4 ms·

https://www.useequityval.com/model?ticker=CRSP https://www.useequityval.com/model?ticker=CRSP Current Price: $56.22 Projected Price: $20,806,772,549,824,028.0

by uh2010 2y ago

https://www.useequityval.com/model?ticker=CRSP https://www.useequityval.com/model?ticker=CRSP Current Price: $56.22 Projected Price: $20,806,772,549,824,028.00 Difference: 37,009,556,296,378,460% Glad I'm long.

Beijinger 2y ago
37,009,556,296,378,460% That is a decent return. I bought a call option for RILY. Went to zero. Well...
- sitzkrieg 2y ago
  always do credit option positions :-)
trevzercap 2y ago
Haha the initial model is not a good representation of value as it projects the lasts years metrics out 5 years. 80K% growth for 5 years would do that. Thanks for pointing it out. I need to incorporate some boundaries for the initial values lol.
icedchai 2y ago
I put in quite a few stocks and the results were often strange. Negative values, under a dollar, etc. These were all stable companies, not penny stocks.
airstrike 2y ago
The hard thing about modeling is not the math to get to present value of the stock. It's figuring out which assumptions make sense. Assuming that a revenue growth rate of 84,762.39% is (a) a valid number and (b) expected to remain the same over the next X years does not quote-unquote "make sense"
giantg2 2y ago
Yeah, there should be multiple massive disclaimers on this site. I'd be worried about regulatory issues as well. Edit: why disagree?
- ghiculescu 2y ago
  Why? Anyone who invests based on such obviously wrong numbers shouldn’t be protected from themselves.
  - giantg2 2y ago
    The concern isn't that they would invest bed on obviously wrong numbers. The concern is that someone invests based on believable numbers that are incorrect. There's no information on accuracy measures or verification. Offering this model to others could be an SEC/FINRA violation.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- jefozabuss 2y ago
  Likely the people who downvoted have no experience with the legal part of stock related discussions/tools (implied expectations/suggestions, etc), there is a reason why you see "not a financial advice" and other legal texts presented in videos discussing stocks. Also there is no real company / person mentioned as an owner at least on the website so the privacy policy is kind of a "trust me bro".
dullcrisp 2y ago
https://xkcd.com/605/ https://xkcd.com/605/
serial_dev 2y ago
It's about as reliable as I thought. If it was even remotely reliable, this would be a billion dollar idea (at least) treated as a secret sauce in an investment company. Instead, it takes some input, throws some garbage output, but as it's not blatantly just random numbers, people think it's helpful for investing.
rib3ye 2y ago
It's a tool to make your own models, not have the models made for you.
fakedang 2y ago
To be fair to the creator, he lets you put in your own assumptions via the revenue growth fields (which is what's skewing your projections). That's frankly better UX than one of its competitors, which does not let you do that.
dsizzle 2y ago
"Gotta pump those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers in this racket"
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

by uh2010 2y ago

Beijinger 2y ago

37,009,556,296,378,460% That is a decent return. I bought a call option for RILY. Went to zero. Well...

sitzkrieg 2y ago
always do credit option positions :-)

trevzercap 2y ago

Haha the initial model is not a good representation of value as it projects the lasts years metrics out 5 years. 80K% growth for 5 years would do that. Thanks for pointing it out. I need to incorporate some boundaries for the initial values lol.

icedchai 2y ago

I put in quite a few stocks and the results were often strange. Negative values, under a dollar, etc. These were all stable companies, not penny stocks.

airstrike 2y ago

The hard thing about modeling is not the math to get to present value of the stock. It's figuring out which assumptions make sense. Assuming that a revenue growth rate of 84,762.39% is (a) a valid number and (b) expected to remain the same over the next X years does not quote-unquote "make sense"

giantg2 2y ago

Yeah, there should be multiple massive disclaimers on this site. I'd be worried about regulatory issues as well. Edit: why disagree?

ghiculescu 2y ago
Why? Anyone who invests based on such obviously wrong numbers shouldn’t be protected from themselves.
- giantg2 2y ago
  The concern isn't that they would invest bed on obviously wrong numbers. The concern is that someone invests based on believable numbers that are incorrect. There's no information on accuracy measures or verification. Offering this model to others could be an SEC/FINRA violation.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
jefozabuss 2y ago
Likely the people who downvoted have no experience with the legal part of stock related discussions/tools (implied expectations/suggestions, etc), there is a reason why you see "not a financial advice" and other legal texts presented in videos discussing stocks. Also there is no real company / person mentioned as an owner at least on the website so the privacy policy is kind of a "trust me bro".

dullcrisp 2y ago

https://xkcd.com/605/ https://xkcd.com/605/

serial_dev 2y ago

It's about as reliable as I thought. If it was even remotely reliable, this would be a billion dollar idea (at least) treated as a secret sauce in an investment company. Instead, it takes some input, throws some garbage output, but as it's not blatantly just random numbers, people think it's helpful for investing.

rib3ye 2y ago

It's a tool to make your own models, not have the models made for you.

fakedang 2y ago

To be fair to the creator, he lets you put in your own assumptions via the revenue growth fields (which is what's skewing your projections). That's frankly better UX than one of its competitors, which does not let you do that.

dsizzle 2y ago

"Gotta pump those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers in this racket"

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]