The Compound and Friends - Meta’s Muse launch, Josh is wrong on Netflix, internals weaken, 10-year bonds at 5%, Buffett steps away

Episode Date: September 22, 2026

Join ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Downtown Josh Brown⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Michael Batnick⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for another episode of What Are Your Thoughts and see what they have to say about: Meta’s massive rally following the launch of Muse and what it could mean for the AI trade and chip stocks. They also break down weak market breadth near all-time highs, debate Netflix’s brutal drawdown and the bull and bear cases for the stock, look at why buy-and-hold is so difficult for individual stocks, make the case for locking in 5% Treasury yields, Warren Buffett’s legacy, ARKK, Snowflake, and much more. This episode is sponsored by DBMF, the world’s largest managed futures ETF. Discover why DBMF’s liquid, uncorrelated, managed futures strategy could be what your Alts allocation is missing at www.dbmf.com/WAYT Please take our 2026 audience survey ⁠HERE⁠. Sign up for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Compound Newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and never miss out! Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://instagram.com/thecompoundnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/thecompoundnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ LinkedIn: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-compound-media/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.tiktok.com/@thecompoundnews⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Investing involves the risk of loss. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be or regarded as personalized investment advice or relied upon for investment decisions. Michael Batnick and Josh Brown are employees of Ritholtz Wealth Management and may maintain positions in the securities discussed in this video. All opinions expressed by them are solely their own opinion and do not reflect the opinion of Ritholtz Wealth Management. The Compound Media, Incorporated, an affiliate of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Ritholtz Wealth Management⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. Any mention of a particular security and related performance data is not a recommendation to buy or sell that security. The information provided on this website (including any information that may be accessed through this website) is not directed at any investor or category of investors and is provided solely as general information. Obviously nothing on this channel should be considered as personalized financial advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any securities. See our disclosures here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://ritholtzwealth.com/podcast-youtube-disclosures/⁠⁠⁠⁠ DBMF Disclosure: The iMGP DBi Managed Futures Strategy ETF’s investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses must be considered carefully before investing. The statutory and summary prospectuses contain this and other important information about the investment company, it may be obtained by visiting ⁠www.imgp.com⁠. The Fund is distributed by ALPS Distributors, Inc. DBMF is the world’s largest managed futures ETF as of July 31, 2026 with $4.16 billion AUM. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Yup. We're back. I haven't done this show with you in, I think it's three weeks, right? Because last week we were in Future Proof. The week before, I was with a back injury. And you had Charcated Matt and Sean. And then, so the week before that, so it's August. Nothing, nothing's happened since then, really?

Nothing at all. Everything has happened. All right. Well, I miss the show. This is like one of the highlights in my week every week. So guys, we're pre-taping. It's Tuesday morning. I am doing a thing at the University of Miami later today, which prevents me from being live.

But those of you in the live chat, thank you for coming for the premiere. And we appreciate seeing you guys do that every week. But we're live. How are you feeling? Like, we're live. Yeah, like you and I are live together. Literally, we're doing it. Feel great.

Well, actually, I don't feel great. I did not like seeing Jackie's knee go sideways last night. That sucked. But it sounds like we avoided catastrophe. And you know what? Who cares? The Knicks are champions. I'm still running high.

I don't care. I was going to say I'm already pivoting to basketball. Yeah. It's okay. I sent my Giants friends a text last night. I might not be watching for the next two or three weeks, so don't even bother. Yeah, James was a tough watch. Yeah, I don't think I can watch that again.

All right. This is what are your thoughts? for those of you tuning in for the first time, this is America's favorite investing and markets live stream. We try to get to the biggest stories or the ones that we feel we have the most interesting take on. We cover stocks, bonds, the economy, venture capital, technology, anything that touches the investment portfolio, we're going to chime in on.

That's what we do. We appreciate all of you guys for listening, wherever you are and watching. We have a sponsor for the show. Michael, tell us who's sponsoring. What are your thoughts today? This podcast is brought to you by DBMF, the world's largest managed futures ETF. Feel like the world's changing fast?

Imagine a strategy built to move when everyone else is standing still. Going long or short across global markets as the trend shift, DBMF is made to move differently, a single low-cost ETF offering genuine diversification, even when stocks and bonds move together. Discover why DBMF's liquid,

uncorrelated managed future strategy could be what your alt's allocation is missing at www. dbmf.com slash Wayy. DBMF may move differently. The IMGP DBI managed future strategy ETF's investment objectives, risk, charges, and expenses must be considered carefully before investing. The statutory and summary perspectives contained this and other important information about

this investment company. It may be obtained by visiting www.imgp.com. The fund is distributed by Alps Distributors Inc. DBMF is the world's largest managed futures ETF as of July 31st, 2026, with $4.16 billion in assets under management. What kind of animal is that? That's a sloth. That's a sloth.

Okay. You know, I was a big. It moves different. I was a big animal child. I enjoyed spending time in the library as a six-year-old. Couldn't get enough books about animals. You were big on animals? Yes.

All right. Well, let me show you this, Will the Beast. Meta finally launched something that people want in the AI arena and it has literally ignited an incredible rally for lots and lots of tech stocks. And I don't know, man. I think this is pretty cool. And there are some big takeaways here. I'm going to share mine and I want to hear yours.

But let's just set this up for people. On September 8th, which I think was a Friday, meta launched Muse and immediately incorporated it into WhatsApp, put it all over, you know, Instagram and all over Facebook and got it in front a lot of people. They're advertising it on NFL games, which is not cheap. Like they're going all in on this thing. And I think it could be the most important company event since they came out with Reels where they said, nope, TikTok is not going to win.

We're going to win. Here's our product. So the stock was $578 a share to open up September. It's now like $7.40, $7.50. So that is $163 per share in all three weeks. It's up 28% month to date. This is basically meta-adding between $400 and $450 billion in market cap in three weeks. This is the single biggest or the biggest single month value creation in the company.

company's history. And just to put that number in perspective, adding $450 billion is like adding a Costco, which is 430. Procter & Gamble, $400 billion. J&J 400, Home Depot, Netflix, 375, 380. So this is an enormous swing in the fortunes of meta. I want to show you how fast the story has changed. Put up this 18-month chart. So basically ever since this time last year, when the share price peaked, it's been a series of lower lows and lower highs. Meta had been locked in this substantial downtrend. And it got caught up in this, you know, are they spending too much in cap X? There's no ROI.

