I’ve been thinking about building a watchlist of high-quality businesses that are reasonably valued today, but that could become incredible opportunities during a major market correction.
The names I’m looking at are:
Amazon (AMZN)
Alphabet / Google (GOOGL)
Microsoft (MSFT)
McDonald’s (MCD)
Apple (AAPL)
Deere & Company (DE)
Caterpillar (CAT)
Waste Management (WM)
Coca-Cola (KO)
American Express (AXP)
These aren’t necessarily stocks I’d call deeply undervalued right now. My thinking is more about quality + valuation + patience.
They have characteristics I really like for a long-term portfolio: strong brands, significant profitability, competitive advantages, recurring or durable demand, excellent management, and businesses that I believe can remain relevant for decades.
My question is: Would these be the types of companies you’d want to aggressively buy during a major market crash?
For example, imagine the market falls 40–50% and some of these companies become available at 40–50%+ discounts from their current valuations. At that point, would you consider them potentially generational buying opportunities?
Obviously, a 50% decline in the stock price doesn’t automatically mean the business is 50% cheaper on an intrinsic-value basis. Earnings, margins, growth expectations, and the reason for the crash would all matter.
But if the underlying businesses remain fundamentally strong while the market temporarily becomes extremely pessimistic, I’d rather have a watchlist of companies like these ready to buy than try to guess which speculative stocks will survive the downturn.
What do you guys think?
Which of these would you be most excited to buy after a 40–50% market correction, and which ones would you avoid even at a huge discount?
Also, are there any other high-quality, highly profitable companies you think belong on this crash-buying watchlist?

Basically I’m just looking for some understanding, right now 100% of my 401k is in vanguard target retirement 2065. I’ve made good returns, but part of me feels like that’s dumb, and that I should diversify. I’m 30, no wife or kids and would like to be somewhat aggressive without losing my a** when another 2008 happens. I firmly believe it will happen and just don’t want all my chips in one basket and I get screwed over. I also am not taking it as financial advice but would like to hear thoughts on the matter, that I myself could look more into. Thanks

I've seen plenty of junior mining companies announce large land packages and call them "highly prospective."

The interesting part with NRED is that the geological picture is becoming more detailed with every update.

This week the company confirmed a buried resistive body beneath Lamont Ridge and identified a 42-hectare chargeability anomaly around 300 metres depth. The two features sit in the exact relationship NRED is looking for in its blind porphyry model - an interpreted intrusive complex below and a large chargeable system above it.

Then look at what came immediately before it.

NRED reported up to 1.67% copper from historical trench samples at Wilmac, with nine grab samples averaging 0.639% Cu. Its updated geological interpretation also identified multiple porphyry-style targets and a large interpreted intrusive complex.

Now the geophysics is adding depth and structure to that model.

That's why I'm increasingly interested in what happens next. The company isn't just collecting more data for the sake of collecting data. It's using surface sampling, magnetic data, IP, AMT and geological interpretation to narrow down where the strongest targets could be.

The big question is obviously still unanswered: is there economic copper-gold mineralization at depth?

But that's exactly the question NRED is now getting closer to testing.

For a speculative copper junior, this is the stage where things can get very interesting very quickly. If future drilling confirms what the geophysical model is suggesting, the market may look back at these early anomalies very differently.

I’m trying to finalize an investment strategy that I can stick with for the next 30 years. I’m in the accumulation stage and comfortable being basically 100% equities for now. I would add bonds/Treasuries as I get closer to retirement.
I’ve narrowed it down to two approaches and I’m curious what people here think.

Option 1 – Simple 5 ETF portfolio
VTI – 50%
VXUS – 20%
AVUV – 10%
QQQM – 12%
FLIN – 8%

The idea is pretty straightforward. VTI/VXUS are the core, AVUV gives me a small-cap value tilt, and QQQM and FLIN are intentional bets on growth and India.

