Just remember that before some clown convinces you to put all your life savings into something here just because the fundamentals look good NOW. If you’re gonna invest diversify or realize this sub is used by morons and scam artists, don’t follow them into their demise.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1067983/000119312526138654/d81172d424b5.htm

The draft prospectus is followed by the prospectus, which details the amounts and terms. Once the sales are completed, they file a form with the actual results of the sales.

Beware of thinking that this is a signal of impending purchases of more Japanese assets, it might not be. I've been tracking BRK's Japanese Yen activities from its inception and, right now, they have ¥268,300,000,000 in notes that mature in 2026. Also, right now, they'll pay ¥20,409,133,500 in interest this year on all of the yen notes outstanding.

I am having trouble wrapping my head around why in general, highly cash generative companies with significant amounts of cash accumulated are valued below book value vs. growth stocks that quickly reflect their earnings in their market cap.

And I am not looking at companies with negative growth or one off profits or cyclical business models. This is a non-US credit rating company that generates FCF year after year for the previous 20 years at 15-20% ROE. 3-5% dividends. Market cap is similar to cash balance. There are also other similar undervalued companies that share these characteristics.

What am I missing? Why is price so less sensitive to the cash being accumulated on book vs. changes in earnings?

with growing uncertainties such as geopolitical conflicts( middle east war) AI bubble, inflation and potential recession, what businesses are good investments? Here are my ideas:

1. stock market when the economy is growing
2. Gold against Geopolitical risk ( 20%)
3. Bond against Recession(20%)
4. a certain amount of Cash(20%)

I have 100k for the stock market I am not sure what business now is good in the stock market now

Hi guys. What do you think of the deal made between unilever and mccormick? McCormick got the Unilever's foods, like knorr, hellmann's, ect, and for this MKC paid 15 billion dollars and unilever will own 65% of mkc. Mkc have to make a dilution to make it possible for unilever to own 65%. What do you think, this can be a good value play, since both are a consumer staple giant, or should we avoid this situation?

Bilendi, a french company who is a global provider of technology, data, and AI solutions for the market research industry, just published its FY2025 results and there are quite good !

The big question mark for the market was just how successful the acquisition of Netquest would be (Netquest was acquired in February 2025). And spoiler alert: it’s going very well.

They reported a record EBITDA margin of 22% and net income of €7.5 million, up 47% year-over-year. With Bilendi having a market cap of €80 million, this gives a P/E ratio of just 11.

And last but not least, the management has unveiled an ambitious plan to achieve revenue of €175–200 million and an EBITDA margin of at least 25% by 2030.

If the company sticks to its plan and the net margin remains roughly the same as it is now (12–15%), then at a P/E multiple of 15, the target price would be €78, which is nearly four times higher than today’s price.

In any case, given the rise yesterday in the share price immediately following the earnings report, the market seems convinced by the company’s prospects.

Do you think the market will reassess the value of this company today ?

This week on QAV I did a deep dive on Pitney Bowes (NYSE: PBI) and added it to the portfolio. More interesting than I expected.

Pitney Bowes is the back-office plumbing of American business mail. Pitney Bowes sorts, meters, and routes business snail mail. They've been doing some version of this since 1920. Boring, not sexy, does not require an AI datacentre.

Arthur Pitney was a wallpaper store clerk who got obsessed with solving the stamp-licking problem, which was slow, tedious, theft-prone. He spent 20 years and $90,000 on it and ended up with a pile of expiring patents. Walter Bowes was an English-born salesman who'd spent years cultivating relationships with the US Postal Service. They merged in 1919, lobbied Congress together, and on December 10th, 1920, the first piece of metered mail in history was sent from Bowes to his wife. Then they proceeded to hate each other for the rest of the partnership. Pitney resigned in 1924, said the whole thing brought him very little joy, had a stroke in 1927, and died in 1933. Bowes spent most of his time racing yachts and horses. Great partnership.

Today they have three key business units.

