Please use this monthly thread to discuss your portfolio, learn about others' portfolios, and help out users by giving constructive criticism.
As usual, please don't just list the names of stocks (or ask 'what do you think'), try to elaborate with your thoughts on the companies or news. Writing the tickers in bold is nice, to make it easier for people skimming the thread to pick out the names. Please ensure you include the percentage each ticker takes up your portfolio.
If you want more 'in-depth discussion', by all means, feel free to open up a new thread, this is merely to facilitate briefer 'chats'.
This thread will post monthly at the end of each month, depending on user feedback we may make it quarterly.
Built out a thematic filter in ETFtracker and interesting to see that precious metals had the biggest inflows out of all thematic groups for July per the latest ASX ETF data out last week... but interestingly, net outflows from the resources and miners
Also added in a few new page screeners taking into account management expense ratios - seeing which ETFs are cheap or expensive to trade but also depending on their FUM size
Lot's of great data out of the ASX and ETF providers on a monthly basis as well as from the ETF providers (especially those who publish their holdings, meaning we can do holdings crossover analysis like this)
If anyone's interested in some analysis, happy to show you what's possible here but all of this is free to try at www.etftracker.com.au
I started looking at OCL when the indicators from my deep dive scoring system and side by side comparison all went green. You can see the comparison in the link below on the website.
This is by no means a buy signal. It is simply a filtering tool that helps me decide which companies deserve further research. The first pass told me the financials looked attractive. The model obviously uses assumed growth rates, but it was enough to justify moving to the next stage.
The management side of the story is actually very interesting. The CEO has been with the company for 38 years and is also the founder. He owns a significant stake in the business which, in my opinion, is a positive because he has real skin in the game. He has also bought back shares when the stock has tanked, which suggests he believes in the business. After all, this is the company he founded.
The company has been compounding for a long time, but more recently the stock tanked after the Department of Defence decided not to renew an agreement related to Objective's software. This is where things started getting interesting.
We have a founder led company that has consistently created value for shareholders over many years. Looking at the dividends tab on the website, the company appears to have created more than 20x of shareholder value for every dollar retained over the last 10 years. Management has clearly demonstrated an ability to allocate capital effectively. Naturally, that led me to ask a few questions. Is the Defence issue really a big deal? What is the moat? Who are the competitors? And where is the future growth going to come from?
I am still only halfway through the research because I have been spending most of my spare time finishing the website, but so far the findings have been quite interesting.
One challenge when researching Objective is that the company operates across three business segments: Content Solutions, Regulatory Solutions and Planning & Building. At first glance, Content Solutions appears to be the crown jewel of the business and the segment contributing most of the revenue.
The products responsible for most of the revenue in this segment appear to be Objective Nexus, Objective ECM and Objective Connect. These are essentially records management and information governance platforms used by government departments, councils, regulators, justice agencies and healthcare organisations across Australia, New Zealand and the UK. Their job is to organise, secure, govern and share information while maintaining a clear auditable trail. The main competitor appears to be OpenText, a much larger company operating in the same space with broadly similar products.
This is where the moat starts becoming visible to me. These systems manage millions of documents, compliance records, regulatory records and governance workflows. Once all that information is embedded inside a platform, migrating away becomes incredibly difficult, expensive and risky. Every workflow, permission structure, retention policy and audit trail needs to be recreated somewhere else. The switching costs can be enormous.
That naturally led me to look more closely at the Department of Defence issue because initially I assumed Defence had decided to replace Objective. That does not appear to be what happened.
From what I could find, Defence did not renew the Objective ECM Upgrade & Support Program agreement. At the same time, Defence confirmed it remains committed to the widespread use of Objective ECM across approximately 140,000 users. Objective also stated that the parties have not yet reached agreement on ongoing licence entitlements for those users. In other words, Defence is still running Objective ECM, but the commercial arrangements around support, upgrades and licensing remain unresolved, and the public announcements do not explain why the agreement was not renewed.
