Tom Lee’s New Portfolio: Why He’s Avoiding Robinhood for 2026

Tom Lee, the notoriously bullish market strategist, recently shook up his list of core stock ideas by adding financial and tech heavyweights while slapping a controversial avoid label on Robin Hood for 2026. During a recent CNBC panel discussion, market analysts debated Lee's updated portfolio additions and dissected the sharp disagreement surrounding Robin Hood's future. By the end of this video breakdown, you will know why Lee is pivotally backing infrastructure giants, the core financial metrics driving the retail trading platform's growth, and whether its heavy correlation with the crypto market is a structural trap or an explosive opportunity. Let's hear the panel on CNBC and after that, I'll give you my own reaction breakdown to what was said. >> All right, welcome back. So, Tom Lee's out today uh updating his list of top core stock ideas. So, he names Robin Hood as a stock to avoid in 2026, and we'll get to that in a minute. However, he added JPM, JP Morgan, and he added Arista Networks to the core stock ideas list. You own Arista? >> We do. >> It's on your core. >> Owned it. Yes. Right. >> It's been It's been a core holding. It's participating in AI networking along with Cisco and Sienna. Um, we've had it for quite some time. It's worked incredibly well and the revenue growth is accelerating. >> Okay, JPM. Kev, take that one before Joe because he owns that too. But I want to hear from you. >> Yeah, I agree with Tom on Arista. I agree with him on JP Morgan. Best of breed financial services. I think that the the the awakening of IPOs is not over and this company is 100% deserving of being on his list. >> Okay. So, do you disagree then? Was that the punch line? You disagree with him on Robin Hood because you own that? >> I couldn't disagree more. Yeah. I mean, I think he got it right on those two, but I'm going to have to push back to Tom on Robin Hood. Revenues were up 32% to a record 1.13 billion. Earnings per share were up 48%. They had a record 22 billion of net assets. >> Why does a stock look like that? >> This is a stock that has a very high valuation. And if you look at it and you stretch it out a little bit longer, you haven't made much money over the past year. But if you look at it over the past three years, there's not many stocks we've made more money with. I just believe in Vlad. I believe in this company and I think that the next generation of investors are invedded in this ecosystem. >> You think the market too correlates it with Bitcoin? >> Absolutely. And incorrectly. >> Yeah. I don't think this should trade with Bitcoin. It did for a long time. And if you think of the original version of Robin Hood, that's what it was. It was a thing for kids to trade online during co and it really was the the the um the Bitcoin proxy, I think, from a stock perspective after it went public. But I think it's matured to a true financial services company. They meant an acquisition of an RAIA. They own a custodial platform. There's a lot more going on here. >> Bin, you sold it in June. Robin Hood, that is. >> Yep. Yeah. I I think it got called away at 110. Um, so I'm out of the position. I think that it is definitely going to be driven by crypto. So, looks like crypto is finally waking up. And so tactically, I actually think Robin Hood could start also heating up because it is still still driven by that. So I disagree with Tom also. I think that if crypto wakes up, this wakes up and therefore the stock would go higher. >> What's so interesting is that Tom Lee is synonymous with crypto, >> right? >> And he doesn't like Robin Hood. So that to me is the most interesting part of this trade. Now it's Ethereum I think more so than Bitcoin if you want to make a distinction but not by much. Guy walks around wearing pins on his jacket. >> Yeah, >> I'm pretty I'm pretty sure >> looks like a general. He I'm pretty sure he had a position in micro strategy at some point. So um that that one seems a little counterintuitive for him not to like Robin Hood. We sold it based on a breakdown in momentum. I'd rather go to Interactive Brokers. The debate ignited the moment the CNBC host highlighted Lee's decision to add Arista Networks, ticker symbol AET, to his highly watched list of core stock ideas. One of the panelists immediately spoke up to defend the addition, revealing that Arista was already a core holding in their own portfolio and pointing out that the company is actively participating in the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence networking. This is a crucial distinction to make for anyone watching the tech sector. When we talk about AI, we often focus on the massive chip makers. But those chips are useless if they cannot communicate with each other at lightning speed. That is where AI networking comes in, allowing massive clusters of graphics processing units to work as a single cohesive supercomput. The panelist noted that Arista operates in this highly specialized space alongside legacy giants like Cisco and Sienna, and they emphasize that Arista's revenue growth is visibly accelerating. My take on this is that Lee is making