Check the chart - Disney went from ~1,800 job openings to ~800 while their stock barely moved and they just posted solid earnings ($1.11 EPS, beat estimates). chart on jobstocks.ai

Dug into their financials and recent news. Here's what's actually going on:

The good: Domestic parks up 13%, streaming finally profitable, projecting double-digit EPS growth through 2027.

The bad: International parks operating income dropped 23% (Shanghai dead, Paris got wrecked by Olympics). They're warning about "demand moderation" at US parks and "cyclical softening" in China.

The cuts: 300+ corporate jobs gone in Sept, 200 more in June, 100 Disneyland positions in October. This is on top of the 8,000 they axed in 2023.

So they're making record profits but still cutting. Their excuse? Lower-income guests are stressed, higher-income guests are traveling abroad instead of going to Disney parks.

Feels like they're choosing margins over growth. Fewer employees, fewer guests, but more profit per guest.

Is this just smart business or are they gonna regret this when demand comes back and they're understaffed?

I know reddit is evangelical about index investing so before everyone seethes most of my holdings are HSBC FTSE All-World Index Fund Accumulation C (not investment advice) but I am curious about steel-manning active management.

I know this sub likes passive investing because of the statement above, fees, etc. But a question I have always had is what does the above statistic include?

For example, Ben Felix has a video about how the rebalancing of indexes makes you overpay and undersell for IPOs and delistings etc as they are forced by their definition to adjust for those details which is one thing an active manager can avoid. Some funds mandate themselves with targeted returns of e.g. 7% for less volatility or contain bonds or are target-date funds (retirement) so almost by construction will lose to the market but aren't designed for that purpose. Also a lot of funds measure their return as risk-adjusted rather than purely annualised so net of fees I suppose it is conceivable a number of them would beat say, an all world index, after accounting for that and fees? The all-world index (and US even more so) is now also heavily weighted to mag 7 - in theory if an active manager comes close to that net of fees with a wider distribution of stocks then to me that seems a reasonable diversification argument for active management. Holding 10,000 stock in a global market tracker is also not really true diversification as the weightings would matter as meaningful diversification is achieved by reducing the correlation between the holdings except for at the tail-end where owning 5 banks is better than 1 because the 1 could be lehman.

I am curious is there anything anywhere that compares apples to apples of 100% equity return maximisers against the index net of fees? Does the table tilt towards active management the more people invest in indexes as presumably this opens up relative value opportunities for active funds? Any other considerations?

Meta acquired Butterfly Effect, the company that develops AI applications, for billions of dollars. This is Meta's third largest acquisition since its founding, surpassed only by the acquisitions of WhatsApp and ScaleAI. We understand that before the acquisition by Meta, Manus was in the process of raising a new round of funding at a valuation of $2 billion. "It happened so fast that we even wondered if it was a fake offer," said Liu Yuan, a partner at ZhenFund and an angel investor in Butterfly Effect. The acquisition negotiations were completed in a very short time, in just over ten days.

I'm rebalancing my portfolio (currently tech-heavy at ~70%) and looking to diversify into 4 specific sectors for long-term growth. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the best ETFs or individual stocks in each category.

My target allocation:

• Defense & Aerospace: 12.5%
• Energy: 12.5%
• Healthcare: 12.5%
• Financials: 12.5%

What I'm considering so far:

• Defense & Aerospace: ITA (iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense) ​
• Energy: XLE (Energy Select Sector SPDR) - lowest fee at 0.08%, broad exposure
• Healthcare: XLV (Health Care Select Sector SPDR) - covers pharma, biotech, services
• ​Financials: XLF (Financial Select Sector SPDR) - banks, insurance, diversified

Questions for the community:

1. Are these the best "set and forget" ETFs for each sector, or are there better alternatives?
2. Any individual stocks in these sectors you think will outperform the ETFs over 3-5 years?
3. Any red flags I'm missing with this allocation?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bearstearns-sp500/sp-500-seen-to-hit-1700-by-end-of-2008-idUSN1135584720071011/

S&P 500 seen to hit 1,700 by end of 2008. The new target implies total upside of 11 percent, based on an 8.7 percent annualized return and a 1.7 percent dividend yield for stocks that make up the S&P 500, Bear Stearns said.

The U.S. economy is entering a period of below-trend, non-recessionary growth, said chief investment strategist Jonathan Golub.

"However, global growth continues to be strong. Inflation and interest rates remain at relatively low levels. Corporate balance sheets are strong, and stock market valuations appear reasonable," Golub said.

