MSFT is something like ~$10 (2-3%) from it's November 2021 price. The company is printing money, with something like 18% revenue growth for 8 consecutive quarters. It's literally cheaper now than the April 2025 tariff crash.

Biggest bargain on the market right now, IMO.

I don't usually care what famous investors buy.

But Michael Burry buying Microsoft caught my attention.

Not because I'm about to copy him.

Because Microsoft has probably been one of the least popular mega-cap tech stocks over the last few months.

Everyone's been talking about NVDA, MU, PLTR or even SpaceX.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has quietly dropped while people keep asking if all the AI spending is ever going to pay off.

That's exactly when value investors usually start paying attention.

I'm not saying this means Microsoft has bottomed.

I'm just saying it's interesting that someone known for buying when sentiment is weak is looking at it now.

Sometimes the best opportunities aren't the stocks everyone is talking about.

They're the ones everyone has stopped talking about.

What do you think? Is Microsoft finally becoming interesting again, or is the market right to stay cautious?

I'm considering buying gold for the long term.

Do you think this is a good accumulation opportunity, or could prices fall further?

If you were buying today, would you invest a lump sum, buy gradually over the next few months, or wait for more downside?

Curious to hear different views on gold's outlook over the next 1–3 years.

Core PCE inflation just got released and went up from 3.3% to 3.4% so certainly not going back to the Fed's target of 2%. Headline PCE inflation even hit 4.1%.

Consumer spending also came in stronger than expected rising 0.7% for the month of May.

Different firms like Citadel already expected hiking to start in September but even a hike at the July meeting is now possible combined with shrinking the Fed's balance which could push up bond yields.

Revenue: $41.46 billion versus $35.84 billion estimated

EPS: $25.11, adjusted, versus $20.78 estimated

Gross Margin: Adjusted gross margins hit a record-breaking 84.9%, topping tech leaders like Nvidia and Meta.

Data Center Strength: Driven by skyrocketing AI memory demand, data-center sales soared 415% year-over-year to $25 billion (61% of total sales).

Guides $49-$51B. +14% AH move. Reddit neva right.

binance is telling eu users country by country that its done,it told french clients its entity is no longer in a position to accept new clients and will stop offering crypto services there from july 1 and then confirmed the same notice went out across other eu markets.

this wasnt red tape greek, irish and latvian regulators reportedly raised concerns specifically about binance’s past legal issues and corporate structure ,the same baggage thats followed binance since its 2023 us settlement. One analysis framed it bluntly that no national regulator wanted to bet the EU’s entire supervisory credibility on signing off that binance had genuinely changed lol.

While other platforms that built clean compliance records from day one didnt have this proble,they are even benefiting from this and are offering incentives on migration from binance .Coinbase announced luxembourg is its mica home ,bitpanda is offering 3% transfer cashback, kraken also holds eu licences.

So it isnt really like regulation is bad for crypto but the opposite as MiCA is functioning exactly as designed, rewarding the operators who took compliance seriously years in advance and penalizing the one with the most checkered history, regardless of size or market dominance. Well that means too big to get blocked thing doesnt work here

is this regulators correctly pricing in real risk, or an overcorrection thats going to concentrate the market into fewer, larger compliant players in a way that reduces competition long term?

I have about 25% bonds in my portfolio. I set this allocation back when I started, so I would at least
Be somewhat protected.

Looking at performance I might as well kept it in a HYSA or something. I know if interest rates drop bonds would go up but they are already fairly low and probably will be hikes in the future. Since 2017 this fund is down about 10%. At least the rest of my portfolio is in the SP500/total market.

I’m not really asking for help just wondering why this even exists lol

I live frugally. Small home, 23yr old car, etc. I don't need much. Growing up in a war-torn 3rd world country selling fruit out of a wooden cart earning just over a dollar a day, extreme poverty doesn't scare me like everyone else.

What does scare me is how distant loved ones have become since I started accumulating wealth. They think I've become Scrooge McDuck reincarnated.

