shhughes1116

I work for a regulatory agency. I am prohibited from investing in companies that derive revenue from regulated activities. I’m also prohibited from investing in some basic materials that could be inputs for these regulated activities. In practice and enforcement, this prohibition extends way beyond the directly regulated activities. I'm not sure I follow the question about whether it is worth it. I tolerate the prohibition because I generally like what I do and I like the people I work with. I stick around because I think I can convince people here that many compliance issues across regulated industries can be solved by additional transparency and information sharing (cheap and easy to effectuate), rather than new regs/guidance (expensive for industry to implement and expensive to verify compliance).

I attribute my 2025 return to luck. It will never happen again. Mining is one of the few areas in the market that I am allowed to invest in. In 2025, I batted nearly 100% on junior miners. Take a look at my Canadian Copper thread - that is one example and one reason for my 2025 return.

All of your returns are likely better than mine over time. I’m ok with that. Clearly I’m leaving some returns on the table. If I am fully invested, whether that is in stocks or ETFs, it is very hard for me to be mentally present with my family. When I die, my kids and wife aren’t gonna remember how much money I had, or the returns I had in 2021 or 2017 or any other specific year. They will remember whether or not I was present with them. And it is easier for me to be mentally present when I am in mostly cash and cash equivalents. we are all creatures of our past. In my past, I watched a lot of people get really mentally f**cked up by the gfc. I saw a lot of people, that should have retired to spend time with their spouse and kids, continue working until they died because they lost a bunch of money. I don’t need that in my life.

1. I hold a lot of cash. 2. I combine deep value with some technical analysis. My personality traits make it really hard for me to do momentum and growth investing. 3. My job prevents me from investing in large parts of the market, so i spend a lot of time deeply following the parts of the market I am allowed to invest in. 4. I missed the COVID drawdown entirely. 5. Luck. I’m sure #5 does most of the heavy lifting. I think my job-imposed investment limitations have also been a blessing in disguise. It keeps me out of a lot of stuff that I don’t know well and probably not capable of understanding. Im sure you guys have better returns than me most years. I’m fine sacrificing some returns in order to sleep well, not have anxiety, etc. My aim is to survive the marathon, not win it.

The GFC was the last time I had a double-digit drawdown across my investable assets. Maybe that means I don’t take enough risk. However, there are certainly specific securities that I’ve had a double-digit drawdown in. In most instances, I broke my own investing rules by getting into those securities, so I take my lumps, sell, and move on. I try to consider it tuition paid, and better to pay it now while I’m still working. I got wrecked recently - 50% loss in the security and about 1% of NAV - in Emerita Resources. While they have some nice polymetallic deposits in Iberian belt, I broke my rule by investing with questionable management, and also broke my rule by wagering on a court verdict for Aznacollar. Stop worrying about other peoples’ returns. Stop worrying about stocks that ran away from you. Envy is the thief of happiness. Manage your money to meet your goals and your risk tolerance. If drawdowns are making you uncomfortable, it’s ok to dial back the risk.

While I like some precious metals for their industrial utility, I’m more interested in base metals. I think copper has further to go and we’ll see a new price paradigm. Nickel has only just started its move, and the price paradigm has likely changed given the actions by Indonesia. All of this supported by resource nationalism, reshoring, and CapEx. I think of Brent $100 as the ejection seat handle. When Brent hits $100, it’s time for me to eject from the metals space.

Chemicals. They’ve traded like dogshit for a few years, although they are off the lows now. Sentiment is still generally in the toilet. And if the administration runs it hot, chemicals will do well. I like Huntsman after their dividend cut. REITs. Sentiment doesn’t seem great across the board, new unit construction has slowed, and some suffer from pretty unique discounts, like the Mandami discount. I like Alexander’s for that reason. I also like NXRT. Sure, deportations will keep a lid on rents for a little while, but I think this will be short lived.

I have no idea, although my suspicion here (like in most tech) is that there will be multiple approaches that make it to the market. The carbon nano tube tech seems promising, although its not clear they've solved the discharge problem, and its seems like it delays rather than prevents dendrite formation. We're gonna learn a lot from the Donut Labs motorcycle. The silver-carbon approach doesn't seem to suffer from the discharge problem, and appears superior at preventing dendrite formation. I'm sure we will learn a lot from the partnership between Samsung and BMW - I think this tech is going into i7 prototype vehicles later this year. To be transparent, I'm not an engineer. I follow this for personal interest, and it happens to intersect with my investing interest in explorers and developers.

This was my initial reaction - short the parabolic move. Then I started reading about Samsung’s solid state battery tech. We’re gonna need a lot of silver for solid state batteries. Now I’m not so sure if we are seeing a step-change in demand. Most silver is produced as a by-product - it’s not so simple to ramp up supply.

+1 If Venezuelan crude comes back to the market in significant quantities, it would end up in Padd 3 and likely displace Canadian crude. The current direction of pipelines would make it hard for Venezuelan crude to be refined in other geographic areas, so padd 2 and padd 4 would continue to be the primary destination for Canadian crude. All of this probably leads to small drop in WTI, and a more considerable widening of the WTI-WCS differential - negative for Canadian oil producers and especially the oil sands producers.

