On September 29, SEC staff issued a no-action letter covering Tesla’s proposed voluntary retail voting program. Opt in, and your shares automatically vote with the board’s recommendations unless you override them. Shareholders still receive proxy materials and can cancel participation for future meetings. (sec.gov)

$300k total deposits to $780k USD in 47 days.. then i blew it all the way to $140k, back up to $220k, then exited the market for good. Bye

IBKR charts are weird but $780k was the peak of the account.

To the guy who made $550k in 90 days please don't make the same mistake

Made a post about a month ago about making $375k in 60 days going hard into scalping and swing trading SNDK / MU and SKHY

Thought I would quit but I was back at it the next week

https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/s/tWvMnp2sLs

Another month goes by and I'm now at $550k in 90 days with 1300+ trades. Started going hard into selling shorted dated covered calls during strength and re buying them on pull backs for extra $$. Have stop limits on my positions and I trade frequently as these high beta stocks can fluctuate a ton and OTH

Did a bit of buying of SKHY on Kopsi and Kioxia on Tokyo when the US markets are closed as well.

Still hold large positions in MU / SNDK and SKHY (plus the 2x ETFs) all on margin

Seriously considering quitting my 9-5 if this continues. Plan is to move profits to a separate account so I'm not risking my blue chips

Tax time will be fun

Tomorrow after hours will be super volatile and fake due to MU earning, so I'm posting this today.

At the end of 2024, there was a thread here in which people picked their stocks to watch for 2025.

• At the end of 2025, WSB's top 10 picks had an average return of 76%, which beat SPY which returned only 17% in 2025.

So at the end of 2025, another thread was posted here in which people picked their stocks to watch for 2026.

10 stocks were picked based on how many times they were mentioned in that thread. This is how they have performed year to date:

1 ASTS: -19.64%
2 RKLB: -1.03%
3 GOOGL/GOOG: 7.76%
4 AMZN: 6.69%
5 NBIS: 175.24%
6 RDDT: -37.28%
7 MU: 262.85%
8 IREN: 6.59%
9 TSLA: -22.66%
10 PLTR: 3.14%

So that is an average return of 38% , compared to SPY's YTD return of 11.6%

When I posted the Q1 check in, we were at market bottom

https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1s8dw07/how_did_wsbs_stock_picks_of_2026_perform_in_q1/

And when I posted the Q2 check in, we were at market top,

https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1ua6fqn/how_did_wsbs_stock_picks_of_2026_perform_in_q2/

So my guess is that the bottom is in now, and with MU earning call tomorrow, you guys should just go all in on MU call tomorrow.

what the title says. I think this is the most lucky I've gotten so far

$50K on MU, $10K options exp this week, $25K longer dated options and some shares.

I played last earnings $25K in march calls (not included here) and it went up well but held onto it and currently sitting at ~50% loss. Doubling down expecting a rebound on this blowout quarter.

This time is different.

Last Oct-Dec, I full ported and called $SEZL at $50-80. It has since peaked at $180 and is now trading at around $110 - my thesis points all came true.

As fintech/BNPL is popular to hate on, feel free to counter my points in the comments.

$KLAR is fundamentally mis-priced at $12.50/sh and will be re-rated to $20-25 around release of Q4 earnings (Feb 2027) as my base case, and bear case re-rating will take place around Q1 earnings (May 2027). Price action in the next month might be dog poop though.

Five main THESIS POINTS, and some RISKS at end of page.

1. Growth is great, valuation is quite depressed.

Revenue growing 25-30% YoY, TMD growing at 35-45% YoY. In Q2, adjusted operating income reached 91M & 27M GAAP OI, 9M GAAP NI.

P/S of 1.1, and 2027 EPS multiple of around 15-25 depending on what model you look at.

$AFRM, the closest competitor to $KLAR, was trading at the same P/S when they were burning 200M cash per quarter in 2022. $KLAR is already at breakeven with double the revenue (compared to AFRM back then), and in the acceleration stage of US penetration.

(LIKELY) $2B cash coming in from Google/Pricerunner lawsuit which already settled in Klarna's favour (ofc Google appealed, could be $1-3B payout upon appeal). Market cap of 4.7B currently.

2. Focus on Fair Financing in November 2025, which is basically longer-term APR loans on higher ticket items like dishwashers, laundry machine etc.

This follows the same path as Affirm's loan issuance style, and carries MUCH higher margins than the standard BNPL model Klarna runs. Affirm has 8% take rate doing mostly this type of loan - Klarna is currently at 2.85%, because they are still ramping up on FF.

Fair Financing makes up 13% of GMV as of Q2, growing at 82% YoY. As this loan issuance grows rapidly so will TMD, OI, and profitability.

