u/Toroshii

Everyone knows about Dollar Cost Averaging. Almost nobody actually does it....really.

Yeah yeah, not new. But hear me out.

I kept my monthly contributions running straight through the tariff crash in April. Didn't skip a single month. Those were the cheapest shares I've bought in two years and I didn't have to do anything clever to get them, I just didn't stop. Same thing in August last year when everything dropped 10% in three days. Scary in the moment, incredible in hindsight.

That's the whole game. Fixed amount, fixed schedule, every month, no matter what the headlines say. The chaos of the last two years hasn't been a problem for DCA investors. It's been a gift.

The people I know who got hurt were the ones trying to time it. Waiting for the bottom, selling during the dip, getting back in after the recovery already happened. Meanwhile the boring monthly auto-invest just kept quietly accumulating.

Stoxcraft has a good breakdown of why this works mathematically if you want the full picture. But honestly the math is secondary. The real advantage is that it removes every bad decision you'd otherwise make when things get scared.

Who else is running DCA right now and hasn't touched it through all this volatility?

Spotify is up 430% since 2023. Uber's business went through the same transformation. Uber is up 31%.

For years the criticism was fair. Uber burned cash at a scale that was genuinely hard to justify. Driver subsidies, market expansion, regulatory battles, the whole thing looked like a company that could grow forever and never actually make money.

That version of Uber doesn't exist anymore. And yet the stock is up about 31% over the past two and a half years.

Free cash flow crossed $6 billion annually. Gross bookings above $140 billion. 150 million monthly active users across rides and delivery. The driver supply problem that paralyzed them post-COVID is largely solved. Operating leverage is finally showing up because the fixed cost base doesn't scale at the same rate as bookings.

The part that gets less attention is Uber Eats. Rides takes all the oxygen in any Uber discussion but the delivery business is approaching the same scale and runs on the same driver network. The incremental margin on a delivery order through a driver fleet you've already paid to acquire is real money.

So why is the stock where it is?

I was looking at the price chart the other day and it kind of hit me, the business is fundamentally different from two years ago and the line barely moved.

https://www.stoxcraft.com/stocks/uber

The comparison that bothers me is Spotify. Same basic story played out in parallel: years of losses, structural doubts about whether the model ever works, then a real profitability inflection. Spotify's stock is up close to 430% over that same period. Uber is up 31%. Both companies flipped the same narrative. The market re-rated one of them and more or less shrugged at the other.

Autonomous vehicles get thrown at this one constantly. The bear argument is that robotaxis cut Uber out of its own market. But Uber already has partnerships with Waymo and others in place, which means they're positioning as the platform that deploys the robots rather than the company that gets replaced. That's not nothing.

The stock still carries the ghost of the loss-making years. That's the bet, really. Not that Uber's business is getting dramatically better from here, but that the market hasn't finished re-rating what it already became.

Rigetti Computing sieht aktuell seeeeeehr spannend aus...

https://www.stoxcraft.com/stocks/rgti

Anfang 2025 fast auf 45, jetzt bei ~17. Über 60% down vom ATH. Das Quantum-Hype-Fenster ist erstmal zu, nicht nur für Rigetti, sondern Google Willow, D-Wave, IonQ haben alle ihren Peak abgebaut.

Nur: das Unternehmen selbst hat sich dabei nicht verändert. Rigetti baut echte Quantenhardware, hat aktive Verträge mit DARPA und DoE, und die nächsten Quartalszahlen kommen bald. Revenue ist im niedrigen zweistelligen Millionenbereich – ja, keine Gewinne, kein klarer Zeithorizont. Aber so schlecht ist die Ausgangslage dennoch nicht für eine Zukunftstechnologie.

Für einen kleinen spekulativen Anteil reizt mich das Setup. Nicht als Investition – eher als Wette auf den nächsten Sentiment-Schwung wenn Quantencomputing wieder Schlagzeilen macht. Und der Chart sieht nach einem möglichen Stabilisierungsniveau aus.

Ich bin kein Quantum-Experte und halte aktuell (noch) nichts davon. Aber "tempted" trifft's ganz gut und ich hätte gerne was Quantumorientiertes im Depot.

Habt ihr $RGTI auf dem Radar? Spekulation mit kleiner Position oder kompletter Nonsense bei diesen Fundamentals?

