저자: CathieWood · 외국인
요약 보기
ARK은 약세장에서 최고 확신 종목에 집중하고 강세장에선 분산한다고 설명. 비트코인 5년 내 150만달러 공식 강세 시나리오(3.8백만달러는 샤프비율 최적 비중 19% 가정의 MPT 모델 값)를 정정하며, 가족에겐 분할매수를 권함. 테슬라 5년 목표주가 2600달러, 머스크 보상안은 ARK 모델과 부합하는 긍정 신호로 봄. 5개 혁신 플랫폼 융합으로 실질 GDP 성장률이 7% 이상으로 가속하고 인플레이션은 예상보다 낮을 것이라 전망. 미국 기업의 델라웨어 이탈 언급.
다듬은 글
When markets get into a bearish period, investors tend to hug their benchmarks and we're moving in the opposite direction. So, I just want to say we do what we do and you know, that's what our advisors expect. They don't expect us to raise cash or or do anything. They might that's their decision, right?
In terms of what we do to control risk, during bear markets, we will concentrate towards our highest conviction names. We have a scoring system based on management, execution, moat or barriers to entry, product service leadership valuation importantly, and thesis risk. So, with those scores, we concentrate.
During bull markets, which I do believe we are in a bull market that is broadening out, we tend to diversify because the IPOs start appearing again and we have more information on some of the companies we've sold during the bear market. Let's start with what everyone's talking about, Kathy Wood's Bitcoin price projection.
A recent interviewer put it bluntly, Kathy, you're projecting Bitcoin at 3.8 million per coin within 5 years. How is that even possible? Her answer was classic Kathy, precise, data-driven, and anchored in long-term conviction. She clarified that Arc's official bull case stands at 1.5 million dollars per Bitcoin, not 3.8 millions.
However, that upper figure came from a modern portfolio theory model. When Bitcoin is included at its optimal allocation in a diversified portfolio, meaning the weight that maximizes risk-adjusted returns or the Sharpe ratio, the math points to a Bitcoin price near 3.8 million dollar. You're projecting in 5 years Bitcoin hits 3.8 million per coin.
That's five times the market cap of gold, which is hitting all-time high. Walk us through the math here. So, I'm going to just correct that a bit. So, Okay. our official for bull case is 1.5 million. Now, what what got us to that 3.8 is using modern portfolio theory. If we were to include Bitcoin in portfolios at its optimal weight, so maximizing the Sharpe ratio, that would have provided that increment to 3.8 million.
Now, believe it or not, that position size, when we did that analysis, was 19% of a diversified portfolio. That's a lot. That's a lot. Yeah. I have more in mind. Well, you swing for the fences when your cousins, your when civilians ask you, hey, how much Bitcoin should I own? What's the number you would say in private to a family member?
For a family member? Yeah, you you want to protect them. You're not like, hey, we're we're swinging for the fences. This needs to be our home run, but just you what I've told my children for a long time now is average in. I mean, you know, average in, you know, every month, every just average in. And and and then I would leave it to them in terms of their comfort factor.
Got it. Kathy, can I ask you about So, Arc has this ability to be a vehicle for a lot of folks that are just living their normal day-to-day lives and they want the answer to what is going to do well in the future. And they can go and they can they can buy your ETFs and then they can participate in that future.
There's a lot of people that are frustrated, palpably frustrated with an inability to sort of get ahead and break through, build wealth. First, what is economically happening in in America that prevents so many people? What do you see number one? And then number two, what characteristics and responsibility do retail investors have?
If they're going to yolo this and if they're going to buy this other thing and they're going to try to go further out on the risk spectrum, what is their responsibility so that there's no crying in the casino? There are ways to access innovation and one of the question many ways, of course. We have packaged it up.
We don't look anything like a traditional benchmark. So, if they're diversifying, we're a very good source of diversification, especially in trying to get exposure to innovation. We also have a venture fund. One of the questions I get regularly from retail investors used to be, why can't we access the private markets?
We know more about those technologies than most of the institutions who are buying them. They have no idea. We're passionate about it. And so, we've gotten more vocal and this administration is certainly becoming more vocal and and and more more focused on this this particular idea because it is un-American, right?
You have to meet this threshold. chat GPT every day, but you can't buy open AI. Exactly. But you can buy a lottery ticket or you can bet on sports. makes no sense. And I do think it's going to change and I think this administration will take it change? Should we just have and I've advocated for this before on the pod and I believe you've talked about it.
6% of the country, 5, 6% are accredited. You got small number who are QPs. Should we just have a test? You know, you get a license to own a gun or drive a car, cut hair in this country. Why not just have a simple accreditation test? You understand diversification, you understand private versus public assets, how to read a balance sheet.
Wouldn't that just solve the problem right quick? I mean, I used to say, you know, it would be what we're doing in the investment world right now would be the equivalent of saying you can't drive because you don't have make enough money or you do not have enough net worth. Take a test. Take a test. And we we have this big question in the country about polarization of wealth.
50, 60% of the country has some exposure equities, but the people who don't, they tend to trend towards socialism or handouts. Maybe they don't feel they're part of what we experience, which is we meet great founders and you get to do public and private and we get to say, yeah, you know, I drove in a FSD car when Tesla was private or whatever it is and or I looked at Coinbase when it was private or Uber.