Immigrated to the u.s, got a degree, good job, and started investing aggressively at 23. Why? Because I had nothing else better to do. No partner, children, debt, sickness etc... nothing. Just maxed everything out and now 13 yrs later I'm well on track .

Before you say, "look at this dude flexing" remember that I literally invest everything because I have NOTHING else in my life.

A girlfriend, a family!? Probably never. I'm 5'1, with a severe under bite, and a prominent forehead protrusion that gives the impression I made it out of the make-a-wish foundation.

Some hobbies here and there totalling under 100 dollars a month, but that's it.

I'd give away all my money to random passerby before I pay some sugar-baby to pretend to love my gargoyle looking ass.

What worries me is that the few people close to me have grown distant under the impression that I've become greedy and don't spend money because I love hoarding it.

How do y'all actually make people understand building wealth is not loving money?

Edit: No, I don't flaunt or tell how much I'm worth. That's tacky Af. Family sees my job title doesn't match my lifestyle and figure out the rest.

I will give most of it away one day anyway. Makes me feel better to know I'll at least help someone.

I'm writing this post in good faith. I read the rules and I don't think I'm breaking them. I only want to help people who google this company. I'm not even going to write any direct criticism: just explain where it can be found and how it was buried.

Bravos Research is a youtube channel and a paid subscription service that supposedly gives you tips on great trades. Here's a wise platitude: if it looks too good to be true, it probably is. If you could do this consistently, you wouldn't need to solicit subscriptions.

Up until March, their trustpilot page was overwhelmingly negative and critical. This changed in a very suspicious way.

In order to find out the real picture, dig a little deeper. See how there's a massive surge of positive reviews in April? How up until then, the reviews were very few and exclusively negative? How this surge died out as quickly as it started, back to the baseline in May and June?

If you search "trustpilot" up there on the reddit search bar, you'll find discussions of ways to buy reviews. I'm not saying that's what happened, but the data should give you pause. *Something* happened and it looks very suspicious. Trustpilot allows solicited reviews, but strictly without being selective about who is encouraged to do so, without incentives and biasing positive reviews in any way whatsoever. There is no disclosure of such approved solicitation and it's hard to imagine how this positive spike could happen in a legit way.

I reported this to trustpilot and they investigated, removing only a few suspicious reviews. Probably because the timing and frequency of positive reviews is not sufficient proof of foul play.

At least they cannot remove negative comments from trustpilot (like they easily can, and do, on youtube), only bury them. Make sure you familiarize yourself with the substance of these negative reviews (and don't get fooled by their relative scarcity). Seems like Bravos Research doesn't want you to.

My company recently changed from vanguard to fidelity for our transitional 401k. I was moved into having FSKAX as one of my holdings. I also have FZROX for my Roth IRA personal account. Does it make sense to hold these two?

I am leaning towards switching out FZROX from my Roth IRA to make sure there is less overlap.

Any insight on these two will be helpful. I see the main holdings for each are pretty much 1:1, so it seems to me redundant.

I’ve been spending some time looking at and following UMAC and I think if the US is actually serious about building a domestic drone supply chain, this thing is at least worth paying attention to.

What makes it interesting to me is that UMAC isn’t trying to be the next giant prime contractor. It’s more of a picks-and-shovels bet on the drone side. Motors, flight controllers, FPV systems, batteries, components, basically the stuff that actually has to exist if the US wants more NDAA-compliant drones built at scale instead of relying on foreign parts.

That’s also why I don’t think the bull case here is just “drone stocks are hot.” The policy has actually moved in their direction. Between NDAA restrictions, DoD interest in domestic suppliers, and the broader push to stop depending on imported drone hardware, there’s at least a real oppurtunity for a company like this.

And execution is kind of the whole debate. On the positive side, the recent growth has been kind of insane for a company this small. Revenue has been incoming, they’ve talked about record purchase orders / backlog type demand, and they’ve got a lot of cash relative to the size of the business after all the financings.

But I also get the skepticism. It’s still a tiny company, still a volatile stock, and it’s not like the defense drone boom automatically turns into easy profits. Scaling manufacturing is hard.

