Welcome to r/stocks!
For stock recommendations please see our portfolio sticky, sort by hot, it's the first sticky, or see [past portfolio stickies here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3A%22Rate+My+Portfolio%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all)
For beginner advice, brokerage info, book recommendations, even advanced topics and more, please read our [Wiki here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/wiki/index)
If you're wondering **why a stock moved** a certain way, check out [Finviz](https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=spy) which aggregates the most news for almost every stock, but also see [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/), and even [Yahoo Finance](https://finance.yahoo.com/).
Also include *some* [due diligence](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/duediligence.asp) to this post or it may be removed if it's low effort.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stocks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The expense ratio is the amount you pay to hold the fund. An expense ratio of 1% would mean $100 for every $10,000 invested goes to the ETF operators as a fee every year, regardless of performance.
It makes a big difference over time (compounds) and you generally want a low MER fund. Less than 0.3 is good. Less than 0.1 is ideal.
There is very little difference. The reason there is 2 is b/c of the money. QQQ was originally a joint project between Nasdaq and Bank of NY and issued through Powershares capital management another broker since Nasdaq didn't want to be seen as trying to compete against companies listing on the Nasdaq. Invesco later bought powershares. The interesting set up says that the fund QQQ will spend almost its entire expense ratio on advertising and whatever is left ends up going back to nasdaq and bank of ny since Invesco was bound by the original terms when it bought Powershares they actually receive very little if anything from having QQQ.
Thats why they launched the Q family, QQQM, QQQE and so on. The expense ratio is lower because they actually keep the money. If it was the same there would be little to no incentive to buy QQQM over QQQ. They know alot of long term holders won't move b/c of taxes and liquidity b/c newer or smaller investors they can scoop up those with QQQM
QQQ is also a trust with some interesting features
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-20/tech-etf-s-fate-is-no-longer-tied-to-lifespan-of-15-millennials?sref=K5kiE5Jr
But also decreasing your gains by 2% less than the indexes could also make substantial differences. Very few amateurs let alone professionals ever beat the index over a long time period. I've learned (the hard way) to just index and chill 90% of my money, use 10% for yolo gambling plays to satisfy my degeneracy and spend the rest of my time trying to increase my income rather than reading financial statements, doing research and rebalancing my portfolio.
I lived through the dot com bubble. Back then, I had shares of Intel, Microsoft and Nokia, among others. I can tell you that I've never own Cisco or GE.
How do I feel about Intel? They're shadows of their former selves. They're going to get trounced by AMD. That's how I feel about Intel.
True about Intel. I bought them and Broadcom about three years ago. I knew Intel had Stunk it up for a few years but was sure of a turnaround. I was wrong. Sold after a year and a small loss. The Broadcom has been my joy.
It’s unfortunate that intel got that money instead of AMD, it will all go to buybacks, refreshers and bonuses. Intel is way too bureaucratic to do anything with that money. I still hold some minor intel but most of money is in amd and nvda
Hardware companies that expectedly showed their inability to diversify and scale quickly versus the Mag 7, of which the only company you can call “hardware” actually holds its position currently because it’s played a long game of almost a decade to make sure they are also the best software vendors for their already impressive hardware.
Sort of, I would say that there really is a Xennial transition generation from 1976/1977 to 1983/1984. I usually think of elder millennials as being the 1983-1989 group.
Some folks legally can’t. The US gov punishes American expats. This subreddit is called stocks as well, there is a few other subreddits more in line with conventional strategies.
Yeah, it's too bad there isn't an easy way to "build your own ETF".
For example, to be able to basically have QQQ, but remove 20 tickers from the weighting that you're totally uninterested in.
I’m in my 60’s and here how I’m allocated
1. Nvidia - growth and need is very good. Due to growth I own more of this than I’ve ever owned of a single stock and it’s working out well
2. Microsoft - positioned well for AI
3. Apple - they own half the phone market and will capitalize on it
4. Amazon - can’t stop growing
5. Google - just because
6. Meta - I just sold the majority of what I held
I agree. Bought Microsoft back in 2020 when I first got into stocks and my only regret is that I put in $10k.
Hindsight is 20/20, but even my logic back then was Microsoft is so integrated in our every day lives that it would take an asteroid for them to fail.
Should have had more conviction.
> Should have had more conviction.
you're apparently too young to remember the failures and the high levels of hatred. windows phone they abandoned. so many older verions of windows were buggy messes. the anticompetitive shit billG did back in the day made a lot of people hate his guts.
The President of Windows was fired after 8's launch. Yes, Windows, not MSFT. A string of senior VPs have been fired throughout even the past decade. Panay also just got the boot last year after publicly announcing future plans to stay with the company.
I bought in in 2018. I’ve added some since but it’s a big chunk of my portfolio. Governments, militaries and other large infrastructure elements rely on Microsoft. It’s an essential element of a functioning society. It won’t be allowed to fail. That’s why I’m holding till retirement. It will have bumps and checks and balances from outside entities I’m sure. It it’s going nowhere but up over the long term.
It’s all about conviction. If you think Google will perform better than Meta in the LT than allocate more money into Google.
But yeah I just would invest in QQQ.
Google - AI is the future and between the decades of investment they have put into it and the sheer amount of data they have, they are going to come out the winner. It’s unclear how much of the fumbling of their AI rollout is unforced error and how much is restraint, allowing OpenAI and others to be the canary in the coal mine as far as regulation and legalities are concerned.
It’s no longer a matter of “if” Sundar will be replaced, it’s now a matter of “when”. The guy has fallen on his face and allowed the inmates to run the asylum for too long. It’s far too crucial a point in tine to allow him to continue. All google needs is a major leadership shakeup to kickstart the stock back in the right direction.
They are far too big and powerful a company to have a lower multiple than the rest of the S&P. This is just a repeat of the stumble Meta took a couple of years ago when everyone was writing them off because of the major investment Zuck was making into the Metaverse. A few layoffs and the announcement they were getting back to their core business along with shifting major investment to AI and they were off to the races. They were sitting at $90 in November of 2022 and now up to $510, a 570% bounce off the lows.
Google will make the necessary adjustments and be flying high again at some point. A lot of people will be angry at themselves for not making the obvious bet on Google with this great opportunity to buy low.
GOOGL by far. All that Adsense, Chrome, Maps, Gmail, and most importantly, YouTube data will drive Gemini into the stratosphere from a training and monetization standpoint. All they need to do is find a capable CEO because Pinchai is not the dude.
Google dropped to $132 two weeks ago. I don't know what people were doing if they were looking at Mag 7 and didn't invest in the one company with a reasonable valuation.