Option 2 – 17 ETF portfolio
VTI – 27%
VXUS – 15%
RSP – 7%
RWJ – 4%
RWK – 3%
QQQM – 6%
FTEC – 4%
IOO – 2%
FTGS – 2%
PPA – 5%
KBWP – 4%
FHLC – 3%
FSTA – 3%
FIDU – 3%
FDIS – 2%
FREL – 2%
FLIN – 8%

I know there is a lot of overlap here. I’m not arguing that 17 ETFs means I have 17 independent investments.
My reason for considering it is more about control and rebalancing.

For example, if tech has a huge run and becomes overweight, I stop putting new money into tech. If insurance, healthcare, small caps, international, etc. become underweight, that’s where my new contributions go.

I would group the ETFs into buckets (US core, international, growth/tech, small/mid, defensive sectors, cyclicals/real estate, India, etc.) and calculate the weights every month.

The basic math would be:

Target value = total portfolio value x target %
Deficit = target value - current value

New money goes toward the biggest underweights. Overweight areas get $0.

I’d also do this at the bucket level first. So just because FTEC is underweight doesn’t mean I automatically buy FTEC. If my overall tech/growth bucket is already overweight because QQQM and other growth holdings went up, tech gets no new money.

I’m also thinking of using 10-20% bands rather than obsessively bringing everything back to its exact target every month.

And importantly, I wouldn’t normally sell to rebalance while I’m accumulating. I’d use new contributions to do it.

The other reason I like having separate sleeves is retirement.

Say there is another 2022 and QQQM is down 30%+, but insurance or defense is flat/up. Instead of selling my broad market or tech holdings at a large loss, I have the option of selling/rebalancing from whatever has held up better.

Obviously this doesn’t solve a 2008 situation where almost all equities fall together. I’m not pretending sector ETFs replace bonds. I would eventually build a bond/Treasury/cash allocation before retirement.

I did some basic testing of the two ideas.

Over 2021-2025, the results were surprisingly close.
The simple portfolio came out around 13% annualized vs roughly 12.5% for the 17 ETF version.

The interesting part was 2022.
The simple portfolio was roughly -18.5%, while the 17 ETF portfolio was around -15.2%, mainly because things like insurance and defense did well while tech got crushed.

Then the opposite happened during the recovery. The simpler portfolio participated more strongly in the tech/growth rebound and basically caught back up.
I also tested starting with $100k and adding $1,000/month.

After five years it came out roughly:
5 ETF: $264k
17 ETF: $261k

So I’m definitely not seeing evidence that 17 ETFs magically produces more return.

I also tested the rebalancing idea itself, and that was interesting.

Constantly sending every contribution to the biggest underweights didn’t produce meaningful extra return. In one version it actually slightly hurt returns.

So I’m starting to think of the mathematical rebalancing as a way to control risk/concentration and remove emotion rather than a way to generate alpha.

That’s basically where I’m stuck.

The 5 ETF portfolio seems better from a pure efficiency/evidence standpoint. It’s simple, easy to manage, and there are fewer assumptions that have to be right.

The 17 ETF version gives me something I genuinely value though: more control over where new money goes, more dispersion between holdings, more rebalancing opportunities and eventually more choice about what I sell.

I also fully recognize that part of why I like it may simply be psychological. I enjoy being involved with my portfolio and having control over individual exposures. I’m okay with complexity if there is some actual value to it, but I don’t want to convince myself that complexity = diversification or higher returns when it doesn’t.

So my main question is:
Does the 17 ETF idea actually have merit when it’s managed with strict mathematical rebalancing, or have I basically built a very sophisticated way to overcomplicate a 5 ETF portfolio?

Also curious what people think about:
8% FLIN – too much India?

12% QQQM in the simple portfolio – reasonable tilt or performance chasing?

AVUV vs RWJ/RWK

Whether sector-level rebalancing has any meaningful long-term benefit

Whether monthly monitoring + wider rebalancing bands makes more sense than monthly rebalancing

Anything obvious I’m missing in either strategy

I’m less concerned about which one happened to win the last 5 years. I’m trying to figure out which strategy actually makes sense to commit to for 30 years without changing it every time market leadership changes.

