Trump Is Betting Billions on These Stocks (You'll Regret Following)

The US government making investments in multiple stocks, but does that mean you should be placing your bets, too? Joining us today are Rob Spivey and Professor Joel Litman with Altimmetry Research. Going through two stocks to stay away from with this federal government investment and three stocks you should look at instead. And we're going to get into exactly why for all five of the names we're going to cover today. Guys, this is such a great topic because we have a lot of investors, a lot of viewers who are really interested in stocks whenever they see the White House or the US government really getting interested in actually taking a stake in some of these companies. What's your take on that? the White House saying we're going to invest in I don't know Rob 50 plus 60 different companies um and billions of dollars and some of them big big headlines like Intel and other ones just lots of smaller firms some that have been very popular on your show Bridget that uh that they they always want to talk about like uh MP right materials and you know what we found is the research shows that in most cases when the government steps in and you could call it not just regulation but it's like super regulation cuz it's now partly owned by the US that those companies actually do very poorly. Um the research would show uh that a number of companies have already fallen by 50%. So there's a the the government announces they're going to buy in, people assume that's good, but a bigger company that's already bad or unprofitable only makes for a bigger batter company. It doesn't make for a great stock necessarily. Uh and in fact, the odds are way against it. >> Right? And I mean, if you think about this, just to put in perspective, what you're doing is when you pick these national winners, you are basically embedding a company that's basically saying we need the government's help. And I mean, the way that we we always talk about it, and I mean, Bridget, you've you've heard us talk about China a whole lot in terms of the issues there. And China's a good example of this, but I mean, the better example to us when you talk about this issue, it's France. And I don't think any of us immediately when we think what is a thriving um economy and a thriving stock market that we want to mimic we don't want to be mimicking the the universe of KLM Air France Renault EDA orange you know and and this is I mean because with France this idea of corporatism and the government choosing winners and losers it has been a thing basically since what the fifth republic whatever republic we are in for France has been around and it really just creates a lot of old crusty companies that don't have to worry about competition or that just that winners and losers that are being picked that just inefficient and you can see it in terms of the numbers and it shows up that just this is not a way that we want to follow. I mean Joel right it shows up in the uniform accounting data I think. >> Yeah. So you know we have a database of more than 32,000 companies globally. virtually all the markets of all corporate corporate America, corporate France, corporate China. And what you find is that despite these the the government's involvement, you'll see that France corporate France earns in total all the public companies in France maybe a hundred million dollars in economic profit. In true economic profit, maybe hund00 million US companies are somewhere close to between$ 1.6 and$2 trillion dollars of economic profit. So it's not even in the same playing field. And when you see the government stepping in with either regulation or sticking its nose into companies or sticking its actual capital into companies, that does not bode well for most of the companies that get that money. And that's why we're seeing so many, they're down 30, 40, 50% since the recent announcements. And even smaller companies are having that problem that as Rob said and alluded to uh the government stepping in on having to uh invest in a firm means they can't get the investment on their own or they don't have the profits with which to fund their own or investment organically. And so we are very wary of when we see corporatism come about because it makes us stay away. And so when we talk about do not buy companies, they often have to do with we see the government sticking its nose where it shouldn't. And we see companies that are free to just compete and do well and show a good strong economic profit earnings but a real true earnings as we calculate it. That makes for you know our best stock recommendations over the many many years. >> Yeah, this is such an interesting topic and so timely right now as the topic of regulation is coming about in almost every industry especially the AI sector right now where you have heads of companies literally asking for regulation and there's a lot of market reaction to those kinds of questions as well. And so for you guys, like you said, your stock recommendations come from following the free market and seeing uh where capitalism really flows, where that money is flowing in the market right now. And that's exactly what you did in the special report that you are working on right now, talking about energy. And that is where the biggest CEOs, the biggest capitalists in America right now are investing. It's following what Elon Musk and Sam Alman are doing with their funds right now and mimicking those trades as an investor before the next big headlines hit. And that's crucial. I want you to check out this report from Joel and Rob uh before we see those major headlines. That's when investors like you and I really need to be getting into these. So, if you want to check out that report today, they have a special offer to look at all of their research of following where the money is actually flowing in this capitalist market. scan the QR code or click the link in the description and you can take advantage of some of the stock recommendations they make in those reports today. But guys, right now in this video, we have five different names to cover and we are going to start in this time by talking about the two stocks to avoid. We normally save those for the end, but I'm more interested in saving for the end this time. What you actually do look for when you are following uh that capitalism where the money is going versus where the government is investing. So let's start it off with the first stock that you are suggesting investors avoid right now because of the government involvement >> and this is MP materials right MP is a ticker and obviously this is a a conversation that often is top of mind for people in terms of this whole entire narrative and so when you look at this right this is a company that since the government put money into it and so for those of you who don't know in terms of everything going on with Mountain Pass right Mountain Pass is in the um in the Mojave Desert right this massive alleged um right uh opportunity for them to mine tons and tons of rare earth metals that we'll be able