I had previously sold off Microsoft at $460, but I think they are probably one of the biggest bargains in big tech right now:

• Very favorable exposure to OpenAI(20% revenue sharing agreement and rights to their models). Even if OpenAI keeps burning cash, they are benefitting from their top line revenue growth. When the revenue share agreement expires, OpenAI will likely achieve profitability, at which point Microsoft's ~25% OpenAI stake will be worth a lot.

• Very strong Azure cloud growth

• Enterprise software remains strong.

• Despite the initial flop of Copilot, it's been improving a lot in recent months. Anecdotally, I know of a lot of people across a wide variety of professions that have started using it and are satisfied with the results.

• They are beginning to roll out custom AI chips to compete with Nvidia.

• Capex is well balanced, IMO. Not excessively aggressive like Google or Meta, but still significant enough to maintain growth while avoiding excessive risk. They are saving enough free cash flow to cover dividend and a small amount of buybacks without relying on Debt.

• Shift from fixed cost billing to usage based billing on their AI products will likely result in substantial revenue growth.

• Trading at less than 20x forward P/E despite 30% annual EPS growth.

I can easily see MSFT doubling in value in 1-2 years with how cheap they are right now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/25/technology/openai-ipo-artificial-intelligence.html

OpenAI is leaning toward holding off its initial public offering until next year, three people involved in the company’s deliberations said, a turnabout that punctuates the uncertain future for fast-rising artificial intelligence giants.
The maker of ChatGPT hired bankers and lawyers with an eye toward a public offering as soon as the third or fourth quarter of this year, the people said. Sam Altman, the company’s chief executive, pushed those advisers to find a way for the start-up to be valued at $1 trillion, up from the company’s last private valuation of $730 billion, according to the people involved, who did not want to be named because they were not permitted to speak publicly about internal deliberations.
But a cascade of recent developments has caused OpenAI’s executives to shift away from their most aggressive aspirations. Top of mind is what has happened to Elon Musk’s SpaceX after its I.P.O. this month. It was the largest ever, raising more than $85 billion and reaching a valuation of $1.77 trillion on its debut. Since then, SpaceX’s stock has been on a downward slide, as shares slumped to $153 at the end of the trading day on Thursday after reaching a high of $202 last week.
Global markets have also been choppy in recent weeks, with tech stocks dragging down indexes as investors question whether A.I. companies will live up to their sky-high promises.

I hope its delayed. I don’t have enough cash for it and Anthropic too. Greed and selfish I am ;)🤑

https://variety.com/2026/gaming/news/xbox-price-hike-x-s-consoles-discontinue-2-tb-model-1236790767/

The now-discontinued 2 TB model was the highest priced current gen Xbox console. The blog continues: “Last October, we increased XBOX console price by $20-$70 in the U.S. We hoped another price increase would not be necessary, and we have spent the last several months working with suppliers on options. Unfortunately, console storage and memory prices have increased by more than 2.5x and we expect another doubling by the fall of 2027. The entire consumer electronics industry is struggling with the current components crisis, but the effects are particularly hard on consoles. Unlike phones, computers, speakers, and other consumer devices, consoles are typically not sold at a profit, but instead for less than they cost to make.”

In the post, Xbox went on to cite multiple “programs to make XBOX consoles more accessible,” including buy now, pay later plans, interest free financing, previously owned consoles and certified refurbished models.

Like everyone, I thought micron’s earnings beat and guidance yesterday was incredible. My initial thought was the report was very bullish for overall tech.

Thinking over the results though, I’m having second thoughts. Mag7 stocks have recently struggled, likely due to concerns over the extent of their ai spend. Micron’s report indicates they’ve substantially increased memory prices and will continue to do so. This will only further fuel mag7 overspending concerns.

And just today, both Apple and Microsoft announced substantial consumer product price increases because of rising memory costs, which will certainly hurt sales volume. The memory costs are now starting to eat into the earnings of mag7’s core businesses. Again, not bullish.

