저자: Kevin미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
Citadel이 제시한 시장 낙관 요인 10가지를 소개하며 금리인상 확률(연내 72.5%, 9월 38.1%)과 잭슨홀 등 이벤트를 짚는다. 트럼프가 중간선거 전 시장 부양을 위해 유가 하락과 이란 공격 축소를 유도한다고 주장하고, S&P500 상승은 RSP 신고가와 기업 AI 투자(사내 칩 구매)에 힘입었다고 본다. 약세 리스크로 IT·금융 집중도와 대공황식 하락 가능성을 언급하고, Trade Desk 적정주가 약 4달러로 부정적이다. 자사 펀드 판매 및 구독 홍보가 함께 나온다.
다듬은 글
Quick announcement: Lifetime access to Meet Kevin membership and Alpha trading alerts expires on Friday, and we are also removing lifetime rates for Homes Reinvest AI. This will be quite expensive on a monthly basis, so if you want to lock in lifetime access, hurry up and sign up at meetreinvest.com or meetkevin.com for an Alpha membership.
Citadel says there are 10 reasons for optimism, and we'll break them down in this segment. They are now either trying to manipulate us into selling the rest of the Leo Fold position—not that they have a history of doing this, like offering to raise rates 2 days before the Leo Fold liquidation. So, you know, you should be skeptical of comments from businessmen in suits, because after all, they are the same "suits." This annoys me.
At the same time, we now have a 72.5% probability of a rate increase. And so I'll start with the bad news for this year. The implied probability that we will get a rate increase this year is 72%. The market is only taking this into account for the September meeting. We have a 38.1% probability of a rate increase.
So, in other words, it's more likely that this won't happen. Jackson-Gole could change that, as could reports from Nvidia and Salesforce later today. And CrowdStrike are companies that will give us an understanding of the market situation. You might ask: “Is the market overheated? "Or not?" All of this could affect Jackson Hole.
This is obviously an important day. But let's look at 10 reasons for optimism from Citadel. And I'm actually going to add an 11th. This is the exact opposite of what I am going to say about Donald Trump, as opposed to the opinions of The Economist. I have to be clear about The Economist. They really don't like Donald Trump, okay?
They really don't like Trump and say that when he becomes a " lame duck" after the midterm elections, he acts on the principle of "when in doubt, attack." They believe that as his influence wanes, the world will see him as more destructive than ever. So expect more problems with Canadian customs and other countries.
Such things work to depress the market. This is the opposite of what I'm going to talk about next. For example, there's another article in The Economist about how Mark Carney has, or , sorry, for short, Canada—let me put it this way. The Canadian government in general, and Carney in particular, should make concessions and try to make a better deal, but they should give in to Donald Trump because he will get angry and make things more complicated.
So, if they stand their ground , it could be a bearish signal. Because Donald Trump is not going to back down. And I think that's what chaos theory is all about. This is a bit negative as it increases inflationary pressures if we get an extension of the trade war with Canada. In doing so, I actually added reason number zero out of 11 reasons.
Donald Trump wants to boost the market before the midterm elections. There are 69 days left until the midterm elections. He tweeted or Truth this morning that we want oil prices to go down. We see that oil prices are falling. We want more oil to pass through the Strait of Hormuz . He claims that the Strait of Hormuz is open.
He claims that the CIA's visit to Moscow will bring something good. This was the optimism I talked about yesterday in my video about Russia. The fact that Radcliffe is going to Russia is probably a good thing, because what we saw with Radcliffe's visit to Cuba was more positive than in the case of Iran or Venezuela.
So, that gives me optimism that Donald Trump will use all his power to lift this market over the next 69 days. Bearing in mind that Trump is also tasking Marco Rubio to seemingly casually leak information that we will conduct fewer strikes, possibly no strikes on Iran, unless they are defensive, to reduce oil volatility in the markets.
Last week, before Scott Bennett's economic "D-Day," oil prices were around $94. Brent oil prices are now around 86, and part of that is because Scott... is now around 87. Part of that is because Scott's economic "D-Day" was a joke. Even Russia ridiculed this economic "D-Day," calling it a complete joke and saying Iran shouldn't take it seriously.
This is because Trump needs to lift the market before the midterm elections. So if you don't raise it before the election, you might not get what you want. We need to make people feel good and lower gasoline prices again . So that's reason number zero why I'm optimistic. Let's quickly go through some of the other reasons here at Citadel for the enthusiasm in the markets.
