美股投资young

美股科技投资者 ai狂热者分享每日快讯. all in ai

303Following

767followers

Feed

Livestream

Feed

The direction of the range will be decided in the next few days of next week, with major events concentrated on 11/17 and 11/18. I don't plan to make big moves before then. Let's first schedule the calendar; all times are Eastern Time. Friday 11/13, 8:30 AM: October PPI release. CPI has already been on the hot side; if this is also hot, the calls for a 50 basis point hike in December will grow louder. Monday 11/16 is relatively quiet, with only the New York Fed Manufacturing Index. Tuesday 11/17, during the day at 8:30 AM, retail sales data will be released to see if consumption can withstand the rate hikes. After market close at 5:00 PM, will hold its Q3 earnings call, covering the quarter ending 10/25. Besides revenue and guidance, the market will focus on how management discusses customers and succession plans. Every sentence on the call will be scrutinized. Wednesday 11/18 is the busiest day. Three House committee chairs will hold a closed-door briefing with Jensen Huang. As of 11/11, the company has not publicly responded; the response deadline has passed, and some lawmakers have hinted at possible subpoenas. On the same day at 1:00 PM, there is a 20-year Treasury auction, followed by the release of the FOMC meeting minutes at 2:00 PM. VIX options also expire that day. Reportedly, Anthropic’s IPO is priced that day and will list the next day, potentially raising over $60 billion. Whether funds will be pulled from major AI stocks will be visible then. Thursday 11/19 brings initial jobless claims and the Philadelphia Fed Manufacturing Index. Friday 11/20 is monthly options expiration, plus the University of Michigan consumer sentiment and inflation expectations. SpotGamma has previously noted that the S&P is in a negative gamma zone between 7000 and 7550, so volatility will be amplified regardless of direction before expiration. With this lineup, the impact of each event on positions becomes clear. Earnings and hearings are packed into two days, with mixed news expected. Using short-term options to bet on direction at this time is risky; even if the direction is guessed correctly, implied volatility could drop, making it a losing trade. I avoid this kind of play. Leveraging through these days is even less necessary; after-hours gaps offer no chance to stop losses. My plan is: keep cash on hand, place planned orders at set prices, buy a layer if it drops, but don’t chase on the way up. After the 11/20 expiration, I’ll see if can hold above the 20-day moving average near 700 and whether the political situation clarifies. Only when these three conditions align will I consider adding. This week will test patience the most.

This year's Nasdaq rebound has seen more failures than successes. Whether this time will succeed or not, don't judge by how much it has risen; instead, watch if it can hold after reclaiming the moving averages. I reviewed several rebounds from 2026 for comparison. The one on 3/30 was a true reversal. reclaimed the 20-day moving average on 4/7, and on 4/8 it reclaimed both the 50-day and 200-day moving averages in one day, rising 2.97% with volume 1.26 times that of the previous day. The next two days saw a pullback, but the lows did not break below the reclaimed moving averages, and by 4/15 it hit a new high. From the low to the new high took 11 trading days in total. There were four failures, all looking quite similar. On 6/26, reclaimed the 20-day and 50-day moving averages on 6/29, which looked decent, but on 7/2 it fell back below the 20-day moving average and then continued to drop until 7/29. On 7/17, it was the semiconductors' turn; on 7/21 $SOXX surged 5.45% in one day with volume 1.54 times larger, but it failed five days later. There was also the early March semiconductor rebound and the February rebound. even had a classic follow-through day but still couldn't hold. In all four failures, after reclaiming the 20-day moving average, the price fell back below it within 2 to 7 trading days. So simply standing above the moving average doesn't say much; it only counts if it holds after a pullback. Now looking at the current rebound: after the low on 11/5, 's lows have been higher day by day. On 11/11 it closed at 690.38, the first time closing above the 200-day moving average. That day was the 4th day after the low, with a 2.31% rise and volume only 6% higher than the previous day, barely enough for a follow-through day, and it retreated from 695.57 near the close. The 20-day moving average is around 699 and hasn't been reclaimed yet. is weaker, with all three moving averages pressing down; intraday on 11/10 it hit 165.89, lower than the 11/5 low. Just looking at these days, it resembles both the 4th day of the 3/30 reversal and the 3rd day of the 6/26 failed rebound, so it's hard to tell. How to recognize the fifth attempt? I set three criteria for myself: must close above the 20-day moving average near 700; then hold on a pullback; and there must be a clear statement on the political front. The earnings report on 11/17 and the hearing on 11/18 are still ahead. Until all three conditions are met, I will treat it as a range trade, buying in batches if it falls to planned prices and not chasing if it surges. There are only eight such samples in a year, so it's not a statistical rule. But using them as a reference is more reliable than shouting reversal just based on one big bullish candle.