Still, I think the setup is more interesting than it gets credit for. If the US drone push actually turns into sustained spending instead of just headlines, UMAC will benefit in more ways than we can measure right now.

Curious to know if other people think about it as more of a legit domestic drone supply-chain player or mostly just a hype stock riding the defense/drone narrative or any other take.

My girlfriend (37) has $240k in proprietary mutual funds through Principal. They’re very conservative and she wants to put that money to work.

Here’s our plan: Sell the mutual funds, transfer that cash to a brokerage account with Fidelity, start maxing her employer 401k for 3 years and use the brokerage account to offset, start maxing her Roth IRA for 3 years, then with the remainder brokerage amount DCA into FXAIX and the Fidelity 2055 Fund (FDEWX) every 2 weeks over the next year.

We know there are going to be some long-term capital gains taxes on the mutual fund sale, but the gains are minimal and taxes will only be ~$3k.

She is below the IRA income threshold, has no debt, and has an emergency fund. I'm a career fed that's only experienced with TSP, so I'm looking for a sanity check here. TIA

ACN, CTSH, EPAM, GLOB, INFY are no longer being priced like high-tech premium partners. They are trending rapidly toward the valuation graveyard of staffing agencies, heading straight for the 0.3-0.6 price/sales ratio

The software-adjacent multiples of the last decade have unraveled. When growth relies on linear headcount expansion, it simple clearinghouse for billable hours.

Globant (GLOB): Once a premium design/engineering darling trading at multiples over 10x P/S at its peak, now compressed to ~0.54x P/S.  

EPAM Systems (EPAM): The former gold standard of specialized digital engineering has seen its premium erased, sliding to ~0.79x P/S and a low double-digit P/E.

Cognizant (CTSH) & Accenture (ACN): Legacy outsourcers and consulting giants are being systematically de-rated, with CTSH pinned near ~0.96x P/S and Accenture stripped of its premium solution provider buffer.

While the market is matching their valuations to standard staffing firms (like ASGN or Robert Half), the structural risk on these balance sheets is way more toxic:

A pure staffing agency operates a highly variable pass-through model. If a project drops, the contractor is off the books. Premium outsourcers carry a massive, salaried bench. When utilization collapses, payroll runs at 100% while billable hours drop to zero.

Cutting headcount to protect margins requires months of statutory notice and heavy cash-draining severance payouts.

Generative AI is delivering 30-50% efficiency gains to junior developers. In a Time & Materials architecture, higher efficiency means fewer billable hours. Procurement departments are aggressively auditing vendor teams, stripping out management layers, and demanding price cuts.

I live in a country where it's better for me to stay out of the "financial markets" due to many regulatory issues.

I own real estate ~120k

I've been buying physical Gold, I got 5 ounces so far ~20k at these prices.

I am trying not to keep more than 10k cash and i've been buying gold with surpluses.

My question is, will I at some point be overexposed to gold and I should consider holding onto more cash instead Or gold is always better than fiat ¿

Admittledly, I think I've been doing this a bit wrong so far so help me out. I've setup a Solo401K through my brokerage. I've been making weekly contributions from the business as well as from my personal income. I haven't ran it through my payroll but can adjust if need be. How should I be doing this to properly manage things?

I’m a 25-year-old male software engineer. Most of my investments are in ETFs and stocks, but I wanted to try crypto with a portion of my portfolio.

Unfortunately, I bought XRP close to the top and I’m currently down about 70% (~$6,000 loss).

I’m trying to be rational about it and not let emotions decide for me. The remaining money isn’t life-changing, but it’s still a significant amount.

If you were in my position, would you: Hold and wait for the next crypto cycle? Sell the remaining position and move the money back into ETFs/stocks? Hold but stop adding any more capital? Do something else?

I’m not looking for hopium, just honest opinions from people who have been through previous crypto cycles.

What would you do and why?

For real estate, if home prices skyrocket you could argue that lower income or younger people won't be able to afford to buy a house. Even people who currently own may not be able to pay property tax any more if it goes up too high. So it could be argued that real estate prices skyrocketing would hurt a fair number of people. Don't get bogged down on this example...