And we'll do it, actually, in reverse. Simply because the last point, in my opinion, is one of the most important, and we will spend a little more time on it. But let's start from the bottom up. Essentially, Citadel argues that people are starting to hedge the “right tail.” This is a complicated way to describe a Gaussian curve, a normal distribution.
The right tail is here, which means that markets will perform much better than expected, while the “left tail ” risk is that markets will perform worse. This is a recession. And this is a climb, right? So, they're saying that right after Leo's liquidation, we saw the largest 5-day call volume in S&P 500 history.
So people are trying to hedge the upside by taking advantage of the low volatility that we're seeing in the markets, and so they're buying options. And this is, in fact, the tenth point; The ninth is that volatility is low, which encourages people to take more risks, especially over the last 30 days.
Therefore, they see this as an opportunity for growth. The eighth reason they give is that market coverage is expanding and correlation is decreasing . In essence, we are becoming less dependent on individual sectors to drive the market, and are seeing a situation where “a rising tide lifts all boats.” I have a thesis on this, and it has to do with corporat.
But if you look at RSP, we've been discussing this for a long time on our streams for course participants. RSP, every day, even though Qs can be volatile, falling, rising, all that nonsense, RSP, which is balanced against the S& P 500 and reduces technology exposure, is actually renewing all-time highs one after another.
I mean, we've been constantly breaking new highs since April, and it just doesn't stop. There seems to have been a small moment during Leo's decline, and this is visible on the weekly charts. So, RSP is showing great results, and that's essentially a confirmation of what you're seeing here . More than 70% of S&P 500 stocks are above their 200-day moving average.
It is worth noting that some stocks are still below their 200-day moving average. I generally think that this creates some opportunity. Meta stocks, such as Netflix, ServiceNow , Salesforce, are close to their 200- day moving average. AppLovin is below its 200-day moving average. By the way, each of these three companies works in the advertising sector, which, in my opinion , will soon begin to attract capital .
So, I think it's only a matter of time before the 200- day moving average is broken for these particular stocks. What is worth noting about the concentration in the S& P 500: it is not an equilibrium index, but a regular S&P 500, and it shows increasing concentration in the technology sector. In my opinion, in the short term this is normal, but in the long term it creates additional risks.
I wrote that no one wants to believe that during a recession or depression, the S&P 500 can drop significantly. You know, like, "Oh my god, there's no way the S&P 500 would ever fall 80%." Well, if we had a 5-year depression, that could very well happen, especially if there isn't someone like Kevin Varsh who wants to print money for a V-shaped recovery, because I don't think he will .
I think he will let us suffer. The free market will prevail while you suffer at the bottom. This is normal. Arguments for another video. But, in my opinion, this is an increase in concentration in IT, where 37 % is information technology, and if you add finance, then the S&P 500 is 49% made up of the tech sector and finance.
Some argue, "Oh, Kevin, why are you bringing in finance here?" Because the financial sector includes investment banking, IPO financing, debt financing , trading, the crypto market, brokerage revenues— all of these revenues will fall if the tech sector collapses. So literally half of the S&P 500 is actually dependent on a tech sector crash, if one happens.
Note that the S&P 500 is only 6% dependent on materials, utilities, and real estate. Look at how much materials, utilities, and real estate have fallen. I posted a video yesterday where I talked about our division by sector. I showed a pie chart and explained: this is how much we have in cash, this is how much in stocks, and this is how much in real estate.
And the vast majority is real estate. It's actually very interesting if you think about it. This means that my company Reinvest is literally significantly more, or rather massively, real estate-focused, while the S&P 500 has the smallest share of real estate. I wonder if you break down the materials, utilities and real estate sectors, how little is actually left for real estate?
And you know what? This is probably easy to check. I'll check that out as we continue our discussion. Let's see. What proportion of the S&P 500 is in real estate, materials and utilities? But let's break it down. So we'll figure it out. OK. While we wait, let's consider the following argument. Share buyback.
We are currently in the buyback authorization window. This window is closing as we approach the next reporting season. My thesis, and I could be wrong, because it all depends on Nvidia and some software companies, but after Nvidia... let's say, "bullish" sentiment plus 10 reasons from Citadel, plus a buyback window, it's worth adding.
Buyback window. This creates the potential for growth over a period of six weeks. You know, on the eve of the " Anthropic effect." "The Anthropic Effect." Because Anthropic's S1 report is likely to be a complete disappointment. Sunny says, “Move to advertising. Would you consider Trade Desk again? Interesting that you mentioned that.
I was asked about this meone says, “ Kevin, you love Meta, you love Netflix. I even like the advertising part of Google, even though I don't invest in Google, right? Kevin, what about the Trade Desk? Isn't this a possibility?" We got rid of Trade Desk when the stock was around $120. Because we saw a " red flag" from Netflix.
