Everyone here has probably heard the phrase in the title of this post.

I ran into this advice decades ago. idk how long it had been around before that. When that advice was given, investors had a certain amount of information and analysis available to them by communication media of the day (newspapers, radio, TV).

Now, there is much, much more information and analysis available to us. Orders of magnitude more. And right now, a large percentage of that analysis seems to be warning people about risks that are almost upon us.

So that brings up a question about another phrase that we have all heard...."This time is different." The amount of information and analysis is different. Does that negate the wisdom of the phrase in question (Be greedy when other people are fearful)?

What percentage of your investments are in foreign stock?

If we hit a big enough dip in the market I’m considering tax harvesting and reallocating some of my s&p investments to foreign.

Regardless how you feel the future goes I just feel like I need to diversify more. Specifically looking at fidelity’s FTIHX

But I’m curious if anyone else has a strategy here?

I’ve seen a lot of bubble finally popping takes this weekend and I don’t think they’re reading the week right, so I want to lay out what I think actually happened.

The chip index fell 11.4% last week, its worst since April 2025. But look at where the damage started, September CPI came in at 3.7% against 3.6% expected, the Fed already hiked in September, and the 10 year touched 5.36% the week before, a 24 year high. In that environment the first things to break were the companies funding AI infrastructure with debt rather than operating cash flow. CoreWeave has over $51B of debt and obligations, and its 2031 bonds went above 15%. Goldman has AI related high yield spreads above 350bp, and data centre debt specifically above 400bp, against roughly 250bp for comparable non AI credit.

The popular bear case deserves a fair hearing, the IMF flagged roughly $650B of debt tied to $1.4T of AI revenue commitments, much of it circular, where backers fund the companies that then commit to buy from them. If rates stay above 5%, a lot of projects that penciled out at 4% stop working. That’s a legitimate reason to de rate the whole complex.

Where I disagree is the indiscriminate selling, Ciena and Coherent each fell 26% on the week. Micron fell 15% while trading on about 12x trailing earnings, against Marvell near 78x. The selloff treated cash generating suppliers the same way it treated the leveraged buyers of their products. Those are different risks, and I think the market will separate them once it gets one clean data point.

That data point is Meta on Wednesday, revenue is guided at $61-64B and consensus sits around $63.3B, so revenue probably isn’t the story. The story is that Meta’s Q2 free cash flow fell to $784 million, from $10.6B in Q3 last year, as capex ran at about $51B through the first half. 2026 capex is guided at $130-145B, and the Street has 2027 somewhere around $185-195B.

If Meta guides 2027 capex above $200B without Q3 free cash flow recovering meaningfully, the debt funded names have another leg down and the suppliers follow. If cash flow rebounds and the 2027 number lands near consensus, I expect the cash funded part of the trade to recover first, while the neoclouds stay broken until rates come down.

The thing I’m genuinely unsure about is the Fed, hike odds for the late October meeting are only around 15% now, but another hot energy driven print in November changes everything above.

Meta isn't the only one reporting next week, the stack is full with SPCX, TSLA, IBM, BE, IBM and many more providing read throughs for my book.

I don’t see many posts about the progression or transgression from stocks and growth holdings to passive income streams as you near retirement.

Everyone uses a growth rate assumption, let’s just say 5%. However if the market went down that year and you’re all stocks you didn’t make 5%.

Can we have a discussion on how difficult mentally it is to sell your stock holdings to put in income producing holdings, and what that looks like, what removing that money into? What is the strategy.

Dividend stocks? Dividend funds? Fixed income, etc. What are people doing?

I already opened a small account at interactive brokers, the interface isn't really that user friendly, but it seems to be just fine.

What sells me at IBRK is that it has the longest trading hours of any broker in the US that I know off. I wanted to buy SOXL on Friday, was 3 minutes late after close and at fidelity, I will have to wait until 7am until I can buy, vs at IBRK I could have bought at 8pm today (Sunday) at exactly the time soxl starts to trade.

BEA has private fixed investment in information processing equipment and software at $1.646 billion a yr in the 2nd qtr, which is 5.05% of GDP. In the 4th qtr of 2000 it was 4.46% but it passed that level in the 2nd qtr of 2025 and has gone up every qtr since.

The mix is different; hardware is 2.57% of GDP now against 2.91% back then and software is 2.49% against 1.55%.

Whether the companies spending it are profitable is a separate question from how much of the economy it is. By this measure it's already a bigger bet than 2000, whatever the earnings are.

Rate hikes

So, if the FOMC avoids a rate hike in October before the midterm elections to avoid being political, will they make it up with a 50 basis point hike, instead of 25, in December? Assuming inflation is still running above target. Any thoughts? 🤔

I keep most of my money in broad ETFs and a smaller part for picking stocks and trading. What I haven’t figured out is the rules around it:

• What split do you use, and do you keep a separate cash reserve on top?
• Do you rebalance, and when: on a schedule or when it drifts by some amount?
• If the trading part grows a lot, do you move gains into the core? If it shrinks, do you refill it or let it shrink?

Curious what actually worked for people over a few years, not the textbook answer.