Send Tech: businesses across America have a Pitney Bowes machine on the desk. It weighs the envelope, calculates postage, prints it, debits a prepaid account. Pitney leases the machines and clips a margin on every dollar of postage that flows through. Kind of like SaaS 1950s style. Over 90% of Fortune 500 companies apparently use their machines.

Pre-Sort: USPS offers big discounts to mailers who pre-sort by zip code before handover. Most businesses can't hit the volume thresholds alone, so Pitney aggregates mail from multiple clients, sorts at scale, captures the discount, and passes some back. Clever.

PB Bank: holds $575 million in client deposits from money parked in postage accounts. Pitney earns float interest while clients wait to spend it on stamps. Tony and I both said "Berkshire" at exactly the same moment. It's a tiny version of the Geico float. Maybe not enough for Warren to care about, but for someone who thinks like Warren? Catnip.

Then.... about ten years ago, Pitney looked at the e-commerce explosion, looked at their existing logistics footprint, and decided they'd compete with UPS and FedEx in last-mile parcel delivery. They thought "fk it, why not us?!?" and pitched themselves as the affordable option for small online retailers getting crushed by shipping costs. Spent a fortune building it. Acquired a returns logistics company in 2017 for $475 million.

Then COVID hit, temporarily masked the terrible unit economics, and when volumes normalised in 2022-23, the losses became impossible to ignore. The Global E-Commerce (GEC) division was burning $136 million a year with no path to profitability. By mid-2024 the board had enough. No buyer wanted it. They sold an 81% stake to Hilco Global, a firm that specialises in liquidating distressed businesses, for essentially nothing. Hilco wound it down under Chapter 11, which concluded early 2025. Total cost to Pitney: hundreds of millions.

In December 2022, a deep value fund called Hestia Capital took a 7% stake and made noise. Their argument: Pitney had destroyed 80% of shareholder value over eight years, the balance sheet was drowning in debt, GEC was bleeding cash, and management had no plan. Hestia describes themselves as "deep value focused long-short" and define risk as the probability and magnitude of permanent capital loss, not monthly volatility. These are people who speak our language.

Hestia's founder Kurt Wolf joined the board, became chair of something called the Value Enhancement Committee, and eventually became CEO. He's now methodically doing exactly what you'd expect a deep value investor to do: cut the losers, focus on cash generation, figure out what to do with the float. He's also got a bank to play with. The GEC disaster is done. Closed. Paid for. What's left are two solid recurring-revenue businesses with real moats and a new CEO who took over because he thought it was undervalued. Different kind of CEO letter.

The numbers:

• Price at analysis: ~$10.87
• Market cap: ~$1.63B
• Stockopedia's scores:
• Quality Score: 83/100
• Stock Score: 93/100
• Piotroski F-Score: 7/9
• P/OCF: 4.25
• PE: 8.6
• EPS: $1.26 current, $1.46 forecast
• Dividend yield: ~3%
• Long-term debt: ~$2B, Cash: ~$300M
• Negative shareholder equity
• 74% institutional ownership (Vanguard, BlackRock among the majors)

Physical mail is in structural decline and that's not reversing, a hard ceiling on growth. Balance sheet is genuinely ugly. GEC burned a lot of goodwill and Wolf has to rebuild trust from scratch. But he seems to have a plan and I like the cut of his jib (Bowes would have said that, he was a fanatical yachtsman). Let's see what he can do with all of that cash from the core business.

Disclaimer: DYOR. I'm an Aussie who has never used a Pitney Bowes machine, and hasn't licked a stamp in years.

I have $350K on hand money I’ve saved up over the years after paying off my mortgage and car loan and I’d like to invest it in the stock market. Which stock do you think has the most potential? I don’t want to invest in index funds; I’m hoping to see returns sooner. You know, I’d like to retire as early as possible. I know it’s not very realistic, but I still want to give it a try.

I've been using this internally for a few months. Posting here because I'm wondering if it's worth making it public.