Is this the Metaverse part two? And I'm not mocking those comments because they were well-founded. But the bigger take, oh, here's meta versus Mag 7. Look how fast this changed. I think it was, I think with Tesla, they were the two worst Mag 7 stocks this summer. And now it's outperforming. And that happened like almost overnight. So before we even get into what Muse is, what are your thoughts on like what investors can take away from the rapidity with which this entire story has changed?

To me, the biggest takeaway for a one point. $1.4 trillion stock knocking on the door of $2 trillion in a three-week period shows how wide the range of outcomes for this entire AI trade buildout. Because we were discussing this over the summer. The stock is a piece of shit. Technically, it looks completely busted. It's in no man's land. After the conference call, they're not making anybody feel any better about the direction of the company. It just seems like a lot of spend.

And it seems like the declining PE is warranted. So you had the setup of really investors throwing the towel. I think meta was trading at 16 or 17 times forward earnings, which sounds insane. But guess what? I had that pitch. So did everybody. And I didn't want it at 16 times earnings because the fears, to your point, seemed completely reasonable.

And I wasn't, I wasn't enticed by evaluation because of the overhang. And here we have this game changing potentially app to hit the app store. And I think it's been number one since it popped on in the top five. And it looks like a game changer. And I don't know how many tens of billions of dollars of new potential revenue this is, but nobody does. And that's where the stock re-rates like that. Well, that's a really key point.

I don't know what earnings estimates you're doing in the wake of this. I know some analysts are taking their numbers up because they know how good meta is at monetizing products. Like that might be the thing that it is the best. in the world at. It's not just that they launch products. It's that they're really good at making money. And so I'm seeing some earnings estimates go up, but the multiples are going up. I saw one analyst this week go from 20 to 25 times earnings in his forecast. And that may not sound like a lot, but we're basically saying this one product is a 20% bump on the multiple of earnings that

people are willing to pay. And, you know, some of that is narrative, but some of that is like, oh, here's a new leg to the business that nobody even thought was coming or nobody was bullish on. And now all of a sudden, everything has to change. That, to me, that's a big takeaway. The other one for me is when, when are we, all of us, the colloquial we, when are we going to stop betting against Mark Zuckerberg? Like, what? Do we ever learn our lesson? How many times has the consensus said well he's really done it this time now he's in trouble how many like how many can you think of offhand the metaverse pivot being like the most obvious gigantic example but i remember when the company was coming public yeah they have no mobile app yeah it's a it's a

desktop uh it's a desktop website in a mobile world they're totally fucked they can't reinvent blah blah blah blah blah. Oh, now they're paying a billion dollars for Instagram. I love this. I love, when are we going to stop betting against this? Never, never. I love the narrative because you're right, Zuckerberg has outperformed literally every step of the way from the time he met Peter Teal until today. But we are never going to stop betting against him because no company, no company gets the benefit of the doubt because the stock market is a cold place. And it doesn't matter what you've done. It matters what you're doing and what investors expect you to do. And I sort of reject the premise of what we're going to stop betting against them because

six months ago, they were in a shitty place. And had we known that news was coming out, then we would have been excited, but we didn't because we couldn't have. And they looked like they were going left. Now they're going right and everybody's back in the boat. And I love it. This is what makes the stock market so much fun. Another key takeaway for me is, uh, I would not be psyched to be an investor in instinct, which raised $350 million at a $2.5 billion valuation. Now, that's a private company that's obviously not our game. But this shit is hard. It's changing really fast.

So the check that was just written back in August for that company, those investors must be sweating. No? Yeah. And Open AI has a personal assistant that's going to drop in the fourth quarter. And that'll instantly have a billion people testing it out. And I feel like this particular product has no moat. because the switching costs are zero.

It's all plugged into your tech. Oh, it knows me. Who cares? It knows your Gmail. That's very easy. That's a commodity. Yeah. And this is a competitor with extremely deep pockets that is not afraid to keep

investing until they have the best product on the market. And not afraid to spend on marketing and advertising off their own platform. Like watching Facebook buy ads during a Monday night football game tells you how important this launch is to them. This is not them just dropping banner ads inside of Facebook and hoping for the best. Like they're spending big money to tell this story. Another very interesting development is that Amazon cut off Muse. Well, it's bundled with Spotify. So they have a Spotify partnership and I don't know, maybe there was talk of an Amazon partnership and it couldn't come to terms. I don't I don't really know the political side of it, but something tells me, like,

people might look at that as a negative, and then all of a sudden they'll make a deal with Amazon and the stock could go up another 10%. But just another takeaway from this announcement is there are going to be knife fights everywhere. Oh, yeah. Because it's because it's the land grab. Yeah. So when when you say land grab, people sometimes don't even know what that means or or there's a great Tom Cruise Nicole Kidman movie called Far and Away. Saw it in theaters. So they're both Irish immigrants. Wasn't he a boxer?

He was boxing? He was like a bare knuckle, like, you know what they used to do it. Put up your dukes. Put up your dukes. Anyway, they take part in a land grab at the, sorry to ruin the movie. The climax in the movie is they're leaving Boston and they're going, they're going west like a lot of the Scots, Irish immigrants did.

Bro, how many times have you seen this movie? Not a lot. But they have a stake and they're going to put a steak in the ground that's literally stake your claim. Like it's a race. They have to get as far away as possible from everyone else and jam a stake in the ground to call, like, this is our future farm or ranch or whatever it is. Like that's the stage that we're at now. Someone is going to own this personal, agentic AI assistant. And Mark wants to win.

he ain't going to win the LLM wars, right? He's not going to necessarily lose if this works, but like he's not going to do the chat GPT war. This is something else. This is something that you talk to and it carries out tasks for you. And it's sick. Not just to ask questions.

It's sick. Have you tried it? So I haven't used it yet. I haven't used it yet, but I'm seeing the use cases. And I've been using instinct. So I get it. It's the same thing.

And it is incredibly powerful. All right. Muse became the number one free app on the Apple iOS App Store and the Google Play Store as of yesterday. It is available for people 18 years and older. So it doesn't like forget all the games downloads.