+188% this year in non-retirement account. Performance almost entirely driven by Zegona, EQR Resources and Canadian Copper. +25% to +45% in retirement accounts. Performance entirely attributable to dumb luck and fortuitous timing that enabled me to avoid the tariff temper tantrum carnage in April. Lots to be thankful for in 2025.

EQR Resources (EQR.AX) Magna Mining (NICU.TO) Nintendo Heartland Express Entravision

Over the last few months, been putting together a basket of junior developers and producers associated with tungsten, copper, and nickel. These include EQR Resources, Magna Mining, Emerita Resources, and Canadian Copper. These go along with an existing position in Guardian Metals. I think we are in the early innings of resource nationalism and an emphasis on domestic production of critical metals.

Are you referring to their sizable stake in FCNCA? I believe that is the bulk, if not the entirety of their equity portfolio.

This vulnerability is not new - we’ve been dependent on China for rare earth elements, especially the heavy ones, for the last decade. I’d hope that the administration considered this (and relevant mitigations) before starting their tariff war with China. I think we are a few years away from MolyCorp resuming refinery operations for all rare earth elements including the heavy ones.

Did you guys mean XIFR, the new name for the bombed out Nextera Energy Partners?

I think there is a compelling investment case for high-powered lasers (CIWS, replacement for Phalanx) and missiles. The events in the Red Sea suggest that 85-95 VLS on destroyers are not enough and so we are likely to see ships equipped with larger volumes of missiles, along with lasers. I think we will see a similar evolution on land (more robust EW, high-powered lasers for close-in defense, and larger volumes of small missiles).

The combination of AEGIS and E-2 Hawkeyes make it almost impossible for someone to get close enough, undetected, to launch a salvo of hypersonic missiles. But let’s assume they are launched. Carrier group changes direction to increase distance and speed between the missiles. CAP aircraft get the first shots. The CG’s destroyer group gets the second shot with SM-3 and SM-6, and each destroyer has about 85-95 vertical launch cells. And if by some miracle the hypersonic missiles get past that, multiple Phalanx CIWS get a shot (likely with some debris damage to the flight deck if they successful hit the hypersonic missile). and all this assumes the enemy kill chain is fast enough to get hypersonic missiles into the air and headed to the right place where the carrier is. The Chinese make this look super easy when they repeatedly hit their aircraft carrier mock-up in the desert that does not move and does not fight back. if you are basing your assessment on the British destroyers in the falklands and their experience with Exocet missiles, you may wish to read about all the mistakes they made leading up to that point - mistakes that are unlikely to be repeated by a carrier group.

There is clear case to make for drones in the future of warfare - in that sense I agree with Elon. The experience in Ukraine highlights the impact of small drones around the line of contact and in the rear. But a majority of infantry casualties suffered by the Russians are not caused by drones, they are caused by DPCIM 155m rounds. And the naval drones are operating in the space of a green water navy, not a blue water navy. The future of warfare is likely a combination of manned vessels/vehicles, wingman-like drones operating from the manned vessels/vehicles, autonomous longer-range drones for ISR and A2/AD, and grunts that hold a position. I wonder if electronic warfare capabilities keep up with drone tech. I've been looking for reasonable investments in companies that make high-powered lasers for ships, vehicles, and air defense. With the proliferation of drones and the cost of missiles, I think we will see a move towards lasers which may be more effective at dealing with large volumes of drones.

I'm sure that approach will work great in the vast expanses of the Pacific Ocean when China employs A2/AD around Taiwan. Marine Grunt: Where's our air support? Tech Bro Call Center: Sorry bro, those drones ran out of juice and fell into the ocean 1000 klicks to your west. Good luck.

CMCT. Combination of tax loss selling and people puking the common after a preferred conversion, which begets more tax loss selling.

It’s quite straightforward to fire poor performers. Done it multiple times over the last two decades. For Insubordination and for performance. Some hiring authorities like Title 42 and SBRBPS - hiring authorities routinely used at NIH - make it more straightforward. Once you fire the first one, your Branch/Division/Office gets a reputation and the shitty employees stay away. If a supervisor is saying it is impossible to fire poor performers, then in my experience in the Fed gov, it is the supervisor that is the poor performer and should be fired. I think re-shoring tech and other supply chain components will be the winning trade under Trump. I think DOGE will implode in a battle of egos between Vivek, Elon, Trump, and JD, which is unfortunate because I think they could bring some good ideas to government.

When I bought it, it was right under book value. At the time, there was a pretty steady stream of branch closures by the money center banks in Alaska which I thought would help the three listed Alaskan banks (FBAK, NRIM, and DENI). The Denali deposit mix was terrible and seemed like it could improve over time (it did) as customers moved from closed money center branches to Denali. Denali is also the smallest of the three by a lot, which makes it pretty easy to take-out at a premium. In the meantime it is a steady EPS grower and you get paid to wait around. My main issue - a recent one - is the increasing share of construction loans. Feels like they are growing this right into the peak of the cycle.

Lots of different reasons to own banks. Because I am constrained in the parts of the market I am allowed to invest in, I spend a lot of time looking at banks. I like FFBB, UNIB, SBNC, LRBI, DENI, BEOB, FRSB, NBN. All for different reasons. I routinely flog myself for not owning more NBN, SBNC, and BEOB.

Why not the Class B shares? 10% cheaper, same economic interest, and additional voting rights.