MoneyTree

Guys, you know the U.S. market is a total mess right now, right?

But there’s a stock that Cathie Wood is confident about.

Cathie Wood isn’t just a regular fund manager—she focuses only on innovative companies.

So what stocks has she picked?

First, Palantir.

Everyone’s freaking out about falling behind in the AI transition.

So who’s going to save the day? Palantir.

It’s the ultimate AI weapon, even contracted by the U.S. government to process massive data.

Second, CRISPR Therapeutics.

These guys are the ultimate players in gene therapy tech.

Genetic diseases? They just cut them out with gene-editing scissors.

This one’s seriously legit.

Third, Tempus AI.

This company tells you you’re sick before you even feel symptoms.

It’s said to diagnose faster and more accurately than doctors—soon, people might go to Tempus before they go to hospitals.

Fourth, Tesla.

Robo-taxis are launching in June, and low-cost EVs are expected this quarter.

Tesla has always been the game-changer.

#Palantir

#CRISPR

#TEMPUS

Ever wondered if a company will keep growing in the future before investing in it?

Most beginners rely on PER (Price-to-Earnings Ratio) to assess a stock’s value, but let’s be real—there’s a much better metric that savvy investors use: EV/EBITDA.

Never heard of it? No worries. I’m about to break it down so simply that you’ll never look at stocks the same way again!

What Is EV/EBITDA? Think of It Like This…

To understand this metric, let’s break it down into two parts:

• EV (Enterprise Value) → Imagine you’re buying an entire company, not just its stock. EV is the total price tag—including its market value, debt, and cash on hand.

• EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization) → This represents how much pure cash flow the company generates every year before extra costs like interest and taxes.

Put simply:

EV/EBITDA tells you how many years of profits you’d need to buy the entire company.

Why Is EV/EBITDA Better Than PER?

Most beginners use PER, but it only looks at net income and ignores important factors like debt and depreciation. That’s a problem!

EV/EBITDA, on the other hand, gives you the full picture by factoring in a company’s financial health, including its debts.

Here’s why that matters:

Low EV/EBITDA = Undervalued Company (It’s making great money, but the market hasn’t caught on yet. Potential bargain!)

High EV/EBITDA = Overvalued Company (It’s expensive but not generating enough cash flow. Risky investment!)

Imagine two burger chains:

• Burger Joint A: EV/EBITDA of 6 → Generates steady cash flow, but the market hasn’t priced it in yet. Great investment opportunity!

• Burger Joint B: EV/EBITDA of 18 → Struggles to turn a profit, yet its stock price is sky-high. Be careful—it might crash!

How to Use EV/EBITDA the Right Way

Warning: EV/EBITDA is only useful when comparing companies in the same industry.

For example:

Comparing Costco vs. Walmart?

Great! Both are retail giants with similar business models.

Comparing Boeing vs. McDonald’s?

Always compare apples to apples to accurately gauge a company’s value.

Bottom Line: Smart Investors Use This Cheat Code

EV/EBITDA isn’t just another fancy Wall Street term. It’s a powerful tool to spot undervalued companies before the rest of the market catches on.

So before making your next investment, check EV/EBITDA, compare within the industry, and invest wisely!

A Potential US Market Crash refers to a systematic or orchestrated decrease in stock values rather than an arbitrary market fluctuation. Currently, the US government is grappling with a significant debt crisis, with approximately 7 trillion dollars—accounting for 20% of its total debt—due this year. Rather than addressing this substantial obligation, the government intends to incur additional debt. Concurrently, interest rates have surged from roughly 1% to over 4%, resulting in increased borrowing expenses. This combination of factors characterizes a Potential US Market Decline.

Government Debt, Escalating Interest Rates, and Trade Conflicts

The transition from low to high interest rates profoundly affects the market landscape. As the cost of borrowing escalates, the government experiences heightened pressure to manage its debt effectively. To alleviate this strain, it may consider initiating a trade conflict. Such a trade conflict can result in elevated prices and a sluggish economy, prompting investors to shift their assets from stocks to bonds. This shift can lead to decreased bond yields and subsequently lower the government’s borrowing costs. These calculated actions may ultimately instigate a Potential US Market Crash.

Historical Instances of Deliberate Market Crashes

Historical records provide notable instances of market crashes that bear resemblance to current trends. The stock market experienced a significant decline during Black Monday in 1987, driven by economic strains and widespread fear. Similarly, the global financial crisis of 2008 was triggered when banks and investors reacted decisively to economic warnings, resulting in a substantial market downturn. These historical examples demonstrate how a deliberate or orchestrated market decline—referred to as an Intended US Market Crash—can transpire when economic conditions and policy decisions converge.

Monitoring Essential Indicators for Future Approaches

President Donald Trump implemented significant tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and China, prompting these nations to retaliate with their own tariffs. This escalation resulted in a tariff conflict that raised import costs, drove up consumer prices, and placed additional strain on businesses. Some analysts even propose that Trump may have deliberately instigated an economic slowdown. But what was his underlying aim?

What Was Trump’s True Aim?

Trump’s objectives might have extended beyond merely engaging in a tariff conflict. His approach likely sought to lower interest rates, devalue the dollar, and rejuvenate American manufacturing.

At present, the yield on U.S. 10-year Treasury bonds exceeds 4%, while the national debt continues to rise. A reduction in interest rates would alleviate the government's debt interest burden, and a weaker dollar would enhance the competitiveness of U.S. exports.

To facilitate this, Trump exerted pressure on the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates by intentionally slowing economic growth. Concurrently, a devalued dollar would benefit U.S. exports and stimulate American manufacturing. Most crucially, he aimed to align the economic recovery with the latter part of his presidency to claim credit for it.

Historical Precedents

Previous U.S. presidents have employed similar tactics to bolster American industries.

- Ronald Reagan (1980s): Reagan safeguarded U.S. manufacturing by limiting Japanese car imports. Initially, he supported a strong dollar but later consented to its devaluation through the Plaza Accord, which aided American exports and compelled Japanese car manufacturers to relocate production to the U.S.

- Richard Nixon (1970s): Nixon introduced the Nixon Shock in 1971, which ended the gold standard and devalued the U.S. dollar. This move made American exports more competitive, reduced trade deficits, and stimulated domestic manufacturing.

Companies That Gained from Similar Approaches

When past presidents implemented comparable policies, certain companies capitalized on these changes and experienced growth.

1. General Motors (GM) and Ford: Reagan's trade policies on Japanese automobiles helped American manufacturers keep their market presence and even grow.

Caterpillar: Following the Plaza Accord, which devalued the dollar, American machinery companies like Caterpillar found themselves with a stronger position in international markets.

Boeing: Nixon's dollar depreciation policies allowed American aircraft manufacturers, particularly Boeing, to thrive as their planes became more affordable for international customers.

If Trump's policies mirror these historical approaches, U.S. manufacturing and export businesses today might also discover avenues for expansion.

How Should We Respond?

If Trump's approach resembles previous strategies, a potential economic slowdown could present investment prospects in U.S. manufacturing firms focused on exports. It's essential to dig deeper than just the visible policies and grasp the underlying motives behind them.