to get away from dealing with China. The US government has basically said, "Hey, we'll give you a floor of $110 a kilogram to be able to produce this." And you know, everybody, oh, this is great. Well, here's the issue. So, the first big central issue with this, right, again, ever since the government announced its uh its position, the stock is down 50%. And really has not caught much of a bit at all. And the reason is quite simply, it's because, you know, this is was wild. It's why on earth is the US government investing in junior miners, right? This is what the people up north that we're friendly with up at SPAT, like I mean the guys at SPAT should be the ones making this investment, not the US government. Um, and when you look at this, you know, this is the the core issue here is this is a company with a negative uniform return on assets. Right? When we look at it, the way that we clean up the real accounting for this company, it is consistently losing money and it basically needs its return on assets to get to roughly 3x what the average miner's profitability level is on every unit of any kind of ore pulled out for this company to possibly just justify the current valuations for the business. So to go from money losing junior minor to at critical mass producing at volume and making 3x what the average minor makes. And the biggest issue is if you actually do the back of the envelope math, you effectively need them to take the lion share of the rare earth demand that we're going to have in the United States of America at that $110 uh kg price for this company to even make any sense at all. And that's what just hammers home. It's the idea that for you to think that what's not going to happen is the free markets are going to happen, which is saying, "Hey, well, if these rare earths are really hard to get, will we not find another way to probably do this? or if these rare earths are so valuable, will somebody else not find a cheaper, better, faster way to be able to get them? And so this is the the whole entire issue is you're you're betting on the US government effectively giving this company a monopoly, which is just not the way to bet um in the market because that often times gets upside down very very quickly. It's so interesting to hear your take on this because that's my favorite thing about market beat is we hear lots of different perspectives and we've had plenty of experts on talking about rare earth mining uh in many different types of materials and talking about why it's so critical and why it has so much bipartisan support in you know in the US government because they're saying that it's a critical part of our defenses to have this infrastructure built up in the US so that we're not depending on these critical materials coming from other countries and other sources. And I I'm curious what your take is on that. I feel like that's a topic that many in the US agree on. But when you're looking at it from a business perspective, what's your take? >> Well, that's just it. There's a difference between a business that's necessary versus a business that's a good stock to own. And so the business, is it necessary? Are the materials that they produce necessary? Yes. But that doesn't mean that at the current valuation of MP that it makes sense that there's a lot of upside. What I think is that you will see good performance. You'll see the company turn itself around from a negative return assets business. something positive, but the level that it has to get to and the size of the company has to be to get that level becomes your betting line. So, it's not just is it going to be a good business. Is it going to be good enough to justify where the stock is right now? And on top of that, you got the momentum against it of being down 50%. That's the reason to say good business, not a great stock. And and that's such an important distinction. >> I want to give a little bit more direction for viewers on this one again because we hear questions about it so often. There were many investors who got in during the momentum phase of this stock. There really was a period where there was a ton of momentum behind this name and a lot of the rare earth mining stocks and then the momentum dropped off. If you're holding this stock right now, do you keep holding? Is there a timeline down the road and what could that timeline be that this company does become profitable and make more sense as an investor? Or is it a stock that if you own it now, maybe is a time to not own it and wait and wait and see where it goes in the future? What what do what's your advice? This is where the whole entire idea of embedded expectations really helps guide us at altimmetistry in terms of how we think about things because it makes us stop step away from the idea of sunk costs, right? The idea of well, I already own it. Should I just wait for it to get back and ask a question of like what does the company need to do for it to even justify the current price, let alone for it to have upside? And when you do the math, when the company was again that for the company to get back to where it was at its peak, it wouldn't have to go up 50%. It would have to go it would have to double, right? because down 50% means on the way back up it needs a double. The amount of expectation that you need in terms of this company's profitability, this company's the size of the market that it's going to benefit from. You really have to assume that it is going to basically dominate the US market. And even if you believe the US government thinks that this company is making something necessary, the idea that we won't still find other solutions, other rare earth opportunities, other ways to be able to get around some of the things that we need rare earth certainly talk about it for magnets, for motors, for all these things that's essential. We're not pretending that that rares are not essential, but exactly to Joel's point, utilities are also essential. But does a power plant make a lot of does a utility does Khan Edison make a lot of money? No. Consess has a four or 5% return on assets every single year and most miners also do. And so that's we would say it's a long road to hoe to be able to get back to those valuations and the embed expectations just don't make sense. That's why we would say there are other opportunities where we think there's a lot more upside as Bridget and I know that you know we'll talk about in a little bit. >> Yeah, I'm excited to get to those names, but we have one other on your stocks to avoid right now also in that kind of rare earth space. Let's get to that second stock to avoid on your list today. >> Yeah, and this is Lithium Americas, Tiger Lac. And this company, right, backed by basically their their entire reason for existence is they have a a potential lithium mine in the Pass in um in Nevada. basically unwritten by a two and change billion dollar department of energy loan, right? And the idea is that again, you've got a junior miner that is has yet to make a dollar in terms of revenue in terms of developing the this lithium mine. You