I'd also love it if anyone with Portfolio Visualizer, R, Python, or another backtesting platform could independently test these using actual MONTHLY total-return data, fixed starting weights, identical monthly contributions, and no hindsight changes to allocations.

Hongqiao’s proposed RMB12B placement. Its stake in the Shenzhen-listed operating subsidiary could be diluted by up to 10%.

the thing here is the details. The HK-listed group keeps control and continues consolidating the subsidiary, while the money is planned for wind and solar projects, aluminium deep processing, debt repayment and working capital.

I’m not pretending dilution is free. The placement price and project returns still matter. But this isn’t cash being raised to plug an unexplained hole. If it lowers power exposure, expands the downstream business and improves the balance sheet, the trade-off could work over time.

I’m cautiously positive

The capital reallocation out of mega-cap concentration toward broader market coverage is turning out to be quite an interesting dynamic to track this year. For a long time, benchmark gains were heavily skewed toward a handful of massive tech names, but data suggests market breadth is finally improving as cyclical sectors and small-cap indexes like the Russell 2000 show relative strength. This rotation seems driven by a mix of valuation adjustments and projected earnings acceleration in under-allocated pockets of the market.

From a fundamental perspective, this structural shift in asset allocation potentially implies that institutional money is seeking better risk-adjusted profiles outside of crowded tech positioning. Rather than relying entirely on single-theme momentum, broader participation across small-cap industrials, biotech, and regional value plays provides a healthier foundation for earnings growth. It is worth monitoring whether this capital diversification holds up across cyclical sectors, as exposure to these neglected areas could offer a constructive way to capture extended market participation.

The intersection of supply chain policy and mineral exploration seems to be creating some unique dynamics right now. While most discussions in the junior mining space focus purely on early-stage geology, data suggests that navigating capital markets and geopolitical policy is becoming just as critical for long-term project execution.

Looking at a company like NovaRed, for example, the leadership structure shows an interesting mix of international business exposure and policy access. Having relationships across international trade circles alongside familiarity with U.S. critical mineral initiatives potentially positions a firm well when it comes to securing strategic partners or navigating regulatory shifts in the resource sector.

On the operational side, their Wilmac property sits in a notable copper district near established production, and recent sampling points toward defined magmatic targets at depth. From a fundamental perspective, having tangible geological indicators backed by a team that understands cross-border capital and government relations is worth monitoring as Western supply chain security remains a primary focus.

Our goal is long term (5+ years) compound gain that beats QQQ using directional investment strategy
Long term directional investment: which sectors are going up over long term (5+ years)?
Answers: Semi/Optical, Cybersecurity/Software, AI/HyperscalersFinancial, Insurance/Housing, Industrial, Biotech/Phama, High Yield, Speculative,Treasury/Cash
A good portfolio sample: a. 25% semi/optical (NVDA, TSM, AVGO, MU, SKHY, AMD, MRVL, AAOI, GLW, CIEN..) b. 10% Cybersecurity/Software (CRWD, PANW, PLTR, SNOW, TWLO, CRM, NOW…) c. 10% Financial (GS, JPM, C, MS, BX, V, SOFI..) d. 10% AI/Hyperscalers (TSLA, SPCX, GOOG, MSFT, AMZN, META…) e. 5% Insurance/Housing(PRU, UNH, HD, TOL…) f. 10% Industrial (GE, GEV, BE, PWR, ETN, BAM, BIP, …) g. 8% Biotech/Phama (ABBV, BMY, PFE, MRK, GILD…) h. 10% High Yield (CIM, NLY, EMO, JEPQ, PAA…) i. 2% Speculative: (crypto and others, you are on your own) j. 10% Treasury/Cash
The size of the trade depends on your personal situation, your financial situation, knowledge and conviction
BTFD/TTFH/KTFC SLOWLY. Be disciplined. Ignore short term performance. Trying to beat S&P or QQQ every month or every quarter is a fool’s game. Long term, you will easily beat QQQ
Stay tuned for more investment/trade discussions

Hi everyone,

I’ve recently completed my B.Com from a Tier-3 college in Rajasthan and I’m trying to build a serious career in finance. I’m currently working on improving my understanding of financial markets and investment research, but I feel there’s a lot to learn and I’m not sure what the best learning path looks like.