For adults, it's number one. It was downloaded 902,000 times in the first six days. How many times? 902,000 times in the first six days. All right, that's going to be like 10 million by next week. Well, I'm saying like it's an instant. Hit. Meta launched the Meta AI app and only did 773 downloads for that.

And the capabilities were not the same as this. It was very different. Here's Evercore ISI. Meta has a hit on its hands with Muse. It amounts to a very tangible sign of successful product innovation is evidence that Meta's $200 billion in AI investments have not been in vain. This is Mahaney and his team. the user trends suggest, quote, a potentially very dramatic new driver of usage and engagement for meta that could bring, quote, substantial new monetization opportunities, advertising, subscriptions, transaction revenue share. Yeah, it's a really big deal.

Now, this is important. As quickly as the narrative became this, it could fade. I don't think it will. I wouldn't bet that it will. but we have seen this before also where an app takes you know catches fire and then everyone's over it really quickly we've seen this a lot right um it did ignite a very interesting rally in CPU stocks did you did you see any of this stuff i did give me my chart so i don't know what's the connection i'll explain in a second the blue line is advanced microdevices amd which just went absolutely

wild. We'll talk about more in a second. Purple is arm holdings, green is Qualcomm, and orange is, you can't really see the magnitude of rally, but Intel was up 15% I think yesterday. Yeah, it was a big, it was a big deal. It doesn't look like a big deal on the scale of this chart, but it was. Here's what's going on. Mews has a very unusual technical architecture that reshuffles the way people are thinking about the AI chip trade. Most AI apps obviously lean heavily on GPUs, which is what VDivDia is dominant in. Muse is keeping a secure virtual machine

for every user. And that machine is handling browser sessions, what's called tool calls, where you prompt something and it has to call on a specific tool, sandboxing, all types of things that CPUs carry out in an AI workload. I think what's notable is that I mentioned arm holdings and Qualcomm,

neither of which are making traditional CPUs, but they are very heavily betting on and invested in inference on device, which means they make specific chips for cell phones, for mobile phones, where people can do that inference work directly on the device rather than routing it to the AI data center. So that's why those stocks, Qualcomm went up 9%. Arm holdings went up 17%. So those are like patent stories, chip stories.

But it's the same idea is that this is agentic workflow that is going around the GPU layer and carrying out these agentic tasks without what, we typically see. Let me put up this AMD chart real quick. Did you know, Michael? AMD has now joined the trillion dollar market cap club. I sure did not. Wow. Unbelievable. And is almost twice the size of Intel, which is 615 billion. Wow. So AMD is just above a trillion. What are your thoughts? Uh, I have no more thoughts. Chart off. You just ate, you just ate the whole bone. You just ate the entire rib and then threw me the bone. You ate it all.

You ate all the meat. I have nothing else to add. You did great. Very tasty. Do you think this meta rally, given how powerful it's been, has legs into year end? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I do. I do. I do. Why? Yeah. This is a monster breakout. This is a game changer.

This has legs. New Hyster are coming. Isn't this the type of stock where people are going to be like, I can't believe I didn't buy it when they put out. Muse. Yeah, totally. Has it gone up? I already feel like, dude, I already feel like an assol. Yeah. Can you buy it here? Well, that's how you know what's going higher. Because it's so hard. Yeah. I, I think we'll get a consolidation period, but I don't think it's over. Yeah, reasonable. It's too big. It's too big of a deal. No, think about what that, that chart

I showed you with the lower highs. The whole thing was like, there's no R-O-I. Meanwhile, there was, in the form of Reels monetization, which is AI, there was some monetization, but now it's like no one's saying that. There was 50 billion of monetization, but nobody was talking about. How about this?

The stock is $750. It'll be at $1,000 next year, and I won't own it. Assholes like me were yelling at them to start renting out their compute. Right. Like, give us the revenue now. Right.

They might not need to do that anymore. I'm pretty sure that in the last two months I bought and sold it. I'm like almost positive. I don't even remember, but I'm almost positive that I did. All right. Well, congratulations.

Thank you. I get an honorary idiot trophy. Okay. Let's talk about, let's talk about this. Bretton the stock market stinks. So the index itself is right near an all-time high after the pretty nice rally we've seen in the last couple of days. By the way, shout to Tom Lee. Am I right?

Say more. Tom Lee said the bull market was going to start tomorrow at 215. So he was a day early. but because the it started the next day it started the next day at 2.15. But so for people watching this without the context, he's not,

he doesn't think he's clairvoyant. 215 the next day he said that was the Fed meeting. But, all right, so we're getting that. We got the rally, but there's not a lot of stocks participating in the rally, which is nothing really new.

We've had this conversation countless times over the last decade. decade. And I think generally speaking, we've stayed mostly positive saying that when the stock market is near an all-time high and you got the washout under the surface that has in a bull market that's bullish because you already got what I call a bullish washout and then the stocks catch up to the stock market. That is what has traditionally happened. Doesn't mean it will always happen. But it is also a fact right now that breath does stink. So Jason Gepford tweeted, we've never in almost 100 years seen breadth this bad. The S&P is not going on new highs,

but there are many more stocks at lows than highs. So he said the only remotely similar setups were 1973, 1999. He's not doing that to be scary. That is just what the data, that's just what it shows. But what you'll notice in that chart, actually, let's go to the next one. So Ryan said, Ryan Dietrich said, as nearly everyone has noted, breadth has been weak the past month or so, but Scott charts noted one positive is that breadth,

and you could see this right here, breath peaked with price this time, Remember, at major peaks, you see breadth peak well before price. And I'll give you Exhibit A for this. Chart off, please. And John, let me just talk to this. I don't need this table. So in 1990, so right now, Josh, the stock market is up 14% year to date. And I asked Charcot, there's a lot of stocks that are getting the shit kicked out of them.

What percentage of the stock market is down 30% or more year to date, okay? And it's 4%. So S&P up 14%. 4% of the market is down 30% or more. That's way less than I would have thought. Honestly, I thought it was... I was going to say, I would have said 10%. Yeah, me too.

I thought it was way more. I was surprised. Okay, this is what a bearish divergence wipeout looks like. For example, in 1998, the S&P 500 was up 29%. And 10% of the index was down 30% and more in 98. And then in 99, the market was up 21%. and 14, 14% of the market was down 30% or more. That is clearly not even remotely what is happening today.

