What are you buying today?

[gfp]

8 minutes ago, Charlie said:

gfp, I bought at €469 and sold them for €492 1-2 weeks ago.

I think we both nearly top-ticked selling Berkshire,

but I really like to own great productive assets and not to own

much cash.

 

What price did you re-purchase them for?

[Charlie]

53 minutes ago, gfp said:

What price did you re-purchase them for?

sold: €492

bought: €469

[Spooky]

5 hours ago, Charlie said:

I bought my Berkshire b shares traders back.

Reasoning: Bank of Ameria sees no recession coming, reported good results

and Apple mainly tariff-exempted and the annual meeting coming

in 2 1/2 weeks and Berkshire likely reporting great results.

I got an e-mail that Himalaya Investing (Li Lu) is taking new investors 

and Trump showing some flexibility.

I see this as bullish signs for the market.

 

 

Does Li Lu specify a minimum investment? Probably too high for a pleb like me.

[alpha]

6 hours ago, Charlie said:

 

I got an e-mail that Himalaya Investing (Li Lu) is taking new investors 

 

 

I am not sure that's a bullish indicator...

[Charlie]

31 minutes ago, Spooky said:

 

Does Li Lu specify a minimum investment? Probably too high for a pleb like me.

They sent me an e-mail. From the e-mail:

 

"...we are looking to set-up a feeder structure, only available to ‘Qualified Purchasers’, which would allow for minimum investment amounts of less than $1M."

 

 

[gfp]

QP is minimum $5m investments not including residence for an individual 

[benchmark]

51 minutes ago, Charlie said:

They sent me an e-mail. From the e-mail:

 

"...we are looking to set-up a feeder structure, only available to ‘Qualified Purchasers’, which would allow for minimum investment amounts of less than $1M."

 

 

are they structured as the standard 2/20? 

[WFF]

6 hours ago, Spooky said:

 

Does Li Lu specify a minimum investment? Probably too high for a pleb like me.

Heard about this about a month ago,  but didn’t get an email or invitation.  Did you email them awhile ago or apart of some group? @Charlie

[Charlie]

2 hours ago, WFF said:

Heard about this about a month ago,  but didn’t get an email or invitation.  Did you email them awhile ago or apart of some group? @Charlie

Some years ago I contacted them. I got an e-mail 5 days ago. 

[Charlie]

8 hours ago, benchmark said:

are they structured as the standard 2/20? 

Probably not, but I don´t know.

[frommi]

slowly buying my put hedges again. IWM, DAX, SPY

[lnofeisone]

I bought back my UNG short calls.

[Red Lion]

Small add to CP. 

[Kupotea]

Jan 2027 calls on equinox gold. Post merge the company is trading sub 2x 2026 EBITDA at spot gold. 

[kh812000]

On 4/8/2025 at 5:54 PM, Parsad said:

 

Warren and Prem have lots of cash because they are more leveraged than any normal investor. 

 

Berkshire is leveraged 2-1 asset to equity and Fairfax is leverage 4.5-1 asset to equity...plus they have debt, insurance liabilities that have to be matched in duration with their fixed income portfolio, etc.  They have very important requirements to hold cash or bonds. 

 

But for the average investor, they should be buying when they find cheap stuff and be fully invested if they have enough great ideas.  Cheers! 

Sorry I dont agree with this at all.  

 

Rule #1 is dont lose money.  Why be fully invested when we are clearly entering a recession?  SP500 PE multiple is currently at 20X on a most likely Incorrect/Elevated E.  A recession multiple is <15x. 

 

All boats will go down with the tide.

[Parsad]

3 hours ago, kh812000 said:

Sorry I dont agree with this at all.  

 

Rule #1 is dont lose money.  Why be fully invested when we are clearly entering a recession?  SP500 PE multiple is currently at 20X on a most likely Incorrect/Elevated E.  A recession multiple is <15x. 

 

All boats will go down with the tide.

 

Didn't say they should be fully invested...just that the average investor doesn't have the same risks as FFH or BRK.

 

I've had this exact conversation with tens of posters over the last 25 years...each time, they were wrong.  Cheers!

