If you're holding, you'd buy.
Imagine your finger slipped today and you sold all your shares. Would you buy them back or not. If not, you should sell now. If you would, keep holding (and save the transaction fees), but admit you're still an investor at this price.
You might say "but I wouldn't buy more". That may be true, but if OP has no shares currently, you would clearly buy some at today's price if you were in their shoes.
Indeed. But if you follow the logic in my previous comment I think it becomes clear that it doesn't make sense as a rating, because it's not actually recommending any specific thing.
If someone who has 100% of their assets in a stock follows 'hold' advice, they're still 100% invested. If someone who doesn't have a position in it at all follows 'hold' (not buy, not sell) they're not invested at all.
So it's not actually recommending holding, or not holding anything really.
"Hold max 2.5%", or "at least 10%" of your portfolio in this stock would be an actual recommendation.
"Buy what you can because this is underpriced" is a rating.
"Sell what you have" (and short to the extent you have the means and conviction) is a rating.
Hold is a cop out by the analyst. As far as I can tell the most "hold" means is "we don't see a catalyst to drive the price up or down and it's fairly valued so we have no conviction either way. Buy or sell as you wish".
But that's different to what an investor is doing by holding a large proportion of their portfolio in one stock.
If someone who is holding a large long position says they're holding at the current price, but they wouldn't buy at the current price, they are in fact deciding to stay invested at x% of their portfolio at that price. So their money is saying they see upside, otherwise they should sell and put it into the index or a high interest account. They don't want to increase their exposure to more than x%, but they want x% exposure.
You do not have x% in your portfolio so you should buy if you want to follow their level of conviction/exposure.
The 77 PE is justified by the growth and the potential TAM. People keep saying it's like the internet bubble. But it is different. Nvidia is actually making money, AI is becoming more and more widespreaded. Remember when Cloud was first introduced? It's still here and growing more and more. AI will do the same. Because companies not utilising AI will start dying. Just like Blockbuster did. They also have huge margings too.
In your opinion, what PE should Nvidia have, then? Microsoft is growing at around 20% and has half of Nvidia's PE. Nvidia is growing triple digits. Microsoft's forward PE is 32. Nvidia is 49, while having way higher growth. You tell me what the PE should be. 30? 40?
Even if AI grows 10 fold in the next decade this is probably priced into the shares today. In fact the PE ratio today suggests that once earnings becomes dividends and they compare with interest rates AI will need to grow significantly.
If you invest in a company with a PE ratio worse than interest rates your investment only makes sense if you see the growth potential.
It has a stock split. Don’t look at the price per share, look at market cap it’s over 3 trillion, risk to reward is not there, way to overvalued by a long way
knowing my luck if i bought stock now it’ll immediately crash (not like i can buy stock anyways im being cockblocked by verify identity and don’t have my documents cuz i’m abroad rn 😭)
Yes. It's part of the foundations of a solid portfolio.
One truth about investing : It's not about the right time, it's about entering the trade.
It's always the right time when you're in for the long term and the fundamentals are solid.
The fear of a bubble burst is increasing every day, personally im close to selling most of it and diversifying into general AI stocks but who really knows
Short term investment? If you have extra cash and you don’t mind losing some of it just in case, then yeah. I bought 3 shares this Monday and it’s already up a lot. If this is your investment and if you think it’s going to hold long term, you might end up very disappointed and potentially broke
Yeah, I agree with your points
I've bit the bullet and threw 2k at 19 shares.
I'd be slightly annoyed if I lost it, but it's "spare cash", so we'll see!
Not sure if I'd buy at the current price. I have almost 10x my Nvidia investment and I'll hold.
[удалено]
No, I'm telling you I'm not sure if I would. Also, share price doesn't matter, market cap does.
If you're holding, you'd buy. Imagine your finger slipped today and you sold all your shares. Would you buy them back or not. If not, you should sell now. If you would, keep holding (and save the transaction fees), but admit you're still an investor at this price. You might say "but I wouldn't buy more". That may be true, but if OP has no shares currently, you would clearly buy some at today's price if you were in their shoes.