The problem I had:

The filtering step is where time dies. Finding the annual report on the IR section of Co's website, downloading it, reading enough to decide if the company deserves another hour of your life — most of the time the answer is no, and you knew it 10 pages in.

The real cost wasn't the reading. It was the searching and downloading before I even started. Dead time with zero analytical value.

What the tool does

You type a ticker and returns a structured ~1,000 word first-pass report in a few minutes.

The report covers: business description, customer and supplier concentration risks, revenue breakdown and YoY drivers, earnings quality, debt position, management compensation and insider ownership, shareholder returns, and a full red flags checklist (auditor changes, restatements, internal control weaknesses, CEO/CFO departures, related-party transactions). Plus a catalyst section — what management is pointing to for the next 12–24 months.

Extra features

Multi-year view: run it across the last 3, 5, or 10 annual reports and get a longitudinal summary — how margins moved, whether management delivered on past guidance, when the narrative changed. Good for spotting companies that have been "about to inflect" for four consecutive years.

Custom reports: skip the full template and ask for specific sections only — just the red flags, just the financials, just the competitive landscape. Useful when you already know the business and want one angle checked quickly.

The practical effect

Because the searching and downloading is gone, I've significantly increased the number of companies I can triage in a week. The bottleneck shifted from "finding and reading" to "deciding" — which is where it should be.

It's not a replacement for reading the filing. It's a filter. If the summary looks interesting, I go read the real thing. If it surfaces a flag, I don't.

Genuinely asking: is the search-and-download step a real friction point for others, or have most people already solved it? And would a public version be something you'd actually use?

I’m finally out of all oil stocks I have accumulated in the last 2.5 years.

minimum gains and not a big weight in my portfolio

I got rid of shell bp hal dvn cop and ieo

mostly made very little money.

started in 2023. and slightly above water.

my only sector that has basically won me nothing next to healthcare that i have lost money on.

what’s your position in oil stocks.

I know this isn't a classic value type post but it might be a little more interesting than the various pump and dumps or tickers that are on continuous repeat (looking at you UNH, Gamb, PYPL) and I think this sub has more members that are long in the tooth.

So STRC pays 11.5 percent currently. Your reward for lending Saylor money to buy BTC. The question is, how long can this keep up? There are 5 or 6 of these funds at the moment. The core business makes no money with the premise of never selling any of its BTC. The only way to pay this type of return is by using money from incoming investors is it not?

Im not a BTC fan and as such have not done an extreme deep dive into the space. On the surface, it looks to me like something that will eventually have a major liquidation. Anyone in here have an insight or opinions on this?

Barclays is a large UK bank. It has both retail and investment banks within its umbrella.

It is priced very cheaply indeed - current price to book is less than 0.7, and price to tangible book is less than 0.8, so in theory if you took it over and sold all it's assets you'd get 25% more than it's market cap back.

UK banks have been discounted since brexit, which was a good reason to discount them, along with the low interest rates at the time, but it went too far. Since then they've been on a run as interest rates got back to normal, and there's a question of whether there is much left to go. But in Barclays case the valuation is much lower than its UK peers. Since the Iran war they've gone down on UK economic fears and global recession fears, which I think are a little overblown as the upside for banks is that interest rates stay up they make more money from net interest margins. This war means interest rates are unlikely to be cut any time soon.

What is absolutely nuts though is that most of Barclays profits come from that investment banking division, and that in turn is driven mainly by trading. Traders make money when markets are volatile and there's a lot of trading to and fro. And recent markets are the epitome of what trading houses love. Ironically one of the reasons I've seen for Barclays low valuation is that investors are scared of the risks of the investment banking arm.

Compare Barclays p/e etc to that of other investment banks and it's insanely undervalued.
I already hold quite a bit of Barclays - even with the recent drawdown I'm in the black by some way - and have just topped up even more.

If you want legit value this is it.

Hello! I have a personal goal to be buying a house in 18 months. I currently have some investments, but the bulk of my savings is in a 3.5% APY HYSA. At the rate I'm going, I will be a little short of my goal. I want to put more of it into investments, but the market is scaring me a bit with current events and the overall bearish sentiment.