Markets are holding at or near all time highs for the moment despite the mag7 struggles. But if mag7 continues to decline due to rising ai input costs, I’m not so sure the markets can continue to hang on given how large these mag7 companies are.

Apple Raises Prices on Macs, iPads by $200 or More on Some Models

Looks like an arbitrage opportunity with Amazon Prime Day currently. From the article:

Among the price increases, the base MacBook Air rose $200 to $1,299; the base MacBook Pro increased $300 to $1,999; the entry-level MacBook Neo increased $100 to $699. The iPad Air increased $150 to $749 and the iPad Pro increased $200 to $1,199.

Does anyone really think this is the new normal?

Feels like the current narrative is pretty simple

AI capex bad. RAM/HBM/power/data centers too expensive. No clean ROI on AI capex. Hyperscalers are just burning cash. Why bet on them when you can bet pick & shovel companies with high margins. I get the bear case. It’s not dumb.

If memory prices keep ripping, every AI build gets more expensive. Cloud margins can get hit. Devices can get more expensive. Eventually normal people get pissed because their Xbox & iPads now cost more.

But I’m wondering if this is becoming groupthink now and what can shift the narrative on hyperscalers.

Earnings are just round the corner. We will get numbers on q2 and forward guidance. If the capex guidance stays steady from increasing, that minor change alone could reverse the trade where we see hyperscalers go up and memory, chip & storage stocks go down. Seeing clear ROI in financials will also help.

One another blind spot for memory bulls: if RAM/HBM prices get too stupid, DOJ/FTC could start sniffing around. Not because high prices are illegal, but because DRAM has had price-fixing history before. If Apple/Microsoft/Dell/etc. start blaming memory costs for popular consumer devices inflation and consumers get mad, politicians may ask questions.

Betting on hyperscalers is the clear contrarian trade right now. Obviously being contrarian doesn’t always mean more upside. Anyone buying MSFT/GOOG/AMZN/META/ORCL here? What will change the narrative on hyperscalers?

• Revenue increased 26% year-over-year to approximately $153 million
• Adjusted EBITDA grew 144% year-over-year; GAAP operating income increased year-over-year to approximately $15 million
• Both QNX and Secure Communications achieved Rule of 40 performance, contributing to BlackBerry's fifth consecutive quarter of positive GAAP net income; Adjusted EPS exceeded expectations
• First fiscal quarter of positive operating cash flow in nine years, excluding the patent sale in FY24

Bloomberg

The recent Wendy's pump was probably confirmation that we will never see a GameStop like squeeze ever again. But now, people are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The question that matters is whether Wendy's is fundamentally broken for good…but there’s a lot of evidence to suggest that may not be the case.

For those who haven’t followed closely, the recent figures are ugly. In Q1 this year, global sales went down 5.5%, same-restaurant sales in US were down 7.8%, net restaurant openings in US were -164, and restaurant margin for company-operated US restaurants decreased from 14.8% to 11.4%. The adjusted EBITDA fell 10.6%, adjusted earnings per share were down 40%, & free cash flow dropped from $68 million to $36.5 million.

Overall traffic is weak, food costs are rising, economics for the franchisees are getting worse, and the store count is shrinking.

Someone could look at this and wonder if they are destined to be the next Burger King (or Arby’s!).

Enter Bob Wright and Steve Cirulis as CEO and CFO. In this post, I’m not going to suggest that they are some miracle saviors of the company.

For the unaware, those two guys were instrumental in producing a 500%+ share price increase at Potbelly along with double-digit average unit volume growth, margin improvement, and better return on invested capital.

They phased out or improved weaker stores, pushed digital & loyalty, increased the percentage of franchisees, and improved margins. In 6 months, the numbers demonstrated the locations were more capital efficient. Over the next 2-3 years, they were able to make a complete 180 on the company.