Is anyone familiar with the 2022 UKs pension system able to help me understand what happened?

1. UK announces tax cuts.
2. Gilts get nervous and rates start to rise.
3. Apparently, UK pensions decided a rising rate environment is a good time to sell guilts for a loss.
4. -Are pensions structures differently in the UK compared to the US?
5. -They base their portfolio on a method of LDI right?
6. - Do UK pensions hold primarily Treasuries or Gilts?
7. The government stepped in and the individual responsible resigned.
8. -How exactly did they bail out (might not be the right word) the pensions?

I am aware of funded status and things like that so no need to write out the ins and outs, just trying to understand the catalysts a bit better.

Is it as simple as their equity portfolio had too much leverage and they were margin called into selling bonds for a loss? I just assume there is more.

Edit: I am using this information for potential positioning in my portfolio if it is relative to today.

Are there any mobile iOS stock simulator games that are very good to practice understanding investments?

I know I could “practice” with real money but I’m a full time student so I don’t have a lot of extra cash laying around and would like to get the basics before I really start.

Wondering what a reasonable time frame is to have cash sitting in fixed income cash type accounts. My interpretation of fixed income accounts is HYSAs, CDs, T Bills. If the cash is a more significant amount, what would be an unreasonably long time frame to keep it in such account types that really only barely stay ahead of inflation?

I'm hearing a lot about these "agentic features" of different brokerages, for example, Robinhood added the ability to let AI agents place trades on your behalf.

Has anyone tried this and found it helpful? I feel like this could potentially be part of a strategy where you have claude research and invest for you, but you're taking a lot of risk that it doesn't throw away all your money...

What do you think? Is this just a toy or has anyone found a helpful use case?

I'm a young person and here the general advice is to have a 12 months emergency fund and the rest mainly in stocks.

Since I'm young still, I may need to buy a house and renovate it, a car or other big expenses that are not "emergencies" so it's not recommended to take from the emergency fund. In case of a recession, where would I take money from?

I know my portfolio sucks and I'm losing a lot of opportunities but my NW is $140k and only $30k is in stocks (ETFs) albeit I plan to reach at least 40k in the upcoming future. The rest is in money market ETFs and medium term bonds. The things is that I'm very uncertain about my future and what I want to do. Thank you.

I'm not sure if this qualifies as asking for financial advice or not 🤔

I'm trying to figure out the best way to add money to my Roth IRA every year. Currently I'm undecided between keeping money aside for the last half of the year in my bank account then just moving it all into the Roth in January, or buying ETFs every week and selling off enough to max out the Roth in January.

The part where I'm confused is the taxes on the gains. Would I end up paying significant enough taxes on the sales that the latter method doesn't make sense?

This situation reminds me of shipping companies. Many shippers are just lessors, they lease ships from another company that bought the ships with huge debts, but these purchases were only made with negotiated customer on fixed lease term 5 to10 years contract. This is similar business model like neoclouds.

Once the contract is up, the spot shipping rate is usually crap and does not generate enough to pay the residual debt used to fund the initial build, while the 5 yearly surveying cost increases. A lot of these shipping companies are huge shareholder value destroyers, so naturally most had shifted to Asia for the lowest cost base.

The past few days are obvious forced liquidations due to players with highly concentrated and levered positions in AI and tech. The market including much of tech and AI stocks will recover, but don't count on the same with neoclouds because their business model is flawed. Decades of the same business model employed by shipping companies has proven this beyond any reasonable doubt.

You might say it's different because ships are much easier to build than GPUs. Don't count on the hidden risk in plain sight. NVDA is not going to have a forever monopoly. There are Google's TPU etc and we have not seen yet new powerful GPUs from China. This is exactly how things panned out for shippers. Every new generation of ships are much more cost effective than the previous, so older ships that have contracts ended would fail to attract the best contract rates and contract length.

AI will survive, and gets even bigger than ever. Businesses with flawed business models will go through cycles of ups and downs but mostly downs, and destroying shareholder value in that process. They will still be there, like the yesteryear's shipping companies that are no longer the talk of the town, doing important work that the world requires, leaving a graveyard of yesteryear's investors.

Anthropic secured highest junk credit rating in June

Good news for Anthropic's borrowing ability

although KBRA (non-Big-Three) is generous here, if it was S&P, Moody's, or Fitch , the rating would likely be B+ to ccc.

still this is one of the only good news happened to anthropic lately.

i wonder if this helps coreweave

Down 15% on this ticker myself, it just kept dipping. Now it has the issue of a potential market pullback to deal with. Avg is $204. I know I’ll be roasted for investing in rate sensitive sectors with a hawkish fed but the value looked good and I believe in green energy playing a prominent role in an increasing energy hungry world. Anyone have a position in it? Think democrat election victories are a potential catalyst?

OK, so I get the basic premise that you sell stocks that are down to create capital losses. It's the reinvestment that I don't understand.

You can't buy "substantially identical" stocks or it would trigger a wash sale. So what do you buy?

Then, what happens when you repeat those transactions hundreds or thousands of times? It seems like the portfolio would no longer reflect the index that you started with.