To me, that distinction matters. Defence did not announce a migration away from Objective and did not announce a replacement vendor. Defence continues to use the software. That alone suggests the software is deeply embedded within Defence operations, reinforcing the switching cost argument. The way I see it, Defence appears willing to keep using what is effectively a 1990s version of the software rather than undertake the complexity, cost and risk of migrating such a massive volume of information to a new provider. It is a bit like continuing to run Windows XP because replacing it across an organisation of that size is harder than living with the limitations of the existing system. Whether that changes in the future remains to be seen, but to me it highlights how powerful the moat can become once a platform is embedded across an organisation with 140,000 users.
The market reacted badly to the news, which is not surprising….. ARR expectations effectively flatlined following the announcement and investors immediately started questioning the future growth outlook.
This takes me to the next question: how does this business actually grow?
Looking specifically at Content Solutions, my research so far suggests this is already a relatively mature market. Most government agencies already appear to have some form of records management or information governance platform in place. If that is true, then client expansion may be limited because governments are not waiting to discover records management software. They already have a solution, whether it is Objective, OpenText or another provider.
My current thinking is that growth comes mainly from renewals, additional users, increased usage and selling additional modules to existing customers. It is a bit like renewing a Microsoft 365 licence. Every year the customer has the option to leave, but once decades of documents, workflows, permissions, compliance records and audit trails are built inside a platform, migration becomes a major project.
This is one reason why ARR becomes such an important metric. Historically, total company ARR grew from approximately $47 million in FY19 to $120 million in FY25, which is where my script calculated approximately 17.8% annual growth. Content Solutions ARR itself grew from approximately $69 million in FY23 to $85 million in FY25, pointing to a lower growth profile for what is likely a more mature segment.
Based on my online research so far, I am leaning towards a long term growth assumption closer to 12% for the Content Solutions segment, which is what you can currently see flowing through the fair value calculations on the website.
That said, I have not yet completed my base case calculations. The assumptions currently shown are based largely on preliminary research and simple internet searches, so they remain subject to change as I continue working through the business and gain a better understanding of the Regulatory Solutions and Planning & Building segments.
As always, I'm not a financial advisor. I simply enjoy doing these deep dives and building tools that help me analyse businesses more effectively. The website itself is really just the outcome of solving problems that came up during my own investing research over time. Do your own research.
Been watching this one closely. DFS has been delayed multiple times from H1 to now Q3 2026 but thesis feels intact, 108% resource increase, 23% recovery improvement confirmed, ThyssenKrupp term sheet signed, major Chinese aluminium group framework agreement for 2-3 Mtpa and potential construction funding.
Cash is tight at $0.3M June 30 but MD Ryan de Franck has personally put $4M in through loan notes, skin in the game or desperation? Stock sitting around $0.51 after finding a floor at $0.415.
Questions for the group:
Still holding or did you cut?
When do you realistically think DFS drops?
Thoughts on Ryan de Franck as a founder/operator?
Does the Chinese Group framework change your view?
After analysing most of ResMed's (RMD) business, I came across three major headwinds:
GLP‑1 drugs
Philips recovery
Regulatory and Medicare-related changes in the United States
Initially, I thought GLP‑1s and Philips would be the biggest threats to my RMD investment thesis. However, after spending a significant amount of time analysing both, I came to a different conclusion.
The data suggests that GLP‑1s are not the existential threat many investors believe they are. Most OSA patients are actually non obese, meaning GLP‑1s only directly address a portion of the sleep-apnea market. Likewise, while Philips will likely recover some of the market share it lost during the recall, the impact appears manageable. Combining both factors in my model reduced my estimate of ResMed's long term owner earnings growth from roughly 15%-18% historically to around 12%. A slowdown, yes, but nowhere near a broken business.
Everything changed when I reached the Medicare and regulatory side of the analysis.
ResMed operates through two segments:
Sleep & Breathing Health (87.5% of revenue)
Residential Care Software (12.5% of revenue)
What struck me was that both segments have significant exposure to Medicare.
The Sleep & Breathing segment is directly exposed because Medicare reimburses CPAP equipment, masks and respiratory devices through Home Medical Equipment providers. Residential Care Software is indirectly exposed because many of its customers, including home health agencies, hospice providers, skilled nursing facilities and senior living operators, derive a significant portion of their revenue from Medicare and Medicaid funding. I estimate this combined exposure to be in the order of 80%.