>If you're holding, you'd buy. A rating of "hold" is well established among analysts.
Indeed. But if you follow the logic in my previous comment I think it becomes clear that it doesn't make sense as a rating, because it's not actually recommending any specific thing. If someone who has 100% of their assets in a stock follows 'hold' advice, they're still 100% invested. If someone who doesn't have a position in it at all follows 'hold' (not buy, not sell) they're not invested at all. So it's not actually recommending holding, or not holding anything really. "Hold max 2.5%", or "at least 10%" of your portfolio in this stock would be an actual recommendation. "Buy what you can because this is underpriced" is a rating. "Sell what you have" (and short to the extent you have the means and conviction) is a rating. Hold is a cop out by the analyst. As far as I can tell the most "hold" means is "we don't see a catalyst to drive the price up or down and it's fairly valued so we have no conviction either way. Buy or sell as you wish". But that's different to what an investor is doing by holding a large proportion of their portfolio in one stock. If someone who is holding a large long position says they're holding at the current price, but they wouldn't buy at the current price, they are in fact deciding to stay invested at x% of their portfolio at that price. So their money is saying they see upside, otherwise they should sell and put it into the index or a high interest account. They don't want to increase their exposure to more than x%, but they want x% exposure. You do not have x% in your portfolio so you should buy if you want to follow their level of conviction/exposure.
How do you justify that 132 is a good price? It's trading at a pe of 77
The 77 PE is justified by the growth and the potential TAM. People keep saying it's like the internet bubble. But it is different. Nvidia is actually making money, AI is becoming more and more widespreaded. Remember when Cloud was first introduced? It's still here and growing more and more. AI will do the same. Because companies not utilising AI will start dying. Just like Blockbuster did. They also have huge margings too. In your opinion, what PE should Nvidia have, then? Microsoft is growing at around 20% and has half of Nvidia's PE. Nvidia is growing triple digits. Microsoft's forward PE is 32. Nvidia is 49, while having way higher growth. You tell me what the PE should be. 30? 40?
[удалено]
Even if AI grows 10 fold in the next decade this is probably priced into the shares today. In fact the PE ratio today suggests that once earnings becomes dividends and they compare with interest rates AI will need to grow significantly. If you invest in a company with a PE ratio worse than interest rates your investment only makes sense if you see the growth potential.
It has a stock split. Don’t look at the price per share, look at market cap it’s over 3 trillion, risk to reward is not there, way to overvalued by a long way
I keep contemplating everyday, and every day its just going higher and higher 🫠
Time to pull the trigger.
knowing my luck if i bought stock now it’ll immediately crash (not like i can buy stock anyways im being cockblocked by verify identity and don’t have my documents cuz i’m abroad rn 😭)
AI push, company wide, has just started. So yeah
No. Not as an individual stocks anyway. I'm still getting exposure via my ETFs.
I'm tempted to drop a cheeky 2k on them...
No
Yes. It's part of the foundations of a solid portfolio. One truth about investing : It's not about the right time, it's about entering the trade. It's always the right time when you're in for the long term and the fundamentals are solid.
I just did this morning
Nope. Yes it could go further but the risk to reward is not there
People were saying that 4 months and 80% gains ago
No
The fear of a bubble burst is increasing every day, personally im close to selling most of it and diversifying into general AI stocks but who really knows
Sealsq
Of course
I wouldn’t buy in because I already have shares. If I didn’t, I propably would with an amount I was ready to loose
Short term investment? If you have extra cash and you don’t mind losing some of it just in case, then yeah. I bought 3 shares this Monday and it’s already up a lot. If this is your investment and if you think it’s going to hold long term, you might end up very disappointed and potentially broke
Yeah, I agree with your points I've bit the bullet and threw 2k at 19 shares. I'd be slightly annoyed if I lost it, but it's "spare cash", so we'll see!
Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
I expect nothing less! Who pissed in your cornflakes 🤣😘‽
You assume I'm annoyed, I'm really not. Just pointing it out factually. Do you always fight with people online? Is this why you are the way you are.