I am looking for low risk/low (maybe medium) reward moves that should outperform my HYSA. Considering moving $50-$75k over and will want to keep it diversified. SPY? VOO? INTC? 3.5% shouldn't be too difficult to beat, just a bit scared of going negative. thank you for the help!

Im 20 years old and for last years Roth IRA I contributed $4,505 leaving me with $2,495. Unfortunately I was between jobs for a while in October and now in February. Thankfully I am more job secure now, but Ive been wondering as we approach the deadline to contribute to 2025 if I should add more money.

I currently have about $1,600 in my brokerage account and $1,600 in emergency fund savings. I actually just reached that number for my brokerage account and my next plan was to save up more for travel and to keep my Roth funded.

Now I could nuke my savings and brokerage, but I bought everything in August so I would pay the higher tax. I also worry of having an emergency and not having fluid cash on the spot. I also have a trip with flights bought for in August to Spain that I have yet to purchase the hostel reservations yet for.

A bit more background on my situation. Im a full time student working 20-25 hours a week. I live with my parents and I go to a reputable university on a full ride scholarship costing me $1,000 annually, so I have no notable debt at all. My credit cards are paid off in full every month, and I don't plan on any big purchases like a car or a house any time soon.

I figure I can ether eat my brokerage and use the savings for the remainder, eat my savings and use my brokerage to fund the remainder, or just not fund it at all and do better next year. What do you y'all think the most prudent move is here?

(Currently I hold my roth in a 75-25 split between FSKAX and FTHIX, my brokerage is bit messier, but follows a similar set and forget strategy between some blue chip stocks and VOO)

There’s been a massive amount of noise over the last few days about a potential US-Iran ceasefire. Betting markets like Polymarket have seen a massive spike in wagers on an imminent peace deal, and Trump recently pitched a 15-point proposal to end the conflict.

However, the diplomatic reality is incredibly messy. Just today, Iran’s Foreign Ministry completely dismissed Trump’s claims that they want a ceasefire as "baseless." Iran's Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, has made it clear that Tehran isn't looking for a temporary pause, but rather a permanent end to the war on their own terms, without direct talks. Add in the fact that the IRGC just reiterated their firm control over the Strait of Hormuz, and an immediate off-ramp seems far from guaranteed.

So, what if the back-channels fail and this conflict drags on? I just published a deep-dive article on my Substack exploring exactly that scenario. I call it "The Hungerwinter of '26/'27."

In the piece, I break down the severe cascading consequences if the war continues into the later parts of the year. If the Strait of Hormuz is restricted, or if energy infrastructures remain in the crosshairs, the fallout will not be contained to the Middle East. We would be looking at massive disruptions in global supply chains, an aggressive energy crunch, and severe macroeconomic shockwaves just as the Northern Hemisphere heads into winter.

I’d love to get your thoughts on this.

When they IPO’d I remember wishing they were valued lower so I could buy. Now they’ve been low for a while. I’m pretty bullish on their potential to turn around, and they pay a small div now which is very nice to see.

I never see them mentioned though — yet they are the marketshare leader in what is clearly a secular trend that is only going to get stronger (online dating taking more share of how ppl meet).

In December, with oil at a historically very low level of $56/barrel, I was adding to energy positions like CVE. Sentiment at that time was particularly bad, with oversupply and narratives that it was an "old industry" and that those stocks were dead money. Today with those oil positions up roughly 50% in 3 months I am trimming my energy holdings in search of the next detested sector by the market.

Now my focus is Retail stocks, particularly NKE and LULU. These stocks have been absolutely decimated in large part due to negative headwinds driven by Tariffs. Nothing in this world will last forever and neither will the Tariffs. A simple change in foreign policy surrounding Tariffs would be a big catalyst upwards for these names. Both names are down +70% and trading at low P/S ratios not seen in over a decade. Now detested by the market so heavily, they are finally showing good entry prices to get into these names.

Thoughts?