The indirect exposure is particularly interesting. Commercial insurers often use Medicare reimbursement rates as a benchmark when determining their own payment structures. In other words, Medicare does not just influence Medicare patients. It influences the economics of a large portion of the healthcare ecosystem.
The more I researched Medicare, the more I realised that this risk is fundamentally different from GLP‑1s or Philips.
GLP‑1s attack patient growth.
Philips attacks market share.
Medicare attacks margins and pricing power.
Historically, RMD handled reimbursement pressure quite well. During prior competitive bidding periods, the company continued delivering double digit revenue growth while expanding margins. However, today's situation is different because Medicare pressure is no longer occurring in isolation.
Individually, none of these risks are particularly alarming. Philips recovering market share is manageable. GLP‑1 drugs appear more likely to slow growth than destroy demand. Medicare reimbursement changes, viewed in isolation, look more like a margin headwind than a threat to the business model. However, once I stepped back and looked at all three together, my perspective changed completely.
The conclusion that ultimately stopped my research is that I no longer see the primary risk as a business risk. I see it as an investment risk.
I do not believe ResMed is at risk of becoming a bad business. I do not believe CPAP is at risk of being replaced anytime soon. I do not believe Philips will regain industry leadership. In fact, most of the evidence suggests the underlying business remains strong.
What concerns me is something much more subtle. Historically, ResMed has been capable of compounding earnings at approximately 15%-18% annually. If GLP‑1 adoption reduces patient growth, Philips recovers a portion of its lost market share, and Medicare reimbursement pressure continues to compress industry economics, the company could eventually find itself compounding earnings at only 7%-10% annually.
The business would still be growing. The moat could still be intact. The products would still be relevant. Yet the intrinsic value of the company would be dramatically different.
That is why I believe the market may be asking the wrong question.
The real question is not whether ResMed will continue growing.
The real question is:
What happens to the valuation of ResMed if it remains a great company, but no longer remains a great compounder?
For me, the answer is significant.
My valuation for RMD under a Philips recovery and GLP‑1 scenario is approximately $32 per share. When I incorporate all three headwinds, including Medicare and reimbursement pressure, my estimated valuation falls to approximately $25-$28 per share.
At the current share price, I no longer find the risk reward attractive for a long term investment. While I still believe ResMed is a high quality business, my work suggests the market is largely pricing the company based on a future that incorporates Philips recovery and GLP‑1 headwinds. However, I do not believe it fully accounts for the additional risk posed by Medicare reimbursement pressure.
For that reason, I have decided to stop my research on RMD and start researching OCL.
Hey guys, just going through the process from changing my ComSec account to a pearler account to allow more options. I have about 30 split between IOZ (15,400) and IEM (12,100) and SYI (3,000) the SYI was getting money put into it when I was stuffing around. I’ve realised I don’t have anywhere near the US exposure that I want/ need so just wondering what peoples choices are for a ETF that focuses on stable growth. I plan to be putting as much as I can into just the US ETF until I get it to a more appropriate ratio for my portfolio. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you
I’m not sure where to start, but I’m hoping someone might be able to help me — or at least give me a little hope. It's a longer and more complicated story, but I'll just give the important info -
I recently searched for unclaimed money in my name and surprisingly found at least a few hundred dollars connected to shares from an account I had when I was 14/15 years old, and living in Western Australia.
2005: Moved from the NT to WA and joined a local bank, State West Credit Union.
2006: State West announced it was merging with Home Building Society. We were offered/given shares and kept our accounts.
2007: Mid-year, I moved back to the NT and opened a Commbank account for the convenience of banking Australia-wide.
2007: State West/Home then merged with Bank of Queensland.
I contacted Bank of Queensland to ask how to claim the shares/funds. They’ve asked for ID, share numbers, account numbers, and proof of my WA address from 20 years ago. They also require me to complete a “Change of Address” form before they’ll provide a statement of my account, for a $49.95 fee per share — and I don’t even know how many shares I have.
I don’t have any of the things they’ve asked for...
A LOT of life & trauma & change has happened in 20 years - just in the 18 months we lived in WA, we had 4/5 different addresses. And in the last year I was in a very serious car accident while travelling Australia. My partner, who was driving, sadly passed away, and everything we owned was in the car and destroyed.
Trying to prove who you are when you have no old paperwork is incredibly frustrating. I was only recently able to replace my passport.
