Investors

MY TOP 10 STOCKS FOR 2025 🧵 And my price target for each! 1) $BABA – Alibaba Group Everyone knows that I’m a BABA bull Undervalued at less than 10x cash flows + actively buying back shares + AI & Cloud upside + government stimulus My price target: $230 (+169%)

Market: up big time today My watchlist 😂:

@F_Compounders The leverage guy

Do you know who this investor is ? Hint: He worked with Buffett and Charlie

One of the kindest things someone ever did for me came from Paul Tudor Jones himself. When I was just starting out in the markets at 20yo – dreaming of becoming a trader after reading the Market Wizards book – I reached out to him. I was naive, unknown… and yet, he replied. He sent me a signed copy of Reminiscences of a Stock Operator with a simple note: “The trend is your friend.” 10+ years later, that advice changed my life. I didn’t end up making money trading – I made it by compounding in great businesses, riding big trends. Funny enough, it echoes the Warren Buffett approach: find a big trend and let it compound. I’ve now made several million dollars following that principle, both in finance and in my own portfolio. Thank you for everything @ptj_official – that simple act of kindness had a massive ripple effect. Now I try to pay it forward: helping younger people who reach out, and sharing part of my gains with those less fortunate. A small act of kindness can go a long way. Make one every day. Change the world.

One of the kindest things someone ever did for me came from Paul Tudor Jones himself. When I was just starting out in the markets at 20yo – dreaming of becoming a trader after reading the Market Wizards book – I reached out to him. I was naive, unknown… and yet, he replied. He sent me a signed copy of Reminiscences of a Stock Operator with a simple note: “The trend is your friend.” 10+ years later, that advice changed my life. I didn’t end up making money trading – I made it by compounding in great businesses, riding big trends. Funny enough, it echoes the Warren Buffett approach: find a big trend and let it compound. I’ve now made several million dollars following that principle, both in finance and in my own portfolio. Thank you for everything @ptj_official – that simple act of kindness had a massive ripple effect. Now I try to pay it forward: helping younger people who reach out, and sharing part of my gains with those less fortunate. A small act of kindness can go a long way. Make one every day. Change the world.

My guest today is Paul Tudor Jones (@ptj_official), one of the greatest macro traders of all time. He correctly predicted the 1987 stock market crash and shorted the Japanese bubble in 1990. For over 40 years, his flagship fund has had a negative correlation to the S&P 500. 100% of his returns are alpha. He says today's market has so many similarities to 2000, "the easiest bear market I've ever seen in my whole life." He makes the case for going long dollar-yen, why Bitcoin beats gold as an inflation hedge, and why he was wrong about Warren Buffett. But what I'll remember most from this conversation is Paul's zest for life. He's 71 and still wakes at 2:30 every morning to trade the London open. He works out for two hours a day. He walks with his wife every evening. He travels the country chasing peak spring and peak fall. He's so excited about the songs picked for his funeral that he wishes he could be there to hear them. Paul has lived five lifetimes in one. He's one of the most entertaining and interesting people I've met, and the conversation will leave you searching to be as passionate about what you do as he is about what he does. Enjoy! Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 1:00 The Kindest Thing 13:19 Trading vs. Investing 17:33 Lessons from Warren Buffet 22:24 The Existential Risks of AI 29:54 The Nature of Trading 31:46 Bitcoin 35:55 Bubbles 42:08 A Day in the Life of PTJ 46:00 Information Overload 47:07 Passion for Markets 50:49 The Robin Hood Foundation 54:18 The Workless World 56:03 Journalism 1:00:00 Principal Components of a Great Life 1:05:06 Kill Them With Kindness

Time to buy some $HOOD? I’m a strong believer in fintech due to their scalability and high marginal revenue conversion into earnings Still very bullish on $NU with world-class operating leverage. Keeping an eye on Revolut too – even if the $REVO IPO is now looking like 2028, that business is an absolute machine Neither are cheap, but you pay for quality

What is the best fintech stock to 10x your money? $SOFI, $HOOD, $NU or $XYZ? Or another one? Maybe $KLAR?