Yeah, it's not big enough. It's not that 4% versus 14%. It's a different planet. Different planet. The 14% of stocks that were making lows as in 1999, the market was ripping, I can tell you exactly what they were. It was literally retailers. And retailers were a really big part of the S&P 500 back then.

Like, you can't even imagine how many of them there were. Sears was a Dow stock, Blue Chip. Oh, wow. We had companies like... What was the ticker for Sears? Do you remember? It was S and then it became S-H-L-D when it became Sears Holdings. Oh, I remember that one.

Yeah. By the way, my least favorite cybersecurity stock is Sentinel One. and I wrote it up for CNBC this week with Sean and one of my main reasons for refusing to get involved with the stock even though it's breaking out. Ticker? It took Sears' old ticker symbol. You don't do that.

You don't take the Sears ticker symbol. What are you fucking high? Like literally the worst judgment imaginable. It's a bad omen. Bad judgment. Now people might say, G, B, you're living in the past, man. Doesn't matter.

Yes, it does. This karma attached to tickers. Ticker symbols are magic. They're like ancient. Roons. They're like hieroglyphs. Don't fuck around with that. Anyway, where was I?

Oh, in 99, all of these retailers were the reason for that stat that you're pointing out. And it was very similar to this summer when we had the Sasspocalypse. There was this whole trade of long, the NASDAQ short the retailers. Yeah. And there was no XRT ETF back then. So you literally had to pick tickers. And people were picking linens and things, which is gone.

Radio Shack, which is gone. Oh, borders. Was that publicly traded? Probably. Totally. BGP. Pure 1 imports. There were a ton of retail stocks in the S&P and in the market.

There was a company called Sam Goody, which sold CDs and guitars. Okay. Guitar Center was a stock. We were shorting, like we. Radio Shack. Was riding those stocks down. The other thing that was going on is, there was a massive wave of bankruptcy for steel stocks,

and those were also very important stocks in the market in the 90s. By 99, they were all almost zero, but those were contributing to that drag down effect. In this case that you're citing, having 4% of stocks getting killed while the market is up double digits, like I'll take that all day. That happened the last three years. It's nothing.

Literally, in 23 and 24 and 25, it was 2.4 and 5 while the market was ripping. So it's nothing new. Throw up this chart of cap weight versus equal weight. This is a hell of a rip that we got in the mega caps or the cap weight relative to the equal weight. Look at this rip, Josh, over the past couple of weeks. This is Apple, Nvidia and meta all at the same time getting their shit together. Because Amazon's been flat for four years and Alphabet has been hanging near highs for a long time. what had to happen to generate this this contra move to the broadening you had to get

Apple and Nvidia back in gear and both of them are within pennies of record highs and obviously this meta thing came out of nowhere think about the market cap of those three stocks combined yeah is it 10 trillion uh is 12 trillion so whatever yeah it's a lot five four and two that's a lot That's it. That's the whole story right there. So to very oversimplify, I was just talking about this with Ben, to very oversimplify the AI trade. Name one stock. What's the AI trade? Like what stock personifies the AI trade? Yes. Don't overthink it.

Invidia. Correct. So invidia is the sum of everything AI, right? It is trading at 16 times forward earnings. Yeah. Is that nuts? I've never looked at that chart in a while. 16.

It is training at a discount to the market because there is so much disbelief of the sustainability of the earnings. Do you know the whole semiconductor sector is now at like a 10 or 20% discount for the S&P? That phenomenon you're pointing out is happening at Broadcom.

There is so much, I think this is so great. There is so much disbelief that even if they're right, even if the earnings are not sustainable, I really feel like that's mostly in the price. price. 16 times forward earnings. Not all of it. Not saying Nvidia can't fall 30%. Yeah, but imagine if these companies are still printing record quarters a year from now. Exactly. And guiding towards your record quarters. Imagine that.

We'll be trading at 16 times earnings then. All right, let's talk about the stock that you and I both own that cannot get out of its own way. I'm going to tell you right now, this is my worst call of the year. What do you think? I don't, yeah, mine too. I mean, well, I've made worse calls, unfortunately. We went to get into that. It's bad. I have not made a lot of bad calls this year. I mean, I always make a few every year because I'm fucking human and I don't think it's the end of the world to be wrong on things.

That's not the game that I play. But I've been double wrong on this. Like, I'm wrong a lot, but I use stops. I did the opposite here. I was like averaging down the whole way. And I just, I just refuse to see reality. We're talking, guys are talking about. So I've been wrong in every venue I've talked about.

the stock. I've been wrong writing about it. I've been wrong on TV about it. I've been wrong on this show about it. And I want to show you the three-year chart. So this stock was ripping. Like in 24, this was a hot name and the first half of 25. And then I'm not a thousand percent sure why it all of a sudden fell apart other than the company waded into this Warner Brothers, Michigan. That's the entire reason. Because look, look around and fell off the cliff. What a horrible decision that was. I never liked that. I never liked the idea. I don't understand. I didn't understand it at the time. But I also were, was sort of like open to the idea that you know what? It's a $400 billion company. They could do whatever they want now. I was like sort of open to that

idea. The bears were like, if they think they need to absorb. Warner Brothers and its labor issues and its debt. $30 billion in debt Netflix thinks it needs to absorb. Why? And that was the right take and it wasn't my take and I was wrong. I want to show you, show me on this chart. I know where I should have sold. I had two chances.

And not at the high. Tell me where you think I should have sold. Before I do that, I will just say, credit to me, I bought this thing after it got killed. So I did buy near the lows in February, I believe, and I sold it on the rip. But then stupidly, when it filled the gap in sometime in May, that's when I bought it again. Because I thought I was going to catch the gap, fill. I tried to get too cute. So I'm now down 19% of the stock.

All right, back to the chart. Where should I have sold? I bought it. My first purchase was at 100, not pictured on this chart. I bought it in the summer of 25. I did not pay the high. The high, I think, was 130 something. So I paid like 100.

Okay. So I think here's the right answer. You can't see where my mouse is, but I'm hovering over May 2026. So when I bought it, when it filled the gap, right? You see May 26? Uh-huh. So it filled the gap, went sideways, and then broke down. Probably that's where I should have sold and where you should have sold.