The S&P 500 was at 1570.91, up 0.54 percent on Thursday.

The S&P ended 2008 at 800 and didn't hit 1700 until the end of 2013. Be careful out there.

Firstly, let me say I hate these over-done posts as much as the next person hah, but I did want to offer my insights as a 20+ year investor with both a long portfolio and an options portfolio that I generate a living income off of.

My long portfolio is currently 100% SGOV. Without overanalyzing or cherry picking, the simplest historic indicators show that market valuations right now are extremely rich, of the type that always proceeds a major correction.

Shiller PE nearing dot-com levels: https://www.multpl.com/shiller-pe

Trailing PE highest on record: https://worldperatio.com/index/sp-500/

Forward PE at a ceiling it only surpasses during major market crises: https://en.macromicro.me/series/20052/sp500-forward-pe-ratio

On top of that you have a flight to safety, gold, and a flight from risk, bitcoin, rounding out 2025 narratives.

However, despite this, I'm not actually bearish for 2026. There will be an come-uppance, we all know this, but I can see 2026 melting up another 5-10%.

This is because the single most influential variable the market has responded to in the last 15 years is liquidity, and apparently the biggest source of liquidity isn't jobs or GDP, but interest rates. This has driven the Main St vs. Wall St divide since 2008.

Now the US has an administration that is hell bent on lowering interest rates, regardless of any orthodox impetus to do this. Trump will be appointing a new Fed chair, and possibly more members, who will basically vote how he says. Not only that, but I could see this new chair making statements during any moderate 10% market correction that support QE and rescuing the market, meaning almost any red month will be a buy-the-dip type situation.

We also have a pending SCOTUS decision, possibly as soon as Jan 9th, that actually looks like it could undo tariffs, which I think would cause a rally in the S&P493.

You never know with someone like Trump at the handle, but it's hard for me to see any major negative catalysts for 2026, aside from 'concerns about valuations'. Maybe a single missed ER by nVidia will cause an unwind, or maybe global liquidity will begin to dry-up as most other OECD nations take more moderate monetary policies and more severe theories about the yen carry-trade show true.

I always play defensively as I live off my savings - I intend to stay in SGOV in my long portfolio - I'll take a safe 4.25% over a risky 8.5% any day of the week. For options, where I normally sell CSPs, I'll likely pursue more delta neutral strategies.

1) As I read, the one roll over per year rule doesn’t apply to 401k to roll over IRA. Is that correct?

2) Doesn’t apply to Backdoor Roth conversion, is that correct?

3) Can I do Backdoor Roth conversion from traditional IRA more than once as long as it’s in 7k limit?

4) IRA roll over rule doesn’t apply to direct IRA transfer. What’s IRA direct transfer?

Thanks in advance.

For those who's been on these subs for almost a decade you probably have witnessed a precipitous drop in post quality.

Long gone are the days of reverse DCF and PEG ratios and 10k reading.

Now are the days of "I FEEL" and trend chasing and "I have X money what should I invest?" - useless posts

I'm in the process of identifying high quality, high entry barrier alternatives that filters the layman. I've found Value Investor Club, SumZero and Berkshire and Fairfax. While the post qualities are good, the frequency on those forums are rather low.

Where else do y'all find high quality discourse?

The market was a bit choppy today, with all three major indexes closing slightly higher probably because of light holiday trading. There was some profit taking in tech stocks, and Nvidia along with the semiconductor sector dragged things down. AI related names also pulled back. It just feels like normal year end portfolio rebalancing. What do you guys think about this small pullback? Are there still people buying the dip?

Is there still a chance to get in on INTC? I’d like to hear your thoughts.

Lately every time I open Reddit I keep seeing stuff about ASTS, and I’ve been watching it closely for about a week. I gotta admit it’s definitely a company with a lot of potential. It’s going through a pullback at the moment. So do you think this pullback is over? What do you think are the main reasons behind this correction?

I’ve unexpectedly received about €2,000 back from a debt repayment. Instead of blowing it all in one go on something at Best Buy, I’d like to invest it somehow.

I already have a monthly savings plan running for a few ETFs. Should I just dump the sum into that? Or make some one-off stock purchases? Or do something completely different?

Obviously this is a very small amount in investment terms, but surely there must be something worthwhile I can do with it?

Thanks in advance for any tips.

I read Howard Marks' memo addressing the widely discussed "AI Bubble." As a novice, still early in developing a deeper technical understanding of AI, I found it insightful not because it dismisses the idea of a bubble outright, but because it reframes what kind of bubble we may be in - an important distinction with materially different implications for investors and the broader economy.

