To The Moon

I have AGQ for sometime now, so I know the strange feeling… but this is something we have to accept if we are holding rather than trading… my better bets are in the gold and silver miners and even better, royalties… they capture the upsides nicely, as long as the uptrend is intact, or the price of silver or gold stays stagnant but at a higher price than the previous years, this would translate to a higher selling price for these royalties. With higher profit margins, obviously the share price would move up. Do consider those royalties for the long haul if that is what the interest lies. Just for transparency sake, I have substantial holdings in $Wheaton Precious Metals(WPM)$. I also have a little interest in $

$Olam Group(VC2.SI)$   Today some buying activities spotted! The price is up 2 cents to 1.22. Shw may rise up to retest 1.27. A nice breakout smoothly would likely drive the price higher towards 1.37 than 1.42. Pls dyodd. Completion of Mindsprint Sale to Wipro for cash consideration of US386m. Finally, the price action is back. She is trading at 1.26, likely to rise up to tear 1.42 than 1.50 and 1.60.Pls dyodd. Olam Group - Nice breakout today plus managed to clear 1.11 level with ease and closed higher at 1.18, looks rather bullish. She may continue to trend higher towards 1.29.Pls dyodd. Hosey! Nice Gapped Up this morning! She is rising up to test 1.11 A nice crossing over with ease plus good volume we may see her rising up further toward

 "Should I sell Tesla and move to SpaceX?" 1. SpaceX - It's difficult to reach Max 4T within 5 years - Because the numbers aren't visible - Even if it lists at 2T, the maximum expected return is about 2x 2. Tesla - Starting this year, performance will be shown in actual numbers in earnest - Annual average 25% profit growth is possible. If 25% average growth over 10 years, profits grow 10x - Looking at the next 5 years, Tesla's upside is seen as 5x 3. Conclusion - No reason to sell Tesla, where 5x profit is expected, and move to SpaceX, where 2x profit is expected - People expect to sell Tesla and move to SpaceX, but on the contrary, after listing, there will likely be more demand to sell SpaceX and move to Tesla - In conclusion, rather than SpaceX, we will choose Tesla, whose era of p

 "Should I sell Tesla and move to SpaceX?" 1. SpaceX - It's difficult to reach Max 4T within 5 years - Because the numbers aren't visible - Even if it lists at 2T, the maximum expected return is about 2x 2. Tesla - Starting this year, performance will be shown in actual numbers in earnest - Annual average 25% profit growth is possible. If 25% average growth over 10 years, profits grow 10x - Looking at the next 5 years, Tesla's upside is seen as 5x 3. Conclusion - No reason to sell Tesla, where 5x profit is expected, and move to SpaceX, where 2x profit is expected - People expect to sell Tesla and move to SpaceX, but on the contrary, after listing, there will likely be more demand to sell SpaceX and move to Tesla - In conclusion, rather than SpaceX, we will choose Tesla, whose era of p

Short answer: it is far more likely an opening chapter than an ending. But it changes how you should think about Rocket Lab. 1) SpaceX S-1 is not bearish for the sector If SpaceX is genuinely moving toward public markets, it does two things immediately: Forces institutional capital to price the entire space economy properly Validates that launch, satellites, and data infrastructure are no longer speculative niches That is typically bullish for listed peers, not destructive. 2) But it is bearish for lazy RKLB theses Let’s be direct. Many RKLB bulls relied on a “next SpaceX proxy” narrative. That breaks the moment SpaceX becomes investable. Capital that chased RKLB for scarcity may rotate. So RKLB must now stand on fundamentals, not comparison. 3) Where RKLB still has a real edge RKLB is not

I would not follow this blindly. At +535% YTD, you are no longer early. You are deciding whether to pay for peak narrative plus tightening supply. Let’s separate signal from noise. 1) Tepper buying: meaningful, but not a green light David Tepper tends to lean into macro dislocations, not chase retail momentum. His entry tells you one thing: he believes the cycle still has legs. It does not tell you the entry price is attractive. He can absorb volatility. Most cannot. 2) The real driver: memory cycle turning + AI demand The move in SanDisk is tied to: AI infrastructure pulling forward NAND demand Supply discipline after years of underinvestment Spillover from HBM strength (even though NAND is a different segment) Add Seagate Technology supply warnings, and you get a classic scarcity premium

$IONQ Inc.(IONQ)$ $D-Wave Quantum Inc.(QBTS)$  $Rigetti Computing(RGTI)$  ⚛️📈🚀 Quantum Stocks Are No Longer Trading On Fundamentals. They’re Trading On Institutional Legitimacy. 🚀📈⚛️ The market is no longer waiting for quantum profits. It’s front-running quantum credibility. That shift is rapidly becoming one of the most important speculative dynamics in global tech markets, and it explains why names like $IONQ, $QBTS, and $RGTI keep experiencing violent repricing every time a powerful institution validates the sector. I’m watching quantum equities behave less like traditional software companies and more like early-stage AI infrastructure play