So right around, that looks like, I don't know, 80, $80 or so. So I'm between May and July 2026. I'm going to tell you that's not where I think I should have sold. And not because the price is higher, but I obviously should have sold shortly after the death cross. So for those of you who are not familiar with a death cross, it's very simply when you have a 50-day moving average cross below the 200-day moving average.

Basically, it's not science. It's like a shorthand for the negative momentum in the near term is now overwhelmed the longer term trend. And the sellers are in control of the stock. So it's not an automatic silver bullet, always right kind of thing. But it is a signpost that tells you the psychology in a stock has meaningfully changed. It may or may not coincide with the fundamental change. In the case of Netflix, there really was no fundamental change at that point. but it was a sign that people were losing enthusiasm for this.

So where did that happen? That looks like the first week of December. Bucktown. Yeah. And you know what? It did not, like in this particular case, it did nothing but fall. It looks like it fell every single day. I know it didn't.

It looks like it fell every single day from December to March. Isn't that what it looks like to you? So I agree with you. When I was looking at the trot, I was looking at the right hand side, I was saying when I should have sold. I didn't realize that you owned it all the way back then. You should have sold. You dumb it. I added.

I fucking added to it. But, okay, but fast forward to today. I, like, I'm afraid to sell. I'm not telling it. I feel this. Seriously, I think we missed the window. Now, it is true that it's never too late to sell. I generally buy that Adam, but the old bald man knows when to break the rules.

All right. I already, well, I already. broke my rule because I'm stuck in it. But here's the good news. Well, I added to it on that gap down. My, my average price is 81. It's a $73 stock.

That's not bad. You're better than I am. The stock was at 80 two days ago. The thing is, I'm really stubborn. And I don't just want to come out of this thing unscathed. I actually, after all this time, you know the way I am. It owes me. I'm violating every, I'm violating every stock market rule on the books and off the books.

I insist on making money here. I actually think I'm going to because of the live events, the NFL, and they're increasing penetration into things that bring in a lot of new users who then don't churn out. And I want to share with you the bear case and the bull case, according to Wall Street.

There's a guy at Wells Fargo that has the low street target. He's at 50... I think it's either... There's two guys. One guy at it... HSBC just cut his price target to 76 um today this guy at Wells Fargo cut his price target on September 18th to $57. He is the low he is implying more than 25% downside from here. Here's here's why compressed valuation multiple he's going from 21 times forward to 15 where he thinks it should trade. He cut his earnings for 20.

He cut his earnings for 2028. He's saying viewing averaged 1.6 hours per subscriber per day in the first half. That's down 8% from 2023 levels adjusted for password sharing and geographic mix. He's saying hours for Netflix's top 100 original titles, which is what they live and die on, by the way, fell during the period. Their share of US TV watching is now below 8%. And his problem with the story is Netflix has lacked big original series and it's showing engagement trends look worrying to us. So his point, which is different than the other bear, I'll talk about in a second, is that Netflix, they're spending $20 billion this year on content. We need the next, it's crazy, right?

We need the next stranger things. We need the next reason that people are talking about Netflix with their friends and subscribing. They need a Bridgeton. They need an Ozark, something that is unique to Netflix that gets people in the real world when they click the TV off talking about it. Paramount has those shows. Everybody I know is talking about Lioness. So good. Landman.

Paramount has that shit right now. What Netflix show is anyone talking about? Honestly, is there another Narcos? Is there anything? So what's the bull case? Why do we own this piece of shit? Last thing on the bear case. Today, HSBC,

they don't care about Netflix's origin program. They think the company's fucked either way. Because they think YouTube has just opened up a new threat level surface that there is no answer to. Quote, YouTube strategy is to expand its presence on televisions and in living rooms, intensifying competition for screen time. YouTube is a fundamentally different kind of threat. Quote, widely distributed video platform financed through advertising

that Netflix has no real answer to. They see no recovery in Netflix's usage metrics given that YouTube pressure. It's essentially a market share story, not an engagement story. So they both are bearish, but for two different reasons. I want to ask you which of those you agree with more. is the problem the lack of creativity and hit shows or is the problem like basically they're going

against Darth Vader and the empire in the form of YouTube and it doesn't even matter what they put on the air it's obviously both but I feel like the YouTube distraction uh market share story I feel like that's in the price I feel like all of that is so well understood you think so yes 100% we've been talking about this for a long time I feel like that part is so understood is Netflix being reactive by adding podcasts and taking things away from YouTube for money yeah yeah and then and then getting into vertical of course capture the 18 year olds who apparently won't watch anything sideways but the bigger issue is there's no hits okay so you think that's the real well that sounds like the

thing they could turn around correct okay they just just hey Taylor Sheridan Well, that's too late, but... Is it? Yeah, he just did a deal with Universal after Paramount. Oh, he did? Yeah. That's his next stop.

What's universal? Peacock? NBC. All right. Here's the bulk case. Evercore ISI doubled down. They actually raised their target from 100 to 110. I'll just give you the highlights.

U.S. subscriber penetration actually hit a multi-year high of 63%. according to their own survey. Japanese penetration rose to a record 22%. Churn intentions, meaning people get asked, are you likely to cancel, improved in both markets? Live event viewership jumped to 60% of users in September from 42% in March, which means they have broadened out the portfolio of live events to the point where more than half of users are interested in what they're putting on. In Japan, 45% of newly surveyed subs said they joined because of the World Baseball

Classic promotion. Netflix Clips, which is their short form content, reached 46% usage amongst Japanese respondents, 38% in the U.S. It's a lot. It's a lot. There's a lot going on. Can I just say last thing on Netflix? I can't imagine it getting to 110 without.

a major change. It's not just going to float there. It's not just going to float there. So you mentioned earlier how many times are we going to learn to not bet against Mark Zuckerberg? And I feel like Netflix has earned that same right with the stipulation that, yes, all of the bare case is legitimate. I'm not saying the stock is getting punished for no reason. There's good reason.

But if you look at the stock chart and you see all the drawdowns, there are multiple different 70% drawdowns. Now, I am, I'm not sitting through a 70. If this goes that way, I'm out. But right now, it's down 47% from its highs. People are bearish. We know. They're buying back.

