4 ms·

By Nancy Pelosi, you actually mean her husband. And if you look at the trades, you’ll learn the biggest secret on Wall Street: make long term bets on tech and

By Nancy Pelosi, you actually mean her husband. And if you look at the trades, you’ll learn the biggest secret on Wall Street: make long term bets on tech and you’ll get richer. Don’t tell anyone I told you.

miohtama 2y ago
Family members are often indicated in insider information tradesm they are still trading on insider information when if they are not part of the decision making process themselves. Both leaker and utiliser are responsible. In the case of Pelosi, she became so famous about this that there are various Nancy Pelosi stock trackers now.
- LeafItAlone 2y ago
  Let’s be real: Pelosi became famous for it because right-leaning groups were looking for yet another thing to put on her and then it was picked up by WSB and became a meme. Pelosi’s rate of return isn’t the highest (in 2024, it was 10th, less than half the highest). If you analyze their trades, very few are suspect of timing. They just make a bunch of long term bets on tech. https://www.fool.com/research/congressional-stock-trading-who-trades-and-makes-the-most/ https://www.fool.com/research/congressional-stock-trading-wh...
  - Jensson 2y ago
    > If you analyze their trades, very few are suspect of timing. They just make a bunch of long term bets on tech. But what about the ones that very obviously are? Why did they sell a lot of Visa stocks? "On Tuesday, less than three months after the massive transaction, Visa was hit with a DOJ lawsuit alleging that the company illegally monopolized the debit card market." Selling whenever a company gets into regulatory trouble means you avoid all the big downs but still get from all the long term ups. Its a very simple strategy as you say, but its still insider trading even though the ups are mostly the long term gains.
    - rvz 2y ago
      > But what about the ones that very obviously are? Why did they sell a lot of Visa stocks? That's a good question and let's use that example. According to the article and as you mentioned, they sold Visa stock less than 3 months ago and THEN the DOJ filed a lawsuit against the company. So how did Pelosi know that that would cause the stock to drop and the DOJ was going to file it? The lawsuit wasn't public months ago and it is related to none other than the government which she has access to. Then she traded with that information with no downside risk which she benefited from. If that is not an insider trading loophole, I don't know what is.
      - LeafItAlone 2y ago
        >So how did Pelosi know that that would cause the stock to drop and the DOJ was going to file it? The lawsuit wasn't public months ago and it is related to none other than the government which she has access to. >Then she traded with that information with no downside risk which she benefited from. >If that is not an insider trading loophole, I don't know what is. Yes, if you start with the conclusion (that she traded because of the impending DOJ lawsuit), then, yes, you will reach the conclusion that she insider traded because of the DOJ lawsuit. If you instead ask why they might have traded Visa at the time they did, you will see that there were many valid reasons that they (and many, many others) decided it was a good time to sell. And as it turns out, they were all wrong, because Visa is up compared to the broad market since their sell date (July 1, 2024). https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/V/SPY https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/V/SPY
        rvz 2y ago
        > If you instead ask why they might have traded Visa at the time they did, you will see that there were many valid reasons that they (and many, many others) decided it was a good time to sell. All said in hindsight today, but never for those who benefitted from the insider information. Investors will always buy the stock after it plummets, whilst those who didn't sell had to wait or buy lower to break even. This does not excuse the fact that the Pelosis' benefitted from insider (political) information and traded on that, like this blatant example. An advantage that neither of us have. Defending politicians trading on insider info (political or economic) isn't the hill one should die on. If you did exactly that and made tens of millions, you would be in prison and be replying to me years later telling others not to do it.
- LeafItAlone 2y ago
  And if you want to be a Pelosi, you can invest in NANC, like you say, which is basically just VOO with higher expensive ratio: https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/NANC/VOO https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/NANC/VOO

miohtama 2y ago

Family members are often indicated in insider information tradesm they are still trading on insider information when if they are not part of the decision making process themselves. Both leaker and utiliser are responsible. In the case of Pelosi, she became so famous about this that there are various Nancy Pelosi stock trackers now.

LeafItAlone 2y ago
Let’s be real: Pelosi became famous for it because right-leaning groups were looking for yet another thing to put on her and then it was picked up by WSB and became a meme. Pelosi’s rate of return isn’t the highest (in 2024, it was 10th, less than half the highest). If you analyze their trades, very few are suspect of timing. They just make a bunch of long term bets on tech. https://www.fool.com/research/congressional-stock-trading-who-trades-and-makes-the-most/ https://www.fool.com/research/congressional-stock-trading-wh...
- Jensson 2y ago
  > If you analyze their trades, very few are suspect of timing. They just make a bunch of long term bets on tech. But what about the ones that very obviously are? Why did they sell a lot of Visa stocks? "On Tuesday, less than three months after the massive transaction, Visa was hit with a DOJ lawsuit alleging that the company illegally monopolized the debit card market." Selling whenever a company gets into regulatory trouble means you avoid all the big downs but still get from all the long term ups. Its a very simple strategy as you say, but its still insider trading even though the ups are mostly the long term gains.
  - rvz 2y ago
    > But what about the ones that very obviously are? Why did they sell a lot of Visa stocks? That's a good question and let's use that example. According to the article and as you mentioned, they sold Visa stock less than 3 months ago and THEN the DOJ filed a lawsuit against the company. So how did Pelosi know that that would cause the stock to drop and the DOJ was going to file it? The lawsuit wasn't public months ago and it is related to none other than the government which she has access to. Then she traded with that information with no downside risk which she benefited from. If that is not an insider trading loophole, I don't know what is.
    - LeafItAlone 2y ago
      >So how did Pelosi know that that would cause the stock to drop and the DOJ was going to file it? The lawsuit wasn't public months ago and it is related to none other than the government which she has access to. >Then she traded with that information with no downside risk which she benefited from. >If that is not an insider trading loophole, I don't know what is. Yes, if you start with the conclusion (that she traded because of the impending DOJ lawsuit), then, yes, you will reach the conclusion that she insider traded because of the DOJ lawsuit. If you instead ask why they might have traded Visa at the time they did, you will see that there were many valid reasons that they (and many, many others) decided it was a good time to sell. And as it turns out, they were all wrong, because Visa is up compared to the broad market since their sell date (July 1, 2024). https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/V/SPY https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/V/SPY
      - rvz 2y ago
        > If you instead ask why they might have traded Visa at the time they did, you will see that there were many valid reasons that they (and many, many others) decided it was a good time to sell. All said in hindsight today, but never for those who benefitted from the insider information. Investors will always buy the stock after it plummets, whilst those who didn't sell had to wait or buy lower to break even. This does not excuse the fact that the Pelosis' benefitted from insider (political) information and traded on that, like this blatant example. An advantage that neither of us have. Defending politicians trading on insider info (political or economic) isn't the hill one should die on. If you did exactly that and made tens of millions, you would be in prison and be replying to me years later telling others not to do it.
LeafItAlone 2y ago
And if you want to be a Pelosi, you can invest in NANC, like you say, which is basically just VOO with higher expensive ratio: https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/NANC/VOO https://portfolioslab.com/tools/stock-comparison/NANC/VOO