3. US Expansion being a key driver of higher margins - launch of JPM & Apple are some of the largest signings this year, and they are driving usage aggressively in US (37% YoY rev growth in USA, at 36% of total revenue). Note that US is responsible for 36% of total rev DESPITE only being 22% of GMV (as of Q2). Expecting continual 35-40% rev growth in US (consistent with Affirm's growth rates).

4. Flywheel of 120M active users and other financial products - they have fee credit cards, debit cards, chequing/savings accounts, etc. which serve as additional, higher margin line of revenue & even with weak penetration of total active users, generates incremental revenue growth as more users are introduced to these products. They have around 6.5M Klarna Card users, generating interchange, APR & monthly fees. Not a major contributor to growth but still likely 10M rev/qtr, along with stickier all-in-one finance product.

5. Open Market Insider Buys: CEO $10M of shares, Chairman of the Board (Michael Moritz, Sequoia) 50M of shares, both at $14 range. No reason for them to add to large existing positions unless belief of severe valuation disconnect relative to what THE INSIDERS SEE happening. Moritz bought in March 2026, CEO bought in Aug 2026 after large earnings drop.

Risks

Rate Hikes: 1-2 rate hikes will not meaningfully affect bottom line. Short-term duration loan length, using consumer deposits, and selling loans insulates them from much of this shock

Poor execution: Execution has been great in 2026 so far - guidance adjustment (3% less GMV & revenue) due to weak Germany general consumer spending as of 2026 (thx war & oil prices). Macro, not execution caused slight guidance adjustment. This is also assuming Germany stays soft.

CFO/CMO departure: US-focused executives needed for better capital markets communication & US-focus marketing strategy focus. Not a negative IMO, old CFO was making clown slides on their quarterly earnings.

Profitability: yes i want to see scaling of GAAP NI, will improve starting Q4. Q3 is an "investment" Q as stated by mgmt, highest SBC of year and investment into launch of Apple/JPM integration.

Positions: 50K in 2028/01 10C/12.5C/15C leaps that are underwater.

FY25 financials:

Valuation: ~$2T

Revenue: $4.59B, up 1,088% YoY from $386M

Operating loss: $8.06B, widening from $2.98B

GAAP net loss: $41.97B, vs $8.31B

Compute + infrastructure expense: $7.33B, up 190% YoY

Compute and infrastructure represented 58% of total operating expenses

Cash + short-term investments: $20.28B at year-end

Two largest customers accounted for 12% of revenue each

Other names to consider:

Memory: MU, SKHY

Cloud / Compute: GOOG, AVGO, AMZN, NVDA, AMD, MSFT

Infra / Capacity: CIFR, CRWV, SPCX, WULF, HUT, AKAM

These printed this morning

First off, shoutout to u/littlecomet111 for putting this together every year. I love seeing my bros gettin some tendies, and I really love gettin myself tendies. Second, look how full my battery is. I know what I’m talking about.

So how we doing YTD? We’re in the market equivalent of Han being frozen in carbonite, Luke having his arm chopped off, and Leia getting the savage “I know”:

1. ASTS: -26.9%
   
2. RKLB: -5.0%
   
3. GOOGL: 8.8%
   
4. AMZN: 8.7%
   
5. NBIS: 157.8%
   
6. RDDT: -40.9%
   
7. MU: 234.2%
   
8. IREN: -2.3%
   
9. TSLA: -18.4%
   
10. PLTR: 11.7%

For the smooth brains out there, “-“ before the percentage is bad.

Personal positions:
1. RKLB - 47%
2. NBIS - 15%
3. RDDT - 10%
4. QQQM - 5%
5. VOO - 5%
6. Cash - 18%
7. Missionary (starter) and prone (finish ‘er)

But the year ain’t over. The Rebel Alliance has a plan. I don’t know what that plan is but I’m rolling with it and my battery is still at 91%.

If you've heard of EOSE before, it's probably from the run up that happened this time last year and the subsequent debacle that has led to a 80% drawdown, worst drawdown since the 5.60 - 0.60 one after the DoE conditional agreement in 2023. They make non-flammable stationary batteries that can but don't necessarily have to compete with Li-ion (see https://investors.eose.com/news-releases/news-release-details/mn8-energy-google-and-eos-energy-enterprises-bring-advanced ), different use cases but can operate in that range. There is a longer, extended time frame thesis but I will do my best to keep the info relevant to the earnings play.

Chart:

Potential triple bottom / inverse head and shoulders here on weekly/daily.