They bought back $4.7 billion worth of stock in Q2. They have a $25 billion buyback authorization still outstanding. Let's go. Be e aggressive. I love it. They should be able to grow earnings, double digits for as far as the eye can see. And they're going to. Okay.

the one difference between what you're saying they earned all this time and you're right a lot of times when 2022 is a great example the stock was more than cut in half and then they launched ad supported and password fix and the stock worked um it's a different guy yeah the CEO's gone yeah so so far ever since reed left this has not been going well and i just think that's like an added wrinkle. Yeah. I don't hear investors calling for the head of, of anyone at the company, but it is not being led by the same people who have turned it around like 10 different, 10 different times.

But Saranos and Peters have been there for decades. Those are content guys, business problem. It's not new guys. Okay. I'm saying those are Hollywood guys. Not those aren't, those aren't like business guys. Please, make a hit. Get people excited again.

All right, I want to give a shout to Adam Parker and Trivariate research who consistently produce some of my favorite digestible research. It's not 97 pages. It doesn't sit on my Chrome tab for three weeks before I delete it. You feel bad like I should finish this. I read it every week. I'm the same way. No, it doesn't sit there.

It does not sit there. No, no, but like the research stuff that you're talking about where you keep looking at it out of the corner of your eye and you know it's there. So like, you can't bring yourself to finish it. Like Mobeson's updated piece on public to private equity. I remember reading this 10 years ago. It's 91 pages. Like this is going to be on this is going to just be here for a long time before I exit out.

Yeah. Okay. I can't do it. So anyway, they wrote a post. Uh, buy and hold doesn't work. And they quantified how difficult individual stock selection is on a buy, and hold basis, which is great shit. So they say the odds of beating the market have fallen sharply.

Only 23% of the top 500 stocks, U.S. stocks held for 10 years beat the index and the latest observation. For three-year holdings, the hit rate is 28%. So the unfortunate truth, you have to trade. Unbelievable. Yeah. And I think this is even harder than most people would have guessed. What do you think about that?

It's way worse. You're right. Like most people would not guess it's this futile. And it's not just that it's difficult to beat the index. It's that the cost of being in the bad stocks is brutal. So for example. Or missing the huge winners. Like you can't recover from it.

He says stocks bought three years ago that lagged the SEP 500 fell behind by an average. By an average of 62%. So throw this chart on. We're looking at the percentage of stocks on the left side. Percentive stocks beating the S&P over three years. And on the right side, it's over the last 10 years. And it's the exact same chart if you're not watching. It's upper left to the lower right.

And it's not just the top 500. It's the top 2,000. So what is it? Like 30%. Oh, we just said it's 27%. Only 23% beat for a 10-year period. Next chart. So it's not just that the losers have sucked, which is the left-hand chart, which shows the mean

three-year return relative to the S&P for the losers. Look at the winners. So the mean loser is down like 80% first of the index and the winners are destroying. So the gap is just massive. Massive, massive, massive. And I'll leave you with this. What I thought it was really interesting and pretty intuitive was the percentage of stocks beating the S&P 500 over a 12-month period, if you look out one year, you have a better

chance to looking out 10 years or three years. And I think the reason why, chart off, please, over a one-year period, you could sort of credibly say, all right, like this is way overdone. The market is misunderstanding the bear case. They're taking it too far. And over the next year. Not over 10 years. Over the next year, I have pretty good clarity as to what's going to happen.

Over 10-year period, whether you're in biology, you're wrong, or chemistry or politics or sports or this, nobody could say anything about the next 10 years for any field, especially the stock market. Impossible. Yeah. And you're just wrong. Impossible. Like the market is not misunderstanding a stock for 10 years. You're just wrong. Too many things change. Right. So if you're going to pick stocks, you don't have to you don't have to day trade, but buying and hold the individual stocks is really not a great idea. We know that. Well, yes. but I have a different takeaway because the problem is

everybody anchors to Berkshire Hathaway and he has successfully done this. It doesn't mean every sale he made was good in hindsight. It doesn't mean every buy worked out and Berkshire Hathaway trades. Like every quarter, even in the Buffett era, the Buffett and Munger era,

every quarter the 13F comes out and they bought and sold stocks. Like people misunderstands, understand like, oh, Warren Buffett, he buys and holds forever. No, there's like eight stocks he bought and held forever. Eight out of 800 that have come and gone from the portfolio. What he does is so brilliant. He lets the market tell him that he's in a forever stock. And then like 10 years goes by and it's like, well, no reason to sell it now. Look at my cost basis. But like in that first one or two year period, you very rarely find him holding losers. He like just, like it almost,

if he's wrong on the buy, they'll sell. People think that he's like this buy and hold machine. If that were the case, think about how many dead companies and bankrupt companies he would have ridden to zero that they had owned in the 60s, in the 70s, in the 80s. So he kept his winners. He kept his winners, which is what I do. Yeah. I learned it from. from him. All right, that's one. Two, part of the problem here, if you're going to try to be a buy and hold person, is your starting point. Where do you select the stocks that you want to buy and hold for the long term? The thing that a lot of investors do is just randomly approach the market. And they flip on CNBC. And it's fast money and it's Guy Adami and Tim Seymour. And I like those guys. You know, nothing specific to them. And it's you. Like, yeah, it could be me. And we're going around the table and we're just batting back and forth ticker symbols.

Oh, I guess those guys are talking about that stock. That's what I should trade. That happens to everybody. Because you just assume a stock in the news is a stock worthy of you knowing. And I understand that. Having a starting point and starting with winners already is so much better than starting with noise. And sometimes the winners are the ones in the news, obviously. But I think like what we do with best stocks in the market

All right, fine. You want to trade stocks, motherfucker? Step right up. Start with these 200 stocks that are already making people money. Is that one of those 200? No. Netflix hasn't been on that list, I think, since we started it. But you know what is?

Dell. Would most people a year ago have picked Dell out of a hat? I think I'm going to start trading the stock. Of course not. No, they make PCs. What is this? Yeah. They make servers.

Dell has been on the list since we started it. I don't think it's ever come off. That's an example of like, and they're not all Dell. Where do we start? Well, let's start with Eli Lilly. Let's start with stocks where people are up and making money and they're accumulating more. And the valuation is re-rating higher. And the earnings are growing.