a highly disciplined play on AI infrastructure rather than speculative software. Instead of trying to guess which AI application will win the consumer market, he is backing the physical plumbing that makes the entire ecosystem possible. Let's pause and dissect why AI networking represents such a massive growth engine. In traditional data centers, network traffic moves primarily from the server to the user, which we call north south traffic. But AI training workloads turn this dynamic completely on its head, requiring massive east-west traffic where thousands of graphics processing units constantly talk to one another. The CNBC panelist pushed hard on this technical reality, explaining that Arista's Ethernet-based open architecture is emerging as the preferred alternative to proprietary networking systems. This matters because major hyperscalers, the massive cloud providers building these multi-billion dollar data centers, are looking to avoid vendor lockin. If Arista can continue to dominate high-speed Ethernet switching, they are positioned to capture a massive slice of the capital expenditure boom. Where I land on this is that the market is beginning to realize that hardware infrastructure is not a short-term trend. The sheer volume of data required for next generation generative models is forcing a complete redesign of network topologies. The CNBC panel debated whether Arista's valuation, which has climbed significantly, already reflects this massive runway. One panelist argued that paying a high multiple for Arista is entirely justified because their operating margins are incredibly resilient, often hovering around 40%. What I find most compelling about Lee's inclusion of this stock is the predictability of the spend. Tech giants have openly committed to spending tens of billions of dollars on capital expenditures over the next several years. And a non-negotiable portion of that money must go toward the physical switches and routers that keep these clusters running. Think about it this way. You can build the fastest engine in the world, but if your fuel lines are restricted, you will never reach top speed. Arista is building the high-capacity fuel lines for the AI era. The conversation on the panel then turned to the next major adjustment in Lee's portfolio, a massive pivot toward financial heavyweights. The host asked the panel why a growth focused strategist like Lee would suddenly find so much value in traditional banking giants. This is where the panel introduced JP Morgan Chase, ticker symbol JPM, and Morgan Stanley, ticker symbol MS, as key additions designed to capitalize on a shifting regulatory and macroeconomic environment. One panelist argued that the financial sector is entering a Goldilocks period. On one hand, high interest rates have allowed major retail banks to generate massive net interest income. On the other hand, a wave of corporate mergers, acquisitions, and initial public offerings is beginning to thaw after a multi-year freeze. Quick pause here. Like the video. Subscribe to the channel for more financial insights. Let's pick this back up. My take on this banking pivot is that it represents a classic defensive overlay disguised as a cyclical growth play. If you look at Morgan Stanley, their wealth management division provides a highly stable fee-based revenue stream that cushions the firm during market downturns, while their investment banking division stands to gain immensely if corporate dealmaking rebounds. The panelist on CNBC emphasized that investment banking pipelines are already incredibly full, waiting for the regulatory green light to execute. When we look at JP Morgan Chase, we are looking at the undisputed king of the banking sector. A financial supermarket that has consistently used its massive balance sheet to acquire market share during times of stress. By adding these names, Lee is not just buying stocks. He is buying into the thesis that the broader economy is strong enough to support sustained credit growth and investment activity. Let me ask you this. When was the last time you saw a sustained bull market without the active participation of the major banks? It rarely happens. Financials are the transmission mechanism of monetary policy and economic growth. If the real economy is expanding, banks are going to make money. But the real fireworks of the broadcast began when the host shifted the focus to Tom Lee's highly controversial decision to slap an avoid label on Robin Hood, ticker symbol Hood, specifically targeting 2026. This move caught many on the panel by surprise given how vocal Lee has historically been about retail investor participation and the growth of digital assets. The host immediately pressed the panel on whether Lee was making a major mistake here, pointing out that Robin Hood has spent the recently aggressively transforming its business model from a simple trading app into a full-fledged financial services platform. One panelist mounted a vigorous defense of Robin Hood, pointing out that the retail platform has seen a massive surge in assets under custody. They argued that the company's subscription service, Robin Hood Gold, has