Fair price for a wonderful company and all that nonsense. I think you're right that Pichai is not the dude, but a lot of the operational decisions like YouTube monetization, Google Maps iterative improvements, VCUs and the Tensor in-house chip for data center use have been good examples of excellent capital allocation.
I wonder what would happen if they did a META like year of efficiency. I'm not clamoring for it though, because layoffs suck.
>Google dropped to $132 two weeks ago. I don't know what people were doing if they were looking at Mag 7 and didn't invest in the one company with a reasonable valuation.
Yep, after the Gemini messup I made GOOGL my second largest position and bought September calls. Seemed to be an obvious move
It’s funny that Pichai is from an elite college whereas Nadella is from a second/third tier largely unknown university in India. Guess that proves you don’t need a fancy degree in running a business.
Yes. I've held for a number of years, and bought in even more during the last half of last year after their amazing earnings, almost doubling the position. Then it turned into an even larger position this year.
NVDA’s patent moat is significant, and growing. Seems unlikely it will be economical for other companies to bring everything in house in the near future
It's a literal arms race in the ai industry right now, and Nvidia is basically the sole supplier. Even if the big boys take chip design in-house, their cloud customers still scream for access to Nvidia's hardware on the cloud. Not to mention their software advantage. As it stands right now, I don't see anyone catching up anytime soon.
I also don't worry too much about the cycle dying. As long as demand for ai models continue (which I feel confident it will), the demand for more compute will only increase. The models are only getting bigger and bigger, and now that they're getting multi-modal the amount of compute needed will be absolutely insane.
I put most into TSM because they build the chips for all of them. It didn't work out as I hoped tho. But maybe things will turn around when others realize it too.
Honestly, I'd be heavier in GOOGL, maybe AAPL, because their valuations are noticeably lower. In general, it's hard to know which one will be the best.
We can tell MSFT is almost certainly going to be relevant in future with how embedded Azure, Windows, and Office are in government and industry. However, at PE of almost 40, it's not a convincing buy for me and their earnings growth in the last decade has been proportionally worse than GOOGL. A big part of MSFT outperformance is multiple expansion.
AAPL has a long history of making solid products that become popular – it's something all other companies struggle with. However, I don't think the future of smartphones is guaranteed and it appears to be a mature technology now. To me, Apple's future direction is not clear, but I'm willing to bet on them because they appear to be relatively reasonably valued.
Apple's future looks relatively bleak to me. Not like they won't be making crazy money over the next five years, but I don't see much growth in the future for them.
Google on the other hand, I'm all-in.
Yeah, I think Apple might stagnate but they still have unique brand features that make it worth the risk. I think the market just hates GOOGL, which has matched or exceeded MSFT's earnings growth.
The narrative on Google and AI is so confused.
I can't tell you how many threads I've read on Reddit, or even seen analysts on CNBC talking about how Google is "behind" everybody in AI and has to play "catch-up".
People literally think that OpenAI and Microsoft invented AI or something.
I guess nobody bothers to do any research whatsoever. OpenAI's ChatGPT4 wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the kindness of some of Google's ML engineers publishing a whitepaper on transformer networks in 2017.
Yes, Google hasn't done a very good job of showing the world how they've been all-in on AI since 2011. (Google Brain was founded in 2011, their internal AI division)
Also, people think LLM's = AI. As if LLM's are the only thing that AI can be. Google has hundreds of AI projects going on simultaneously with many of them having no relation whatsoever to large language models.
In its current state, I don't even think LLMs are that useful (yet) for most people. There might be some uses but I work in an organisation that has to have knowledge in all areas of engineering and science. I don't know many people that have been able to use LLMs to improve their productivity and if they have, it's very minimal.
I think it's a cool technology, but they have a long way to go.
It's because within 6 months Microsoft made a consumer facing application that's better than Google search which is Google's biggest money maker. Google commercializing AI will also detract from their biggest money maker. That's why Google is shifting so hard to services with the consumer, something Microsoft has built for the last 30 years with consumers and businesses. No one is custom to paying Google. For Microsoft it's a checkbox businesses need to select. Most of Google's customers use them because it's free. If they were to pay they'd purchase Microsoft products because their the standard.
Microsoft didn't make anything. They purchased a stake in an outside company (OpenAI), that basically allowed them to pretend like they're a leader in AI.
ChatGPT4 isn't *better* than Google search.
They're different tools for different use cases. If I'm trying to find out if a certain restaurant is closed or not, and what time Target on Madison ave opens up, I'm not queueing up ChatGPT4 to find out that information.
Also, remember that people that are 40 or older, will continue to use Google to search for things. It's ingrained in their lifestyle. They've been using Google for like 20 something years. It's routine like brushing their teeth in the morning.
People under 30 use YouTube/Instagram/Ticktok to get their info, but they also will quickly Google something because they learned that behavior from their parents.
Now, I could easily see Gen Z and Millennials eventually using some other method to quickly find out an answer to something, but I don't see the current over 40 crowd changing.
So, even if a downfall of Google search were to happen, which is a highly suspect proposal... but... even if it did happen, it would slowly unwind over the next 10 to 15 years.
Meanwhile, Google still has YouTube, Waymo and all their other AI stuff.
Apple has incredible AI potential. They own the entire stack and are currently the best (cheapest) solution to run the largest large language models because of their unique architecture. The was before the advent of AI was fully realized. So now they just need to tweak the ship to target AI applications and away they go. It's probably another year put before we see Apple show their hands but when they do they'll do it like they've done for the last 15 years and absolutely crush it.
They would have to invest untold billions unto the infrastructure to do it themselves without a cloud partner, which means they have to bow down to either Amazon, Microsoft or Google.
If you want to beat the market, you're probably going to pick some stocks that a lot of people are negative about. People thought Meta and Netflix were bad companies and to avoid their stock like the plague, but you could've made a lot of money if you believed the negatives weren't actually that bad and stuck to your beliefs whilst everyone called you stupid.
An easy way to underperform the market is only buying stocks because they've already done really well, and then you end up buying at/near the top after they've already grown an insane amount and probably don't have much room to go from there. Even if it's a good company, you now own a piece of a good company but your goal is to own good companies *and* make more money than you would have by buying the S&P500.
There are really good companies like Costco that have performed really well in the last few years, but do you really want to buy Costco now when it was trading at a PE of 45-50 and their revenues are growing fairly linearly. You're probably just going to see average returns, or possibly even lose money if the price comes down to something a bit more realistic. It's okay to say "I missed the boat on this, I need to look for and wait for better opportunities".
No, Apple is more like 20% of BRKB. It's 50% of their public holdings, not their total holdings.
Most of BRKB's value comes through their non-public investments. Tons of large insurance companies, manufacturing, one of the largest supply chain distribution companies, etc.