Like, that's your starting point. Not what are these guys talking about on a bar stall somewhere at a sports bar? That's your starting point for stocks. No wonder you can't stop losing money. You're not fishing in the right pond. And Fami's been talking about this forever. Our friend John, who sadly passed away. John Borman was always, he said, if you want to buy a stock because it'll go up,

start with a stock that's already going up. Like this is not, I didn't invent this. But it's like one of the few things that I just have always believed in. And what you just showed me from Adam Parker, I think is an illustration of that. Like most stocks are not going to do well relative to the market. It's impossible for most stocks too. Right. Which is why we have trillion dollar market caps.

That money was diverted from going into the other 400 stocks that suck. It's like, oh, everyone's buying this. There must be a reason. All right, can we do bonds real quick? I bought bonds. I wanted to ask you, should we just lock this in? We're not looking at this chart technically. Give me the 10-year yield.

I'm not going to tell you what you think I am, which is that it's about to break out because it's a yield on a bond. I don't know. Last time it got to these levels at the end of 23, it was a no-brainer. Lock it in 5%. You didn't see it.

it again for almost, almost two and a half years. Now we're back at this level. It doesn't matter, Trudeau. It doesn't matter if you, if you don't need to call the top in bonds. I'm very thrilled with a 5% yield on a 10 year. And guess what? If it goes to 5.8%, I'll be even happier. You don't need to.

All that is is opportunity, uh, that you missed. Yeah. It's not the end of the world. I haven't owned bonds in, I don't know, ever. Ever, ever, ever, to me, this just seems like prudent to asset allocation. Like, bonds are offering an attractive real rate of return. And if stocks keep going up, fantastic. Let's double down on that for the viewers with treasury bonds.

If you buy a treasury at a 5% yield and six months later, the yield is six. Yes, you missed out on some potential upside. But if your plan from day one was you're going to hold on to the bonds, you're not trading bonds, you're saying, I'm going to buy a 10-year bond and hold it for 10 years. It doesn't make a difference what happens to the yield after. You're going to get your 5%. Well, yes, I will in all likelihood not be in bonds for 10 years, but the point is this. The point is a move from 5% to 6% of the 10-year, I don't know exactly what it costs you, but you're not losing that much money because you already have the 5% cushion.

So the risks are asymmetric. You go from 5% to 6%. okay, your total return goes down 3.5%. Don't quote me on that. But guess what? What if yields do come in? What if there is a recession? What if the stock market wobbles? 5% to 4%, you get a huge boost.

I guess the point I'm making is it's not the equivalent of buying a stock at 10 that drops to 8. That's not the same kind of thing. No, of course not a stock. Missing the right price in bond yields. It's not quite the same thing. And there's no cushion in stocks. Equity can go to zero. That's exactly right.

the other thing is no one is stopping you from taking your coupon and we investing that in higher yielding bonds. Right. No one is set like so in other words, let's say you put $100,000 into a 10 year bond lock in a 5% rate. They're going to pay you $5,000 over the course of the first year. You could take that $5,000 and buy bonds that are yielding a higher yield. And like this is very common.

This is what people do in fixed income. Nobody's stopping you. The other thing nobody's stopping you from doing is laddering, is laddering out and saying, all right, I'll buy $50,000 at 5%. And if it gets to $5.5.5, I'll buy another $50,000. You're welcome to do that too. So I think that's a really key point. I do want to show you the yield curve.

Okay. Normal. Good. Totally normal. Shaped the way that you would want it to be shaped. And actually, the 10 year is the juiciest part of the curve from my perspective. Like, this is, first of all, look at the improvement from the blue line to the dark blue line to the light blue line. Look how much higher the yield is now than it was one year ago. And quite frankly, that is what you should be doing.

If you have excess cash that you don't know how to invest today and your time horizon is 10 years and you can't afford loss principle with that cash for one reason or another, this is now a great option for you. It's a way better option than it was a year ago. Let me show you the long term here. This is another critical thing for people to understand. The level 5% on the tenure is not some sort of like no man's land, which the media is attempting to portray it as. if anything, the rates from 2010 to 2020 were the aberration.

That made no sense. This is actually normal. And if you go back and look by decade, this is pretty much where rates were or higher for most of recorded history. Completely normal. I want to show you this rates versus oil chart real quick, too. This is from Sebo via Daily Chartbook. The three-month rolling correlation between the U.S. 10-year yield and WTI oil prices hit a high of 65% last week, meaning extremely correlated. That's above the highs we saw during the depth of COVID and the 2011 Arab Spring.

All right. So? So what happens, Shash, when oil pulls back? I think the story here is where yields go from here will be less dependent on the Fed and more on the situation in Iran. The 10-year yield is not controlled by the Fed. The Fed controls overnight money. The 10-year is being batted back and forth by whether or not we're going to have World

War III and oil supplies coming through the Strait of Hormuz globally, et cetera, et cetera. Last thing, counterpoint to this 5% being problematic. Michael, did you know we have just broken a new record according to Fidelity? the number of stock market millionaires with 401Ks has expanded by 19% from the first quarter we now have 769,000

401Ks at Fidelity with over a million dollars. That's it? Yeah, that's a lot. You don't think that's a lot? No. 401Ks only. How many would you have guessed

would be over a million dollars? Millions. Well, there are millions, but just at Fidelity and just 401K, not people's overall wealth. 3% of Fidelity's 25.8 million 401K account holders are now millionaires. I don't know.

If you actually look at nationwide household wealth, one-fifth of American households are millionaire households. It's a lot of households. You see anybody celebrating that, Nope. I try to.

We try to. I sort of feel like that's, I don't know, really good news. That's great news. All right, let's end. I know we're going late, but we got to say goodbye to Warren. Chart kid, I'm sorry. Sean. He did not die.

He sat down as chairman. So he had a hell of a run. Oh, my bad. Sean made this chart looking at Warren Buffett's legacy. You could screenshot it and take a look later because we're not going to spend too much time on it. But it's a, it's a great history of what he's done. For example, in 1972, when it's showing the growth of, the growth of, I guess, $10 or whatever it is.

In 1970, he acquired Seas Candy. He started buying Coca-Cola, as we mentioned in 1988, still holds it. He's done some shit. 2016, they started buying Apple. All great, great work, Sean. But two other things that I want to show this is really incredible. The annualized return from various starting points, I mean, just unbelievable. Wow.

