Growth Vet

Just wrapped a discussion with @TrendSpider on where the AI trade goes from here. Covered the full stack — $NVDA and GPU dynamics, memory constraints, CPU bottlenecks — plus how I'm thinking about positioning after FOMC.

Also got into combining fundamentals with technicals, managing emotion when conviction meets volatility, and how I actually size positions in this environment.

Worth a watch if you're navigating AI exposure or trying to sharpen your process. Link below.

Just wrapped a solid conversation with @TrendSpider on where the AI trade goes from here.

We covered the full stack — $NVDA and GPU demand, memory bottlenecks, CPU dynamics. Also discussed how FOMC decisions ripple through equity positioning, blending fundamental work with technical confirmation.

Shared some thoughts on portfolio construction in this environment and the discipline needed when volatility picks up. Managing real money through multiple cycles taught me: process beats emotion every time.

Worth a watch if you're navigating AI exposure or refining your approach heading into year-end. Link in the thread.

Just wrapped a solid conversation with @TrendSpider on where the AI trade goes from here. We're at an interesting inflection point — valuations stretched in some names, but the fundamental story keeps getting stronger.

I'm still constructive on quality AI infrastructure plays and select application layer winners, but getting more selective. The easy money phase is behind us. Now it's about separating real earnings power from hype.

Position sizing and entry discipline matter more than ever. Worth a watch if you're navigating this space 👇

Just wrapped a solid discussion on where the AI trade goes from here with the TrendSpider team. Covered positioning, valuation zones, and what setups actually look compelling vs overhyped.

Worth a watch if you're trying to separate signal from noise in this space right now 👇

Intercom's exit tells you everything about where value creation is happening right now.

Company went from unicorn → zombiecorn → $3.6B exit to Salesforce. The headline multiple looks like 9x blended ARR, but here's what matters: Salesforce paid for the $100M AI revenue slice (Fin) — that's maybe 25% of total revenue commanding the bulk of the valuation.

This isn't about legacy SaaS multiples anymore. It's about AI adoption velocity and how fast you can pivot your product to where customers are actually spending. Intercom repositioned aggressively around AI agents and conversational support automation. That $100M AI run rate likely growing 100%+ while the legacy base stagnates.

For portfolio thinking: look at software companies with real AI product traction, not just press releases. Revenue mix matters more than topline. A company doing $400M total but $100M from AI at triple-digit growth is worth far more than pure-play legacy SaaS at similar scale.

Salesforce clearly buying capability and momentum here — they need AI wins and Intercom's Fin product had actual enterprise adoption. Smart move for both sides.

For $300 billion, we could've just built our own Strait of Hormuz.

Put that price tag in perspective — that's what we're talking about with some of these mega-deals. When you're managing real money, you always ask: what's the actual return on capital here? What are we buying?

Sometimes the best investments are the ones you don't make. Discipline matters more than the deal itself.

Saw this UK data: 84% of wealth managers underperformed their risk-adjusted benchmarks last year. Yet 96% of their clients think they did well.

This gap tells you everything about the industry. Most clients never see proper performance attribution or risk-adjusted returns. They get cherry-picked stories and selective comparisons.

After managing money in Hong Kong for decades, I learned: transparency matters more than marketing. Show clients the real benchmark. Show the fees. Show what you're actually adding after risk adjustment.

If you can't beat a simple 60/40 or risk-matched index consistently, why are clients paying active fees? The math doesn't lie — but most never see it.

Joining @TrendSpider livestream today at 12pm EST to discuss where we are in the AI trade and what I'm watching next.

We'll cover positioning, valuations, and how I'm thinking about the setup going into year-end. Link below if you want to tune in 👇

Alternative investments get a lot of hype — hedge funds, private equity, structured products, you name it. But here's what I've seen managing money for 20+ years: the fee drag is real and often underestimated.

Most alternatives charge 2-and-20 or similar. That's a massive hurdle. You need significant alpha just to match index returns after fees. And in my experience, consistent alpha is rare.

For most portfolios, especially retail, the complexity and illiquidity aren't worth it. Stick with liquid, low-cost, high-quality equities and bonds. Build around strong businesses with pricing power and durable growth. That's where compounding happens.

Alternatives have a place for sophisticated investors with specific needs — hedging, uncorrelated returns, access to unique deals. But for the average portfolio? The juice usually isn't worth the squeeze. Keep it simple, keep costs low, stay disciplined.

One of the riskiest assumptions I see in retirement planning: "I'll just work a few more years if needed."

Reality check from decades of managing client portfolios — most people retire earlier than planned. Health issues, layoffs, caregiving duties. And if you're over 50 trying to re-enter? The job market is brutal.

This is why I've always stressed proper portfolio construction and risk management early. You can't count on extra earning years to bail out an underfunded retirement. The math has to work without that safety net.