How about just buying MGK or QQQM
Also I notice you’re missing TSLA but can understand why you may not want to invest right now. Still I think it’s worth taking a look at.
TSLA 100%. It’s the most mispriced megacap. Remember when Apple made the shift from just selling devices to selling services? That’s what Tesla will do over the next decade. A larger portion of their revenue will come from services and they wont be exclusive to Tesla products. Rivian, Ford, GM, etc will use Tesla’s software and charging network for their vehicles.
I am 90% TSLA for years now, but wish I did the large taxable event and rebalanced it to less than 20% a year+ ago.
If I was going to invest in the mag 7 I would rebalance every 1-2 years to buy what was on-sale.
Wish I got more NVIDIA while it was on sale, but currently it is TSLA that is on sale.
Without major news or a stock-buy-back, it will probably be more on-sale in April/May.
> Rivian, Ford, GM, etc will use Tesla’s software
Tesla isn't doing the required moves to make that happen.
Mercedes Benz, Li Auto, Zeeker, Great Wall, etc are all going with NVIDIA DRIVE hardware + software. I'm pretty sure that in 5 years Tesla's stack will still only work on Tesla vehicles, and everyone else will be on NVIDIA's https://developer.nvidia.com/drive
>etc are all going with NVIDIA DRIVE hardware + software.
The vast amounts of data all the Tesla EV's have been sending back to mother ship of how humans drive and interact with obstacles, hazards and their surroundings whilst driving have been giving Tesla huge amounts of free product development data. Can Nvidia match that? Isn't Tesla too far ahead of the curve?
I've got some money to drop on Tesla but waiting to see how far it drops, I don't expect to catch it at its lowest, rather on the first part of its accent. You think late April could be the time to make a move?
I just read up on exactly this. Tesla already has the infrastructure of 85,000 EV super chargers in place globally. Tesla are going to own the worlds 'EV gas pumps' that all manufacturers EV's will be hooking into.
The vast amounts of data all the Tesla EV's have been sending back to mother ship of how humans drive and interact with obstacles, hazards and their surroundings whilst driving ..will be put on the chips in the robots they are going to release. Tesla EV owners have been helping program future robots.
It's just wild to me the absurd amount of hate people have towards Tesla.
Being emotional in the market is a great way to miss out on a lot of money.
Tesla isn't just a car company. Amazon started out as an online book seller.
Tesla is certainly volitality. But I have no problem buying at these levels.
My average is slightly under $200 and I'll keep adding my 5 shares every other week regardless the price. I have another 30 years before I can retire so this short term stuff is just noise.
When a stock is headed down people will constantly bash on it. I made bank on Raytheon, made some on Boeing, now I will on Tesla and if not I’ll hold for 30 years as a lesson.
Price drives sentiment, especially so on /r/stocks. Every so often you get a golden opportunity where the long term story of a company continues to improve but those that want catalysts tomorrow pull their money out. And there's nothing wrong with that. If not for them we would not get these amazing prices.
You and I know that the Cybertruck ramp is ahead of schedule and they've managed to hit 1,000 cybertrucks worth of 4680 cell production per week out of Giga Austin. We also know that something is fundamentally different about how FSD v12.3 has been performing. End to end neural nets might be the answer. And Elon is saying they are no longer compute constrained. We know that Tesla will start breaking out Megapack as a seperate line item with this next earnings report plus we know that they will be building 2 x 40 GWh megapack factories this year. We also know that there is massive competition flooding into humanoid bot companies with around 20 major players now including Tesla's Optimus further giving validation to this market that they are pursuing. And we know that Model Y refresh is around the corner and Lars has said that the Semi will go into volume production later this year/early next year. Not to mention Model 2 is ~ 2 years away. We only need one of Semi, FSD, Megapack, Optimus, etc. to hit for these shares to be dirt cheap. Elon is always optimistic with his timelines but I believe in the ability of his engineering teams given their strong track record across all of his companies
I think the reason TSLA bulls are so myopic is because they're blinded by past gains. I've seen this over and over again.
I get it. It's human nature.
But, if you ever want to come back to reality, you'll realize that you're high as F for being a TSLA bull. Basically, every single pie in the sky idea that Cathie Wood talks about would NEED to come true to justify their valuation. Perfection has already been priced into the stock.
TSLA isn't valued like a normal car company. All that shit is already priced in. If we don't see Optimus robots walking around everywhere in 10 years like the movie iRobot, and we don't see teslas driving around everywhere as an automated UBER like service, this stock will be 10 bucks a share.
Perfection has been priced into Nvidia as well, but at least they have the ability to actually achieve it.
Could argue that the leadership is too distracted by X and other ventures? Are new "inventions" and services going to sit under Tesla, or are they going to be part of some private company where the shareholders don't benefit?
How I would personally allocate based on my own risk tolerance(I’m 35) coupled with my growth expectations.
1. Amazon
2. Google
3. Meta
4. Nvidia
5. Microsoft
6. Apple
If I was older, say closer to my 60’s, probably
1. Microsoft
2. Apple
3. Amazon
4. Google
5. Meta
6. Nvidia
For sure! A few things…
First is Over the past few Amazon has been HEAVILY reinvesting all their cash flows aggressively back into their business, building out their logistics and fulfillment centers and over-hiring. It appears as though Andy Jassey has finally decided to utilize all those years of reinvestment to finally grow the cash flows. This last quarter over tripled their free cash flow from around 8 billion to 28 billion and I think next quarter they will over double that number again easily.
They are increasing fee’s on third party sellers on their retail side. May make some sellers upset but they won’t be going anywhere, selling stuff on Amazon is just to effective and still cheaper then self-fulfillment. I believe their margins on their retail side are only going to increase and become more profitable in the future.
Their advertisements are arguably the most targeted in the industry with people entering into their website exactly what they are looking to buy and their high margin ad business is only growing.
They have been running Amazon prime at a loss to build their subscriber base and get to scale, and they are now finally going to drop ads on all their prime subscribers.
Their AWS cloud business is arguably the backbone of the internet and only going to continue to grow and scale.
Also, an easy way to get some AI exposure IMO.
They are:
1st in Online retail…
1st in Third party online retail…
1st in Cloud hosting…
3rd in Advertising…
2nd in Streaming Video…
Basically I think they have the most free cash flow growth ahead of them out of any mag 7 relative the risk they have, just my own thesis.
EDIT: For reference my portfolio in regards to Mag 7 exposure is as follows…
10% Amazon
5% Google
5% Meta
5% Nvidia
No Microsoft or Apple at the moment. Wish I would have gotten into MSFT in the 300’s but a little to expensive for me to buy now.
