.71-1 = 0.27%, implying a duration of 27 years.\n\n It turns out that the 'duration' of a security in years is identical to its 'duration' in terms of the percentage change of price in response to a 1% fluctuation in expected returns. Duration is also the holding period that 'immunizes' the investor against changes in expected returns over time.\n\nHistorically, investors wishing to match the duration of their investment portfolio to the duration of their investment horizon could be reasonably comfortable holding 100% of their assets in stocks, provided they had an investment horizon of about 25-30 years. Presently, these investors would need an investment horizon closer to 65-70 years. They are currently holding sippy cups.\nScarcity, usefulness, and value\nWhile we're on the subject of bubbles, I'll add a few comments on Bitcoin, just for fun. I'd write more, but my sides still hurt from laughing.\nObjects like tulip bulbs and Bitcoin differ from securities in that they do not deliver a stream of cash flows to the holder. Instead, what objects like tulips and currencies provide is a little stream of services over time, for example, as a perennial thing of beauty or as a means of payment. What people sometimes forget is that it is not just scarcity that defines the value of an object, but the stream of useful \"services\" that it provides (for some reason, nobody wants to buy my unique, limited edition, digitally-signed porcupine seat covers). The price of the object, and the stream of services it provides, should be commensurate.\nU.S. dollars, for example, have value primarily because they are tethered to the real economy by fiat (they legally must be accepted as a means of payment, as noted on the face of any dollar bill), and they represent the entire substrate of the banking system - nearly every payment that goes back and forth in the U.S. economy represents a transfer of base money. Base money (currency and bank reserves) provides billions of little \"services\" over time.\nWith every transaction, reserves move electronically from bank to bank between one account holder and another. That combination of legal fiat and constant use as a substrate of the payments system is what gives money \"value.\" That value also means that the U.S. government essentially obtains revenue as \"seigniorage\" for producing the stuff. For those who imagine that governments are going to surrender that revenue in favor of using Bitcoin, I've got a non-fungible token to sell you.\n\nAs I've noted before, blockchain is a brilliant algorithm, and I expect that it will have a great number of uses for secure transactions and inventory management. Bitcoin, however, is a token generated by an energy-inefficient, replicable blockchain app. Ultimately, its value rests on the capacity to provide transactions services, yet without fiat to require its use, and with strikingly narrow bandwidth - one block of roughly 2000 transactions every 10 minutes - that I expect will prove to be a wildly limiting feature. That's a problem in a world where speculators now value the stock of bitcoin at one-fifth the value of the entire U.S. monetary base.\n\n If you think about how money is valued, it's clear that people accept it because they believe it will provide a claim on the future output of others. Of course, that expectation requires that future producers will also give away their output and accept the money, on the belief that yet other future producers will do the same. That expectation has to continue indefinitely. Like the question 'What holds up Atlas when Atlas holds up the world?' it's not enough to answer that he's standing on a turtle. It's got to be turtles all the way down. The value of money has an enormous psychological component.\"\n\n\n - John P. Hussman, Ph.D., Turtles All the Way Down, February 2019\n\nOf course, Bitcoin may have a certain user base as a vehicle for money laundering and black market transactions, but that's an undesirable investment thesis. The vast majority of transactions are to exchange Bitcoin itself, though the New York Times did recently report that \"pornography, patio furniture, and an at-home coronavirus test are among the odd assortment of goods and services that people are purchasing with the cryptocurrency.\" So, basically, if your typical day consists of surfing porn on your patio while testing yourself for COVID, you're gonna want to look into Bitcoin.\nMy largest concern is that people are actually forking over hard-earned savings in exchange for these tokens, which allows early \"miners\" to cash out. That's essentially the defining feature of a Ponzi scheme. Like all speculative bubbles that rely on increases in price, rather than cash flows generated by the production of value-added goods and services, Bitcoin isn't actually creating \"wealth.\" It's only creating the opportunity for wealth transfer, primarily from those who will end up holding the bag.\nBitcoin has certain characteristics of base money in the sense that it's exchanged on an electronic ledger, but by design, transactions are limited to an average of about 2000 per block, with one block successfully validated, on average, every 10 minutes. In order to validate a transaction block, CPU farms across the world grind out terahashes of random SHA256 validation attempts in order to discover a sufficiently small binary that matches the cryptographic hash of the block.\nAll of this \"mining\" burns up about as much energy as it takes to run a modest-sized country. Validating a block of transactions produces a reward to the miner (and dilution of the coinbase) of 6.25 Bitcoin per block, which currently works out to nearly $200 per transaction. Yet the value of the median transaction in Bitcoin is only about $1000 in the first place.\nThere's a rather primitive regression analysis floating around (tagged as \"sophisticated\" by some observers who apparently go numb at the word \"logarithm\") that attempts to relate the log price of bitcoin to the log \"stock/flow\" ratio, as if it represents some mechanistic supply-demand relationship. Aside from the fact that the correlation between two diagonal lines is always about 0.9-something, I find that one can obtain a better fit just by regressing the log price of Bitcoin on the log ratio of block difficulty/block reward, which is basically a measure of how much energy one needs to waste in order to mine a new bitcoin.\nSo the \"value\" of Bitcoin is partially linked to the backward-looking sunk cost of the energy wasted to mine these tokens. Still, I wouldn't dream of using this sort of \"model\" to trade an object whose \"value\" is primarily in the heads of speculators. Use it if you like. If you happen make money on it, feel free send me a check, preferably in U.S. dollars.\nUndoubtedly, this view of Bitcoin will be unpopular among those who associate holding Bitcoin with superpowers like laser eyes and diamond hands. \"Not surprised Hussman doesn't get Bitcoin. Few do.