6/6/2026 at 1:49:00 AM
From [1]:> A higher RG value indicates a larger gap between market valuation and the estimated fundamental base — meaning the market is pricing the company at a significant multiple of what the fundamentals alone would support. A lower RG value suggests that the market price is closer to being covered by the fundamental base.
This is dumb. They’ve decided that their estimate of the true value is the correct one, and then calculate the difference from that. But of course, the fundamental issue is everyone has a different estimate. There’s no reason to believe their estimate is better than anyone else’s
by pinkmuffinere
6/6/2026 at 3:37:04 AM
How large is your Tesla position?by jnaina
6/6/2026 at 5:50:03 PM
Funny enough, about 10% of my net worth is in an inverse position on Tesla [1]![1] https://bagelpour.wordpress.com/2025/11/30/taking-an-inverse...
by pinkmuffinere
6/6/2026 at 7:48:47 AM
None. The point is not Tesla specifically. Tesla is just a convenient stress case because expectations, narrative, and fundamentals are unusually far apart.by hstrex
6/6/2026 at 1:55:02 AM
They’re just using the typical historic valuation based on fundamentals yes?by lazide
6/6/2026 at 2:22:34 AM
They define a new metric that they call the “fundamental base”. It includes value of assets, trailing revenue, goodwill, and likely more. They claim in a couple places that it is not intended as a valuation, although I think the main way it would be useful is it if is a valuation. It also claims to be an “estimate” — but an estimate of what?Somebody who seriously works in finance will have a more enlightened view than me, but it seems to me that they defined a heuristic by combining existing heuristics. I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong, but there’s also no reason I can see that it should be right. And because it’s complicated, i think it obscures some of the confusing bits that you’d directly face if you used traditional metrics
by pinkmuffinere
6/6/2026 at 7:44:34 AM
[flagged]by hstrex