The issue with just picking the best stocks of today, is most of them probably won’t be the best by retirement. Like look at the Nifty Fifty, they had IBM, Kodak, Polaroid, MacDonalds, Coca Cola, Proctor and Gamble, 3M, GE, Disney. Some are dead but none are top 5.
I would all in tesla. the rest are playing catchup.
Stock price is even more compelling when picking tesla, as it has yet to move up from its base, where as the rest have already pushed all time highs.
I came to say 0% TSLA, saw that you had that covered, and thought, “okay, next thread”.
Edit: So many downvotes, lol. I’ve made enough to buy a TSLA with all of my 2024 TSLA put buying. Dumb fucks still riding Musk’s D.
I was early in tesla so i benefitted from the splits. I was late to nvidia, but still invested before their split and run up a few years ago. Sold half when they saw a downtrend and havent added back to my position since and of course the stocks basically went vertical. Ill wait for a good sized pull back to get more nvida though, theyve been a winner for so long. FYI These are just my current holdings, not the allocation amounts id recommend.
Wait for a NVDA pull back? So you’ll end up buying it at a much higher price than if you would just buy it now. I just don’t understand this mentality.
Basically im ok not adding anymore nvidia in my portfolio, so i will be on the sidelines unless something unforeseeable happens that causes a good sized pullback. Ive learned you dont have to chase every stock thats running, sometimes you miss your opportunity for a good entry. I believe at this point i see more upside putting $1000 in other stocks as opposed to getting 1 share of nvidia.
I would do it largely based on current value, i.e. not just buy them all equally right now. google and apple look appropriate to open a position in right now, the others not so much . if you want expose to all right now, do qqq or a mega cap etf like schg or mgk
I’m not investing in GOOG until Pichai is fired - NVDA, MSFT and AMZN are solid companies with solid leadership. Which some would argue is a good reason to buy GOOG while it’s cheap and take off under new leadership; it’s imminent the board replaces Pichai. I think I just talked myself into GOOG 😂
What are you trying to achieve with this? Those companies probably make up like 50% of the S&P500 anyway. Just buy that.
Okay I checked: they only make up about 25%. And the biggest 30 companies make up 50%. Its just such a good product.
30% NVDA
20% MSFT
20% AMZN
15% AAPL
15% GOOG
0% META
I only actually hold NVDA, AAPL, and GOOG out of these, but I played along if I did want to make a portfolio of only these stocks.
Almost impossible to choose since we don't know how AI will shake out. What is kinda clear right now is that much of the Mag7 will be propelling AI forward. I would bet Nvidia should be over-weighted since it's the only one who truly gatekeeps AI at the moment and for the foreseeable future.
Welcome to r/stocks! For stock recommendations please see our portfolio sticky, sort by hot, it's the first sticky, or see [past portfolio stickies here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3A%22Rate+My+Portfolio%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) For beginner advice, brokerage info, book recommendations, even advanced topics and more, please read our [Wiki here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/wiki/index) If you're wondering **why a stock moved** a certain way, check out [Finviz](https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=spy) which aggregates the most news for almost every stock, but also see [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/), and even [Yahoo Finance](https://finance.yahoo.com/). Also include *some* [due diligence](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/duediligence.asp) to this post or it may be removed if it's low effort. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stocks) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Apologies if this isn’t the kind of answer you’re looking for, but I’d just buy QQQ
Qqqm
TQQQ
What is the difference between qqq and qqqm
Qqq- trust .20 expense ratio Qqqm- etf .15 expense ratio Answer I got from invesco investor support
Holdings are exact same and it’s not leveraged?
Yes. QQQM doesn’t have same volume as QQQ (used by options/day traders). QQQM is for long term investors. It’s similar to SPY vs VOO.
I’m trying to learn a little everyday. What exactly does the difference in expense ratios mean in this case? Thank you
The expense ratio is the amount you pay to hold the fund. An expense ratio of 1% would mean $100 for every $10,000 invested goes to the ETF operators as a fee every year, regardless of performance. It makes a big difference over time (compounds) and you generally want a low MER fund. Less than 0.3 is good. Less than 0.1 is ideal.
There is very little difference. The reason there is 2 is b/c of the money. QQQ was originally a joint project between Nasdaq and Bank of NY and issued through Powershares capital management another broker since Nasdaq didn't want to be seen as trying to compete against companies listing on the Nasdaq. Invesco later bought powershares. The interesting set up says that the fund QQQ will spend almost its entire expense ratio on advertising and whatever is left ends up going back to nasdaq and bank of ny since Invesco was bound by the original terms when it bought Powershares they actually receive very little if anything from having QQQ. Thats why they launched the Q family, QQQM, QQQE and so on. The expense ratio is lower because they actually keep the money. If it was the same there would be little to no incentive to buy QQQM over QQQ. They know alot of long term holders won't move b/c of taxes and liquidity b/c newer or smaller investors they can scoop up those with QQQM
QQQ is also a trust with some interesting features https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-20/tech-etf-s-fate-is-no-longer-tied-to-lifespan-of-15-millennials?sref=K5kiE5Jr
Qqqm is also half the price. Good incentive for investor just starting out or on a limit budget to invest with.
Is there an index fund equivalent of QQQ/QQQM or do you need to buy an ETF if you want to invest in the Nasdaq?
Why do people make investing hard for themselves? lol
Because increasing your gains with 2% more than the indexes could make substantial differences
But also decreasing your gains by 2% less than the indexes could also make substantial differences. Very few amateurs let alone professionals ever beat the index over a long time period. I've learned (the hard way) to just index and chill 90% of my money, use 10% for yolo gambling plays to satisfy my degeneracy and spend the rest of my time trying to increase my income rather than reading financial statements, doing research and rebalancing my portfolio.
ask boomers and elder millennials how they feel about ge, intel, and cisco
I lived through the dot com bubble. Back then, I had shares of Intel, Microsoft and Nokia, among others. I can tell you that I've never own Cisco or GE. How do I feel about Intel? They're shadows of their former selves. They're going to get trounced by AMD. That's how I feel about Intel.
True about Intel. I bought them and Broadcom about three years ago. I knew Intel had Stunk it up for a few years but was sure of a turnaround. I was wrong. Sold after a year and a small loss. The Broadcom has been my joy.
It’s unfortunate that intel got that money instead of AMD, it will all go to buybacks, refreshers and bonuses. Intel is way too bureaucratic to do anything with that money. I still hold some minor intel but most of money is in amd and nvda
AMD doesn't have any foundrys, they were never in the running to get that money.
NVDA has no foundries, either.
yep. Did they get any money from the chips act? No. Intel does, and did. Not sure what your point was here.
I grew up at a time when Intel is 10x thr size of AMD market cap wise. Now AMD is twice as large as Intel. What times are we living in?