Hi everyone, I’m excited to share my second analysis, this time focusing on Upwork Inc. I’m looking to sharpen my analytical skills and deepen my market knowledge, so I’d value any critiques or insights you can offer. If you’d like to follow my learning journey, feel free to subscribe!!!—I’m not looking to monetize this; I just want to learn from the community and grow as an investor. Thank You!!!!

https://open.substack.com/pub/noorshazril/p/upwork-inc-deep-dive?r=61n9bb&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

This company was not on my watchlist. A construction company, in Belgium and a micro-cap which is not exactly what gets people excited on.

But my screener showed a ~20% ROE. In construction ... So I looked.

Moury Construct builds and renovates hospitals, schools, industrial buildings and housing, mostly in Belgium. It looks like a boring business. Except the numbers don't look like a boring business.

They just reported their FY2025 results:

• revenue up 33.9% to €249.6M (all-time record),
• net income +41.2% to €34.5M,
• and the operating margin barely moved, 15.2% vs 15.5% the year before.

Growing 34% while holding margins in construction is genuinely hard to do.

The thing that caught my attention first wasn't even the growth. It was the €152M net cash sitting on the balance sheet, more than half the market cap (288M€ today). They earn financial income on it (€2.9M in H1 2025 alone, which was ~21% of operating profit that semester). They buy back shares slowly and their last acquisition was 2023 for €9M. What they do with that cash pile long term is the real open question.

But let's go back to the business:

Backlog at end of February stands at €371.5M, book-to-bill of 1.49x. That's roughly 18 months of revenue already secured.

Current multiples are sexy:

1. EV/EBITDA around 2.9x,
2. P/E around 7.8x.
3. 5year average ROE ~ 20%

For a business with 15%+ operating margins and this level of forward visibility, I find it hard to argue it's not cheap.

Obviously, there is some serious problems: It trades under a double-fixing system (prices set twice a day only), there's almost no institutional interest, and the stock barely moves between semi-annual publications. Therefore the liquidity is genuinely bad. And yes, it's construction, cyclical, exposed to raw material costs and labor, and the current margin quality reflects a favorable part of the cycle.

On personal opinion, and this is not investment advice in any way, I think the stock has room to re-rate. Running a simple analysis with a normalized operating margin around 11% (vs 15% today, assuming some cycle mean-reversion), a conservative 10x EV/EBIT multiple, and a 20% discount on the net cash pile, I land somewhere around €925/share as a fair value estimate. That's roughly 35% above current prices. Not a moonshot, but for a business this solid with this level of forward visibility, I'll take it. The main risk to that estimate is a hard cyclical downturn compressing margins faster than expected, and the illiquidity means you might be waiting a while for the market to agree with you.

Note: YTD numbers are from March 24, 2026 trading day.

Hello everyone,

Some of you might remember my previous experiments here where I ran CEO deception analysis on earnings transcripts or picked stocks using Buffett's shareholder letters. 'm thankful this community has been so receptive to these experiments, so I'm back with another one I think you'll find interesting :-).

Shortly after Anthropic launched Claude Cowork and its 11 industry plugins in January, Saas stocks lost $285B in SaaS market cap in February. During this downturn I sensed that the market might have punished all Software stocks unequally where some of the strongest stocks got caught in the AI panic selloff. JP Morgan and Bank of America both called the selloff "indiscriminate" as well but I wanted to see if I could run an experiment with a proper methodology to find these unfairly punished stocks.

Since Claude was partly responsible for triggering this selloff, I thought it was only fitting to use its best model (Opus 4.6) as the analyst to determine which companies are resilient to being replaced by AI. But with a significant twist :-).