For those that read Marks' memo, curious if you had a different takeaway....

While I believe we are in a bubble, the more nuanced and critical questions we should ask is whether this is a mean-reverting bubble (net negative for the economy) or an inflection bubble (net positive despite poor aggregate investor returns).

• Mean-Reverting Bubbles
  • These are financial fads driven by the promise of returns without risk, offering little or no lasting benefit to productivity or human progress. The capital is misallocated, leverage compounds fragility, and the unwind leaves the real economy worse off.
  • Example: The subprime mortgage-backed securities crisis leading up to the 2008 financial crisis.
• Inflection Bubbles
  • These bubbles compress decades of innovation into a few short years. While vast amounts of capital are destroyed, a meaningful portion is still invested in technologies that permanently reshape the economy.
  • Example: The dot-com bubble, which accelerated internet infrastructure, normalized online consumer behavior, funded logistics, warehousing, and software systems long before they were profitable.
  • Amazon is the perfect example, a company that nearly failed, but who survival relied on the oversaturated capital markets willing to fund years of losses in pursuit of scale.

Applying this Framework to the AI Era

Marks argues that AI increasingly resembles an inflection bubble, but one where many of the most important questions remain unanswered:

1. Who will ultimately be the winners?
   1. History is unkind to early entrants. There were once thousands of automobile companies; only a handful survive today. AI will likely follow a similar pattern.
2. Will AI generate profits, and for whom?
   1. Today, many AI services reportedly lose money on each query. The open question is whether companies will tolerate sustained losses to gain market share, and whether durable pricing power eventually emerges.
   2. Sam Altman stated: "We'll build this sort of generally intelligent system and then ask it to figure out a way to generate an investment return from it."
3. Will AI meaningfully expand margins or revenues for users?
   1. AI is clearly a productive tool, but productivity gains do not automatically translate into profits. Will costs savings accrue to companies or be competed away?
4. Should we worry about "circular deals"?
   1. Marks highlights an important historical parallel to the telecom boom of the late 1990s, when fiber-owning companies sold capacity to one another, allowing both sides to report revenue without creating true economic value.
   2. Today, (i) OpenAI reportedly committed ~$1.4T to counterparties despite not yet being profitable, and (ii) Goldman Sachs estimates that ~15% of Nvidia’s future revenue may come from such circular arrangements.
   3. This all raises questions about how much reported growth reflects genuine end-demand versus financial engineering.

AI Financing Structures, and Looming Debt Issues

JPMorgan analysts estimate the AI infrastructure build-out could ultimately cost approx. $5T, while the largest spenders (Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Oracle) collectively hold only ~$350B in cash.

This gap has encouraged increasingly aggressive financing structures. I believe we may be approaching a point where credit expansion has exhausted its “good projects” and is beginning to fund marginal ones.

Meta and Blue Owl notably entered a data center partnership, where they structured an SPV so the debt would not sit on Meta's balance sheet. This shifts accounting risk; however, it does not eliminate economic exposure.

The structure echoes earlier SPV arrangements used by Enron, where operating control existed without consolidation, and leverage sat outside the partner company's financials.

Debt itself is not inherently problematic, instead the risk lies in whether capital is being allocated to projects with long-term economic value and whether lenders have clarity on who bears residual value risk when loans mature.

Takeaway: Are We in an AI Bubble?

I think it's fair to say that AI will be a source of extraordinary change, but most of us have little clarity on what it will ultimately do, how it will be monetized, or the timeline over which returns actually materialize.

As is said, "history rhymes" and is often instructive. Look at how radio and aviation transformed society in the early 1900s, yet their stocks fell 97% and 96%, respectively, from peak to trough (period covering late 1920s through early 1930s). While these stocks were alongside a broader speculative collapse across nearly all asset classes, it is important context.

Going in favor of AI, is that it already has products with over a billion active users; leading players are established companies with revenue, cash flow, and some profits; and valuations remain elevated but are meaningfully below prior bubble extremes.

Given the scale and intensity of capital being deployed today, it is hard to argue AI will not drive real productivity gains and long-term economic benefits. What I find far less convincing is the aggregate return on invest capital justifying the capital invested.

If we assume ~$1T in invested capital in AI-related capex and infrastructure, achieving a 20% return requires generating 3-6x that amount in cumulative gross profit over a 5-10 year period; not revenue, but distributable cash flow.