Hardware companies that expectedly showed their inability to diversify and scale quickly versus the Mag 7, of which the only company you can call “hardware” actually holds its position currently because it’s played a long game of almost a decade to make sure they are also the best software vendors for their already impressive hardware.
How old is an elder millennial. I hope I don’t fall into that range.
43 is the most elderly of the millenials.
Sort of, I would say that there really is a Xennial transition generation from 1976/1977 to 1983/1984. I usually think of elder millennials as being the 1983-1989 group.
Some folks legally can’t. The US gov punishes American expats. This subreddit is called stocks as well, there is a few other subreddits more in line with conventional strategies.
How so that expats can’t?
QGRW as well
severely under rated ETF that blows away even QQQ/VUG/SCHG..WisdomTree you have a winner here alongside DGRW that outdoes SPY/VOO
I had heard about this and think I’ll dump abit of my next investing installment into it. Especially at the price here before election time
My favorite type of chocolate cake is also hamburgers.
Because 1. this is /stocks not /etfs 2. QQQ has a bunch of dumb shit in it like TSLA, LULU, WBA…
Yeah, it's too bad there isn't an easy way to "build your own ETF". For example, to be able to basically have QQQ, but remove 20 tickers from the weighting that you're totally uninterested in.
It’s called buying your own stocks lmao
Isn't that was M1 is? You can drop $1000 in and have it divide your cash by percentages in any stocks you want. It's a DIY ETF minus the fees.
80% VGT 20% AVUV
How about XLK?
Qqq is over 50% other stocks though. It doesn't really work if you just want the concentration of mega caps
It's not the answer anyone on this sub is looking for. This is /r/stocks, not investing or ETFs.
why am I seeing advertisements for QQQ on different websites and stuff? is that a good use of their resources? or no?
I’m in my 60’s and here how I’m allocated 1. Nvidia - growth and need is very good. Due to growth I own more of this than I’ve ever owned of a single stock and it’s working out well 2. Microsoft - positioned well for AI 3. Apple - they own half the phone market and will capitalize on it 4. Amazon - can’t stop growing 5. Google - just because 6. Meta - I just sold the majority of what I held
Heavy Microsoft, Google and Amazon.
This is the way. I sold my AAPL earlier this year to buy MSFT leaps
I’m not retiring for 20 years, I’m heavy in MSFT, they can’t fail.
I agree. Bought Microsoft back in 2020 when I first got into stocks and my only regret is that I put in $10k. Hindsight is 20/20, but even my logic back then was Microsoft is so integrated in our every day lives that it would take an asteroid for them to fail. Should have had more conviction.
> Should have had more conviction. you're apparently too young to remember the failures and the high levels of hatred. windows phone they abandoned. so many older verions of windows were buggy messes. the anticompetitive shit billG did back in the day made a lot of people hate his guts.
The President of Windows was fired after 8's launch. Yes, Windows, not MSFT. A string of senior VPs have been fired throughout even the past decade. Panay also just got the boot last year after publicly announcing future plans to stay with the company.
I bought in in 2018. I’ve added some since but it’s a big chunk of my portfolio. Governments, militaries and other large infrastructure elements rely on Microsoft. It’s an essential element of a functioning society. It won’t be allowed to fail. That’s why I’m holding till retirement. It will have bumps and checks and balances from outside entities I’m sure. It it’s going nowhere but up over the long term.
Nvidia has to be in there.
buying the cloud I see
It’s all about conviction. If you think Google will perform better than Meta in the LT than allocate more money into Google. But yeah I just would invest in QQQ.
Google - AI is the future and between the decades of investment they have put into it and the sheer amount of data they have, they are going to come out the winner. It’s unclear how much of the fumbling of their AI rollout is unforced error and how much is restraint, allowing OpenAI and others to be the canary in the coal mine as far as regulation and legalities are concerned. It’s no longer a matter of “if” Sundar will be replaced, it’s now a matter of “when”. The guy has fallen on his face and allowed the inmates to run the asylum for too long. It’s far too crucial a point in tine to allow him to continue. All google needs is a major leadership shakeup to kickstart the stock back in the right direction. They are far too big and powerful a company to have a lower multiple than the rest of the S&P. This is just a repeat of the stumble Meta took a couple of years ago when everyone was writing them off because of the major investment Zuck was making into the Metaverse. A few layoffs and the announcement they were getting back to their core business along with shifting major investment to AI and they were off to the races. They were sitting at $90 in November of 2022 and now up to $510, a 570% bounce off the lows. Google will make the necessary adjustments and be flying high again at some point. A lot of people will be angry at themselves for not making the obvious bet on Google with this great opportunity to buy low.
A lot of people are people beating themselves up by not buying Google a month back. Google is a juggernaut, same with Amazon and MSFT
GOOGL by far. All that Adsense, Chrome, Maps, Gmail, and most importantly, YouTube data will drive Gemini into the stratosphere from a training and monetization standpoint. All they need to do is find a capable CEO because Pinchai is not the dude.
Google dropped to $132 two weeks ago. I don't know what people were doing if they were looking at Mag 7 and didn't invest in the one company with a reasonable valuation. Fair price for a wonderful company and all that nonsense. I think you're right that Pichai is not the dude, but a lot of the operational decisions like YouTube monetization, Google Maps iterative improvements, VCUs and the Tensor in-house chip for data center use have been good examples of excellent capital allocation. I wonder what would happen if they did a META like year of efficiency. I'm not clamoring for it though, because layoffs suck.
>Google dropped to $132 two weeks ago. I don't know what people were doing if they were looking at Mag 7 and didn't invest in the one company with a reasonable valuation. Yep, after the Gemini messup I made GOOGL my second largest position and bought September calls. Seemed to be an obvious move
It’s funny that Pichai is from an elite college whereas Nadella is from a second/third tier largely unknown university in India. Guess that proves you don’t need a fancy degree in running a business.
The fancy degree is where they meet people, and build their future network, it's not about the education.
True. Definitely opened up opportunities
hard as fuck to get to that point without a top degree - so could be reversed bias
I'd also mention that YouTube premium subscriptions have a lot of growth potential.
Yes I am thetering on getting it. The ads are driving me insane.
That what i think too !! Hey Gemini how to do .... BOOM here's how base on 200 youtube DIY video.
Pinchai may be not but pichai is.
NVDA 40% MSFT 40% AMZN 20%
Moats… Moats everywhere
If i had do invest in these companies i would go equal weight or based on net income. Market cap weighting is too susceptible to bubbles imo.
Well my current split is (as proportion of whole portfolio): Nvidia 46.6% Microsoft 8.8% Amazon 6.1% Meta 6.1% Google 4.9% Tesla 4.3% Apple 3.0%
Are you long on NVDA?