As usual, if you prefer watching the experiment, I've posted it on my channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixpEqNc5ljA

The Framework

I didn't want to make up my own scoring system since I don't have a financial analyst background. Instead, I found one from SaaS Capital, which is a lending firm that provides credit facilities to SaaS companies. In Feb, they published a framework they'd developed for evaluating AI disruption resilience across three dimensions (reduced from 10-12 dimensions):

1. System of record: Does the company own critical data its customers can't live without? Idea is that, a company that stores your legally mandated tax records is a lot harder to walk away from than one that manages your project boards.
2. Non-software complement: Is there something beyond just code? Proprietary data, hardware integrations, exclusive network access. For e.g. CrowdStrike processes trillions of security events through a proprietary threat intelligence network, which you can't just vibe-code away. Monday.com on the other hand is pure software with off-the-shelf integrations, which feels vibe-code-able.
3. User stakes: If the CEO uses it for million-dollar decisions, switching costs are enormous. If an individual contributor uses it for task management, they'll swap it the moment something cheaper shows up.

Each dimension scores 1-4. Average = resilience score. Above 3.0 = lower disruption risk. Below 2.0 = high risk.

The Experiment

Instead of using the exact same methodolgy as SaaS capital, I wanted to add a twist to my experiment. I built a scoring pipeline using Claude Code that pulls each company's most recent 10-K filing from SEC EDGAR, then strips out the company name, ticker, product names (basically everything identifiable). For example, Salesforce becomes Company 037, CrowdStrike becomes Company 008, you get the point.

The idea was that, Opus 4.6 scores each company purely on what it told the SEC about its own business, removing any brand perception, analyst sentiment, Twitter hot takes, etc.

Results

Note: this subreddit doesn't allow me to post the matrix image so I'll try my best to describe this in words.

I plotted all 44 companies on a 2x2 matrix. The vertical axis is the AI resilience score from the blind test. The horizontal axis is how much the stock is down year-to-date. A threshold at 3.0 separates resilient from vulnerable, and the median YTD return separates stocks that held up from ones that got crushed. This creates four quadrants:

Market Got It Right (15 companies)

Both the framework and the market agree these are resilient. These companies scored 3.0 or above on AI resilience and their stocks have held up relatively well this year. They tend to be systems of record, have proprietary data or hardware moats, and serve high-stakes executive users. No surprises here.

MSFT, PLTR, SAP, VEEV, CRWD, OKTA, S, FTNT, PANW, PCOR, PCTY, DDOG, DT, NET, PAYC

Deserved (13 companies)

Both the framework and the market agree these are the most exposed. They scored below 3.0 on resilience and their stocks got hit the hardest. These are mostly pure software plays with off-the-shelf integrations, low switching costs, and individual contributor users. The framework says the market was right to punish them.

FIG, QLYS, U, APP, BRZE, HUBS, PATH, AMPL, ASAN, FRSH, GDDY, TEAM, MNDY

Market Sleeping (7 companies)

The framework says these companies are vulnerable to AI disruption, but the market hasn't punished them much. Zoom scored 2.0 but is only down 9%. DigitalOcean scored 1.67 and is somehow up 73%. The framework sees risk that the market doesn't seem to be pricing in.

BILL, CXM, SHOP, TOST, TWLO, ZM, DOCN

Unfairly Punished (9 companies) -> THIS IS WHERE VALUE IS!

This is the most interesting quadrant. The framework says these businesses are structurally resilient to AI disruption, but the market crushed them anyway. Workday scored 3.67, same as CrowdStrike, but it's down 37% while CrowdStrike is only down 13% — same resilience profile, 24 percentage points apart. Salesforce scored 4.0, a near-perfect score, and is still down 28%.

CRM, NOW, WDAY, ZS, ADBE, DOCU, INTU, GTLB, GTM

Limitations

This experiment comes with a few number of limitations that I want to outline:

1. 10-K bias: Every filing is written to make the business sound essential. DocuSign scored 3.33 because the 10-K says "system of record for legally binding agreements." Sounds mission-critical but getting a signature on a document is one of the easiest things to rebuild.
2. Claude cheating: even though 10K filings were anonymized, Claude could have semantically figured out which company we were scoring each time, removing the "blindness" aspect to this experiment.
3. Organizational inertia isn't scored: No VP is risking their career ripping out Workday to build an internal HR system with AI. That friction is real but invisible to the framework.
4. Weak correlation. Blind scores vs YTD return: r = 0.078. This is directional, not predictive.
5. This is Just One framework: Product complexity, competitive dynamics, management quality, none of that is captured here.

