No Data
SymbolStock Name
PriceChg% ChgVolumeTurnoverOpenPre CloseHighLowMarket CapFloat CapSharesShs Float5D % Chg10D % Chg20D % Chg60D % Chg120D % Chg250D % Chg% Year-to-dateDiv YieldTTMTurnover RatioP/E (TTM)P/E (Static)AmplitudeIndustry
WatchlistPaper Trade
Sinisloth : $Virgin Galactic (SPCE.US)$ $Hyperscale Data (GPUS.US)$
102701962 : Thanks for the dip Jensen
TokenSleep 102701962 : Right, this is 100% the time to buy and hold.
StockPeep : Yeah we don’t need your opinion Jensen, but thinks for the dip. More shares I buy :)
BelleWeather : I sold my second naked calls ever on quantum tickers last week (the first time was only a single contract, and while I had very high conviction, it wasn’t to the point of feeling that “I know,” and so risky that, well, one contract was a fine start. I did have the highest level of conviction that quantum stocks would correct, hugely and soon. Still sold extra time for obvious reasons. The only “new” idea I had going into the New Year with any confidence. I’m happy it worked out, of course, because the opposite would have been very not good. I’m so sorry for others, however. It was odd, as I mentioned, commented, shared the trade and spoke of the correction in a Moo Moo Livestream. And there was only one single response that considered essentially what Huang said possible, and many others who disagreed, most vehemently, some angrily and a few in an ugly fashion. Also, I explained my reasoning (same as Sir Jensen’s, but also others,) and it seemed that those in disagreement had none. I should think that a few hours of reading on the technology and examination of valuations and other fundamentals would have prompted caution at the least? I feel bad that the trade worked, but also, wish I saw more reasoning behind strong conviction trades from others. Unless trading purely junk pennys with TA, these things do matter, I think.
View more comments...