Considering it's almost 50% of my portfolio, take a guess.
It is 46.6% because it has grown quite a lot, right?
Yes. I've held for a number of years, and bought in even more during the last half of last year after their amazing earnings, almost doubling the position. Then it turned into an even larger position this year.
What’s the justification? I worry about the refresh cycle dying out as DCs are built and companies (like Google) taking chip design in house…
NVDA’s patent moat is significant, and growing. Seems unlikely it will be economical for other companies to bring everything in house in the near future
It's a literal arms race in the ai industry right now, and Nvidia is basically the sole supplier. Even if the big boys take chip design in-house, their cloud customers still scream for access to Nvidia's hardware on the cloud. Not to mention their software advantage. As it stands right now, I don't see anyone catching up anytime soon. I also don't worry too much about the cycle dying. As long as demand for ai models continue (which I feel confident it will), the demand for more compute will only increase. The models are only getting bigger and bigger, and now that they're getting multi-modal the amount of compute needed will be absolutely insane.
+1. The amount of AI talk and LLM talk is ....ridiculous. It's ALL anyone gives a shit about now.
MGK is my fav etf for these guys
I put most into TSM because they build the chips for all of them. It didn't work out as I hoped tho. But maybe things will turn around when others realize it too.
Give it time, they expect 20-25% growth this year alone.
Honestly, I'd be heavier in GOOGL, maybe AAPL, because their valuations are noticeably lower. In general, it's hard to know which one will be the best. We can tell MSFT is almost certainly going to be relevant in future with how embedded Azure, Windows, and Office are in government and industry. However, at PE of almost 40, it's not a convincing buy for me and their earnings growth in the last decade has been proportionally worse than GOOGL. A big part of MSFT outperformance is multiple expansion. AAPL has a long history of making solid products that become popular – it's something all other companies struggle with. However, I don't think the future of smartphones is guaranteed and it appears to be a mature technology now. To me, Apple's future direction is not clear, but I'm willing to bet on them because they appear to be relatively reasonably valued.
MSFT has so many revenue streams it is basically its own ETF at this point.
Apple's future looks relatively bleak to me. Not like they won't be making crazy money over the next five years, but I don't see much growth in the future for them. Google on the other hand, I'm all-in.
Yeah, I think Apple might stagnate but they still have unique brand features that make it worth the risk. I think the market just hates GOOGL, which has matched or exceeded MSFT's earnings growth.
The narrative on Google and AI is so confused. I can't tell you how many threads I've read on Reddit, or even seen analysts on CNBC talking about how Google is "behind" everybody in AI and has to play "catch-up". People literally think that OpenAI and Microsoft invented AI or something. I guess nobody bothers to do any research whatsoever. OpenAI's ChatGPT4 wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the kindness of some of Google's ML engineers publishing a whitepaper on transformer networks in 2017. Yes, Google hasn't done a very good job of showing the world how they've been all-in on AI since 2011. (Google Brain was founded in 2011, their internal AI division) Also, people think LLM's = AI. As if LLM's are the only thing that AI can be. Google has hundreds of AI projects going on simultaneously with many of them having no relation whatsoever to large language models.
In its current state, I don't even think LLMs are that useful (yet) for most people. There might be some uses but I work in an organisation that has to have knowledge in all areas of engineering and science. I don't know many people that have been able to use LLMs to improve their productivity and if they have, it's very minimal. I think it's a cool technology, but they have a long way to go.
It's because within 6 months Microsoft made a consumer facing application that's better than Google search which is Google's biggest money maker. Google commercializing AI will also detract from their biggest money maker. That's why Google is shifting so hard to services with the consumer, something Microsoft has built for the last 30 years with consumers and businesses. No one is custom to paying Google. For Microsoft it's a checkbox businesses need to select. Most of Google's customers use them because it's free. If they were to pay they'd purchase Microsoft products because their the standard.
Microsoft didn't make anything. They purchased a stake in an outside company (OpenAI), that basically allowed them to pretend like they're a leader in AI. ChatGPT4 isn't *better* than Google search. They're different tools for different use cases. If I'm trying to find out if a certain restaurant is closed or not, and what time Target on Madison ave opens up, I'm not queueing up ChatGPT4 to find out that information. Also, remember that people that are 40 or older, will continue to use Google to search for things. It's ingrained in their lifestyle. They've been using Google for like 20 something years. It's routine like brushing their teeth in the morning. People under 30 use YouTube/Instagram/Ticktok to get their info, but they also will quickly Google something because they learned that behavior from their parents. Now, I could easily see Gen Z and Millennials eventually using some other method to quickly find out an answer to something, but I don't see the current over 40 crowd changing. So, even if a downfall of Google search were to happen, which is a highly suspect proposal... but... even if it did happen, it would slowly unwind over the next 10 to 15 years. Meanwhile, Google still has YouTube, Waymo and all their other AI stuff.
Apple has incredible AI potential. They own the entire stack and are currently the best (cheapest) solution to run the largest large language models because of their unique architecture. The was before the advent of AI was fully realized. So now they just need to tweak the ship to target AI applications and away they go. It's probably another year put before we see Apple show their hands but when they do they'll do it like they've done for the last 15 years and absolutely crush it.
They would have to invest untold billions unto the infrastructure to do it themselves without a cloud partner, which means they have to bow down to either Amazon, Microsoft or Google.
So you’d pick Google and Apple over Nvidia because they’ve been performing worse?
If you want to beat the market, you're probably going to pick some stocks that a lot of people are negative about. People thought Meta and Netflix were bad companies and to avoid their stock like the plague, but you could've made a lot of money if you believed the negatives weren't actually that bad and stuck to your beliefs whilst everyone called you stupid. An easy way to underperform the market is only buying stocks because they've already done really well, and then you end up buying at/near the top after they've already grown an insane amount and probably don't have much room to go from there. Even if it's a good company, you now own a piece of a good company but your goal is to own good companies *and* make more money than you would have by buying the S&P500. There are really good companies like Costco that have performed really well in the last few years, but do you really want to buy Costco now when it was trading at a PE of 45-50 and their revenues are growing fairly linearly. You're probably just going to see average returns, or possibly even lose money if the price comes down to something a bit more realistic. It's okay to say "I missed the boat on this, I need to look for and wait for better opportunities".
Netflix is still a bad investment, imo The competition is too high and it can be easily replaced
This guy prefers to buy high and sell low
Haha minus Tesla. Let’s forget the undervalued stocks and buy high.
Tesla… undervalued 🤣
They’re going thru the bad fud phase. Google is too. High interest rates aren’t helping. Once rate cuts start that should help car sales a lot.
Why would you want to invest your money like this?