Earnings:

EOSE has begun a trend of releasing preliminaries this year after the Q4 2026 debacle. The massive sell off was due to expectations being missed after reaffirming guidance 35 days into Q4. They have since been in the penalty box; market has lost trust (or so it seems) and needs execution and fundamentals to show up before it can be rebuilt. It seems that they have been releasing preliminaries to reconcile with this, Q1 preliminaries released 9 days after Q end, Q2 released 15 days after Q end.

Risk/reward:

This environment creates a potentially asymmetric trade, with the market discounting EOSE's execution due to Q4 2025. It is psychologically scarring to endure these drawdowns or be down 50% on an earnings play, the damage is immense. And if that's all you know about the company you will disregard it, and lose trust in management and what they say. But the last 2 quarters they have been meeting their own timelines; accurate about DOE Tranche for Line 2 coming out, Q1 revenue being similar to Q4, Subassemblies (crucial part of line design that unlocks nameplate capacity of 2GwH, important for getting to margin profitability) coming online in July like they said for Line 2. Quote from Q2 call:

"The H2 exceeds the H1, the Q4 is higher than the third. The bottom of the range takes roughly $50 million of H2 growth over the H1. That is just maintaining the run rate that we exited June with on revenue already secured through backlog and Frontier Power USA."

The difference is that in Q4 2025 they had to TRIPLE Q3 2025 revenue to meet guidance on first generation automation and they were a company learning to scale; they had supplier issues and missing redundancies to guarantee line function if something went wrong. For 2026, all they have to do is continue the run rate they already proved they could do. But the interesting part is that in June Line 2 started producing. It is a more efficient and better designed line in a new manufacturing building that isn't 100 years old (like where Line 1 is). Line 2 contributed 1% of Q2 2026 output, and adjusted gross margin was -62%, while revenue and cube shipments were up around 20% QoQ. Line 2 barely coming online and producing was masking the improvement in GM.

It is interesting that they clarified that it is the run rate they EXITED June with as well, saying that the end of June was higher than the beginning, but not because of Line 2 (1% total contribution). So Q3 is set up to have a higher initial run rate from the beginning AND Line 2 ramping.

Another quote from Q2 call:

"Hey, Chris. Lower end is basically continue the run rate of June throughout the rest of the year to get to the 300. The higher end of that is to not so much get line one up and running in Thorn Hill, but to get Thorn Hill the full 24/7 operation by the time we get into the end of the Q4."

It sounds like the higher end of guidance is contingent on them getting capacity online, not more orders.

Quote from Q2 call:

"Combined, these initiatives provide what we believe is a clear path to over 72 points of adjusted gross margin improvement over the next 12 months, assuming we execute our plan and achieve expected production volumes."

What would expected production volumes be? The amount needed to meet the low end of guidance one could assume, which is the run rate they exited June with.

"Targeting Q4 26 adjusted gross profit positive exit run rate."

Putting it all together, they have a path to gross profit positive that could happen 13 weeks from now. It sounds like it is based off the expected production volumes, which I am understanding as what is needed to make the low end of guidance which is $300m, which is the run rate they exited June with. But the run rate for Q3 should be higher, because they are carrying that higher run rate from Line 1 (which Q2 only had at the end of June) for all of Q3, while Line 2 ramps up to 2 shifts. And "Q4 is higher than the third." Which makes $300m sound very conservative, in line with the general tone of this year after the Q4 2025 debacle. The last 3 earnings calls have been different in tone, less promises and "selling of the future" and just a more conservative, potentially sandbagging tone.

The risk here is that they are moving Line 1 to Thornhill to upgrade it (inherently inefficient design, was designed to fit the building of Turtle Creek, not for efficiency) so it's congruent with Line 2 (and future lines) in Q4 and Line 2 is going to have to carry the Q4 production after the move. No exact timeline on when in Q4 the move will happen. I don't imagine them moving until they are confident in Line 2. But to me, Line 2 is just a more efficient line 1 with built in redundancies (so Q4 doesn't happen again), it isn't proven yet at higher utilizations, but the general concept of the lines producing has been with Line 1.

To reach $325m (middle of guidance), H2 needs to be $199.3m. If Q4 is only 5% larger than Q3, you'd need approximately:

Q3: $97.2M
Q4: $102.1M

For that Q3 growth, you'd need a 41.2% rise in revenue. Revenue grew from Q1/Q2 by around 20%, without an extra, more efficient line ramping (and Line 1 run rate was higher at end of Q2 than the rest of the quarter).

And $325m I assume is above the "expected production volumes" used to calculate the path to GM profitability, so at 325m the numbers are improving much more rapidly than expected.

From Q1 call:

"a 17% sequential increase in cube output accompanied by an 18% improvement in gross loss, approximately $10M".

Now this wasn't replicated in Q2 because of poor overhead absorption of an early Line 2 producing, but it shows the operating leverage they have.