Time to maxxleverage or what

@10009nyny @goddek @Doomerzoomer @higgsfield Crazy, some people are insane

@goddek @Doomerzoomer @higgsfield @CompoundinGirl Wild to see this

💰 DEVELOPING STORY – If you’re wondering why the accounts @Doomerzoomer and @higgsfield got banned, here is the whole story: I was invited into a private Telegram group. I’m usually very hesitant with paid promotions and I rarely trust setups like this, but I joined anyway to understand what was going on. What I found was not organic support or independent creators sharing tools they liked. It was a coordinated system. Inside the group that was run by @Doomerzoomer, creators were given exact instructions. What to post, which words to use, what to retweet and when. There were external briefs that linked directly to the companies’ websites, basically telling people how to frame their opinions. The process was as follows: You filled out a Google form with your X handle, the link to the post, and the agreed payment. Then you submitted it and were promised of being paid within a week. I never got to the payment part and here is why: After a few days of collecting evidence, I stopped. Because it became clear this was not just aggressive marketing. It was literally a scam. Two examples: – Perplexity AI was pushing influencers to avoid disclosing that posts were paid. – Higgsfield told people disclosure was optional. That’s deliberate platform manipulation. This had been running for months. There were around 150 large creators in that group, all being directed on what to post. In private chats, @Doomerzoomer would tell people what to say and not to say publicly. He told me, for instance, to stop talking about Israel. A huge red flag imho. Benjamin’s mistake was that he contacted me via his private phone number. As a white-hat hacker, I was able to identify the person behind it. His name is Benjamin S., a Chinese individual living in New Zealand. From there, more pieces came together. Old data traces, profiles, behavior patterns. Even things like him cheating on chess dot com, which says a lot about character. The arrogance in his messages matched exactly what I found. It painted a very clear picture of the kind of person operating this system. In the middle of it all (between companies and the creators), Ben acted as a single coordinator and gatekeeper. He recruited creators, controlled the flow of information, and based on everything I could verify, positioned himself to take a significant cut (7 digits per month) while keeping the creator side unclear about how the money actually moved. – Payment rates were inconsistent. – Stories did not match. – Nothing about it was transparent. Many of the creators involved were making between $15,000 and $50,000 PER MONTH from these campaigns alone. Doomer most likely made 50% of each payment on top as a “one person agency.” Do the math. I understand why some of the creators are upset with me now. And I’m sorry. I could have stayed quiet. I could have played along. I could have taken the money. BUT I DIDN’T. Because if platforms like this are going to mean anything, they cannot turn into pay to play schemes disguised as real opinion. And it did not stop there. Ben kept pushing for more. More creators. More reach. More volume. There were even incentives to recruit additional people into the system to expand it further. The screenshots below show how that recruitment worked. At some point, you have to ask yourself how no one in that group felt like cattle. Because that is exactly what it felt like. Controlled messaging, controlled behavior, scaled and monetized. I want to be clear about one thing. There is nothing wrong with getting paid to post. But if you are getting paid, be honest about it. Say it openly. Do not disguise it as organic belief. Yesterday I contacted @higgsfield via email and asked them about their relationship with Benjamin S., the structure behind these campaigns, and the briefing material being distributed. They did not respond to my questions. Today, they got suspended. I also have their full briefing texts saved. In the long run, honesty wins.

@mastersinvest I remember going into a Nike store in 2019 and thinking “if nothing changes, competition is going to eat them alive” They overconfidently increased their prices as if there were no competition

'As investors, it’s important for us to examine why and how good companies can go off the rails.' 'Since Nike’s all-time high in November 2021, the stock has fallen more than 75%. Remember that on Wall Street, one 75% drop is effectively two back-to-back 50% drops. This is a massive reversal of fortune. In the 37 years prior to Nike’s peak, the stock gained 18,000%, and that’s before dividends. What went wrong? The short answer is—everything.' - Eddy Elfenbein crossingwallstreet.com/archives/2026/…

@Gautam__Baid Unfortunately these letters are fake as confirmed by the Rockefeller Foundation..

Timeless lessons on work, life, and money. Enjoyed reading this book.

Just spotted Oh no Close the strait

@BillAckman @X I would close the family office and invest all my money in the fund/entity being IPO’d, and/or HHH. Buffett didn’t have a family office

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

@Mindset4Money_X They are fucking shareholders hard with their stock based compensation Shame on them

It’s early 2017 and the hottest messaging app in the world goes public. You invest $10K. Today, that's worth just $1,900. Why didn't $SNAP work?

Lmao that was a short rally

So Buffett retired at the top The one and only goat 🐐 $BRK

@Tintincapital Boomer 😂

Follow @CompoundinGirl if you want to avoid buying $SNAP at the wrong time

I heard gurgavin blew up his trading account?!

$PDD reporting today btw

Starting to see a few exciting names at those new prices Will be very excited if we get lower $MELi $SHOP $HOOD $META