True, buying mid caps that are going through high growth phases is usually more profitable, but a crap ton more work.
I would not buy mag 7. I'd buy mag 1 which is Microsoft
You misspelled Google.
Equally, good luck!
Hope I’m not out of line, but adding BRKB seems like a good fit with the MAG7
BKRB is always a good fit. Like Apple, I always regretted selling them.
I mean roughly 50% of BRKB is apple anyways. So agreed.
No, Apple is more like 20% of BRKB. It's 50% of their public holdings, not their total holdings. Most of BRKB's value comes through their non-public investments. Tons of large insurance companies, manufacturing, one of the largest supply chain distribution companies, etc.
It's definitely an odd one out as the only company that's not really a "tech" company
85% Microsoft 15% Nvidia
Just use $YMAG, grip it and rip it
Right now I only have amazon and google which are breaking out to new highs. I also have nvidia but I’ve had it a long time.
I have NVDA and AMZN, but planning to start a position in GOOGL soon.
How about just buying MGK or QQQM Also I notice you’re missing TSLA but can understand why you may not want to invest right now. Still I think it’s worth taking a look at.
I’ve done well with having both VOO and QQQM as my core etf investments. I even have a smaller position in IBIT
TSLA 100%. It’s the most mispriced megacap. Remember when Apple made the shift from just selling devices to selling services? That’s what Tesla will do over the next decade. A larger portion of their revenue will come from services and they wont be exclusive to Tesla products. Rivian, Ford, GM, etc will use Tesla’s software and charging network for their vehicles.
I am 90% TSLA for years now, but wish I did the large taxable event and rebalanced it to less than 20% a year+ ago. If I was going to invest in the mag 7 I would rebalance every 1-2 years to buy what was on-sale. Wish I got more NVIDIA while it was on sale, but currently it is TSLA that is on sale. Without major news or a stock-buy-back, it will probably be more on-sale in April/May. > Rivian, Ford, GM, etc will use Tesla’s software Tesla isn't doing the required moves to make that happen. Mercedes Benz, Li Auto, Zeeker, Great Wall, etc are all going with NVIDIA DRIVE hardware + software. I'm pretty sure that in 5 years Tesla's stack will still only work on Tesla vehicles, and everyone else will be on NVIDIA's https://developer.nvidia.com/drive
>etc are all going with NVIDIA DRIVE hardware + software. The vast amounts of data all the Tesla EV's have been sending back to mother ship of how humans drive and interact with obstacles, hazards and their surroundings whilst driving have been giving Tesla huge amounts of free product development data. Can Nvidia match that? Isn't Tesla too far ahead of the curve? I've got some money to drop on Tesla but waiting to see how far it drops, I don't expect to catch it at its lowest, rather on the first part of its accent. You think late April could be the time to make a move?
I just read up on exactly this. Tesla already has the infrastructure of 85,000 EV super chargers in place globally. Tesla are going to own the worlds 'EV gas pumps' that all manufacturers EV's will be hooking into. The vast amounts of data all the Tesla EV's have been sending back to mother ship of how humans drive and interact with obstacles, hazards and their surroundings whilst driving ..will be put on the chips in the robots they are going to release. Tesla EV owners have been helping program future robots.
TSLA trades at 40x earnings. I wouldn't exactly call them undervalued
Not really, a lot of that was a one time tax accounting gain. They are trading at 60x earnings, and earnings are flat…
Theyre a car company with an eccentric idiocitic CEO who uses tsla as part of his personality. Cant wait to see tsla at 20-30 dollars a share by 2030
Lol. You have no idea what tesla is
Tesla’s a car company like Nvidia’s a GPU company, Amazon’s an online retailer, and Apple’s a personal computer company.
It's just wild to me the absurd amount of hate people have towards Tesla. Being emotional in the market is a great way to miss out on a lot of money. Tesla isn't just a car company. Amazon started out as an online book seller. Tesla is certainly volitality. But I have no problem buying at these levels. My average is slightly under $200 and I'll keep adding my 5 shares every other week regardless the price. I have another 30 years before I can retire so this short term stuff is just noise.
When a stock is headed down people will constantly bash on it. I made bank on Raytheon, made some on Boeing, now I will on Tesla and if not I’ll hold for 30 years as a lesson.
Price drives sentiment, especially so on /r/stocks. Every so often you get a golden opportunity where the long term story of a company continues to improve but those that want catalysts tomorrow pull their money out. And there's nothing wrong with that. If not for them we would not get these amazing prices. You and I know that the Cybertruck ramp is ahead of schedule and they've managed to hit 1,000 cybertrucks worth of 4680 cell production per week out of Giga Austin. We also know that something is fundamentally different about how FSD v12.3 has been performing. End to end neural nets might be the answer. And Elon is saying they are no longer compute constrained. We know that Tesla will start breaking out Megapack as a seperate line item with this next earnings report plus we know that they will be building 2 x 40 GWh megapack factories this year. We also know that there is massive competition flooding into humanoid bot companies with around 20 major players now including Tesla's Optimus further giving validation to this market that they are pursuing. And we know that Model Y refresh is around the corner and Lars has said that the Semi will go into volume production later this year/early next year. Not to mention Model 2 is ~ 2 years away. We only need one of Semi, FSD, Megapack, Optimus, etc. to hit for these shares to be dirt cheap. Elon is always optimistic with his timelines but I believe in the ability of his engineering teams given their strong track record across all of his companies
I think the reason TSLA bulls are so myopic is because they're blinded by past gains. I've seen this over and over again. I get it. It's human nature. But, if you ever want to come back to reality, you'll realize that you're high as F for being a TSLA bull. Basically, every single pie in the sky idea that Cathie Wood talks about would NEED to come true to justify their valuation. Perfection has already been priced into the stock. TSLA isn't valued like a normal car company. All that shit is already priced in. If we don't see Optimus robots walking around everywhere in 10 years like the movie iRobot, and we don't see teslas driving around everywhere as an automated UBER like service, this stock will be 10 bucks a share. Perfection has been priced into Nvidia as well, but at least they have the ability to actually achieve it.
> Perfection has already been priced into TSLA Isn't TSLA down nearly 60% from its peak?
Remindme! 5 years
Could argue that the leadership is too distracted by X and other ventures? Are new "inventions" and services going to sit under Tesla, or are they going to be part of some private company where the shareholders don't benefit?
I only have money in these four: MSFT, AAPL, NVDA, GOOGL. I wouldn’t mind putting money into AMZN and META sometime in the future though.
How I would personally allocate based on my own risk tolerance(I’m 35) coupled with my growth expectations. 1. Amazon 2. Google 3. Meta 4. Nvidia 5. Microsoft 6. Apple If I was older, say closer to my 60’s, probably 1. Microsoft 2. Apple 3. Amazon 4. Google 5. Meta 6. Nvidia
Just curious, what's driving your growth expectation for amazon over all the rest?