I thought they went under after the whole phone thing. Randomly came across about an article about them....

https://www.stoxcraft.com/news/blackberry-scores-vs-the-market-narrative-a-stoxcraft-turnaround-analysis

Turns out the company hasn't made phones since 2016. They've got QNX, which is basically the OS embedded in like 235 million cars globally, and a cybersecurity division called Cylance. Nvidia just partnered with them on their edge AI platform for autonomous vehicles.

They've been profitable three quarters running, which I didn't expect. The stock spiked 13% on April 20 on volume that was 497% above the normal daily average.

I don't know if it's a buy or whatever but the gap between what I thought this company was and what it does now felt pretty wild.

Has anyone looked into this one?

Wieder ein Fund den ich komplett verpennt hab.....FIX!
https://www.stoxcraft.com/stocks/fix

HVAC-Firma. Baut Klimaanlagen, Lüftung und Elektroinstallationen in Gewerbegebäude.

Kein AI Hype oder medial gepushte Earnings, Tweets oder der übliche Kram.

Trotzdem: +2.100% in 5 Jahren. +347% allein in den letzten 12 Monaten. Zum Vergleich: Nvidia hat in 5 Jahren ca. +1.800% gemacht.

Die eigentliche Story kam mir erst später: jedes neue KI-Rechenzentrum braucht extreme Kühlung. Ein modernes Datacenter verbraucht so viel Strom wie eine Kleinstadt, der Großteil davon wird zu Wärme. Comfort Systems baut genau die Infrastruktur die das ableitet. Microsoft, Amazon, Google bauen gerade im Rekordtempo. Jedes dieser Gebäude ist ein Auftrag.

Was mich wirklich überrascht hat: die Fundamentals halten komplett mit. Keine aufgeblähte Bewertung auf Hoffnung. Solide Bilanz, konstant wachsende Margen, Piotroski-Score so gut wie er nur sein kann.

Ich hab die Aktie zwar 2022 zum ersten Mal gesehen, aber irgendwie hab ich dann alles natürlich auf AI Hype gesetzt anstatt auf Klimaanlagen.

Kennt jemand noch mehr solche Aktien die etwas unterm Radar schwimmen (also medial zumindest) und entsprechend weniger anfällig sind für "Drama".

I'm someone who actually believes in value investing. Like, genuinely. Low multiples, margin of safety, don't overpay. The whole thing. But I've had to admit to myself that the label has basically rotted from the inside.

Because what even is "value" at this point. You read the blogs and it's always the same clean framework. Growth stocks here, value stocks there, tidy little comparison table. And then you look at what Buffett actually did. Spent decades preaching Graham, then held Apple at a multiple Graham would've never touched, called it a "consumer products company" and quietly updated the doctrine to fit. Value investors cheered. So which framework are we actually using here.

The word got colonized by fund marketing. You need a label on your ETF. Growth or value. Pick one. And now every conversation inherits that binary even when it doesn't fit.

And it gets worse when you look at something like Tesla. Is that a value stock or a growth stock. Depends who you ask and which year we're talking about. At 200x earnings it was "priced for disruption." At 40x (yeah....I know) it's suddenly "becoming a value play." The multiple changed, the label changed, the underlying business barely did. People just retrofit the framework to whatever they already believe.

Same thing on the growth side. People talk about "growth stocks" like it's one category. It's not. A company growing 40% with a 15x multiple is a completely different animal from one growing 15% at 80x. Both get called growth stocks. One of them is arguably cheap.

My honest take is the split is useful as a rough vibe check and almost useless as an actual decision framework. The best opportunities I've seen don't sit cleanly in either box. They're just mispriced. For whatever reason.

Do people here actually use this as a real filter or is it more just shorthand at this point?

Quelle: Lam Research

Aus der Kategorie: hätte hätte Fahrradkette.

Hab Lam Research Nov 24 bei 70 USD verkauft. Damals dacht ich nach langem hin u her es wär der richtige Move

• Umsatz war mehrere Quartale eher flach

• Zyklik voll spürbar

• Guidance eher solala

• China-Thema + Exportrestriktionen im Raum

Ich dachte: ok, nimm den Gewinn mit, parke Cash, und bin bei Trading Desk rein

Seitdem?

Das Ding läuft einfach straight nach oben, ohne Pause. Jedes mal wenn ich hinseh 20% mehr

Rational war der Sell nicht komplett dumm.

Timing halt maximal unglücklich. Aber ichsollt aufhören immer Aktien anzusehen die ich verkauft hab

Wer hat noch so einen „fundamental richtig, timing falsch“ Move? Rein zur Aufmunterung 🫣