/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>29882550
no they weren't

>>24624699
sorry didnt proofread, meant market cap to revenues + profit margins (to give context to that valuation)

Tesla is at 21x of revenues since people are treating it like a tech company (e.g. NVDA is at like 25x of revenues right now), whether or not you can really justify Tesla is a tech company is besides the point, the point is that's what the market is treating them as

frankly, high PE ratio is more a bullish indicator nowadays since it probably means they're focusing everything on growth. Another example being AMD, "higher PE ratio" than NVDA, justified since it has faster growth than NVDA (and its valuation is still lower than NVDA at 13x of revenues)

>>22645933
it's the funniest shit

i think we're all feeling too greedy though and discounting the possibility that we are overdue for a pullback considering the +50% rally. But who gives a shit about a -15% dip short-term.

>>22645965
PE is retarded, growth is king. Unless it's something like TSLA where their PEG doesn't justify their valuation either, then ignore PE. Like AMD's PEG for example is pretty good, their valuation is justifiable considering how fast their growth has been even if that ~140 PE ratio looks scary as fuck. Anyone who understands semiconductors can plainly see that AMD's growth will continue to be explosive for the next 3 years because Intel shit the bed HARD. Whatever Intel tries to do to catch up will take at least 3 years to attempt.

>>21817479
<The damn PE ratio

and?

>>21788862
daily reminder that PE is a shit, buy AAPL

>>21576537
P/E ratios have always been retarded to trade with even before the decade bull run

>>20394091
why should I care if my tech pick has a forward PE ratio of 25 and is bottlenecked by their production rather than demand?