Yeah, I got the sense I want to put 1 or 2% into that. Yes. Yeah, it does feel profoundly unfair, doesn't it? Yes. Yes. Kathy, there's a lot of market signals right now that are flashing green. There's a lot of market signals that are flashing red. Do you feel that you have to position actively to all of those things or do you say, you know what, I can't control this.
I need to look 5 years out. So, how do you manage the risk and how do you view the markets today? Yes. So, the risk question obviously we get a lot because our portfolios are volatile. They don't look like the benchmarks and uh when markets get into a bearish period, investors tend to hug their benchmarks and we're moving in the opposite direction.
So, I just want to say we do what we do and you know, that's what our advisors expect. They don't expect us to raise cash or or do anything. They might that's their decision, right? In terms of what we do to control risk, during bear markets, we will concentrate towards our highest conviction names.
We have a scoring system based on management, execution, moat or barriers to entry, product service leadership valuation importantly, and thesis risk. So, with those scores, we concentrate. During bull markets, which I do believe we are in a bull market that is broadening out, we tend to diversify because the IPOs start appearing again and we have more information on some of the companies we've sold during the bear market.
Give us the read on Elon's trillion-dollar pay package. You know what's so interesting about it, and this happened with the first model we put out. We put out a model once a year of Tesla and with our price target 5 years out. We looked at his first package and we said, that looks like our model. And we looked at this one, we said, that looks like our model and our model is public.
forecast has Tesla at 8 and 1/2, 9 trillion. Well, right. And we we put out there 5 years Yeah. Yeah. So, and I think if he delivers on humanoid robots the way he thinks he is, we don't have enough in there. So, our price target is 2600. I think it's at 330 today, something like that. Yeah, 2600 and and we have very little for humanoid in.
But what Elon is capitalizing on is this convergence that I mentioned, robotics, energy storage and AI. That convergence in the robo-taxi space is pretty much the same convergence in the humanoid robot space. Do you underwrite compensation as part of your model, meaning like when you look at a package like that, if you compare it to other CEOs, Zuck or whomever, different styles of compensation, Bezos famously took no compensation post the IPO.
How do you think about that as a motivating factor or a necessary condition in 2025 to get results? I think it's huge. I mean, I I wish more CEOs would do this. Elon's not going to be paid unless unless he reaches these milestones either. So, I think it's very motivating to him. I think it also, you know, it's uh kind of an incentive to, you know, shoot for the stars, but do it in a a very first principles way.
You know, everything's physics-based and everything's milestone-based and he's very disciplined. If people do not know that, they should. And when a milestone misses, By the way, final on the floor. Final quick question. As a stock picker, do you care where the companies are incorporated? Like do you look at Delaware now and say there's fundamental business risk?
I need to sort of and or and or do you cajole these folks now to maybe reincorporate in different places? We're not an activist investor. I have to be very be very careful and say that. We are moving out of Delaware. Cathie also touched on Elon Musk's trillion-dollar compensation package and her take might surprise you.
She sees it as a positive signal, not greed. Musk only gets paid if he delivers and his milestones align directly with Arc's forecasts for Tesla's growth. According to Arc's latest model, Tesla could reach $2,600 per share within 5 years driven by breakthroughs in robotics, AI, and energy storage. That projection doesn't even fully price in Tesla's humanoid robot Optimus, which Cathie believes could become an entirely new trillion-dollar category.
What you're seeing here is the impact of innovation on productivity. And you can see in this time we've had two great eras. The first one was in the late 1800s, early 1900s, telephone, electricity, internal combustion engine. Huge boost in GDP growth. And in fact, prior to that, for the 400 years prior to that, real GDP growth had been averaging about 0.6% per year, very slow.
After that, we went into a 125-year period of 3% real GDP growth. So, a fivefold increase from 0.6 to 3%. You have to move uh to forward to today to see multiple innovation platforms evolving at the same time. So, for the first time in 125 years, this time there are five platforms, not three major platforms, and they involve 15 different technologies.
This is very important in terms of how to research and analyze the world. It's not going to be by sector or industry anymore. It is going to be by technology because technology is permeating every sector, every industry, and blurring the lines between them. So, you can see five here. We believe that the productivity uplift here is going to be so strong during the next 5 to 10 years and I think President Trump's tax package is going to turbocharge this, that real GDP growth will accelerate from that 3% where it has been for the last 125 years towards 7% plus.
And we think that could be conservative. That's a little more than two times as opposed to the fivefold uplift before. So, get ready, but the other thing that we think is going to happen is that inflation is going to surprise significantly on the low side of expectations. We would not be surprised to see 0% inflation or less as we exit the tariffs here and and the way they're getting through the indexes and move forward into this new age of technological explosion.
One of the reasons for this explosion is not just the five platforms, so I should have named them, , and multiomic sequencing. Five major platforms involving 15 different technologies. And here you can see why we think we're going to see explosive growth. It is the convergence between and among these technologies.
Finally, Cathie laid out her grand macro thesis, a view that extends beyond any single company or asset. She compared our current moment to the early 1900s when the world experienced an unprecedented productivity boom driven by electricity, the telephone, and the internal combustion engine. Before that era, global GDP growth averaged just 0.6% per year.
After those innovations, it jumped to 3% annually for 125 years, a fivefold increase. Now, for the first time in over a century, Cathie says five innovation platforms are emerging simultaneously.
Comments 0