Todd Burch
14-Year Member
We are up 50% in a month. There's the reason.
Up 75% in a month is better.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We are up 50% in a month. There's the reason.
The Netherlands is rumoured to go in lockdown this evening. If the lockdown measures prevent Tesla to deliver cars, it could mean about 2000 cars can’t be delivered this year. Germany already announced a stronger lockdown, so Tesla may not be able to deliver cars there too.
Edit: the 2000 cars is my guestimate based on how the delivery graph looks like this quarter so far.
I am still not clear on whether those are 3/7 business days or calendar days??
SPY prospectus said:, the Trustee is required to adjust the composition of the Portfolio whenever there is a change in the identity of any Index Security (i.e., a substitution of one security for another) within three (3) Business Days before or after the day on which the change is scheduled to take effect
I'm aware of that, thanks. I was wondering why someone would specifically point to tomorrow(4 trading days out). My guess now is that it's calendar days? My assumption was that funds would be buying at either 3 trading days out or 7.We've been over this exhaustively, many many times now.
Each fund has its own rules.
Some could be allowed to buy today
Some not till 3 days in advance.
Some could've been allowed to buy last week even (though likely a small minority).
MOST funds that have a rule on this in their prospectus seem to be either 3 or 7 days... (and that's both pre and post inclusion date) but even those funds usually have some disclaimers about additional special cases.
All that said- several folks have posted sources in the past suggesting during previous inclusions most funds don't buy until the day before inclusion no matter their own rules.
Of course this isn't a typical inclusion so YMMV.
Yes, that certainly is preferable to “...of shorts’ shorts”.I love the smell of TSLA in the morning!
It is now a defensive decision. Before, they could just chop TSLA up to "just another unicorn" and there were a lot of unicorns out here beating the SP 500 by miles. Investors wouldn't hold it against them for not buying TSLA, or ZM, or SHOP because there was always a high level of risk associated with them. As TSLA becomes the latest tech behemoth to get the SP 500 badge, it is no longer a unicorn. The decision has to be made with a different set of criteria now.... how was it not an active choice before but magically is one now?
If you thought it would outperform the index as a whole before you'd have bought it before. ARK sure did.
If you thought it wouldn't you wouldn't.
Active choice.
Same today.
I dunno- maybe my standards are too high...
If I was gonna pay fees to an actively managed fund I don't think I'd accept "we are just gonna add exactly index weight of this new index stock because we're too lazy to make a decision about it" for an answer.
WTF am I paying them for in that case?
They probably do. It’s also an essential business for people whose leasecontract expires January 31st. Would be surprised if they have to close down.In the US Tesla used a "touchless" delivery service during various statewide lockdowns. They used the same techniques if your car needed servicing. Don't these methods work in Europe?
... how was it not an active choice before but magically is one now?
If you thought it would outperform the index as a whole before you'd have bought it before. ARK sure did.
If you thought it wouldn't you wouldn't.
Active choice.
Same today.
I dunno- maybe my standards are too high...
If I was gonna pay fees to an actively managed fund I don't think I'd accept "we are just gonna add exactly index weight of this new index stock because we're too lazy to make a decision about it" for an answer.
WTF am I paying them for in that case?
Nice morning pop to $626, but we better watch out, those FUDsters are trying to throw everything they got at us! Look at this article that just showed up on my feed, really stretching if you ask me:
The Rise and Fall of Nikola Tesla and....
This post originally appeared on Smithsonian Magazine and was published February 3, 2013. This article is republished here with permission.
Up 75% in a month is better.
One thing I'd like to add about the level2 charts @Cherry Wine helpfully posts is, they're less useful during times like these than other times where there is nothing interesting going on.
Specifically what that shows is the limit order book and if you're a big player, buying or selling via limit orders is akin to playing poker with your cards on the table. Pretty much shooting yourself in the foot. Most of the times what it shows is the smaller retail buy /sell interest.
Even for retail traders, places like IB offer VWAP and iceberg orders that let you hide the real buying and selling demand.
There are three hard things in computer science, naming variables and off-by-one errors.I would've thought it'd be more like Wednesday, the 3 trading days prior to inclusion?
Um, er, what? You're confused. Of course I want to beat whatever I'm benchmarked against. What that means is that my 0 (no win, no lose) is whatever that benchmark does. So before inclusion the benchmark was doing it's thing without TSLA, and after inclusion it is doing it with TSLA. That means that, as a fund manager, having no opinion and going with the flow means owning the same percentage of TSLA as the index. Most fund managers have no opinion and go with the flow on the things they don't understand. Most put TSLA in that category. You can tell because they didn't own any TSLA.I think you're misunderstanding what benchmarked against means.
It means they want to beat the results of the index.
Why would you mirror something you are trying to do better than?
They held 0 TSLA because they felt it would not help them BEAT the index results.
If a managed fund that charges significant fees were to report "Hey we exactly matched the returns o a passive S&P index fund!" their customers would wonder WTF they're spending their money on with those fees.
Buying into stocks NOT in the index is literally the only way to beat it
Again- how does that make any sense?
At that point they're just a passive index fund- not an actively managed fund trying to beat the index.
If you want to BEAT the index, mirroring it is exactly the way to insure you fail at your one job.
So pre-inclusion, an active fund manager either thought TSLA would do worse than the index as a whole, and bought 0.
Or she thought it would beat the index as a whole and bought shares (see ARK as the most obvious example of such a fund).
The same is true post inclusion.
Actually the easiest reply to that is, "I heard that exact statement !!7 years ago!!", and just leave it at that.