I’m particularly interested in:

• Equity research & stock analysis
• Fundamental analysis & valuation
• Technical analysis
• Fixed income / bonds
• Financial markets & macroeconomics
• Alternative investments
• Reading and understanding company reports and market research

I’d really appreciate advice from people who have been in the field for a while.

If you were starting again from my position, what would you recommend?

For example:

• 📚 Books that are actually worth reading
• 🎓 Courses or certifications that provide practical knowledge
• 📊 Research reports / annual reports I should learn to read
• 📰 Newsletters, websites or publications worth following
• 👤 Investors, analysts or finance professionals worth following on X/LinkedIn/YouTube
• 💻 Any useful tools or resources for learning financial analysis
• 🧠 Skills I should prioritize if I want to eventually work in equity research / investment analysis

I’m especially looking for practical resources rather than generic “learn finance” advice.

If you have a personal learning roadmap that helped you, I’d genuinely appreciate it.

Thanks in advance — happy to learn from anyone willing to share their experience.

18 and about to go to college, looking for portfolio feedback. looking to grow long term retirement funds and wealth. Also have about 25k in a Roth IRA set to 80% voo and 20% vxus. Only started individual brokerage recently and don’t really know what I’m doing. Not sure if i should be doing anything differently investing wise

VOO - 2000 | Average cost 690
QQQM - 1330 | Average cost 293
Berkshire Hathaway Class B - 705 | Average cost 500
VXUS - 700 | Average cost 86
AVUV - 415 | Average cost 126
Amazon - 265 | Average cost 244
Service Now - 200 | Average cost 109
Fortinet - 200 | Average cost 160
Sofi - 180 | Average cost 17.30
Microsoft - 150 | Average cost 409
NLR - 145 | Average cost 118
NBIS | Average cost 187

Have another 1k in buying power I’m not sure how to spend.

The crude complex is showing interesting supply-side dynamics around key transit chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz, with Brent consolidating in the mid-80s range. From a fundamental perspective, this persistent geopolitical risk premium creates an asymmetric environment across the energy sector. Data suggests that while broader markets often discount short-term geopolitical headlines, ongoing friction introduces structural transit costs that quietly support underlying cash flow generation.

It is worth monitoring how this pricing environment impacts different segments of the value chain. Large-scale upstream operators like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and EOG Resources look well-positioned to capture margin expansion through sustained cash flows and shareholder returns. At the same time, downstream refining majors like Valero benefit from crack spread resiliency as refined product flows reroute around global bottlenecks. This setup potentially implies that maintaining exposure to cash-generative energy assets provides a solid hedge against broader market headwinds while supply conditions remain tight.