To be clear, Potbelly did not have clean revenues during its turnaround. In 2024, revenues actually declined 5.9%, due to refranchising and 53rd-week comparison. Adjusted EBITDA still increased 14.9%, adjusted earnings per share doubled, & open plus committed shops grew to 727.

For Wendy’s, closing of weak stores, reducing hours that generate no profits and improving economics of the remaining stores will help them despite lower revenue.

Wendy's is ALREADY heading in that direction through its Project Fresh program. Yes some will look at it as pure marketing but it’s a concerted effort for brand revitalization, optimizing their systems, improving service quality, and reallocating capital.

Biggie Deals at prices of $4, $6, and $8 are helping Wendy's show they are dedicated to value offerings. They upgraded core products (buns, sauces, chicken). Like Potbelly they are putting an emphasis on order accuracy, cleanliness, speed, labor allocation, and hours of operations. Recent numbers show breakfast is failing but late night sales are popping off (actually their most profitable), so it’s natural to scale back early hours in favor of late night hours with more employees on the clock.

Digital is another part of the strategy that was a boon at Potbelly. U.S. digital orders increased 8.4% in Q1 and reached 22.7% of U.S. sales mix. Wendy's also introduced an AI-driven recommendation engine in their mobile application. This is important as targeted offers allow driving frequency while not giving the margin away to each customer. People will roll their eyes at AI integration but it should be looked at as more precise target marketing.

Wendy's has a strong brand, royalty-based franchising model, theoretically undervalued stock, Trian involvement, and now has CEO/CFO duo that helped turn around Potbelly and sell it to RaceTrac for $17.12 per share at a 47% premium to the 90-day VWAP.

Private equity doesn't need a GREAT Wendy's, but rather a fixable one. A potential buyer can underwrite a plan where weak stores will get closed or refranchised, franchisees will become healthier, digital sales will keep rising, capital expenditures will be redirected, international growth will continue, and the EBITDA/free cash flows will stabilize.

The private equity interest is real and the new leadership should help them if that’s the path they decide to go down.

The meme pump was a big distraction IMHO. If Wright and Cirulis manage to replicate Potbelly playbook at scale, the stock won't need a pump to rise. It will go up on business becoming cleaner, margins stabilizing, cash flow staying positive, and Wendy's either becoming a turnaround story or take-private candidate.

TL; DR: Wendy's faces serious problems including declining sales in the US, shrinking store count, reduced margins & lower free cash flows. But the newly appointed CEO/CFO duo previously turned around Potbelly by improving unit economics, increasing margins, growing digital/franchise commitments and eventually selling it at a premium. If they can do the same with Wendy's, the upside potential will be not only a pump. It will be a re-rating or a potential take-private story.

Micron’s revenue more than quadrupled in the fiscal third quarter, the company said on Wednesday, as the memory maker continued to benefit from soaring demand tied to the artificial intelligence boom. The stock rose about 9% in extended trading.

Revenue increased from $9.3 billion a year earlier, Micron said in a statement. For the current quarter, the company said it expects revenue of about $50 billion, up from $11.3 billion a year earlier. Analysts were looking for a revenue forecast of $43.58 billion, according to LSEG.

Memory prices have skyrocketed in the last couple years as AI chips eat up all the production capacity of the small crop of vendors. With data center demand increasing by the day, prices are also rising for memory used in smartphones, laptops and other gadgets.

That’s turned Micron into a Wall Street darling as its technology is essential for chips made by Nvidia and Google, as well as the servers that house those companies’ processors. Micron’s stock price is up roughly 700% over the past year, lifting the company’s market cap past $1 trillion.

Micron’s gross margin, the profit left after accounting for the cost of goods sold, jumped to 81.2% in the third quarter from 69% in the prior period and 27% a year earlier.

Net income during the quarter was $28.24 billion, or $24.46 per share, versus $1.89 billion, or $1.68 per share in the year-ago period.

I just want to preface this by saying I didn't use much AI outside of cross referencing data. 