Unfortunately, my algorithm predicts an even bigger drop for Trade Desk. I have a fair value estimate of about $4, which is really bad. Very, very low. You might ask, “Kevin, why? This is terrible. " Why so low?" I'll give you the answer right now. Their revenue increased by 3% and their cost of goods sold increased by 22%.
Growth has stalled , and costs are rising rapidly. But Meta is still growing at a breakneck pace. Now, to be fair , their spending in the last quarter increased more than in previous ones, and it makes you wonder: is this a trend? Is this a one-time event? You know, there are fundamental things to look at in these different companies, but the Trade Desk numbers are bad.
And maybe they can fix it. I hope they can fix this. I'm kind of jealous. Either, or I, I shouldn't say I'm jealous. I do n't envy Trade Desk. I, well, okay, let me think about how to phrase this better . Trade Desk is the largest company in the city where I live. Ventura, California. I would really like them to thrive because it helps the city, right?
So I want to see them succeed, but they need to fix things because right now their margin trajectory justifies a very low price target. And so they need to change that margin trajectory. Anyway, thanks for the question. Okay , so the share buyback was reason number six. Next, we have the fact that demand has not disappeared.
This is related to capital inflows, okay? Seven and a half billion dollars enter the stock market every day, which is just crazy. Households are becoming incredibly dependent on the stock market, mind you. Oh, I got the data. It says real estate is 1.7% of the S&P 500. Oh my god. I mean, think about it for a moment.
This means that if you invest, if you have access to Reinvest or, let's say, previously invested in housing and then invest in the S&P 500. You are effectively now diversified into stocks and real estate because the S&P 500 gives you virtually no access to the real estate market. This is very interesting.
Well, okay. So , portfolio allocation. So, we saw these tides. Next, what we have here is retail purchases again, which actually became net buyers, although obviously we weren't in the last week of March. I bought on the geopolitical downturn . We bought Leo on the decline . I even made a YouTube video titled "buy " around July 26th.
It was the day before the liquidation. It looks like someone has been liquidated. Leverage has been reset. As Citadel says, the liquidations have already taken place. And now forward price/earnings ratios are indeed in the lower half of estimates. Some of it might be nervousness because, you know, is the boom going to continue?
This is the main question. And here we come to the most optimistic reason. Well, you know, for the sake of fairness, we need a hedge here, right ? We have to guard against their words: "Oh, this time it's different." Maybe that's not true. Most likely, this is not true. Because one day all this will inevitably collapse.
You must be ready for this. But until then, I think a lot of money will still go into what I call corporate AI. And this becomes point number one. These are estimates, profits do all the work. That was point number two. We just talked about the ratings being in the bottom half. But here's the most interesting thing.
Profits are better than we feared. The earnings are causing the sharpest revisions to the figures since 2000. In my opinion, the reason why earnings and RSPs amplify the wealth effect for the equilibrium index is that the AI spending cycle lifts all boats. That's my thesis on this. And many people asked, including this commenter, saying, "Kevin, you keep talking about corporate AI and buying your own chips." Why does Reinvest buy its own chips?
Why do we have Blackwell chips? Why do we use small chips, large chips, whatever? Why do we use them all? There are many reasons for this, and I believe it is important for an investor to know them structurally. Here we have "Let's do work". They write: "I would like to see a video about why you should buy your own chips instead of just buying computing power." " It's obvious that there's no point in running your own chips in a mini-data center." So, first of all , between you and me , this guy is probably too invested in the computing companies.
Because the statements, the questions, the way it was written are very biased. He's actually saying, well, you see what the emphasis is. " Obviously, this does n't make any sense." Really? This is a very biased statement. Because this does make sense. You just don't realize why it makes sense. So, it's not obvious at all.
This is actually unconscious incompetence, right? You don't even know that you don't know something. And I'm not trying to attack this person, I'm just saying that they wrote it in a condescending manner. Well, there's no point in launching your own chips. And then "chips" in quotes, like, well, your Blackwell chips aren't as good as Meta chips.
Well, maybe again. But that doesn't change the facts, dude. Okay. So let's face the truth . So, uh, first of all, why doesn't this make sense? They doubled in price, they paid for themselves, we keep our own data, and we can be much more flexible. So let's figure it out. This is exactly the same argument that any business in America could make.
