Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by uh2010 | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

uh2010

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.

View on HN

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"

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.

37,009,556,296,378,460%

That is a decent return. I bought a call option for RILY. Went to zero. Well...

always do credit option positions :-)

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

https://xkcd.com/605/

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.

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.

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

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

Edit: why disagree?

Why? Anyone who invests based on such obviously wrong numbers shouldn’t be protected from themselves.

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.

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".

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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com