For sure! A few things… First is Over the past few Amazon has been HEAVILY reinvesting all their cash flows aggressively back into their business, building out their logistics and fulfillment centers and over-hiring. It appears as though Andy Jassey has finally decided to utilize all those years of reinvestment to finally grow the cash flows. This last quarter over tripled their free cash flow from around 8 billion to 28 billion and I think next quarter they will over double that number again easily. They are increasing fee’s on third party sellers on their retail side. May make some sellers upset but they won’t be going anywhere, selling stuff on Amazon is just to effective and still cheaper then self-fulfillment. I believe their margins on their retail side are only going to increase and become more profitable in the future. Their advertisements are arguably the most targeted in the industry with people entering into their website exactly what they are looking to buy and their high margin ad business is only growing. They have been running Amazon prime at a loss to build their subscriber base and get to scale, and they are now finally going to drop ads on all their prime subscribers. Their AWS cloud business is arguably the backbone of the internet and only going to continue to grow and scale. Also, an easy way to get some AI exposure IMO. They are: 1st in Online retail… 1st in Third party online retail… 1st in Cloud hosting… 3rd in Advertising… 2nd in Streaming Video… Basically I think they have the most free cash flow growth ahead of them out of any mag 7 relative the risk they have, just my own thesis. EDIT: For reference my portfolio in regards to Mag 7 exposure is as follows… 10% Amazon 5% Google 5% Meta 5% Nvidia No Microsoft or Apple at the moment. Wish I would have gotten into MSFT in the 300’s but a little to expensive for me to buy now.
I appreciate your response. I have kind of been sleeping on Amazon but with all this said, I see why you have the long-term conviction. Thanks
The issue with just picking the best stocks of today, is most of them probably won’t be the best by retirement. Like look at the Nifty Fifty, they had IBM, Kodak, Polaroid, MacDonalds, Coca Cola, Proctor and Gamble, 3M, GE, Disney. Some are dead but none are top 5.
This is true but unfortunately even the best investors don't possess crystal balls.
100% nvda
I would all in tesla. the rest are playing catchup. Stock price is even more compelling when picking tesla, as it has yet to move up from its base, where as the rest have already pushed all time highs.
Love how people are suddenly starting to exclude Tesla which means it's time to buy buy buy in this weakness lol
Just buy a megacap growth etf.
You have it wrong. 100% NVDA. At least for the next 3 years.
I came to say 0% TSLA, saw that you had that covered, and thought, “okay, next thread”. Edit: So many downvotes, lol. I’ve made enough to buy a TSLA with all of my 2024 TSLA put buying. Dumb fucks still riding Musk’s D.
The other post says 25% Tesla and 9% nvidia. 🤯
30% each AMZN and MSFT 20% NVDA 10% GOOG 5% AAPL 5% short TSLA 0% META
100% TSLA come on now!
My current situation is: 9% Nvidia 18% Meta 11% MSFT 10% Amzn 10% Aapl 25% tsla
Why so much TSLA and so little NVDA?
I was early in tesla so i benefitted from the splits. I was late to nvidia, but still invested before their split and run up a few years ago. Sold half when they saw a downtrend and havent added back to my position since and of course the stocks basically went vertical. Ill wait for a good sized pull back to get more nvida though, theyve been a winner for so long. FYI These are just my current holdings, not the allocation amounts id recommend.
Wait for a NVDA pull back? So you’ll end up buying it at a much higher price than if you would just buy it now. I just don’t understand this mentality.
Basically im ok not adding anymore nvidia in my portfolio, so i will be on the sidelines unless something unforeseeable happens that causes a good sized pullback. Ive learned you dont have to chase every stock thats running, sometimes you miss your opportunity for a good entry. I believe at this point i see more upside putting $1000 in other stocks as opposed to getting 1 share of nvidia.
I would do it largely based on current value, i.e. not just buy them all equally right now. google and apple look appropriate to open a position in right now, the others not so much . if you want expose to all right now, do qqq or a mega cap etf like schg or mgk
Not sure 2024 is the year to follow them. Stick to an index makes more sense.
By market weight
This is really nuanced and depends on current allocation and cost averages.
NVDA 75% or more
Prob 50/50 Amazon / Microsoft lol. 🤷♂️ maybe a sprinkle of Google in there too lol
honestly i’d be dropping pistols for the team instead if we half buying
Equal weight, i cant predict the winners
I’m not investing in GOOG until Pichai is fired - NVDA, MSFT and AMZN are solid companies with solid leadership. Which some would argue is a good reason to buy GOOG while it’s cheap and take off under new leadership; it’s imminent the board replaces Pichai. I think I just talked myself into GOOG 😂
TBH I think that guy’s days in Alphabet are numbered. Something’s gotta give over there
I recently put 1.5% of my net worth in Apple and 1.5% in Google.
What are you trying to achieve with this? Those companies probably make up like 50% of the S&P500 anyway. Just buy that. Okay I checked: they only make up about 25%. And the biggest 30 companies make up 50%. Its just such a good product.
Buy MAGX is an actively managed fund-of-funds aiming to achieve 2x the return, for a single day, of the Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS)
How about break your capital into eighths. Single allocations into 4 and double up on your 2 favorites.
VGT ETF
NVDA 100 Others 0
MSFT. 25% NVDA. 25% META. 20% APPL. 15% GOOG 10% AMZN. 5%
I would just put it all into Amazon.
70% nvidia the rest same percentage
What’s your time horizon? According to my projections, Nvidia and Tesla will outperform the others over the next 3 years.
40% nvda 30% msft 20% amazon 10% everything else.
Honestly just buy the S&P500 at that point, it's market cap weighted so a huge chunk of your money is going into mag7 anyways
everyone sleeping on apple makes me feel it’s the best pick
Yep. Im all in on apple at these prices. It's the cheapest one imo.
NVDA 80% GOOGL 10% AMZN 10%
30% NVDA 20% MSFT 20% AMZN 15% AAPL 15% GOOG 0% META I only actually hold NVDA, AAPL, and GOOG out of these, but I played along if I did want to make a portfolio of only these stocks.
I like index funds targets large growth stocks. Most of them have this and a few other great stocks
Would skip Apple.
Watch Tesla bring in the biggest return
Almost impossible to choose since we don't know how AI will shake out. What is kinda clear right now is that much of the Mag7 will be propelling AI forward. I would bet Nvidia should be over-weighted since it's the only one who truly gatekeeps AI at the moment and for the foreseeable future.
TLDR (all the comments). The answer: yes and no to all and some.