We don't have to spend money on a GB300 rack or a $4 million Rivera Rubin. But we could spend, you know, $ 200,000, $300,000, $400,000, whatever, on chips and infrastructure, and it could actually be a good investment. Why? Well, for various reasons. First, if you buy computing power or rent it, oh, we'll come back to that.
This is an accounting aspect. We'll talk about that a little later. Er , saving your own data. Let's go in reverse order. Keeping your own data private is critical, especially when you're a startup or a medical company like Moderna, because we already know that Claude and OpenAI want to replace the very software companies they pretend to work with.
There was a very big controversy about Figma collaborating with Claude, and then Claude potentially using some of Figma's intellectual property and releasing a Claude design. Now Claude, of course, denies this. They say, "Oh, we were going to release Claude design anyway." But now companies like Figma are saying, "Wow, we're essentially being replaced by the same company we worked with." So there is a very strong reluctance to send your medical data or your own weights and algorithms to large cloud services like Claude or OpenAI.
In addition to this, these models are very expensive to use. Claude or OpenAI, you know, they... I mean, as soon as there's an article about Deep Seek, we can quickly open it. Claude or OpenAI cost a fortune, significantly more than some open-source models. Here, look at this. So if you look at it, Moon Shot charges $15 per output, Claude Opus 5 costs $25 per output.
And you have Deep Seek, which costs $4 per withdrawal. And in addition to that, which is not mentioned in this article , there are models from Alibaba, such as Qwen, which are even cheaper per input. So, do you want to send your data to the cloud and lose protection for your own intellectual property?
No, most businesses don't want that. What does this mean? Well, that means many companies will likely be buying their own corporate hardware. Perhaps that is why Dell is showing such good results. Super Micro could also benefit from this. But it's a lower- margin business, so it's a little harder to bet on.
Although Dell is showing phenomenal success, so obviously people are interested in this investment idea. Using open scale models not only protects your data and your own scales, but also reinforces why it's worth buying your own chips. Plus , you get more flexibility with your own chips. Why would I rent a chip with 256 GB of video memory when a 32 or 96 GB chip is enough?
32GB—that's the 5090, Nvidia's Blackwell gaming chip. The 96GB version is the RTX 6000, which costs three times more because it has three times the RAM, you know? If you don't need it, you're wasting resources. Why rent more powerful chips from companies that scale with big chips like H100 or similar if you don't need them?
Isn't that right ? Moderna doesn't need to run its mutation algorithm for cancer drugs on GB300. They could literally run it on a chip with 32GB of video memory. You just don't need it. So why pay for it ? So, having your own equipment is more profitable. This is not only more cost- effective, but also allows you to keep your data safe.
You can use open- weight models and customize them however you want, gaining flexibility. All of this leads to increased costs for enterprises to build their own data centers, right? You take a 5090, an RTX 6000, plug them into a 240V, 30 amp outlet, and boom—you can run twice as much equipment as you would on a 120V outlet.
Yes, you're using the same power, but the amperage is half that , so your circuit breakers won't blow out. Another reason why this is a concern for big companies, and that's the difference between big companies like us... Our chip costs are relatively normal compared to some of the biggest multi-billion dollar businesses, right?
But multi-billion dollar businesses prefer to invest in their own chips because it's an investment in the balance sheet, you know? Cash becomes an asset on the balance sheet, instead of becoming an expense that is shown in the income statement as a loss. So, if you are renting computing power, think about this.
This is probably one of the important lessons because it helps you understand where to invest. If you rent computing power, okay? You spend $100 on rent, and that $100 in rent goes straight into minus $100 for your net income, right? This hurts the company's financial performance, earnings per share, etc.
If I now come in and say, "Oh, no, we're actually going to spend ..." minus 80 on the asset and minus 20, let's say, on electricity. Okay, this is just an example. I'm oversimplifying this. Well, now I record $80 as an asset on the balance sheet, and net income is only reduced by $20 because the energy expense goes on the income statement and the asset investment goes on the balance sheet.
So, earnings per share look higher for large companies that spend a lot of money on corporate chips. Therefore, it makes sense to own your own equipment for many reasons. And this is another reason, in my opinion, to be optimistic. I think that's why many companies invest in their own hardware rather than relying solely on the cloud.
There are many reasons for this . So, all of this together creates a very strong potential for the markets to grow once we overcome some of the negative or worrisome factors. They're not necessarily negative, but Jackson Hole... we have Jackson Hole on Friday. Remember, join Meet Kevin and the courses on building your wealth.
You will receive all trading alerts and more. Join Friday. This is the expiration date for the Jackson Hole coupon. Get it at meetkevin.com. And yes, that was a good segment about Citadel. .
Comments 0