https://www.morningstar.com/articles...-a-major-twist

But I can't stress enough that a google search of "morningstar ark" returned this as the 2nd result in about half a second

man they sure have a lot of TDOC

nice lil range between 130 and 105 for arkk, curious how the summer plays out

also LOL at my post on Feb 10th basically top-ticking it 0___0

lol shes a steam chaser, what else is there to see really?

good grief... ARKK as long-term investment? you might as well light money on fire....

tech stocks, even expensive ones, might be good buys here, but be very very careful buying ARKK or any of its key components (I might exclude TSLA from this comment)

it was so obvious ARKK would someday implode 80%.... the question was when, and at what level?

ARKK and Cathie will be facing a vicious cycle now.... lower price > more selling > lower price > more selling > rinse/repeat... and all the component stocks are still miles from washed out valuations (washed out valuations for generally high growth companies)

I think it was super-obvious that ARKK would implode spectacularly sometime in the next couple of years.. the question was when and at level.

the savviest investor I know (billionaire and way ahead of his time on hedge fund success) loved something as 200 day moving average as a basic tool to play something like ARKK... Soros to a large degree play simple trends and structured his portfolio for the most pure, liquid plays of that trend..... something like ARKK (and many of its constituents) you might want to cut back to 150 day moving average.... but basically using something like 150 day MA, you can get much of ARKK upside and avoid much of its downside

lol ARKK returns wiped out back to june 2018 what a joke

btw has anyone heard from OP? he literally made this thread at the pico top

FEB 7, 2021:

OP is probably doing just fine. Looks like he's still actively posting and staking people. Assuming he did everything he said in the OP:

Feb 2021 - total accounts = 800k

200k into 5 ARK tickers at 40k each, down probably about 50-67% = 80k value

"300K are in a few large cap stocks (with GOOG being a major position)" - GOOG is up 50% = 400k-450k value

300k cash

Still sitting somewhere around 800k unless he made a huge mistake with Russian stocks(he made the Russian stocks risk/reward thread)

He's not panic selling his ARK stuff at a 67% loss when his original plan was to hold 10-15 years and has no immediate need for the money.

This thread(and Russian thread) are comically hilarious timing and the next thread that he makes it is absolutely 100% betting the opposite side, but he's fine financially.

I am guessing OP is doing ok too.

frankly, it was a great thread to have started... and ARKK was I think was a pretty obvious great buy a couple of years ago if you were ok with the volatility/craziness and were someone who would definitely sell once this thing tanked.

the funny thing I found in the op's headline was "LONG-TERM investment vehicle"..... ARKK was never a good long-term investment.

if someone is reading this and thinking "I'm a big believer in tech stocks..... I want to buy these beat-down stocks... why shouldn't I buy ARKK?".... I think you are much better off to buy beaten down stocks like NFLX, ADBE, NVDA, PYPL, FB. they all have pretty reasonable to dirt-cheap valuations (I'd have to check on NVDA valuation) and some are still growing very nicely. the ones with significant business risks are very cheap...... I would add AMZN to this list, but not sure how beaten-down it is.

also, things like CSCO, ORCL, INTC, IBM, HPQ, HPE, DELL look really intersting too but some of them have been dead (relative to QQQ) for a long time.

If ARKK did not have TSLA (their biggest single stock FWIW) I believe they would be down 80% from 2/5/2018.

I think of this all the time...

TSLA is a remarkable stock... cult-like followers. bit like Warren Buffett/Berkshire

I have 2 questions:

1) where can I look at ARKK's units outstanding? say on a monthly basis

2) if "net selling intensity" is similar on ARKK and most of its key component stocks, would that mean that the units outstanding would remain relative stable? ....

I'm very very new to this analysis but I'm thinking for small to medium sized ETFs (like alot of sub-sector funds), a big change in units outstanding occurs when a big institution decides to get more exposure (say to aerospace/defense) through an ETF and not a basket trade of a bunch of aerospace/defense stocks (might not be exact same as ETF holdings).... so there is large buying pressure on aerospace ETF, but the stock doesn't rise. the ETF creation mechanism takes care of that. there is lots of liquidity in underlying stocks..........

1) It changes daily.
2) ETFs have been created as money flows in. Selling in the underlying stocks doesn't cause units to disappear.

She's below SP500 since inception, which was ludicrously easy to forecast, thank god for shorting this year.

Not to kick someone when they are down, but just lol at naming an investment fund after the Ark of the Covenant. For non religious-nutters, I'm guessing the most common association is the face melting scene at the end of Indiana Jones which I'm sure someone has turned into a meme with Arks YTDs. And even if you are a religious nutter, the Ark of the Covenant is then the most unique/valuable object in human history now lost/destroyed because it was mismanaged by the people entrusted to take care of it.

omfg, i always assumed it was an acronymn of sorts

When are we thinking it cheap enough to enter?

~every one of these companies hopes to be breaking even in five years except for tesla which just dipped to a 90 p/e ratio on the news that their ceo is maybe a sex criminal. i think we should stay away

I'd watch the bond market. Bond market will sniff out before the fed is ready to start cutting, the lower rates and yields will benefit innovation. I wouldn't touch it until then. Funds are still unwinding.

This is the sort of reasoning that's kept me out of SHOP despite the discount. The only thing with SHOP is for the first time in a decade their leadership is buying more shares. That's an interesting tell.

Guess I'll wait longer!

Many like to measure things as a discount vs ATH. The ATH for most stocks of the last 3 years are irrelevant. The regime has changed. Similar to the alt coin market of 2017, a lot of the stuff in ultra speculative high growth was absolute trash that benefited purely because of a euphoric bubble and a lot of it went to zero. Cathie holds a lot of stuff that will never recover, picking from the best of what she holds might be a better play. TWLO/Roku are interesting to me, but not quite yet.

I think there's a legitimate chance that I'm going to get to pick this thing up 90 percent off it's all time highs.

All the businesses in there have great potential, but need capital to stay afloat, which is going to be hard to come by in this tightening cycle.

It will be like picking up Amazon 90 percent off its highs in the Dot Com Crash.

Amazing opportunity. Let's hope it keeps dropping so we can pick these businesses up at massive discounts.

Why don't you just buy the individual names that you like? You've gotta be able to outperform Cathy's unrelenting "buy the dip despite massively overvalued PE's" in the face of -80% losses mentality.

at Jonny Buzz haha ya that is a good point.

It's something that I've thought about.

I don't really like the way that Cathy keeps trading in and out of things.

However, the really good stuff that being Tesla is still very high.

I think most of the names in her portfolio have massive massive short interest that will eventually be unwound at a time when we go back to a bull market so there is a big chance of a nice short squeeze there in those names for people who can buy in really low and wait for the massive bounce

Has there ever been one of these actively managed funds that starts off with 10s of millions blows up to a hundred billion or whatever and says “we’re at the upper limit of fund size where we can generate market beating returns, so we are not accepting inflows and in fact will pay out some distributions”? Or is it a coincidence that they get paid mostly on a % of AUM and their strategies never run into scale problems?