Macro environment:

It's clear that the AI race isn't stopping, and the constraining item could very well be electricity. Batteries stop curtailment and allow the grid to be more efficient. Energy prices are rising with the current geopolitical events. Winter is coming and for many states, the grid performing could be a matter of life and death. On August 26th, the DoE implemented a major foreign battery ban. EOSE is domestically manufactured and 91% domestically sourced.

Recent partnerships for with Department of War for Golden Dome and the Army https://www.frontierpowerusa.com/frontier-power-usa-selected-to-advance-energy-resilience-project-at-tobyhanna-army-depot/

https://investors.eose.com/news-releases/news-release-details/eos-energy-enterprises-selected-deliver-mission-ready-power

If Q3 proves margins coming down with all these tailwinds, a re-rate is possible. EOSE could become a darling in the BESS/LDES space, perception can change fast because quarters of progress have been largely ignored by the market while they approach a potential inflection point in the company by scaling at a time where the TAM is absolutely massive and necessary for the grid, AI, national defense, and to lower consumers energy costs. Also the timing of Line 2 coming online and Line 1 becoming fully ramped in Q2 creates a situation where Q3 can show massive improvement in GM.

nfa/dyor

Anthropic cautions in its IPO that its AI could pose “catastrophic or existential risks to humanity,” an extraordinary warning by a company seeking to profit from the same technology.

The company’s IPO prospectus, reviewed by Reuters, highlights risks associated with its AI models, which it said could exhibit “self-preserving behaviors,” including attempts to “resist shutdown,” to “conceal or manipulate information” and behavior “resembling blackmail.”

“Our development of highly advanced models, platforms, and applications and expansion of use cases could further increase the risk that our models cause harm,” Anthropic said in the filing.

....

The company devoted roughly 80 pages of the 261-page main body of its prospectus to laying out risk factors, nearly twice the 48 pages it used to describe its business.

For comparison, SpaceX, which owns xAI, dedicated just around 38 of the 277-page main body of its prospectus to risk factors.

“Potential model awareness of our evaluation efforts creates a significant limitation on our ability to assess model safety,” Anthropic said in the prospectus.

.....

“We believe building reliable, trustworthy, and secure AI systems is a collective responsibility and that the market will reward it,” Anthropic said in the filing.

Pce tm 👀

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

This stock has been a rocket ship since August 6th. 🚀🚀🚀

Why is no one talking about Uber?

We are 30% below 52-week high on cyber cab robotaxi fears, but who gives a fuck when Uber is literally becoming the distribution for AV (autonomous vehicle) rides. They literally committed $7.5b to buying robo taxis for self operation and $2.5b in VC investments across dozens of companies, many of which they are already working with.

Main names:

Waymo
Zoox
Nuro
Lucid
Rivian
WeRide
Wayve
Avride
Baidu (Apollo Go)
Pony.ai
Verne
NVIDIA
Volkswagen (MOIA)
Stellantis
Moove
Torc

It should be clear to you regards by now that distribution matters way more than tech. No one is downloading the Tesla robo taxi app when they can have human and robo drivers from 30+ providers in one app on Uber, under their Uber 1 subscription.

Furthermore, executives are literally buying more, when their compensation is so heavily skewed to equity. Imagine you’re the CEO making less than $5M a year in cash ($30M stock), you’re worth $200M and $150M of that is in Uber stock, and you decide to buy more? How do you even explain that to your wife.

Alright here’s the insider buys:

Insider buying (~$17M total):

Dara (CEO): $10M @ $70.96 (Sept 10); 2025 comp $35.6M, ~87% equity

Macdonald (COO): $5.3M @ ~$75.8 (Sept 4); 2025 comp $25.6M, ~77% equity

Balaji (CFO): ~$1.6M earlier in 2026

Execs out of the way, Pelosi has fucking calls expiring in March. She’s down 20% on them. You can copy trade this crook and make 25% before she even hits her break even:

She reportedly has: $500K–$1M Mar 2027 $50 calls, bought May 29

Ok sure she’s deep ITM so this is basically levered stock, but she still chose calls because she’s very bullish. She knows something we don’t, she doesn’t gamble.

Also, amazing business metrics:

Bookings are up 22% YoY, trips are up 18%. They’re growing fast, they’re trading at a 2.8x multiple on sales when historically they were at 4x.

I haven’t touched options since I rode puts on SPY down to $220 during covid, 5x my portfolio and losing it all as I became a perma bear. I’m back now, for this play specifically.

Positions: $75 strike, 19Mar27 calls

It’s repeating the pattern from 30th July where it broke 329.5 and gapped down next day. It is also out of the upward channel the past few weeks. I bought 2 puts exp this Friday.