My portfolio (+812%) vs. S&P 500 (+83%). In 4 1/2 years since my portfolio has been public, I've outperformed the S&P 500 by ~10x.
I've been told consistently that it's nearly impossible to beat the S&P 500, yet I've been doing just that for ~25 years! Kind of wild.
What am I buying now? My portfolio is public and 100% free (link in bio). But if you must know, this year, I've been going heavy into $MU (my AI semiconductor bet, trading at a ridiculous forward PE of just 7, or a 70% discount to FPE of the S&P500), $META (my overall "amazing business" that's growing faster than peers with huge AI upside, yet trading at a massive discount) and $RIVN (my "future is EVs + Autonomy" bet, but on a company that has a ridiculously low valuation of just $22 Billion rather than $1.4 Trillion!).
I share my views and what I'm doing publicly, including alerts of when I make trades, but I don't give investment advice. Everything I share is for awareness and helping others learn from my transactions.
If it's helped you in any way, comment and say hi!
This is over a 10-year period. I love that a lot of people are running with the $825 Billion headline number to imply $META will go bankrupt soon!
For context, the company's CURRENT businesses pump out over $100 Billion of profits per year, growing at ~25% annually!
Meta Platforms $META said it has agreed to spend ~$825 Billion in the future on leases and contracts, many of them related to computing power and AI infrastructure - Bloomberg
Yesterday, @dustinalper and I discussed $SPCX earnings in depth...The incredible beat, the datacenter rentals at $50/watt spot pricing, what it means for $NVDA and $MU and much more...What do you think?
@rayfaltinsky It's already about 1/3 of my portfolio! It seems like a great price for what will be a money printing machine for at least the next several years.
@CalcioMaestoso Thatβs an incredibly dumb (and wrong) take. Rather than attacking the person, try to refute what is said. Did you, as a Tesla bull, expect near 0 growth for the past 4 years?
$TSLA revenues for the past 4 years by quarter.
There are literally -0- Tesla Bulls who would have thought this level of stagnation in revenue was possible for each of the last 4 years.
Join @dustinalper and I LIVE at 1pm Pacific / 4pm Eastern for Ep 61 of Buy Hold Rant where we'll talk about $META, $TSLA and $SPCX earnings, $RKLB, $MU and AI in general, plus the new Tesla Roadster demo, and sooo much more + your questions.
https://t.co/EJg833ijT9
Yeah, what Grok said!
Also, I never short stocks. I'm generally rooting for companies to succeed and I hope SpaceX achieves these goals. I just think it's irresponsible to set these expectations with shareholders and imply these goals are relatively conservative, which is what Elon did in the earnings call.
I'm not saying Elon is making up the pricing - $50/watt is the current price based on extremely low availability (maybe low single digit GWs are available). It's not that SpaceX is getting a premium. That's what the current spot price is based on limited availability.
However, next year ~40 GW of data centers will go online and if everyone could get $50/watt for all of that new capacity, that would represent $2 Trillion of new revenue!
So something has to give...either the price per watt will come down, or everyone should sell their DC capacity and rake it in with < 1 year return on investment.
Each of $GOOGL, $AMZN, $MSFT, $META and $SPCX hope to bring 5-10GW of new AI data centers online in 2027. In SpaceX's case, maybe they hope to get to 20GW.
However, only @elonmusk is claiming that his 10-20GW will generate $500 Billion to $1 Trillion of ARR for SpaceX next year.
At this point, what's stopping the rest of the industry from saying "you know what, we can also sell our new capacity at $50/watt" and project MASSIVE revenue increases based on hypotheticals? Everybody should do this.
So what's the reason none of the others are making such claims? Are they dumb?
At those numbers, the rest of the revenue is a rounding error!
The rest of the business is substantially below $100 Billion in 2027, that's assuming EVERYTHING DOUBLES!
SpaceX has become all about datacenter rental at spot pricing of $50/watt per year while they build the data centers for that or less!
At some point, this level of hubris (confidently predicting 2027 $SPCX revenue at $500 Billion to $1 Trillion), becomes indistinguishable from a scam.
Because where will that revenue come from?
Elon is assuming there is infinite demand for data center rentals at $50 per watt per year, even though it costs less than $50 per watt to build a data center. His assumption is that if SpaceX can put up 10-20GW of DCs x $50 per watt, that = $500-$1,000 Billion of revenue.
I think at best, it's irresponsible to set such expectations with your shareholders, and at worst, it's very hard to tell it apart from what a scammer might say.
@j_a_w_s_o_c_k I downsized substantially. You can see every buy and sell by clicking on Rocket lab in my portfolio on savvy trader (link in my bio - itβs free)
I recorded this video making the case for $RKLB in June of 2025, when the stock AND its revenue-run-rate was roughly 1/2 what it is today. Since this video, space has become far more important. Also Rocket Lab has solidified its ambitions into space-based communication (something I argued was a natural next-step for Rocket Lab) with the acquisition of Iridium $IRDM:
I would argue that Elon goes off of his feeling rather than facts. Starship was supposed to take cargo & humans to Mars by 2022 and 2024, a million Robotaxis by 2020, Roadster 2 w/620 mile range by 2020, 1/2 price 4680 batteries with 2x range, 20 million Teslas by 2030, etc. etc.
Remember when he and Gwen promised to do 45-minute earth-to-any-point-on-earth flights regularly using Starship for the price of a first-class ticket? That was supposed to have happened years ago! They even made a video about it.
When someone has such a bad track record on his predictions and timing, it's their job to be persuasive on why they are right this time. Believing everything he says at face-value seems naive.