Sigh, now that it's pulling back, it's like celebrating a funeral; all the bad news is out, and every little movement is good news. 's first candlestick at today's open dropped to 148.8, then steadily climbed up. By 10:20 AM Eastern Time, it had already bounced back to 164.8, an 11% rebound from the low point, narrowing the day's loss to about 5%. Jensen Huang's resignation has finally landed, so the short-term negative news is basically all out. Next up is the earnings report on 11/17 and some potential positive news from the interim CEO, which could trigger a rebound. But rebound or not, my long-term view on has changed: it has lost certainty. Not only but the entire AI hardware supply chain related to it, the whole AI certainty is gone—it's really a mess. In the past three years, holding was about certainty. You knew there would be a new generation architecture every year, you knew the supply chain would be tightly controlled by them, and you knew Jensen Huang would spot and bet on the next big direction first. No matter how hard it fell, as long as the captain was at the helm, you dared to hold. Now that certainty is gone. Think about it: what if Steve Jobs was forced out when needed him most? What would that look like? is at that moment now. AI is moving from training to inference, from selling chips to selling entire AI factories. Sovereign AI, robots, national computing centers—all are waiting for it to plan, expand, and form alliances. Yet at this critical time, this kind of incident happened, and a cultural symbol of the AI era was politically taken down. And it's not just affected. The entire semiconductor supply chain has been following 's roadmap these years. 's advanced processes and CoWoS, SK Hynix and 's HBM, optical modules, switches, liquid cooling—everyone dares to expand and invest because they believe Jensen Huang can bring out the demand every year. The flag bearer has fallen, the roadmap remains, but who guarantees it will be followed on time? The confidence for downstream expansion will also be discounted. So my view now has two layers. Short term, after all the bad news is out and oversold, a bounce is very normal. If the earnings are good, it could bounce even more. Long term, the certainty of and the entire AI semiconductor chain is gone, and the "future premium" in the valuation needs to be recalculated. At times like this, the biggest fear is mistaking a rebound for a reversal. The move from 148 to 164 is an opportunity for those wanting to reduce positions, not a signal to go all in. No leverage, no options betting on earnings. Those with positions should slowly manage them by price level; those without positions shouldn't rush to buy.

Without Jensen Huang, faces great uncertainty in its prospects, and I think the negative impact is quite significant. But at the 160 price level, based on orders and profits, it is still seriously undervalued, far from my target price. I have shared the exact figure in the members' group. Undervaluation is one thing; discounting the outlook is another. Orders won't disappear just because the CEO changes. Capital expenditures from , , and are still increasing, and production capacity is booked through next year and the year after. Next week's earnings report will likely still look very good. But the greatness of has never been just about how many cards it sells. It doesn't make its own chips or server racks. Chips rely on , HBM on SK Hynix, Samsung, and ; packaging, switches, optical modules, liquid cooling—all backed by dozens of suppliers. The ability to twist such a long supply chain into a tight rope and push it forward generation by generation each year depends on Jensen Huang himself. His vision is also 's most valuable asset. In 2006, he went against the crowd to develop CUDA, was criticized by Wall Street for ten years, and later the whole world’s AI ran on it. NVLink, full rack solutions, from selling chips to selling entire AI factories—every step was first seen and bet on by him. These things don’t show up in financial reports or get counted in DCF models. Many compare and Steve Jobs, saying that after Jobs left, still rose to trillions in valuation. But when Jobs left, Cook had already been groomed for many years, and the supply chain was built by him; the successor was already in place. cannot find a second Cook. Currently, the CFO is temporarily acting as CEO, and the board is searching both internally and externally, but there isn’t a single candidate yet. The interim management can maintain the existing business, but who will decide the future direction? Who will negotiate capacity with and memory manufacturers? Who dares to approve the next CUDA-level big bet? All of this is unknown now. Compared to other MAG7 companies, is the most dependent on its founder. , , and have all changed CEOs, relying on platforms and systems. Much of ’s innovation pace over the past decade has been set by one person. So my concern is not just about alone. The AI revolution narrative in recent years has largely been told by Jensen Huang himself. When he talks on stage about computing power demand and AI factories, the entire semiconductor hardware sector’s valuation rises accordingly. Without its flagbearer, this narrative may suffer a heavy blow, and the short-term impact could be far beyond just one company. Speechless, I didn’t expect the Americans to go so far as to cut off their own arm—truly a divine person.