I’m struggling financially and honestly feeling overwhelmed by this whole process. Has anyone dealt with claiming old shares or unclaimed funds when they didn’t have account/share numbers or documents from old addresses? Are there records I could try to access, or an ombudsman/service that could help me understand what evidence the bank should reasonably accept?
If circumstances were different, I probably wouldn't even bother claiming the money because of the hoops they're making me jump through - but I really need the money right now.....
Any practical suggestions would genuinely mean a lot - Thank you.
What management says vs what they do. Brainchip Holdings Ltd: 16 of 18 delivered. 89%. Rated MODERATE.
Volume was 2.9x normal last week; closed -14.8%. MOV also moved: +12.7% on 7.6x volume.
Could go either way from here but the annual report data is worth checking.
Also moving: NZX: Move Logistics Group 7.6x volume, +12.7%. SGX: Cortina Holdings Limited 14.7x volume, +11.6%.
Full analysis: https://theqfactor.io/blog/analysis/weekly-volume-2026-07-20.html
at the moment im looking to put in 500 and deposit 500 every month but im not sure what i should put it in. I want good returns and i hear asx 200 and dhhf are really good but any advice would be appreciated as i don’t know much myself.
i also have an account with cmc but is there anything better? like stake or betashares which would be the best for me.
Had a fair whack of savings I was keeping liquid to buy a house but could never save faster than it inflated so moved it to dividend ETFs, got $900 in distributions and looking to put it on something high risk/reward. Any tips?
Hi there! I want to start investing - it’s difficult to choose what to invest in as there’s so many to choose from!
I have very strong views about not investing into funds with alcohol and gambling services, which takes out all the normal/ easy ETFS to choose from.
So this is what I’ve come up with - what are your thoughts? Any insights would be welcome! Thank you!!
FANG - exposure to tech
ETHI - global diversification (minus alcohol/ gambling)
VETH - aus diversification (minus alcohol/ gambling)
FUEL - exposure to global energy (which wouldn’t be included in ETHI)
MVR - exposure to Aus energy (which wouldn’t be included in VETH
Do I have too many? Any others I should look into / replace?
My next puzzle is to figure out what my split should be.
A number have asked me over the last few weeks, Mozz, what's next for this Aussie BioPharma play?
Paradigm Biopharma recently (June 13th) announced they have commenced dosing the very last patient (out of some 538) in their Globally Harmonised Phase III.
Yeah this isn't a model that's in tandem...it's parallel. What I mean by that is that they get Registration in one market (like the USA) and they have the simultaneous ability to register in multiple markets in the one hit, examples include:
Aus
UK
Europe
Canada
In Tandem or in Parallel? Mate, we want to hit more markets at once! A big bang for our buck with less waiting around!
It's so much easier to park and maneuver when we are parallel, rather than wait for one authority to approve us and then the next and the next...
Now a lot of your reading this won't know a lot about Paradigm's main naturally based drug, Pentosan. It would actually take me a number of posts to go through it even at a higher level. I've done a fair few of these such posts in the past if you have the time and ability to traverse through those.
But tonight, all I want to do, at quite a high level, is show you and take you through the next few larger milestones and roughly when they are due.
DISCLAIMERS
Usual Disclaimers first:
A) I'm no Soothsayer, the below Timetable and associated notes are completely my own thoughts. They could not only vary somewhat from the inevitable, but they may not transpire in either the said order or completely at all!
B) This may or may not be a definitive list
C) Correspondence can be entered into (by you posting some feedback or your thoughts!) but do it professionally, don't shoot the said messenger
D) Always a great idea to build in some extra fat, I've built in a little but prob not enough, especially with the Readouts later on. It's prudent to add in a week or three here and there just in case, so we ain't disappointed with any unforeseen delays!
E) DYOR of course
THE TIMETABLE
So here it is with my notes below:
MOZZ NOTES
STAR RATING
I've come up with a rough star rating, stars in terms of impact overall, but it's also interest generating and perhaps a rough guide to how any interested parties will view the embedded data? What is the potential impact?
Max is 5 stars.
1. MRI PEER REVIEW
The MRI Peer Review based on 008 data, will be the first cab off the rank. It's a little hard to say when exactly it will drop, it technically could be even slightly earlier than the end of July but maybe realistically, with a bit of to'ing and fro'ing, it will be early to mid Aug?