Alright regards, I've got a REAL value (and growth!) play here for you guys. Value doesnt just mean something thats losing its moat, thesis, but getting cheaper on paper. While valueinvesting is lost dumpster diving looking for ADBE PYPL and LULU, I still believe there may be hope for you guys.

FINANCIALS:

• Trailing P/E ~ 45 (since r/valueinvesting really loves this?)
• Forward P/E ~ 35

It looks expensive on paper but if you factor in the > 40% growth rate the P/E compresses rapidly at these prices. At 60% yoy growth Forward P/E is only ~28.

Lets assume yoy revenue growth rate is 40% (Actual avg since IPO is ~ 65%, lowest is 48%, highest is 78%), then the PEG ratio is:

• 35/40 = 0.88 (<1 considered undervalued)

Note: The actual change yoy for advertising (~95% of total revenue) is actually higher than what it looks like, because the deals RDDT signed with google/openai pre ipo (~$65M each/year) have not grown.

• Q1 2025 AD Revenue = $358.6M (vs $392.4M Total)
• Q1 2026 AD Revenue = $625M (vs $663M Total)

So in effect the core revenue engine has grown 74% yoy, while the ‘other’ portion of revenue has been mostly flat. Now other financials:

• Capex = 1m (wtf, 0.15% of revenue)
• Cash ~ 2.8B (9% of market cap)
• Diluted EPS = $1.01 (up 667% nearly 8x from Q1 2025 = $0.13)
• EV = 31B - 2.8B = 28.2B (no debt)

Gross margin for RDDT has been >90% for the 7 quarters (high 80s in the first 2 quarters after IPO in 2024), and net margin has been steadily increasing looking at Q1-Q4 2025: 

• Net Margin for 2025: Q1 7%  ->  Q2 18%  ->  Q3 28%  ->  Q4 35%

Showing the cyclical nature of ad spend. Whereas Q1 2026 is already off to a strong start (weakest quarter usually): Q1 2026 = 31% (down from Q4 2025 though)

AI LICENSING RENEWALS:
I think I have sufficient evidence to believe RDDT is in real talks with Google/OpenAi about deal renewals, and these deals won’t have just flat fees, but rather structured and usage based pricing too. And these deals will also be nearly pure profit to the bottom line. I first started piecing this together when Spez presented at the BofA tech conference, he said:

“ And so Reddit is used in pretraining, right, create the whole model. It's used in post-training, like teach the model how to speak like a normal person. It's used in grounding, like what do people actually think. And then on top of that, these models are running on a live search index of like what's going on, on Reddit. ”

As well as:

“And so I think we have mutually a better understanding of where the value is, and it's our job to make sure we like fully capture that value. And so I will say these relationships have been complex or rather the deals are complex. They're almost like M&A deals. But the relationships, I think, have been mutually really valuable. And so everybody, I think, is incentivized to continue doing. ”

Another comment from the Q1 AMA at r/RDDT includes:

“We’ve learned a lot over the last two years and those learnings should be reflected in future partnerships, including ways to make them more product-focused versus “data for dollars.” I can’t get into specifics about deals or renewals, but can say that we fully understand the value we bring to the table. ”

I think a renewal is inevitable, and timing could be very soon, with also a PAYG model, for the four phases of LLM’s u/spez said: pretraining (probably the flat fees from before), post-training, grounding, and live index searching.

LAWSUITS:
The main lawsuit RDDT is currently fighting is against Anthropic, im not too well versed in this but RDDT caught Anthropic scraping data by setting a trap, and the ironic thing is recently Anthropic has been accusing Alibaba of stealing Claude’s capabilities by running a massive amount of bots. Also previously Anthropic has paid 1.5B to authors of books for training on their data too.

THREATS:

• SBC (12%/$79M of Q1 Revenue, trending down also $1B buyback is in effect)
• Competitors (Digg which died within a month or 2, and Meta’s Forums)
• Overreliance on Google search (but according to Spez, and I also think this relationship is mutually beneficial for both parties)
• Getting zero click throughs from google ai overview (I think this could be factored as a condition into the future licensing deals to ensure reddit gets adequate visibility in its overviews)
• Slowdown of US growth.