[sleepydragon]

51 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

Didn't say they should be fully invested...just that the average investor doesn't have the same risks as FFH or BRK.

 

I've had this exact conversation with tens of posters over the last 25 years...each time, they were wrong.  Cheers!

Parsad,

any suggestions what to buy?

[KPO]

KMX

[Parsad]

1 hour ago, sleepydragon said:

Parsad,

any suggestions what to buy?

 

I think you have to look at the sectors getting hit the hardest...tech, restaurants and retail.  They've all been battered around for months for various reasons, but I think they are getting quite cheap in some cases.  Find the best quality of those three, with ample working capital, manageable or low debt, or excellent liquidation value.  I haven't checked the corporate fixed income market for those sectors, but I would imagine you are probably starting to see good drops in retail and restaurant company debt.  Might be a better way to get exposure, but secured by the assets.  Cheers!

[Paarslaars]

10 hours ago, kh812000 said:

Sorry I dont agree with this at all.  

 

Rule #1 is dont lose money.  Why be fully invested when we are clearly entering a recession?  SP500 PE multiple is currently at 20X on a most likely Incorrect/Elevated E.  A recession multiple is <15x. 

 

All boats will go down with the tide.

What is the multiple excluding Mag 7?

 

Edit: Grok estimates 16.5x, not that high to be honest?

Edited April 17, 2025 by Paarslaars

[kh812000]

4 hours ago, Paarslaars said:

What is the multiple excluding Mag 7?

 

Edit: Grok estimates 16.5x, not that high to be honest?

I dont think Grok information is current.  Factset has the latest information by sector which shows elevated PEs across the significant majority of sectors (ie cant be blamed on MAG7). Additionally, these sector PEs are STILL elevated vs 20 yr averages... So not only is the market not "cheap" versus historicals but also the market has still not priced in a recession.  Plus, likely these E's are too high since 90%+ of companies have yet to report which implies the true sector "forward PEs" are significantly higher than listed... 

 

Also the SP500 2025 bottoms-up earnings forecasts have been constantly in downward revision since Sept'24!  IE even before the Tariff wars started!  

 

 

                                       Current          10 yr ave

SP500                             19                    18.3

Consumer Disc               23.7                 24.1

Info Tech                         23                    21.6

Consumer Staples          21.5                 19.8

Industrials                       20.6                 18.7

Materials                         18.2                  17.3

Comm Svcs                     17.1                   16.5

Utilities                            17                     17.8

Real Est                           15.3                   na

Health Care                     15.1                    16.4

Financials                        16.2                   13.5

Energy                             12.6                  15.3

 

 

[kh812000]

14 hours ago, kh812000 said:

But for the average investor, they should be buying when they find cheap stuff and be fully invested if they have enough great ideas. 

Didnt say be fully invested?  

 

In concept I agree you should be buying when things are cheap, but first cheap alone is not sufficient unless you know there is a known catalyst for rerating... And second a stock could look cheap but in actuality could be a value trap due to permanent business impairment from this real-time rearrangement of World order... 

 

 

Edited April 17, 2025 by kh812000

[Castanza]

ABNB, NVO, EADSY

Edited April 17, 2025 by Castanza

[Intelligent_Investor]

18 hours ago, kh812000 said:

Sorry I dont agree with this at all.  

 

Rule #1 is dont lose money.  Why be fully invested when we are clearly entering a recession?  SP500 PE multiple is currently at 20X on a most likely Incorrect/Elevated E.  A recession multiple is <15x. 

 

All boats will go down with the tide.

That's not rule #1. Rule #1 is to not lose money permanently. If you are trying not to lose money you will only ever get a shitty results because you will just own bonds and gold.

[kh812000]

49 minutes ago, Intelligent_Investor said:

That's not rule #1. Rule #1 is to not lose money permanently. If you are trying not to lose money you will only ever get a shitty results because you will just own bonds and gold.

You're right.  We should all be fully invested in the equity market right now. 

 

BTW Gold btw has outperf SPY over the last 5 yrs!