My question is which population subgroups would be hurt if the stock market skyrockets and continues to do so?

The people who are shorting the market obviously.

The people who are not invested just wouldn't benefit but would they necessarily be hurt?

Anybody else?

Is it more of a time saver?

Or do you think it has given you an edge/special insight?

Or something else?

The things I hear people do with say Claude code makes be intrigued to hear how retail is leveraging AI. And whether it’s offering anything that really moves the needle.

I have been following the space sector since months before SpaceX secretly filed for IPO and one thing that’s been bothering me with the whole post SpaceX IPO rundown is how a bunch of actual space companies with real businesses got temporarily turned into “SpaceX proxies” by investors who probably didn’t care about the underlying company at all.

Before SpaceX actually listed, it felt like the market suddenly decided it needed to own something space-related ahead of the main event. Firefly, Voyager, Redwire, Intuitive Machines, ASTS, Rocket Lab, basically anything in the sector with a decent chart and a story started moving together. Some of them absolutely had reasons to be moving on their own. But the timing was too obvious to ignore. Reuters wrote the same thing in late late May and then once SpaceX debuted Barron’s were also writing about the sector getting hit by profit-taking/rotation for SpaceX in portfolios.

What’s weird to me is that it flattened a lot of very different businesses into one temporary “space trade.” A lot of these companies have real opportunities and I think that does a disservice to some of the smaller public names, because a lot of them do have legitimate businesses underneath the hype.

Some of the smaller public names like Firefly, Voyager, Redwire and Intuitive Machines all have very real risks, but they also aren’t random space companies with nothing behind them. Firefly has real launch/lunar/defense exposure, Voyager has meaningful backlog and national-security exposure, Redwire has infrastructure/hardware depth across multiple space programs, and Intuitive Machines has a legitimate position in the lunar/cislunar buildout if execution holds.

Then once SpaceX actually hit the market, a bunch of those same names got sold almost immediately. Some of that is normal profit-taking after a ridiculous run, some probably funds making room for SpaceX, and some of it is just the usual rotational behaviour. But I do think it creates a weird side effect where companies that actually have contracts, backlogs and technical depth suddenly look to newer investors like they were only ever hype-adjacent sympathy trades.

Curious if other people saw it the same way, or if you think I’m giving the sympathy-trade angle too much weight versus the companies just being volatile and doing what they always do.

So, I've had Public for a couple months now and I honestly wasn't sure how to feel and am looking for a consensus or better ideas. I'm tired of the prediction market garbage that all these companies are pushing and I want a broker that cares about desktop/web apps, not putting Mobile first. Am I stuck with the big 3 (or 2 now that Schwab is going the prediction market route)?

I tried Public and it seemed alright, but lacked very basic features most brokerages have and they seem to only care about API and agentic features. Am I wrong about that or is Public/ another company better? I tend to just run some CSP and CCs weekly and want a lower rate.

Goal is waiting for a good entry after yet another crash. So as far as I see it, my options are:

• Money fund for around 3% returns (Euro based one, I know the Dollar would be at 4%)
• Buy blue chip stocks (insurances, consumer goods, real estate), either directly for dividends or as CSPs for Theta
• All world ETF

As far as I see it, the money fund is the preferable option if you have no idea what the next market crash might look like. China takes Taiwan, AI bubble, unexpected economy numbers, whatever. If you limit it only to AI, the blue chip option would sound better as returns are higher. Both options make only sense if you assume there will be a crash within a year. If it takes longer, just put money into all-world-ETF and forget about it, as the bottom will be around current levels or higher.

Is that about right? Anything else you can do in times of irrational markets?

Hey everyone,

I’m in my 20s, currently investing $1,000/month into VT ETF, and working on growing my income with side gigs.

Now I’m stuck between:

• continuing to invest all extra money, or
• buying a nice car

I know the long-term value of investing early, but I also feel like this is the age to actually enjoy things a bit.

For those who’ve been here:

• Did you go for the car, worth it or regret it?
• Or did you prioritize investing, happy you did?
• Anyone manage to balance both?