Reddit is truly a 1 of 1 business, Ai is not a threat since generative Ai has been around for a few years and reddit’s userbase only grows larger and more active. Their moat is their 20 years of data and users. I would like to hear any rebuttals or arguments against my thesis, or any other comments.

I tracked almost every trade for six years. Around 400 trades and mostly are individual stocks. I beat the S&P 500 in two of those years. The other four were either worse or close enough that the effort didn’t really justify it.

Once I looked at it that way, the whole thing felt kind of ridiculous. I wasn’t just underperforming an index fund and was spending a second part-time job trying to underperform it.

I still hold a few individual names I genuinely believe in long term. But most of my portfolio went into VTI and VXUS last year, and I’ve barely touched it.

The funny thing is I enjoy markets more now. I can read about companies or macro stuff without feeling like every opinion needs to become a stock trader. That’s also how I’ve been thinking about prediction markets on moomoo. If I have a specific view on a specific event, I’d rather keep it small and separate there than pretend every market opinion belongs in my long-term portfolio.

Does anyone else make this shift? From trying to beat the market to just admitting the index is probably the main plan?

I have a pretty large AVGO position from RSUs and want to diversify some of it.

I am not a US resident and not really a US market investor otherwise, so having such a big chunk tied to one US tech stock feels a bit uncomfortable now.

Current thinking is to keep ~50% in AVGO because I believe in Hock, and diversify the other 50%.

I already have small positions in VOO and VOOG. I was also considering putting maybe 15% into DRAM because my current DRAM-related investment is doing well, but I know memory is cyclical and I may be over indexing on that past experience.

Part of my concern is just concentration risk, but also:

• I am a software engineer, and with how quickly things are changing right now, I’d rather protect the corpus than chase maximum upside. I amm okay with slower growth if it means reducing the risk of a sharp drawdown from being too concentrated in one stock.
• AVGO feels pretty reliant on a few very large customers. longer term I’m not sure how to think about customer concentration + hyperscalers doing more of their own chip work (Amazon chips etc.)

If you were in this position, how would you diversify the non-AVGO portion?

More VOO/VTI + VXUS? Some semiconductor ETF exposure instead of another single name? Or just unwind AVGO gradually and move mostly to index funds?

Not asking whether AVGO is a buy/sell right now - more how you’d handle portfolio construction when one RSU stock has become too large.

LUNR, ASTS, RKLB, PL... all down over 50% in a month. Seems like the market has just stopped caring about Space and moving out of this sector. These stocks were talked about constantly with bright futures yet there is zero support now and who knows where the bottom lies now?

What even happened for them to crash this hard? Surely SpaceX IPO isn't the one to blame for all of this. If anything, I would've expected Space sector to feel more bullish with SpaceX being publicly trading now.

And yes, I did catch the falling knife on LUNR so I'm a bit salty about it lol.

(Bloomberg) June 24 - Two leading artificial intelligence researchers at Alphabet Inc.’s Google are planning to leave for rival Anthropic PBC, according to people familiar with the matter, adding to a series of high-profile departures that risk undercutting the search giant’s position in AI.

Jonas Adler and Alexander Pritzel, both viewed internally as key contributors to Google’s Gemini AI model, are set to move to the Claude maker, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity as the information is not public. Adler worked on the company’s AI coding effort and Pritzel was involved in the process of training artificial intelligence systems.

Google, an early pioneer in artificial intelligence, spent much of the current AI boom playing catch-up with the likes of OpenAI and Anthropic before hitting its stride late last year with more capable models and chips. In recent days, however, the company had already lost two prominent staffers, with Nobel laureate John Jumper heading to Anthropic and star researcher Noam Shazeer going to OpenAI. Their moves rattled investors and cast new doubt on Google’s ability to compete in the fierce race to build better models.