Last Thursday, May 21, the Trump administration quietly redrew the map of American technology. The Department of Commerce signed nine letters of intent to deliver just over $2 billion in CHIPS Act funding to quantum computing firms. But here is what makes this different from every previous federal handout: Washington is not just writing checks. The government is taking equity stakes. Uncle Sam is now a shareholder. The market response was instant and violent. D-Wave Quantum surged 33%. Rigetti Computing jumped 31%. IonQ added 12%. IBM, set to receive the lion's share of $1 billion, rose 12% on the news. Within 48 hours, the entire quantum sector had been re-rated. The Money Trail The funding allocation tells you everything about where Washington thinks the technology is heading. IBM gets $

ARM Holdings has done something extraordinary. In two trading sessions, the British chip designer added 35% to its market value, vaulting from the $175 range to an all-time high of $298. The stock now sits at $304 after-hours, with Bernstein calling for $300 and TD Cowen targeting $265. The catalyst is not a new product launch or an earnings beat. It is something far more powerful: a complete repricing of what ARM means in the age of agentic AI. The question every trader is asking right now is the same one: is this a structural re-rating or a textbook overbought top? The Bernstein Bombshell The trigger was a single research note from Bernstein analyst David Dai. He initiated coverage with an Outperform rating and a $300 price target, forecasting that ARM's sales and profits will increase m

Nebius Group jumped 14.65% in a single session on twin pre-market catalysts that fundamentally repriced what the stock is worth. Broad cloud provider price increases on AI GPU services boosted Nebius's revenue outlook, and Nvidia's earnings confirmation of robust sustained AI compute demand removed the last bear argument. One SeekingAlpha analyst called it "the highest-conviction AI bet" on his coverage list. With the stock now trading near $213 and up 143% year-to-date, the question is whether this is a one-time re-rating or a durable profit engine that justifies even higher prices. The 684% Revenue Explosion The core story is simple. Nebius reported Q1 2026 revenue of $399 million, up 684% year over year. The AI Cloud segment specifically grew 841%, now accounting for 98% of total sales.

Got Called Away On 2,000 Shares. Took Some LEAPS Off The Table. Two Weeks In One Post. Mathematical Money | May 23, 2026 I skipped last week's post. Honestly because there was too much going on and I wanted to wait until the dust settled before writing about it properly. So this one covers two weeks instead of one. Two weeks ago I wrote about how the system runs quiet most of the time. I also said the harder weeks were coming and I'd write those too. This is one of those weeks. Maybe two of them. Let me walk through what actually happened. The Assignment MARA pushed from around $12 to $13.55 over the past fortnight. That kind of move sounds great when you're long the stock — and it has been — but I was also short a lot of calls. The ones I was most worried about were the May 15 $10 strikes

The Pulse $ARM Holdings(ARM)$ $NASDAQ(.IXIC)$ $S&P 500(.SPX)$ $ARM just pulled off one of the most violent two-day rips in semiconductor history—rocketing from ~$175 to kissing $300 in 48 hours on what can only be described as pure AI narrative euphoria. The Street is now pricing in a 4-5x profit explosion over the next 3-4 years, driven by fat royalty checks from AI PCs, custom cloud silicon, and edge devices all riding ARM's architecture into the agentic AI era. But here's the kicker: this isn't based on fresh company guidance—it's sell-side modeling on steroids. With the 14-day RSI screaming above 80 and valuation now rivaling $NVDA on some forward metrics

The Pulse $D-Wave Quantum Inc.(QBTS)$ $Rigetti Computing(RGTI)$ $IONQ Inc.(IONQ)$ The quantum computing sector just got its "CHIPS Act moment." With reports of $2B in dedicated funding and potential direct government equity stakes, $QBTS, $RGTI, and $IONQ are trading like they've discovered the holy grail. But here's the reality check: these companies remain deeply unprofitable, and policy-driven rallies in frontier tech have a notorious track record of pump-then-dump. The real question isn't whether Washington is bullish—it's whether the technical milestones and revenue inflection can justify sustained valuations, or if this is just another speculative squeeze t

As artificial intelligence stocks continue their meteoric rise, fueled by insatiable demand for data center infrastructure and high bandwidth memory, retail investors worldwide are piling in with increasing urgency. In South Korea, the epicenter of memory chip production, this enthusiasm has crossed into dangerous territory. Citizens are liquidating life insurance policies, raiding savings, and borrowing heavily to chase the AI trade. This raises fresh warnings about speculative excess in an already frothy market. The Korean Cautionary TaleRecent reports from Seoul paint a vivid picture of FOMO driven behavior. South Korea’s three largest life insurers saw a sharp rise in policy surrenders in the first quarter. Savings type policies, intended for family protection and retirement, jumped ov