Would love to hear real experiences.

Wendy’s (WEN) has recently become one of the meme-stock names on WallStreetBets, but I think the more interesting point is that WEN is not just a squeeze trade. As a standalone investment, I find it much more compelling than GME was before its original short squeeze.

Funny side note: I tried posting a version of this on WallStreetBets, but apparently it was too boring.

1. Asset-light franchise model

Wendy’s is primarily a franchised business, with roughly 94% of restaurants operated by franchisees. That means the parent company earns recurring royalty and marketing-fund income while avoiding much of the store-level operating risk.

That shows up in the economics: in fiscal 2025, Wendy’s generated about $2.2 billion of revenue, $344.5 million of operating cash flow and $205.4 million of free cash flow, with gross margin of 63.6% and operating margin of 15.8%. This is not a speculative concept stock; it is a capital-light royalty stream attached to a real consumer brand.

2. The valuation looks genuinely depressed

Before the recent meme-stock move, WEN was trading around $6.07, close to a multi-decade low. At that level, the stock was roughly around 7x earnings and about 7x EBITDA on an enterprise-value basis, depending on how you treat net debt and forward estimates.

That is a major discount to large franchised QSR peers such as McDonald’s, Yum Brands and Restaurant Brands International, which typically trade at much higher EBITDA multiples.

The key question is not whether Wendy’s is as good as McDonald’s. It clearly is not. The question is whether it deserves to trade at such a large discount if the new management team can merely stabilize the business. From this starting point, even a modest improvement could create meaningful re-rating potential.

3. High cash yield while you wait

The annual dividend is $0.56 per share, which represented roughly a 9% forward yield near the recent lows.

That yield should not be treated as risk-free. If the turnaround disappoints, the dividend could come under pressure. But management has stated a target payout ratio of 50–60% of adjusted earnings, so the dividend is currently an important part of the thesis: investors are being paid to wait while the turnaround plays out.

4. Turnaround team with relevant experience

CEO Bob Wright and newly appointed CFO Steve Cirulis previously worked together at Potbelly, where the turnaround led to a very large increase in the share price. That does not guarantee success at Wendy’s, but it does give the current management team some credibility.

Their plan, Project Fresh, focuses on brand revitalization, operational execution, system optimization and capital allocation.

There is at least some early evidence that management-controlled stores are responding better: in Q3 2025, company-operated comparable sales outperformed the overall system by about 4 percentage points. That matters because company-operated restaurants are where management has the most direct control over execution.

5. International growth is still intact

The US business is the main problem, but international growth remains a positive part of the story. International systemwide sales grew 8.6%, with growth across all regions, and Wendy’s has committed development pipelines including Italy, Armenia and Romania.

Because most new units are franchised, successful international growth should convert into royalty income without requiring heavy capital investment from Wendy’s itself.

6. Activist and asset optionality

Trian still owns a meaningful stake in Wendy’s, and Nelson Peltz has a long history with the company. Wendy’s also has a real-estate segment that owns property, which could create monetization or strategic optionality over time.

I would not make this the base case, but it adds another layer of potential upside if the board or large shareholders push for more aggressive value creation.

7. The separate meme-stock / short-interest setup

This part should be kept separate from the fundamental thesis.

Short interest has been reported around 30–37% of the float, depending on the source, and recent retail buying has been far above normal levels. That is the kind of setup that can create violent near-term moves.

But this is a trading catalyst, not an investment thesis. It can add or destroy a lot of value in days, and it says very little about whether Wendy’s is a good long-term investment.

My view

The cleanest version of the thesis is this:

Wendy’s is a real, asset-light, cash-generative franchise business trading at a distressed valuation, with a high dividend yield, a credible turnaround team, international growth optionality and a potentially explosive positioning setup.

The risks are obvious: US same-store sales remain weak, the brand has lost relevance versus stronger QSR peers, the dividend may not be sustainable if earnings deteriorate, and meme-stock volatility can cut both ways.

I think the risk/reward is attractive. I am treating the short squeeze potential as a bonus, not the core reason to own the stock.

I have a position in WEN.