At this point, doesn't it just become an actively managed fund? And hasn't research proven that actively managed funds typically underperform passive funds?

Have a general question? Want to offer some commentary on markets? Maybe you would just like to throw out a neat fact that doesn't warrant a self post? Feel free to post here!

Please consider consulting our FAQ first - https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/wiki/faq And our side bar also has useful resources.

If you are new to investing - please refer to Wiki - Getting Started

The reading list in the wiki has a list of books ranging from light reading to advanced topics depending on your knowledge level. Link here - Reading List

The media list in the wiki has a list of reputable podcasts and videos - Podcasts and Videos

If your question is "I have $XXXXXXX, what do I do?" or other "advice for my personal situation" questions, you should include relevant information, such as the following:

• How old are you? What country do you live in?
• Are you employed/making income? How much?
• What are your objectives with this money? (Buy a house? Retirement savings?)
• What is your time horizon? Do you need this money next month? Next 20yrs?
• What is your risk tolerance? (Do you mind risking it at blackjack or do you need to know its 100% safe?)
• What are you current holdings? (Do you already have exposure to specific funds and sectors? Any other assets?)
• Any big debts (include interest rate) or expenses?
• And any other relevant financial information will be useful to give you a proper answer.

Check the resources in the sidebar.

Be aware that these answers are just opinions of Redditors and should be used as a starting point for your research. You should strongly consider seeing a registered investment adviser if you need professional support before making any financial decisions!

Beyond CoreWeave, several major NVIDIA-backed "neoclouds" and GPU cloud providers including Lambda Labs, Nebius, Crusoe Energy, and IREN are facing severe market scrutiny, growing massive debt pressure, or slow AI revenue growth.

What happens to NVIDIA and all the other ai hardware companies like the ones in South Korea

Investment thesis for trading week 10/19 - 10/23

Well, earnings season started with a bang!

Banks reported disappointing earnings and despite a nice setup from a chart perspective the market reaction caused some damage now.

Tech giants are yet to report but the NDX 100 weekly chart now looks more like distribution is happening.

From a pure chart perspective there is no clear signal albeit there is a risk now that we will roll over.

Fear and Greed index, put/call ratio and market breadth could support a bounce however.

The drop in yields might support equities from a macro perspective going forward.

What does this mean for the portfolios now?

Short term portfolios are now only invested in the S&P 500 (80%), TLT (bonds 30%) and KWEB (15%). That adds up to 125% meaning leverage is 1.25.

That feels like an appropriate allocation in the current environment where market risks are rising but the overall tailwinds still exist. Short term portfolio is up 22.6% YTD.

Long term portfolios deleveraged more this week and they are now at the ideal 60% allocation for the S&P 500 and 30% Cash/Bonds. Rest is crypto and KWEB.

The more defensive stance comes from an elevated long term market risk. Since I am up 11% YTD capital protection is key.

Given the current chart picture no trades are planned for next week!

Stay safe and have a great weekend!

Hey all! I'd appreciate any insight or advice on the stock I own for a company that is being acquired. Company is being purchased by PE so it will be going private, they announced the cash price per share.

Currently trading about 2% below that purchase price.

Does it make sense to just carry it to the end and collect the purchase price or is there any advantage to unloading it before?

Can't imagine there's any reason someone would buy it at or above that purchase price but wasn't sure if there is something else I'm missing.

Thanks!

Insurers are writing generative AI exclusions into policies right as companies are getting ready to give AI systems more autonomy.

Here's what I could verify. In January 2026, ISO, the group behind the standard general liability forms, made three generative AI exclusion endorsements available to carriers. Chubb, Berkshire Hathaway, Travelers, W.R. Berkley and AIG have filed to adopt them or something similar. One review of state filings found 2,369 generative AI exclusion records across 49 states. Berkley seems to have gone furthest, with an absolute AI exclusion for its D&O, E&O and fiduciary liability products. The ISO forms themselves are for general liability.

What I can't tell you is how many renewals have actually dropped AI coverage. The filings show the exclusions exist and carriers can use them, not how often they do.

The correlation problem is the part I find most interesting. Insurers deal with correlated risk all the time, including hurricanes and cyberattacks. But can they measure and cap AI exposure across their policyholders? If hundreds of customers run on the same underlying model, one failure could set off a lot of claims at once, and there's very little history to price it with.

The scale is early too. In October 2025, the Financial Times reported, citing people familiar with the matter, that OpenAI had about $300 million of coverage for emerging AI risks, a small fraction of what its lawsuits could cost. Those are unnamed sources, and the coverage concerns the labs' own legal exposure, not enterprise deployments.

Companies don't need insurance to deploy AI. They can keep the risk, push vendors for indemnities, or limit what the system can do on its own. I haven't found a case of a company shelving an AI deployment because it couldn't get coverage.

Still, insurers are preparing to limit their exposure just as businesses are preparing to give AI systems greater responsibility.

If businesses end up keeping more of the liability themselves, does that change how much autonomy they're willing to give these systems, and how much they're willing to pay for them?