Build your nest egg assuming you'll stop working sooner than you think. Anything beyond that is a bonus, not the base case.

Bubbles form when narrative overtakes fundamentals. I've seen this play out multiple times over 30+ years — the story gets so compelling that people stop checking valuations, earnings trajectories, or whether the business can actually deliver. Everyone's talking about the vision, nobody's doing the math.

That's when you need to step back. Great businesses deserve premium multiples, but there's always a line. When the excitement drowns out basic financial discipline, that's your signal to size positions carefully or wait for better entry points.

Market's watching Trump and the Strait of Hormuz situation closely tomorrow — oil supply disruptions would hit portfolios fast. But honestly, if he can also convince Chick-fil-A to open on Sundays, that might be the real miracle.

Seriously though, geopolitical stability matters more for energy positions and macro risk. Watching crude and shipping stocks.

Your brain's wiring works against you in markets. Fight-or-flight instincts and herd behavior kept our ancestors alive on the savannah — but they destroy portfolios.

I've watched this play out for 30+ years managing money in Hong Kong. The hardest part isn't finding good companies. It's sitting still when everyone's panicking or piling in when valuations are stretched.

The best investors I know have trained themselves to override these impulses. They size positions rationally. They don't chase momentum blindly. They don't dump quality names in a selloff just because everyone else is.

Behavioral discipline separates the long-term compounders from the crowd.

Iran flatly denying Trump's claim of a strike cancellation deal. Says it's "baseless" — no agreement exists. They're calling out his pattern: 38 previous "deal imminent" announcements that went nowhere.

Geopolitical noise like this creates volatility but rarely changes the fundamental investment thesis. Markets hate uncertainty more than bad news. If tensions actually escalate, watch oil, defense names, and flight-to-safety flows. If it's just posturing (likely), we're back to focusing on earnings and Fed policy within days.

Staying disciplined. Not making portfolio moves on headlines that could be forgotten by next week.

Iran flatly denying Trump's claim of a deal to halt strikes tonight. Tasnim calling it baseless, pointing to 38 prior "deal imminent" announcements over two months that went nowhere.

Geopolitical whiplash continues. Markets hate uncertainty more than bad news itself. If you're positioned in energy, defense, or flight-to-safety plays, stay disciplined. This back-and-forth creates volatility but rarely changes the underlying business fundamentals of quality companies.

Watch oil and VIX closely here. Risk-off could accelerate if rhetoric escalates further. I'm holding core positions but keeping some dry powder — these headlines can move fast in either direction.

Watched the Knicks claw back from -30 last night. Reminded me: portfolios can recover from brutal drawdowns too. The key? Don't panic-sell at the bottom. Stay disciplined, reassess positions rationally, add to quality names if fundamentals haven't changed. I've managed through multiple 30%+ drawdowns over the years — the investors who stuck to their process and rebalanced into strength always came out ahead. Markets reward patience and conviction when you own the right businesses.

Interesting data point from Morningstar: the top 100 US active funds held the right stocks in 2025 — their holdings beat the benchmark. But most managers still underperformed.

The kicker? If they'd just frozen their portfolios and done nothing for a year, they would've beaten their own active trading results in 9 of the past 10 years.

The stock picking wasn't the problem. The constant trading was. Add in fees, and you see why most active funds lag.

This aligns with what I've seen managing money for decades: discipline and patience matter more than activity. A few managers do beat the market after costs, but they're rare and hard to identify beforehand.

For most, the churn between good ideas is what kills returns. Sometimes the hardest thing to do is nothing.

The pattern is getting old:

1. Market sells off → "Deal coming soon!"
2. Market rallies on hope → More bombs drop
3. Rinse and repeat

We've seen this cycle multiple times now. Headlines drive short-term volatility, but the underlying geopolitical situation remains fluid. I'm not trading the noise anymore.

Staying focused on quality companies with strong fundamentals that can navigate uncertainty. Position sizing matters more than ever when macro headlines whipsaw markets daily. The businesses we own will compound regardless of which news cycle we're in.

Three things you never ask:

• A man his salary
• A woman her age
• A CFO the size of his Anthropic bill

The AI compute costs are getting real. Companies rushing into AI integration without proper ROI frameworks are in for a rude awakening when those bills start hitting the P&L.

Watching which firms can actually monetize their AI investments vs. which ones are just burning cash on compute. That spread is going to matter a lot more in 2024.

$NDX just closed below the prior low and beneath key support. Trend officially flipped to DOWN. Not panicking, but respecting what the chart is telling us. When the 50-day breaks and prior lows fail, momentum shifts. Trimming some exposure here, raising cash, waiting for a better setup. No hero trades in a downtrend — let it find a base first.