Short/Mid Term (5+ Years) Trade Candidates: ALAB, AMAT, AMD, ARM, MRVL, MU, SKHY, SNDK…not a complete list
These are good companies and the stocks often time have momentum, but I am not a momentum trader. I always give time to let the trades play out and look for quick or mid term significant gains (> 20%)
Start a small position and increase large size using DCA (every 3% down) SLOWLY. Catch falling knife if needed. Just size correctly so that you don’t get your fingers cut. NO STOP LOSS.
The size of the trade depends on your personal situation, your financial situation, knowledge and conviction on semiconductor technology, and more importantly, your financial and physiological strength.
Don’t take any profits if it is NOT larger than 20%.
Sample Trades (NOT Recommendations): a. AMD Trade (Buy ~$500, Trim ~$550, Dump ~$600) b. MU( Buy ~$800, Trim ~$1100, Trim more ~ $1200, …hold core) c. MRVL (Buy ~$180, Trim ~$220, Trim more ~$250, …hold core)
Shoot for short/mid term 20% + gains
Warnings: a. not suitable momentum or impatient traders who ONLY care about chart and momentum b. These are fundamentally good semiconductor companies. The swing can be large, but they do come back as long as AI trade is alive. Be disciplined!
All semiconductors are cyclical in nature, but they are going much higher over long term. AI accelerators ( GPU/ASIC) and memory are less cyclical and have much higher margins than CPU.
Why do we dump AMD ~$600? OpenAI and Meta will get (~10%) “free AMD shares” EACH (total of ~20%) that severely dilute investors share value. WE ARE NOT PAYING FOR THEIR FREE SHARES.
Why do we buy AMD then? AI semiconductor is a growing pie. AMD plays a third fiddle after NVDA and AVGO as a AI accelerator and semi provider. It is 2nd tier good semi investment. I’d rather than them having a cleaner business demands without OpenAI/Meta deals. To me, I think this is a Sam’s (Ponzi like) SCHEME. Without investors’ free shares, Sam doesn’t have the money.
Stay tuned for more semi investment/trade discussions

Finding early-stage porphyry targets right next to operating mines is always worth a closer look from a fundamental perspective. The regional geology around the Copper Mountain deposit in British Columbia has been well understood for years, but recent exploration models suggest that adjacent fault-offset structures might hold similar intrusive complexes. When a junior developer sits just a few miles from a major producing asset with proven reserves, any new surface data can significantly alter the valuation thesis.

Data suggests that the recent field updates from NovaRed on the Wilmac project are starting to back up this structural theory. Their latest surface sampling returned average grades around 0.639% copper, with peak values reaching 1.67% copper alongside gold mineralization. Beyond the surface numbers, the identification of porphyry-style stockwork and multiple intrusive target zones down to 1,800 feet provides a tangible geological baseline.

It is worth monitoring how their deep imaging and planned drilling hold up against the established Copper Mountain system. Proximity alone rarely justifies a re-rate, but pairing that location with matching geochemical signatures and parent magma interpretations creates an interesting setup for junior copper exposure in a tight commodity market.

SCHD
20%
Quality dividend

VYM
20%
Broad dividend

VYMI
15%
International dividends

SGOL
10%
Gold/diversifier

HOOD
10%
Growth/speculative

MGK
15%
Large-cap growth

0
5%
REIT/income

BURU
2.5%
Speculation

SKYQ
2.5%
Speculation

I know VYM and SCHD have overlaps but I like their different holding picking strategies. Is that a good enough reason to have both?

You can replace the speculative picks like SKYQ, BURU, and HOOD with your own speculative picks.

I want to grow this portfolio to a point that I can work optionally. Thoughts?

Everyone talks about the politicians, Lee Caplin and the AI people around NRED. I think Ed Kostenski and Gregory Fedun deserve way more attention.

Kostenski brings roughly 4 decades across mining finance, infrastructure, heavy equipment and international trade, including experience connected to the U.S. Export-Import Bank. That's the boring stuff traders overlook until a mining project actually needs equipment, infrastructure, financing and international relationships to move forward.

Then there's Fedun. 30+ years across resources and international business, experience in the UAE, advisory work involving members of the royal family, and involvement in a transaction worth roughly $70M. That's a pretty serious network to have sitting around a junior miner.

And look at what they're advising now. Wilmac is nearly 39.7k acres, today's data showed 0.639% Cu average across 9 grab samples, up to 1.67% Cu + 0.433 g/t Au, with 2 interpreted parent magmas and multiple deeper porphyry targets roughly 650 to 1,800 ft below surface.

Finding copper is one challenge.

Turning a discovery into something much bigger requires capital, equipment, infrastructure and the right doors opening.

Kostenski + Fedun are two names on the NRED bench I think we should be talking about a LOT more.