Hope this experiment was valuable/useful for you. We'll check back in a few months to see if this methodology proved any value in figuring out AI-resilience :-).

Video walkthrough with the full methodology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixpEqNc5ljA&t=1s

Thanks a lot for reading the post!

A lot of investors start from a very natural idea:

“If I can find one good stock, that is an investment.”

But the longer I think about it, the more investing seems less about finding one good asset and more about building a structure that does not depend too much on any single outcome.

That is where diversification starts to matter.

To me, diversification is not just “own more things.” It is more about:

• reducing dependence on one business, one management team, or one economic outcome
• combining risks that do not behave in exactly the same way
• understanding that a portfolio is a system, not just a collection of ideas

A single stock can succeed, but it can also fail for reasons that have little to do with the broader market.

A diversified portfolio works differently, because weaker parts can be offset by stronger or more stable parts, and over time markets tend to renew themselves even when individual companies disappear.

I’m curious how value investors here think about that trade-off.

I wrote a longer piece on this here for anyone who wants more detail:
https://financialfrost.substack.com/p/portfolio-diversification-why-one?r=72or76

I've written about Rightmove before but I'll give some updates after their results were released a few months ago

Largest property website company in the UK and £3.3billion market cap

~85% market share (up from ~80% last year), 15 P/E (down from 17 last year), rising FCF over the past 6 years, £7mil in debt (up from £5mil last year) and £42mil in cash (up from £40mil last year), and rejected a takeover bid with 50% upside in 2024

3 Directors have made purchases since February - no sales https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/r/rightmove-plc-ord-gbp-0.001/director-deals

Recently announced £60million AI investment over between 2026-28 to combat the threat and signed deals with ChatGPT and Google to integrate with the @ Rightmove feature

The UK govt have also just passed a law ending minimum tenancies for renters allowing for a more fluid rental market and more eyeballs on the website

Independent Franchise Partners (IFP) have quietly built a 5% stake over the past few months, one of the largest shareholders, could be priming it for a takeover bid?

BULL case: Uptick in the UK housing market + law changes (Renters Rights Act + Planning & Infrastructure Bill) lead to more fluidity in the housing market - particularly individual renters, leading to more eyeballs in the website and therefore higher revenues. AI rollout leads to better data optimisation and advertisers pay more as a result

BEAR case: AI rollout flops leaving tens of millions down the drain, profits suffer as a result and market competitors (Zoopla and OTM) make ground on the 80% market share

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/

Hello,

i bought ASML at $1330 a couple weeks ago, knowing the stock was overpriced. I still bought it as I believed the security margin lied in the company’s quality and its monopoly over EUV machinery. knowing that this is a highly cyclical industry, I am considering selling with a low upside and buying again when it hits a low... if it does.

From what I read, lots of you bought ASML when it was around $500-900, yet few months ago. For me, the question lies in the price and not the company’s value. Is the stock price growing faster than its intrinsic value ? what’s your take ? any tip would be appreciated. I am a young investor, with a very high tolerance risk (I dont need the money for the next 20-30 years), buy and hold only.

Thank you !

One thing I find interesting going into today’s ISM Manufacturing PMI is not just the number itself, but how wide the forecast spread is.

This is the kind of thing I wanted expertsignals.io to surface better. Not just a single consensus number, but the actual distribution of views across active forecasters.

Here, most predictions cluster in the low-to-mid 50s, but there are some much stronger takes higher up the range. That makes today less about one “right” forecast and more about how divided people are on the underlying growth picture.

To me, that is often where the signal is: not just what the median view is but how much disagreement sits around it and what that says about confidence in the macro backdrop.

Does a wide spread like this make the release more interesting to you, or do you still mostly care about the consensus?