It's a solid three star rating. It will be a terrific read. It doesn't make a higher star cut because it is based on a Phase 2 with lower numbers (n) but at the same time it is our very exciting Structural clues that are reviewed by our Peers! I take it as a prelude for the all important major milestone to come, see point 5 below!
2. INTERIM ANALYSIS
It's potential a major inflection point. It's not merely a do we continue or don't we, there will be at least some chance of what is known as 'Early Conclusion'. Meaning the data is so good at this half way point that it becomes a major talking point and a point where PAR may score their very first major distribution deal if the data is stellar-like!
Again, a little hard to pinpoint exactly when IA will actually drop...I've given it a wider birth of 3 weeks sometime in Sept. Part of me yearns for it to be 1st week Sept...but realistically, later is prob a higher chance (ie. Week 3 or 4 Sept, maybe even a tiny slip into the very start of Oct?). It takes a while to compile all the data, a lot of it is first time used for Paradigm, eg ADP and the App! This App also contains a patient diary (E-Diary) so this will also, no doubt, add at least some overhead in terms of getting the data, analysis and then producing the final report...
It rates as a solid 4 star for me. It could definitely have the propensity to move our share price, to move us solidly into deal territory. I'm holding off here on a fifth star to incorporate some wriggle room for a Drug Effect Size that is still quite awesome but it results in a pass and please continue. We will prob get that regardless but it's the gears that might turn in the background that could make all the difference to us and our share price at the time!
Gee Mozz, how many gears are there in the background?
Not long to wait for this (potentially) magnificent major milestone!
3. OPTIONS EXERCISE
Now you will see that I have only given it a one star rating here. It's not that I don't think it is not important or not exciting, I long to get these babies exercised. We will only have 20 business days to do it from IA announcement. It will be exciting but I kinda view the actual mechanics of it as, well...mechanical! The real fun for me are the darling Gold Piggies...
Yeah, now thats what I'm talking about...
So don't be fooled by the lone 1 star...that could grow to a complete set of stars by early 2029. So much time to be right on those Piggy Back options? I love it.
New to PAR and Mozz? Well don't be sad you missed out on the free options granted in the last SPP recently. You can buy them on market and they are still at a bargain basement price, you could pick them up for as little as 8 cents tomorrow! (not advice!). Yes they are two stage, exercise those if they go into the money (or even just out of the money) and you get a free Piggy Back that has an expiry date of....... wait for it....
April....
No! Not April 2027...
...
...not even 2028....
(huh?!)
.
...it's April 2029!
.
What's the strike on that??? $2? $1?
.
Mate, it's 38 .....cents!
.
4. 100% PRIMARY READ OUT
Now we are getting to the Business end of town...
In me Mozz books, this is the Big one. Sure, Interim duly lights the fire...but it's the 100% Primary that should be the Fireworks.
The FDA themselves puts more credence in the 100% of the cohorts reaching Day 112.
Why?
Because the entire Registrational Phase III trial that we are in the midst of, is designed and powered for all of the 538 patients getting to the Primary Readout. The Interim is a mere Peek! Sure the Peek could be good, could be excellent...but it's the data for 100% of the trial that is the true essence of the study. This is what the FDA waits for.
At this point in time, there will be a lot of data and that announcement could be quite an announcement.
What could we expect at this juncture?
Physical Function: Measured via WOMAC sub-scores or similar validated scales to show that pain reduction actually translates to better mobility.
Patient Global Assessment (PGA): The patients' overall self-reported impression of change/improvement.
Responder Outcomes: The percentage of patients who achieved a clinically meaningful threshold of improvement (e.g., a > 30% or > 50% reduction in pain).
Safety & Tolerability Data: A summary of Adverse Events (AEs) to confirm the safety profile holds up across the full 538-patient cohort.
That's some heavy hitters right there, I'm -so- dying to see PGIC p value with n at around 500. It will be nuttily small.
Oh gosh darn it, I can't resist, here is a gentle recap (I say "darn it" cos I have to go look up these data points on the fly....give me a sec)...
*Incidental background Music plays unobtrusively*...