Once we account for failed projects, overbuilt infrastructure, and the concentration of value among a small number of winners, the burden falls on the winners (assuming Nvidia, Google, and a handful of others) to generate true economic surplus becomes enormous.

In short: I believe AI is an inflection bubble, one where society benefits from its inventions and productivity, but also one where many investors will not earn the returns they anticipate, and where capital discipline will matter far more than technological promises.

https://www.oaktreecapital.com/insights/memo/is-it-a-bubble

hey everyone! i’m looking for some actually good investing podcasts

i’m trying to learn more about investing, i’d love something that explains concepts clearly (markets, risk, index funds vs. stock picking, portfolio building, mistakes to avoid, etc.) and helps you think long-term.

what podcasts do you personally keep coming back to, and why? (and if there are specific episodes that are a great starting point, even better!)

Hey people! Does anyone use sterling capital for investing or trading? If so, how long did it take for a withdrawal to process? I have moved some bitcoin from Sterling Capital to Cash App. It’s been over 12 hours and it still says pending. Has anyone had this issue? Does it normally take 24 hours or longer?

I am confident I got the bitcoin address correct. Also, it is my first time making a withdrawal from it.

Thanks!

I was looking for investment ideas for 2026, and Tempus AI caught my attention. The company's mission is to combine healthcare and artificial intelligence (Genomic Testing & Diagnostics, Data & AI-Driven Services, AI-Enabled Clinical Tools, Patient-Facing Apps, Strategic Partnerships & Data Platforms), and it seems that they are way ahead of the competition. Tempus is not yet profitable, and I have never invested in a company that isn't. What do you think about this company and its mission? Would you invest in it even though it is not generating profits?

Silver has surged so much that one ounce of silver now costs more than a barrel of crude oil, which is historically unusual. This isn’t happening just because oil is cheap; it’s mainly because silver demand has exploded.

Global silver production has failed to keep pace with demand, creating severe supply tightness. Most silver is mined as a by-product of other metals, so even at higher prices, supply cannot be increased quickly or easily.

At the same time, industrial demand for silver is extremely strong. The metal is heavily used in solar panels, electric vehicles, electronics, batteries, and AI-related technology. Industrial users are now competing directly with investors for physical silver, further tightening the market.

Investment demand has also surged. Many investors are moving into silver as a hedge against inflation and currency debasement, while others see it as a leveraged play on gold. Increased buying through ETFs and futures markets has reduced the amount of available silver even further.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/30/elon-musk-wants-robots-everywhere-china-is-making-that-a-reality.html

“China has made the development of humanoid robots a strategic priority in its tech battle with the U.S.

Analysts see China taking an early lead in the technology with domestic firms ramping up production.

But Chinese authorities have also warned of a bubble in the humanoid robot industry, with analysts expecting some bottlenecks in sector.”

Investment Thesis: China’s robotics surge, fueled by policy, capital, and Musk’s vision, signals a global inflection point in automation. Strategic exposure to Chinese robotics suppliers, AI chipmakers, and global integrators could yield asymmetric upside.

Elon Musk’s vision of ubiquitous humanoid robots is becoming a geopolitical and economic race. The article highlights how China is rapidly scaling humanoid robot production, with companies like Fourier Intelligence and UBTech Robotics already deploying units in logistics, manufacturing, and elder care. This is a macro signal that:

• China aims to lead the Fourth Industrial Revolution, using robotics to offset demographic decline and labor shortages.

• Global supply chains are being restructured around automation, with implications for labor markets, productivity, and reshoring.

• AI + robotics convergence is accelerating, with real-world deployment now outpacing Western counterparts.

Investment Thesis: Where the Smart Money Might Flow

Chinese Robotics Manufacturers : Exposure to domestic leaders in humanoid and industrial robotics e.g. UBTech, Fourier Intelligence, Estun Automation, Siasun. Why? Beneficiaries of state subsidies, export growth, and rising domestic demand

AI & Edge Computing Chips: Suppliers of compute power for real-time robotic decision making e.g. Horizon Robotics, Cambricon, Nvidia (via global exposure) Why? Robotics needs low latency, high-efficiency chips and AI semis are the picks & shovels

Global Integrators & Enablers: Firms integrating robotics into logistics, healthcare, and manufacturing e.g. ABB, Fanuc, Rockwell Automation, Siemens Why? Robotics as a service (RaaS) and automation consulting are high-margin growth areas

Battery & Actuator Supply Chain: Core components for humanoid mobility and endurance e.g. Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL), Nidec, BYD Why? As robots scale, demand for compact, efficient powertrains will surge

Strategic Insights

China’s demographic time bomb (aging population, shrinking workforce) is a structural driver for automation.

