To The Moon

‌$Quantum Computing Inc.(QUBT)$   🚀 Why QUBT Can Rocket to $15 1. Explosive Revenue Growth Is Repricing the Stock QUBT’s Q1 revenue surged over 9,000% year‑over‑year, jumping from $61k to $3.69M. This is not hype—this is confirmed financial data. Such extreme revenue acceleration forces analysts and funds to revalue the company upward, especially in a sector where growth is everything. 2. Strong Analyst Targets Support a Move Above $15 Across multiple analyst sources: Average 12‑month target: $17.83 High target: $27 Consensus rating: Buy (4 Buy, 2 Hold) When the average target is already 35% above current price, a push to $15 is well within the near‑term trading range. 3. U.S. Government Quantum Funding Is Pouring Into the Sector Recent news

$IBM(IBM)$ 科研量子計算所費不菲,美國政府還會持續注資於IBM嗎? 這是一個很有深度的政策與技術交叉問題。美國政府大概率不會「直接持續注資給IBM公司」，但會持續透過多種機制（如國防部、能源部、NIST的科研計畫）投資於量子計算這一戰略技術領域，IBM作為主要參與者會從中受益。** 具體來說，可以從三個層面分析： 1. **注資主體與方式**：美國政府對量子計算的資助主要透過**國家量子計畫法案**（2018年啟動，2023年續簽）流向大學、國家實驗室和企業的合作項目。例如，能源部旗下的量子科學中心、國防高等研究計畫署的量子基準測試項目、國家標準與技術研究院的量子經濟發展聯盟。IBM在這些項目中通常需要**匹配資金**並共享智慧財產權——政府並非直接給IBM「開支票」，而是為特定研究目標買單。 2. **IBM的獨特位置**：IBM是當前超導量子位元路線的領先者之一（與Google、Rigetti等競爭），且擁有龐大的量子雲平台與開放生態。政府對「競爭前技術」和「供應鏈安全」感興趣：如果過於依賴單一公司會違反反壟斷與競爭法精神，但若完全繞過IBM又可能浪費其工程能力。因此更可能的模式是**分散投資**——同時支持IBM、IonQ（離子阱）、PsiQuantum（光子學）等多條路線，避免押注單一技術。 3. **持續注資的政治經濟考量**： - **利好因素**：量子計算被視為人工智慧、密碼學、藥物研發的下一代基礎工具。與中國、歐盟的競爭壓力（例如合肥國家實驗室、本源量子等進展）會促使美國維持資助。 - **不確定因素**：聯邦財政赤字削減壓力、量子計算短期商業化前景不明（多數專家認為容錯量子計算機仍需5-10年以上）、以及大選後科研預算的重新分配。IBM自身近年也調整策略

You can’t compare the two timeframe. AGQ is daily compute, meaning it resets itself every day. When the price of silver rises, it doubles itself, obviously the same applies for the drop. However, if you reset daily, it changes the logic. If you have stronger down days than up days, we will end up having a much lower AGQ price in a long run. So, it all depends on the number of up days vs down days and strength of up vs down days. This is something that you have to bear in mind when going for leveraged bets like AGQ. It is not simply leveraging that moves along with the silver price. That is the misconception many market participants have. Last point, might be obvious but all the same to emphasise, AGQ is good for catching the up-moves of silver, but it is not something to keep for the long

I have AGQ for sometime now, so I know the strange feeling… but this is something we have to accept if we are holding rather than trading… my better bets are in the gold and silver miners and even better, royalties… they capture the upsides nicely, as long as the uptrend is intact, or the price of silver or gold stays stagnant but at a higher price than the previous years, this would translate to a higher selling price for these royalties. With higher profit margins, obviously the share price would move up. Do consider those royalties for the long haul if that is what the interest lies. Just for transparency sake, I have substantial holdings in $Wheaton Precious Metals(WPM)$. I also have a little interest in $

$Olam Group(VC2.SI)$   Today some buying activities spotted! The price is up 2 cents to 1.22. Shw may rise up to retest 1.27. A nice breakout smoothly would likely drive the price higher towards 1.37 than 1.42. Pls dyodd. Completion of Mindsprint Sale to Wipro for cash consideration of US386m. Finally, the price action is back. She is trading at 1.26, likely to rise up to tear 1.42 than 1.50 and 1.60.Pls dyodd. Olam Group - Nice breakout today plus managed to clear 1.11 level with ease and closed higher at 1.18, looks rather bullish. She may continue to trend higher towards 1.29.Pls dyodd. Hosey! Nice Gapped Up this morning! She is rising up to test 1.11 A nice crossing over with ease plus good volume we may see her rising up further toward

 "Should I sell Tesla and move to SpaceX?" 1. SpaceX - It's difficult to reach Max 4T within 5 years - Because the numbers aren't visible - Even if it lists at 2T, the maximum expected return is about 2x 2. Tesla - Starting this year, performance will be shown in actual numbers in earnest - Annual average 25% profit growth is possible. If 25% average growth over 10 years, profits grow 10x - Looking at the next 5 years, Tesla's upside is seen as 5x 3. Conclusion - No reason to sell Tesla, where 5x profit is expected, and move to SpaceX, where 2x profit is expected - People expect to sell Tesla and move to SpaceX, but on the contrary, after listing, there will likely be more demand to sell SpaceX and move to Tesla - In conclusion, rather than SpaceX, we will choose Tesla, whose era of p