created a highly predictable recurring revenue stream that completely changes the risk profile of the business. By offering high yields on uninvested cash and low margin rates, Robin Hood has managed to attract wealthier, more stable depositors, moving away from the highly volatile, lowbalance accounts that characterized its initial public offering era. This panelist argued that the market is still valuing Robin Hood as a speculative trading portal, completely missing its evolution into a legitimate wealth management challenger. What I find fascinating here is the underlying tension between Robin Hood's current financial strength and the structural risks that lie ahead in 2026. Why would Lee, a structural bull, tell investors to steer clear of this retail darling? Another panelist on the broadcast offered a highly convincing explanation that centers on the platform's extreme sensitivity to the crypto cycle. While Robin Hood has successfully diversified its revenues, a massive portion of its transaction growth is still driven by retail crypto trading. If you look at the historical patterns of digital asset adoption, retail enthusiasm tends to lag behind institutional flows, peaking in an explosive, highly speculative blowoff top before entering a multi-year cooling off period. If Lee's broader macroeconomic view assumes a peak in the current crypto cycle by late 2025, then putting in a void label on Robin Hood for 2026 is a highly logical riskmanaged decision. During a crypto winter, transaction fees on altcoins dry up instantly and retail trading volumes in options and equities typically follow suit. The panelist pointed out that during the last major market downturn, Robin Hood's active monthly users fell off a cliff, dropping from over 20 million down to single digits. My take is that Lee is anticipating a similar cyclical hangover, even if the company's subscription revenues remain stable. The loss of high margin transaction volume would deal a massive blow to the company's operating leverage, forcing a severe contraction in its earnings multiplier. Let's look closely at the math behind this debate. In a high interest rate environment, Robin Hood has been able to generate substantial revenues simply by sweeping customer cash into partner banks and collecting the net interest spread. But what happens when the Federal Reserve continues to cut interest rates? The yield Robin Hood can offer on customer cash falls, potentially making Robin Hood Gold less attractive to yield seeking depositors, while the net interest margin they earn on their own balances begins to compress. This creates a double whammy. Interest income declines at the exact same time that retail trading volumes might be cooling off. This is the structural trap that the bearish panelists focused on. They argued that Robin Hood remains a highly cyclical business masquerading as a structural growth story. On the other side of the ledger, the bullish panelists see an explosive opportunity. They point to Robin Hood's aggressive international expansion, particularly in the European market, and its roll out of retirement accounts with attractive matching contributions. The argument is that these initiatives will lock in long-term capital that is far less sensitive to daily market fluctuations. The panel was deeply divided on which of these forces will dominate the narrative over the next 24 months. Where do I land on this portfolio clash? When you compare Lee's addition of Arista Networks and major financials with his avoidance of Robin Hood, a highly coherent strategic picture begins to emerge. Lee is rotating away from retail dependent high beta momentum plays and moving heavily into institutional infrastructure and capital market beneficiaries. He is essentially betting that the physical architecture of the tech sector and the back-end plumbing of the financial system are far safer places to park capital than the retail facing platforms that rely on continuous speculative frenzy. It is a highly disciplined approach that shows even the most optimistic strategists on Wall Street recognize the need for risk management as a bull market matures. You do not have to agree with Lee's specific timeline for Robin Hood to appreciate the logic of his rotation. If we are indeed heading into a period where corporate activity, infrastructure spend, and institutional capital dominate the tape, then backing the companies that facilitate those flows rather than the platforms that cater to speculative retail trends is a highly prudent move. As we watch this market cycle play out, the real test for Lee's thesis will be the resilience of retail engagement in the face of shifting interest rates and regulatory updates. If the retail trader proves to be more durable and less cryptodependent than expected, Robin Hood may well defy the avoid label. But if history is any guide, the plumbing always wins in the end. And backing the structural giants of networking and finance remains one of the most reliable ways to navigate a maturing bull market. Thanks for watching. Like the video, subscribe to the channel, and tell me in the comments what I missed. See you next time.