Like almost no matter when you bought Brokshire Hathaway, it was a winner. Wow. All right. And then the most face melting chart, this is my favorite, one of my favorite investing data points. I think I heard this from Medfabre first, that if Berkshire Hathaway fell by 99%, it still would have outperformed the SEP 500 since 1965 when he started running this thing. That sounds fake.

It's not. It's so, it's so, I mean, you have to have gone back in time and boarded in 1965 for this to be relevant to you. Guess what? Mathematical point about compounding is he really did it. He really did it. Yeah. Like, it's not a fake stat. All right.

Anyway, his son, Howie is stepping in to be the chairman of the board. Whatever. Who really cares? Let's, let's talk about my make the case. Josh. I can't believe you're about to do this. I sort of the doc. I said, I can't wait to hear this.

If I jinx the stock market rally, then I apologize. But I am going to make the case for one, Kathy Woods, arc, AR. You never go full arc word. Full, I'm doing it. I want to set this table by saying this. People are bearish. They're sure of shit, not bullish.

So we have the fewest bulls in a year from the AAII survey. The fewest bulls in a year. And at the same time, the number of bears rose by the most in which, one and a half years, pushing the bull bear spread down to the lowest since May, 2025. And chart off, please. I don't think it will take very much for the sentiment to come back really, really fast if the stock market starts moving. And it is moving.

So look at this chart of arc. Purple line, please. I mean, this, this, it could fail here. But would you bet on it? Would you bet on it failing right here? The problem is, I'm just looking at an ETF where the holder. change every day. It's not an index. Like in other words, if you showed me this and you said, this is the Black Rock blah, blah, blah, blah fund. And I know it's like a static group of stocks.

I got you. I would tell you the tactical is meaningful. She could turn this whole portfolio over tonight. Okay, but she's not going to because she, so your point is well taken. There should be skepticism because you're not buying and holding an index. But the pond that she fishes in doesn't change very often. She buys the shit. And I don't mean the shit the garbage, but she buys what she buys. Innovation. So, so look at this chart. So these are her top six holdings and they're all working pretty well. Number one and number two are Tesla and SpaceX. And they both just went on a hell of her run, especially SpaceX. Number two is Tempice AI. She owns circle and Coinbase and CRISPR. So it's innovation. It's, uh, it's crypto. It's genetics. These stocks are all massively off their highs.

and in long-term downtrends, all of them. Even SpaceX, I mean, I know it's been public for six weeks, but like even that's in a downtrend, technically speaking, relative to where it started. So if the risk on comes back into the market in a meaningful way, I think that Arc is going to massively benefit and it looks like it's going to break out. But could it be setting up for a double top, sure?

It's a good pitch and I understand why you're making it and I actually applaud the guts that it takes for the first time ever, I actually want to challenge you. Not only do I not agree, I want to take the other side, I want to tell you that what she'll do, unfortunately,

this has been the history, she will sell her winners and buy more of her losers. And so some of those stocks might work, but the portfolio management strategy is when people on social media start chirping at her. I can't believe you were so,

dumb to buy CRISPR, she will literally take that as a cue to buy more stock. And very often it doesn't work out well for ARC shareholders. And I love Kathy personally, but I'm just telling you, she has like more guts than most portfolio managers. And she has more guts than is actually good for a person to have. So I would like to do a challenge. Wendy, when do you want to? You're on. You're on. Okay. You might end up being right. I, you know, I'm not like table pounding, but I want to see if my logic wins out over yours, because not only are we going to look at the result, we're going to look at the actual portfolio turnover, and if I was right about what would happen.

We'll take a snapshot of the holdings today. We'll take a snapshot in the future and see if she, okay? Does that sound good? Yeah. All right, real quick, mystery chart, and then we'll get out of here. I'm not sure if you're going to get this one. You're very good at this. I'm showing you since inception of a stock that I recently.

I know it on this show it's Airbnb no I didn't pitch Airbnb on the show did I thought you did okay keep going since inception so that's your clue you can see it came public in 21 I'm with you I have pitched this stock um for make the case on this show this year huh so it's like the mother of all you shaped recoveries it's a very it's a very rare winner in 2021 is it not yet it's not even a winner yet because look where it started. It's just barely. Just barely. Is it a firm? A firm? That's such a good guess, but it's not. Okay. I don't know. Take one more. Do you want to give me any sort of clue other than you pitched in 21? No, no, no, no. I understand. I pitched it this year. I get it. It came public at 21. One more, one more.

How many stocks have I pitched on make the case this year? 20? Give me one more clue. Okay. Um, oh. There is a super inappropriate, almost borderline rapy Christmas song where this, the ticker symbol, the ticker symbol appears in the name of that highly disturbing song. Oh my God. I didn't want to guess. Just what is it? I don't want to guess. What is it?

Is that the craziest clue? Oh, my God. What in the world? Oh. Oh. I didn't think that you were going to get it, but, uh... No, that was bad. That was bad.

What was bad that you didn't get it? Yeah. Should have gotten it, you mean? Yeah. All right. For the listener, it's Snowflake. I, I, I want to show you a technical chart here, too. All right.

This is where, this is where I, uh, I think like this area, July 29th is where I bought it. So right around there is when I would have pitched it. I want, I want to point out to the viewer one thing. this obviously could have ended up not working. I basically bought the high. So it made a high in June and then it spent a full month consolidating. And then it ran right back to that high. And look what RSI was doing at the time.

It was getting a little bit overbought. But people were excited about the stock. That's my setup. I don't do well. In fact, I almost always lose buying value stocks, buying lows. this is what I do. I pull the buy trigger at the high after I've already missed out on like a lot of the performance

and it doesn't always work, but I have an exit. This is, to me, this is the thing that keeps you out of trouble if you want to play these types of stocks. It's so easy. Not buying them when they get killed. You're right. You're right. Why do I do this to myself, Josh?

Why do I? I do it too. I still do the wrong thing. All right, that's it for us today. Special thanks to everybody. watching on YouTube. Thank you to the Spotify people, the Apple podcast people. No matter what platform you're on, the most important thing for you to do is leave a rating, leave a review. Super meaningful. We love you for it. We appreciate it. Tomorrow's Animal Spirits, of course,

we'll do Ask the Compound later that day. And we'll finish out the week with an all-new edition of the Compound and Friends. Keep it locked right here. We'll talk to you soon. Thanks, guys.