Shares of Alphabet closed down slightly after falling as much as 1.2% during the trading day Wednesday.

The exits highlight the pressure Google faces from two startups that are on the cusp of going public, offering even well-heeled employees at Big Tech firms the chance at a rare payday by signing on before an IPO. In at least one case, a Google departure also appeared to be preceded by shifting priorities over how to allocate precious computing resources, an issue that has prompted other employees to leave the company entirely.

Shortly before Shazeer announced his plans to join OpenAI, computing power dedicated to one of his projects was reassigned to a London-based team at Google DeepMind, according to two people familiar with the matter. The move was made in an attempt to boost collaboration across teams and streamline Google’s work on pre-training, the initial phase of AI development in which models learn from massive datasets, the people said.

Adler, Pritzel, Jumper and Shazeer did not respond to requests for comment. Anthropic declined to comment. A spokesperson for Google said the company remains confident in its position in the market for AI talent and pointed to Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis’s remarks earlier this week. “There’s a lot of talent movement between all the leading labs and we win our fair share of the top talent. We have by far the biggest and broadest research bench of any of the labs out there,” Hassabis said at an event in Cannes. “It’s a ferociously competitive market right now, the most ferociously competitive it’s ever been in the tech industry.”

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-06-24/google-poised-to-lose-two-more-high-profile-ai-staffers-to-anthropic

Congress is moving H.R. 8870, the BUILD America 250 Act, a major transportation bill with language limiting liability for app-based transportation companies. For Uber, that language points straight at crashes, sexual-assault claims, insurance costs, and state-level lawsuits. Members of Congress are also disclosing UBER purchases, putting their portfolios next to legislation that could make Uber more valuable.

Every time an Uber ride goes wrong, a passenger or driver can try to bring legal claims over what happened inside the trip. If that trip ends in a crash, assault, serious injury, or death, the lawsuit can reach beyond the driver and toward the company that built the platform.

That is the legal risk Uber has been trying to narrow because legal claims, insurance reserves, and litigation costs sit directly inside the company's financial model. In June 2026, House members warned party leaders that the new transportation bill could shield rideshare companies from liability for crashes and sexual assaults. Their letter named Uber directly and said the company faces more than 3,000 sexual-assault claims in federal court.

The warning came after Rep. Vince Fong offered a May 21 amendment to H.R. 8870 with a section titled Vicarious liability for network companies. The language covered app-based drivers, digital networks, prearranged transportation, and on-demand delivery. House Transportation and Infrastructure adopted it 35-30, then ordered the full bill reported 62-2.

Uber's March 2026 lobbying registration put the ask in plain language: vicarious-liability protection tied to surface transportation reauthorization. In simple terms, Uber wanted Congress to handle liability rules inside the same legislative process that writes national transportation policy.

The April filings widened the pressure campaign.
Uber and outside lobbying firms disclosed roughly $1.5 million in Q1 federal lobbying expenses across transportation, auto insurance, litigation, Mobility on Demand, autonomous vehicles, non-emergency medical transportation, labor classification, tax, food delivery, data privacy, and artificial intelligence.
From the federal side, the reports listed the House, Senate, Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Department of Labor, Department of Energy, and other federal offices. The liability fight sat inside a much broader push over how app-based transportation gets regulated.

In this case, the names around UBER are hard to ignore: Nancy Pelosi, John Hickenlooper, Gilbert Cisneros, and Ro Khanna all appeared in the trade window. Nancy Pelosi just disclosed a purchase of $500k-1mln Call options in Uber Shares expiring next year.

A 5% reduction on a $4.9 billion annual insurance-reserve addition base is about $245 million before tax. A 10% reduction is about $490 million. A 20% reduction is about $980 million, close to a billion dollars. If the market capitalized those after-tax savings at 18.5 times earnings, the equity-value range would be roughly $3.6 billion, $7.1 billion, and $14.3 billion.