 "Should I sell Tesla and move to SpaceX?" 1. SpaceX - It's difficult to reach Max 4T within 5 years - Because the numbers aren't visible - Even if it lists at 2T, the maximum expected return is about 2x 2. Tesla - Starting this year, performance will be shown in actual numbers in earnest - Annual average 25% profit growth is possible. If 25% average growth over 10 years, profits grow 10x - Looking at the next 5 years, Tesla's upside is seen as 5x 3. Conclusion - No reason to sell Tesla, where 5x profit is expected, and move to SpaceX, where 2x profit is expected - People expect to sell Tesla and move to SpaceX, but on the contrary, after listing, there will likely be more demand to sell SpaceX and move to Tesla - In conclusion, rather than SpaceX, we will choose Tesla, whose era of p

Short answer: it is far more likely an opening chapter than an ending. But it changes how you should think about Rocket Lab. 1) SpaceX S-1 is not bearish for the sector If SpaceX is genuinely moving toward public markets, it does two things immediately: Forces institutional capital to price the entire space economy properly Validates that launch, satellites, and data infrastructure are no longer speculative niches That is typically bullish for listed peers, not destructive. 2) But it is bearish for lazy RKLB theses Let’s be direct. Many RKLB bulls relied on a “next SpaceX proxy” narrative. That breaks the moment SpaceX becomes investable. Capital that chased RKLB for scarcity may rotate. So RKLB must now stand on fundamentals, not comparison. 3) Where RKLB still has a real edge RKLB is not

I would not follow this blindly. At +535% YTD, you are no longer early. You are deciding whether to pay for peak narrative plus tightening supply. Let’s separate signal from noise. 1) Tepper buying: meaningful, but not a green light David Tepper tends to lean into macro dislocations, not chase retail momentum. His entry tells you one thing: he believes the cycle still has legs. It does not tell you the entry price is attractive. He can absorb volatility. Most cannot. 2) The real driver: memory cycle turning + AI demand The move in SanDisk is tied to: AI infrastructure pulling forward NAND demand Supply discipline after years of underinvestment Spillover from HBM strength (even though NAND is a different segment) Add Seagate Technology supply warnings, and you get a classic scarcity premium

$IONQ Inc.(IONQ)$ $D-Wave Quantum Inc.(QBTS)$  $Rigetti Computing(RGTI)$  ⚛️📈🚀 Quantum Stocks Are No Longer Trading On Fundamentals. They’re Trading On Institutional Legitimacy. 🚀📈⚛️ The market is no longer waiting for quantum profits. It’s front-running quantum credibility. That shift is rapidly becoming one of the most important speculative dynamics in global tech markets, and it explains why names like $IONQ, $QBTS, and $RGTI keep experiencing violent repricing every time a powerful institution validates the sector. I’m watching quantum equities behave less like traditional software companies and more like early-stage AI infrastructure play

Last Thursday, May 21, the Trump administration quietly redrew the map of American technology. The Department of Commerce signed nine letters of intent to deliver just over $2 billion in CHIPS Act funding to quantum computing firms. But here is what makes this different from every previous federal handout: Washington is not just writing checks. The government is taking equity stakes. Uncle Sam is now a shareholder. The market response was instant and violent. D-Wave Quantum surged 33%. Rigetti Computing jumped 31%. IonQ added 12%. IBM, set to receive the lion's share of $1 billion, rose 12% on the news. Within 48 hours, the entire quantum sector had been re-rated. The Money Trail The funding allocation tells you everything about where Washington thinks the technology is heading. IBM gets $

ARM Holdings has done something extraordinary. In two trading sessions, the British chip designer added 35% to its market value, vaulting from the $175 range to an all-time high of $298. The stock now sits at $304 after-hours, with Bernstein calling for $300 and TD Cowen targeting $265. The catalyst is not a new product launch or an earnings beat. It is something far more powerful: a complete repricing of what ARM means in the age of agentic AI. The question every trader is asking right now is the same one: is this a structural re-rating or a textbook overbought top? The Bernstein Bombshell The trigger was a single research note from Bernstein analyst David Dai. He initiated coverage with an Outperform rating and a $300 price target, forecasting that ARM's sales and profits will increase m

Nebius Group jumped 14.65% in a single session on twin pre-market catalysts that fundamentally repriced what the stock is worth. Broad cloud provider price increases on AI GPU services boosted Nebius's revenue outlook, and Nvidia's earnings confirmation of robust sustained AI compute demand removed the last bear argument. One SeekingAlpha analyst called it "the highest-conviction AI bet" on his coverage list. With the stock now trading near $213 and up 143% year-to-date, the question is whether this is a one-time re-rating or a durable profit engine that justifies even higher prices. The 684% Revenue Explosion The core story is simple. Nebius reported Q1 2026 revenue of $399 million, up 684% year over year. The AI Cloud segment specifically grew 841%, now accounting for 98% of total sales.