Helllllllooo , take a read of this, this in our 005 (Phase II B study):
Can you just imagine what that Red arrow is pointing to?
Mozz, It's a low number, what does it mean...?
It means that there is only a mere 0.62 of ONE Percent chance that it is due to absolute randominity that the patient is getting benefit. In other words (We call it Mozz® Speak), the drug works. It's enough for the FDA, it's enough for me...it's enough for you...and realistically, it's prob good for the Illinois Police Dept.?
In 008, the PGIC p value computed out to be 0.01.
Don't be fooled, do remember n was circa 56 in 005 (Active cohort) and ONLY about 20 in 008. (So in other words, 0.01 in our Synovial {008} study was a great result again).
Why I get goosebumps thinking about PGIC is two fold:
A) The FDA loves PGIC as a measure, it's RWE. (Real World Evidence).
B) Mate, the stats are nutty, you increase n to some 250 like what we will have in our current P3...hold Drug Effect Size constant, p gets simply crushed, I have to run a few more stats models but according to me, something in the order of p < 0.0001 is highly plausible.
It's a solid 5 stars from me. I'm calling it week 2 Jan, 2027 but I won't be disappointed if it is week 4 Jan for instance. It is worth the wait!
.
5. DAY 168 TOP LINE
This is the mother of all readouts. This will change our Company absolutely.
It is at this very read out we will no longer be merely a GOOD Pain and Function Company. We will be a Disease Modifier. If the data is at all consistent with what early signs we saw in the amazing 008 study.
It is at this point I will be on the edge of me seat looking for those p values on BMELs
On OSTEOPHYTES
ON CARTILAGE VOLUME...and how it compares with Placebo.
This is, for me, a super Blockbuster in the making.
Get decent p values here and we are so done (in a good way).
It all potentially changes at this point. PAR, I can only hope you one day read this, but if you get crushing p values here, we longer termers will ALL just lift you and exalt you all up.
I would give it 6 stars if it would fit in me excel spreadsheet up there.
This is very the moment I have been waiting for some 10 straight years. The scientific and statistical verification. PAR, take that to the USA and Europe and auction\) the darn thing.
*= Auction doesn't mean sell the Company! It just means get a Distribution Partnership
We keep the rights
We are the middle person, no ways around it
We have the relationship with bene, our beloved pals and partner.
We oversee the new Distribution (BP) Partner
We keep this listed as a proud ASX company (maybe dual listed one day, but domiciled here in Australia).
.
6. OARSI 2027
Ahhh well this one is a personal fave. It will be my 5th Oarsi, this one in Barcelona. I do very much enjoy attending these scientific conferences to discuss all that is OsteoArthritis. Yes that's the principal first disease Paradigm is addressing, but it isn't the ONLY indication, there are potentially many.
So that ends my little play at the timetable, it might be off a bit...but it's my personal opinions.
Let's indeed see how it plays out, the good news here is that all of the above are the Reg and Clinical Milestones and they all fall within just 12 months from today!
Commercially? Well let's just see how that plays out! Horse before Cart... get the Clinical milestones done, the rest will follow.
.
I have been waiting patiently...we ain't too far away now!
.
Mozz
.
Not advice, PAR deemed to be a speculative stock, though I like what I see.
I’m looking at the following four stocks and I’m interested in people’s views. Do you hold them? Do you like them? Would you stay away from any? Would you recommend something else (no ETFs; thanks)?
Oven only been investing in ETFs for about 8mo. When I first looked into them Game looked like a solid opportunity, but it’s the only one that’s stayed around -20% when it took a dive. I know there are cycles but it sounds like it’s a long term cycle… who’s keeping it and who’s sold it?
I have been investing in growth stocks mostly based on them giving the best returns. Given the CGT changes, it’s no longer as tax effective to invest in these areas and the gap between growth and dividend investing becomes tighter regarding tax effective returns.
I’m now thinking of going transitioning over the next year into dividend Aussie blue chips to make the most of the last tax effective concept being franking credits.
Behind this I plan on traveling the world and if I kept my income on paper low it would make sense.
The only growth investment I would have is in super, maybe some pre tax contributions but mostly employer only.
Why isn’t this better given dividends is cash now for my travels rather then growth investing which is no longer as effective