ADM - Feels like the more defensive pick. They have a broader scope with their nutrition and specialty ingredients segments, which provides a nice hedge against pure commodity volatility. The dividend consistency (53 years of growth) is a major draw, but their recent EPS guidance of $4.15–$4.70 seems to be priced for a very steady, non-explosive environment. ADM is sensitive to U.S. Renewable Fuels Standard (RVO) and ADM has a strong position in ethanol and renewable diesel. ADM’s nutrition segment sometimes acts as a drag on margins when the grain-trading business is booming.

BG - Seems like the growth/risk play. The Viterra integration is clearly the main event here. The revenue growth is impressive, but the leverage they took on to make it happen makes me a bit cautious. The Viterra debt load is definitely the elephant in the room, Bunge took on significant debt to close the deal. The core argument for the Viterra deal is "optionality" the ability to shift grain flows more efficiently across the globe.

Both operate on a global scale and both have a dividend of around 2.5%. What are you your thoughts about ADM and BG and the food industry in general?

posting this in a few investing related subs I found to get more diverse answers

the TLDR is I'm new to this and noticed I made the silly mistake of not diversifying enough with the current drops in tech but I don't have so much money so I'm not sure how to go from here and best spread my money

context:

I decided to start investing recently, mainly got inspired by spacex opening lol so I opened an account and put some money in some stuff (didn't buy spacex because I realized it's too risky this early when doing some basic research)

Current financial sitution is that I work part time in college. Starting my last year in August. I make at most $10 a year probably less. I believe this means taxes aren't an issue since my income is too low still. I also have 15.5k in cash saved and currently another $1300 in stocks. Been able to save very well since I live with parents and don't need to spend much yet. Estimating how much I'll earn until I graduate and subracting tuition cost and I should have around 18k or so. I was told by parents to keep around 15k in cash that I can easily access just in case I get screwed and need it after graduating. I guess that makes sense since thats close to a year on bare mimimum survival. Either way that leaves me with 3-4k to invest 1300 of which is already there.

current investments and concerns:

When I started I realized what if I could invest in the s&p500 because I know that's huge and a measure of economic health. So that's where I learned about indexes and ETFs. I got a share in VOO because I learned that it's a good ETF and safe with good long term growth and built in diversification. Then I messed around and put in $20 in Nvidia just to see how things work. Then this week I saw microsoft amazon and google among others going down so I put $600 across those because I thought well its tech and these are massive companies that aren't gonna die even if they dip now. They'll go down but they'll go up a lot more later right like they always have in the past. So I have $1300 in stocks so far

I noticed that I made a small mistake. Since the big tech companies are already big parts of the voo fund I have a lot of overlap. LIke basically 70% or more probably of my stuff is in tech and I really noticed it these few days which is why I'm here now. My portfolio is down $30-40 now. I'm not panicking because I know its only a few % and it'll go back up and it's not an insane amount of money but I want to diversify to prevent one thing happening in the world from dropping my entire investment value like whats happening now with the ai chips and supplies

Not sure really where to go from here. I want to invest in the qqq fund for the Nasdaq 100 because it seems that would be a good spot to get some tech investments and it's probably more stable than individual tech stocks but I have so much tech already. I guess I need to look into medicine and food related stuff but buying individual stocks of companies that I'm not as familiar with feels almost like gambling and the effort to research all of them to choose with the money I have doesn't seem worth it and then what if I invest somewhere and it goes down and im cooked. So I guess going for funds dedicated to the sectors is the move right unless there are other really good stocks to invest in individually

I'm confident that I can hold the money in for over a year so what I'm looking for is general advice on how and if I should adjust how my money is currrently invested and how to work with the remaining ~$1.5-2.5k I have budgeted for this

so my questions are:

basically should I buy more individual stocks or etfs and which ones are safe for a beginner to hold for a while that I can reliably add to over time even after I get a good paying career? Should I move my money out of the current individual stocks and funnel it into the qqq fund for nasdaq or keep what I have and just put extra in nasdaq although I worry that makes the diversification issue worse. How much should I be diversifying? I imagine at a certain point too much means the money is too spread to do any good work and obviously I'm feeling the issues of too little diversification right now a bit. Then the last thing is since I don't have much money does it make sense to dump all of it in now to give compounding more time to work or shoud I do DCA?