\" M'kay. Look, there's certainly a case to be made that a speculative mindset creates its own reality, and while it does, there's an opportunity to obtain wealth transfers from frantic late-comers who can no longer tolerate missing out. Tulips gonna tulip. Not my gig, thanks.\n\n In the short run, it will be said to be an attack, motivated by either deficient understanding or uncontrolled envy, of the wonderful process of enrichment. Those involved with the speculation are experiencing an increase in wealth - getting rich or being further enriched. No one wishes to believe that this is fortuitous or undeserved; all wish to think that it is the result of their own superior insight or intuition. As long as they are in, they have a strong pecuniary commitment to belief in the unique personal intelligence that tells them there will be yet more. Accordingly, possession must be associated with some special genius. Speculation buys up, in a very practical way, the intelligence of those involved. Only after the speculative collapse does the truth emerge. What was thought to be unusual acuity turns out to be only a fortuitous and unfortunate association with the assets.\n\n\n - John Kenneth Galbraith, A Brief History of Financial Euphoria","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3791,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":329408030,"gmtCreate":1615264531520,"gmtModify":1704780313803,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Can I have some likes and comments pls&nbsp;","listText":"Can I have some likes and comments pls&nbsp;","text":"Can I have some likes and comments pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/329408030","repostId":"1143436063","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2527,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":321482035,"gmtCreate":1615461741027,"gmtModify":1704783067247,"author":{"id":"3574340444890290","authorId":"3574340444890290","name":"YLYLYL","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ae8547633cf3cfc652f7952fe63b1c7","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574340444890290","authorIdStr":"3574340444890290"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Help to comment and like pls","listText":"Help to comment and like pls","text":"Help to comment and like pls","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/321482035","repostId":"1199156489","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199156489","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1615452861,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199156489?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-11 16:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"US Daylight Saving Time","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199156489","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"From 02:00 U.S. East time March 14(this Sunday),the North America region entered daylight saving tim","content":"<p>From&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;March&nbsp;14(this&nbsp;Sunday),the&nbsp;North America&nbsp;region&nbsp;entered&nbsp;daylight saving&nbsp;time,until&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;ends&nbsp;on&nbsp;November&nbsp;7,2021.</p><p>So,starting&nbsp;on&nbsp;Monday,March&nbsp;14,the&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;market&nbsp;will&nbsp;open&nbsp;and&nbsp;close&nbsp;one&nbsp;hour&nbsp;ahead&nbsp;of&nbsp;schedule&nbsp;during&nbsp;north&nbsp;american&nbsp;daylight saving time,i.e.,U.S.&nbsp;trading&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;changed&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30&nbsp;beijing&nbsp;time&nbsp;to&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;a.m.the&nbsp;next&nbsp;day,pre-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;16:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30,after-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;8:00.</p><p><b>What is daylight saving time?</b></p><p>The DST is the practice of moving clocks forward by one hour during summer months so that daylight lasts longer into evening. Most of North America and Europe follows the custom, while the majority of countries elsewhere do not.</p><p>Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and most of Arizona don’t observe daylight saving time. It’s incumbent to stick with the status quo.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>US Daylight Saving Time</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nUS Daylight Saving Time\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-03-11 16:54</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>From&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;March&nbsp;14(this&nbsp;Sunday),the&nbsp;North America&nbsp;region&nbsp;entered&nbsp;daylight saving&nbsp;time,until&nbsp;02:00&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;East&nbsp;time&nbsp;ends&nbsp;on&nbsp;November&nbsp;7,2021.</p><p>So,starting&nbsp;on&nbsp;Monday,March&nbsp;14,the&nbsp;U.S.&nbsp;market&nbsp;will&nbsp;open&nbsp;and&nbsp;close&nbsp;one&nbsp;hour&nbsp;ahead&nbsp;of&nbsp;schedule&nbsp;during&nbsp;north&nbsp;american&nbsp;daylight saving time,i.e.,U.S.&nbsp;trading&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;changed&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30&nbsp;beijing&nbsp;time&nbsp;to&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;a.m.the&nbsp;next&nbsp;day,pre-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;16:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;21:30,after-trade&nbsp;time&nbsp;will&nbsp;be&nbsp;04:00&nbsp;to&nbsp;8:00.</p><p><b>What is daylight saving time?</b></p><p>The DST is the practice of moving clocks forward by one hour during summer months so that daylight lasts longer into evening. Most of North America and Europe follows the custom, while the majority of countries elsewhere do not.</p><p>Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and most of Arizona don’t observe daylight saving time. It’s incumbent to stick with the status quo.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199156489","content_text":"From 02:00 U.S. East time March 14(this Sunday),the North America region entered daylight saving time,until 02:00 U.S. East time ends on November 7,2021.So,starting on Monday,March 14,the U.S. market will open and close one hour ahead of schedule during north american daylight saving time,i.e.,U.S. trading time will be changed to 21:30 beijing time to 04:00 a.m.the next day,pre-trade time will be 16:00 to 21:30,after-trade time will be 04:00 to 8:00.What is daylight saving time?The DST is the practice of moving clocks forward by one hour during summer months so that daylight lasts longer into evening. Most of North America and Europe follows the custom, while the majority of countries elsewhere do not.Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and most of Arizona don’t observe daylight saving time. It’s incumbent to stick with the status quo.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2558,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}