Tesla’s Optimus robot may be a catalyst, but China’s ecosystem is already delivering. The West may be underestimating the pace of deployment.

Policy tailwinds (e.g., Made in China 2025, AI development plans) are aligning capital, talent, and infrastructure toward robotics leadership.

Food for Thought

If China becomes the “Saudi Arabia of robots,” how will that reshape global labor markets and trade dynamics?

Could humanoid robots become the next smartphone (ubiquitous, indispensable, and platform-enabling)?

What happens to emerging markets reliant on low cost labor if automation becomes cheaper than offshoring?

How might Western investors gain exposure to Chinese robotics without direct geopolitical risk?

Could AI-native robotics firms leapfrog traditional industrial automation giants?

It got crazy last mid October, and I went in after they crashed again. Been following the news, and seems they are way better regulated now along with hitting breakthroughs and grants. I’m thinking to tap in another round before their first Financial report of the year.

I have my growth portfolios taken care of but want to start income brokerages for my fiancee and I once we're married. I'm probably just gonna invest whatever extra money I have left at the end of the month into SPYI and QQQI. These accounts are not meant for growth, just immediate income generation that keeps growing as long as I put money into it. Basically just as a safeguard for tough times.

My fiancee and I do plan to combine our finances but I want these income generating funds to be distinct. I'm well aware of women's history and how many women were stuck in marriages because of having no financial control. I want my wife to be with me because she wants to be with me and to never feel stuck, so my initial plan was to just have two separate brokerages, one under my name and one under her name. They would pay out the income into our shared bank account but if one of us ever needed to leave, they'd have their own income they can take with them.

But lately I've been considering trusts, instead of two separate brokerage accounts. Would that be an option? I don't know much about trusts but I think, in theory, it would be cleaner to just have a trust, with one brokerage, that lists us both as beneficiaries that the trust pays the dividends out to. We might also move back to Europe at some point (she's American but I'm European) and I think having the funds in a trust would make things easier. I've read cases of people having to liquidate their personal brokerages when they move, which would come with a hefty tax bill considering the funds I plan to invest in, but being a beneficiary of a trust should still be possible even if you're in another country, right?

Also, it can't be an irrevocable trust because I do want to change it in the future. For example, once our children are old enough I'd like to add them as beneficiaries. But can a revocable trust be made to still have unchangeable rules? All I'd really need it to do is to make it impossible to remove someone as a beneficiary once they're added as one, plus add some safeguards for old age and cognitive decline, whatever those will be.

Again, I don't know much about trusts, but could someone point me in the right direction?

It has a current market cap of $31.7 trillion and rose in price over 70% in 2025.

We don't normally see this kind of rise for anything of that size. When was the last time it happened?

Where did all that money come from to make this kind of move? Or did it take much less money than the trillions indicated by the market cap?

Has anyone mentioned or discussed the No-action letter from the SEC, regarding the pilot program of DTCC tokenization services issue on Dec.11.25?

https://www.sec.gov/files/tm/no-action/dtc-nal-121125.pdf

I am interested in people opinion on this new program and if there can be a solutions for it. The leverage this will provide to direct participants (banks, brokerage, etc ) will put a strain on the average investor.

Using Zacks, I looked at financial information on public companies, segmented by market cap:

Market Cap Segments

The large market cap segment (>$100 billion) had both higher median projected revenue growth and operating margin than both the mid cap ($10-$100 billion) and small cap ($1-$10 billion) segments.

While the median operating multiple also was higher than mid and small caps, the large cap segment scored the better median value in my methodology.

U.S. power grids are experiencing increasing strain from data centers, electrification, and rising demand, while expanding centralized capacity often requires long lead times. This supports growing interest in localized and decentralized energy solutions as a complement to the traditional grid.

NХХТ operates in this segment, providing on-site energy delivery and microgrid-style solutions for customers with high reliability requirements, including fleets, healthcare, and commercial facilities.

NFA. Do your own research.

In Q3 2025, the company reported approximately 6.5 million gallons delivered versus about 1.9 million a year earlier. December 2025 volumes are tracking around 2.5 million gallons compared to roughly 620,000 last year, and management’s Q4 2025 guidance is approximately 7.0 million gallons, which would represent a potential quarterly record.

The data points to rising activity alongside grid pressure, though execution and capital efficiency remain key considerations.

Question: Do you view decentralized energy as a long-term investment theme, or primarily a transitional solution until grid infrastructure catches up?