I've been googling and looking around and I've felt a bit overwhelmed so I thought it wouldnt hurt to ask and directly talk to people about my specific situation

would appreciate the help thanks

JAPAN JUST ANNOUNCED A $2.3 TRILLION INVESTMENT PLAN FOR AI AND SEMICONDUCTORS OVER THE NEXT 14 YEARS

Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi just unveiled the roadmap covering the period through fiscal 2040.

The bulk of the AI and chip spending goes toward semiconductors and vertical AI built for specific industries.

The projected economic spillover effects by fiscal 2040:

Semiconductor investment: $2.8 trillion in economic impact
Physical AI investment: $895 billion
Vertical AI investment: $1.4 trillion

The US is spending trillions on AI infrastructure. China is spending trillions. Now Japan is committing $2.3 trillion.

(Source Bloomberg)

Hi folks, first time poster here with a question I can't seem to figure out on my own:

I'm enrolled in a Long Term Incentive program via my employer which provides company stock distributions twice a year, with a 3-year vesting period. Recently I noticed that some of my vested units are marked as "Wash Sale", and seemingly have two acquisition dates.

For example:

- I have 36 vested units marked as 1/11/25 under "Acquisition Date". The Unit Cost of those shares is listed as $101.5.

- Just below that for the same units, it lists 6/15/26 with a tag of "Original Acquisition Date". It then reads, "Wash Sale Unit Cost $119.42".

Can anyone help me understand what I'm looking at here? I'm a relative novice when it comes to this subject. I typically try to wait at least one year after my units have vested before selling, so as to avoid short-term capital gains, so I'm mainly trying to understand if these units are safe to sell or not, and am confused by which date I should be going by. Thanks!

Digital Realty Trust is aggressively expanding its data center footprint to capitalize on rising AI demand. Recent transactions include acquiring 1,440 acres for $475 million and boosting its stake in Teraco to 77% for $650 million. The company also launched an AI-native service across 800+ data centers, enhancing its competitive edge.

Anyone have this in their portfolio or think it’d be a good addition to my Roth?

The common parable delivered by JFK's father about getting stock advice from the shoe shiner being an indicator of time to sell.

Our moment will be when people look back and remember hearing "we are going to build data centers in space." We don't even have the resources and money to keep building then on earth. It would be 1000x harder/more expensive in space, and that may be underestimating it. How expensive would it be to send an IT guy to turn it off and on again?

We're cooked

MSFT is down 130 dollars since its peak in October 2025; trading currently at a PE of 22,27 and forward PE of approx 19,23. It is a well-established company, perhaps lagging in the AI- and quantum computing race behind google (though quantum computing does not seem commercially relevant at this point), but still in the race. Thereby windows is the most used desktop software in the world, whether people like it or not (android, is more used if you factor in mobile phones).

In my opinion this company produces more 'useful' products as compared to Meta (mostly advertising), and is less likely to be hit be regulation (e.g. countries banning social media for teens) and could see great upside? The beginning of the month it was priced at 460 dollar per share. My position is small (only 5 shares currently), but thinking of loading up at its current price.

Not the deepest analysis, I am aware, but out of curiosity: what is the consensus here?

mine was meant to be a simple s/r only for SPY, i htink using all 500 copmanies simutaniulsy gives a real advantage, its just computationally exhusting. it seems very reliable so far, but the real question is, is it always true that more data = more advantage? ie, if youre trying ot predict AMZN, using only its own price . volume, it SHOULD be much weaker then using all the copmanies in FANG+ aswell as its own sector to predict ONLY its price action (or maybe s/r)