is Cathie Wood’s fund in trouble?

kmgilroy89 said:
I'm probably early, but I don't try to pick tops or bottoms. Her fund already went down over 60%. The upside to holding on isn't worth it. Best to take the meat of the move to something more lucrative. It's a short of companies that aren't going bankrupt anytime soon. This winner can only run so much.
More...
I am neither long SARK or short ARKK, but if I was I would let the market decide for me and not some random forum comment it isn't worth holding on just .... because.

Don't know your age but I was around and trading when Pets.com/The Globe.com/Webvan/Geocities and many others blew up in the 2000 techwreck never to be heard from again. Cathy Woods was around then too but apparently did not learn from it.

Maybe I'll turn out to be the one that is wrong but Elliott Wave count on my chart shows another $20 (minimum) to go before a likely bottom.
 
SunTrader said:
I am neither long SARK or short ARKK, but if I was I would let the market decide for me and not some random forum comment it isn't worth holding on just .... because.

Don't know your age but I was around and trading when Pets.com/The Globe.com/Webvan/Geocities and many others blew up in the 2000 techwreck never to be heard from again. Cathy Woods was around then too but apparently did not learn from it.

Maybe I'll turn out to be the one that is wrong but Elliott Wave count on my chart shows another $20 (minimum) to go before a likely bottom.
More...

I wasn't old enough to trade then, but I know more people lost trying to short the bubble than profited from it. I don't think most people realize how hard it is to be profitable short-selling over extended periods. Let me clarify what I said, if you have a technical approach, stay with it. However, if you're just long SARK, because ARKK is "overvalued", that's not a profitable strategy. I still think there's a lot better places for people to invest their money.
 
kmgilroy89 said:
I wasn't old enough to trade then, but I know more people lost trying to short the bubble than profited from it. I don't think most people realize how hard it is to be profitable short-selling over extended periods. Let me clarify what I said, if you have a technical approach, stay with it. However, if you're just long SARK, because ARKK is "overvalued", that's not a profitable strategy. I still think there's a lot better places for people to invest their money.
More...
Really?

I certainly have no idea either way.
 
Last edited:
IMO not a valid comparison. $NDX leaders back then (Y2K) are still leaders today MSFT, APPL, AMZN, lesser extent INTC, QCOM & AMD etc. Add GOOGL, FB, TSLA since then.

Does anyone really think ROKU, TDOC or ZM are leaders or potential ones in the future?
 
Covertibility said:
.......
Back in ye olde days, I remember the 4 horseman being MSFT, INTC, CSCO and DELL.
AAPL was getting money from MSFT back then to stay alive.

Something in the ARKK is bound to come back.
More...
But I doubt she knows which one it might be and to double, triple, quadruple her current position in advance.
 
Covertibility said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1496130078203424774


Back in ye olde days, I remember the 4 horseman being MSFT, INTC, CSCO and DELL.
AAPL was getting money from MSFT back then to stay alive.


Something in the ARKK is bound to come back.
More...
TSLA is a disruptor. Most of these other stocks are one trick ponies with a limited product line. Many of them have plenty of competition with their one product too. The other main disruptors in this economy are the same companies that have been for the past 20 years: MSFT, AAPL, GOOGL, and AMZN.
 
Palm was actually a pretty good company and ahead of its time, of course Apple had its own "palmtop" product called the Newton which was good but heavy.

In my IT department back in the late '90s the iPaq was the one the Sysadmins used. I believe the iPaq was actually made by HTC but it was Compaq that sold it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top