know, you've got and also not for nothing when you think about um the competition that they have here. You think about the Alberals and the um and the SM the um the the the the other miners in um in Peru and in uh Chile that are actually producing lithium at good reasonable prices. So this is the thing too and yes a lot of that gets processed in China but like could that be processed in the US or elsewhere? Do we really need the lithium mines to be in the United States of America? And the thing is when you look at this again, this is a company has massive negative uniform earnings and to the point of where their uniform return on assets is actually more negative on an as on a uniform basis than it is an as reported basis. And we really have no clear runway to success for this business at all in terms of this point. And it's trading well above what its book asset values are. And just rule of thumb when you've got a mining company, those assets are real, right? Those are hard assets that are in the ground. And so generally you see a company like that trade in what's called a mill on the hill. It trades for the value of those assets when you've got it trading way above the value of those assets and it hasn't even made a dime and there are real viable competitors out there. This is not a place for the US government to be. But also this is not a place for anybody. But again people who back junior miners for a living like Sprat, like Joel, right, our friend Rick Rule, they're the people who should be backing this. not the US government and not everyday investors who are not experts and specialists in this. >> Yeah, this is I I think this is a heartbreaking interview for some of our viewers who are really all in on some of these stocks. And so I want to push back a little bit on that that same question of eventually what we keep hearing from people who are bullish on these rare earth stocks is that the story will play out eventually. The returns might not be seen in the next year or two, but maybe 5 years or longer down the road, these these stocks could be very profitable companies. Do you buy into that? Do you think that there is hope that these stocks will bring some returns for investors on a longer timeline? >> Well, the nice thing is, I mean, if that's the case, cuz here's the thing. Lithium America's the expectations for this company are not as high as they are for MP Materials, right? MP materials, again, think about the size of the rare earth market and what they need to take at at a reasonable level of profitability. It's wild. Lithium America, Lithium Americas, the expectations are not as crazy. But here's the thing, you can always wait um right for some for one of these companies to actually hit production. Sure, you will lose on the first 50%. But if this company could throw off a billion dollars of uniform earnings, then guess what? The first 100% up because they actually showed success, you won't be missing out on a lot. But the thing is, your riskreward at these levels for what they need to get to, the targets that they need to hit, their ability to actually show they've been able to do it, and the fact that they're already in a competitive market just says this is not one to have to say, I have to bet on this now. Cuz also if the opportunity is which generally for a junior minor, right, junior minors invariably always, not always, so often the timelines they hit and the volumes they produce are always promises are up here and then promises are here and then promises are here and then promises are here and then you have reality, right? And so wait to see wait and to see what actually happens and you'll be able to cuz if it's going to happen 5 years from now, there's going to be a lot of volatility in the next 4 years. you aren't going to be missing out by letting the US government do SPRAT's job and sit and wait. That doesn't mean you need to sit and wait also because there's no real catalyst in the near term anyways. >> I think that's really solid advice and a good push back for investors to consider that while yes, the long-term payoff could be there, it's just going to be volatile for the next several years. And that is something consistently I've heard from tons of analysts whether they're pro- rareear stocks or a little more hesitant like both of you are on these right now. there. Everybody is saying expect a lot of volatility over the next few years. So, help yourself sleep a little bit better at night and just wait until you start to see that turnaround. I think that's solid advice right now and it's also great advice to understand the industry. You two have clearly done your research on that. That's exactly what you've done with the energy field too. I know you have done a huge deep dive into the need for more power especially for the AI buildout right now. And there are so many areas of the market that are going to see a huge volatile upswing coming in just a little bit once some major announcements are made from some of the big giants right now who are doing the buildout of the AI story. Whether that's uh models like Claude or whether that's you know Elon Musk and what he's doing with XAI. There are so many different power sources they're looking into that are going to see a huge spike in upside volatility once this comes around. And so if you want to get in before that big announcement is made and those headlines come and the stock already runs, make sure to check out their special report. It details several different stocks you should be looking at right now before we see some of these big headlines that make these stocks move. So if you want to look into energy, make sure to scan the QR code or click the link in the description. Now is the perfect time to take advantage of that special offer and check out those names. We have three other names. Joel, I know we're going to start in on the three stocks you do recommend buying right now. And I want to before you get to the first one, talk about what you're looking for as far as recommendations and how it fits into the story about government regulation and government investment. >> Just as we worry about the government investing and trying to pick winners that turn out not to be because again, if they were truly winners, why would they need the capital from the government being invested? That's the natural statement because if they're good businesses, they should be be able to get the capital anyway. That said, there are areas that we see deregulation. Uh, and that's where our picks come from. There's deregulation going on in the energy industry. There's deregulation going on that is creating a re-industrialization of the United States. Um, and there's deregulation going on in the banking sector. And that gives us three really interesting um favorite recommendations of ours that fit that. The first one I'll mention, and you know, we've talked about in the past is GE Vernova. If we're going to solve the needs for AI electricity, you're going to have to do that a gigawatt at a time, which means you need really, really big turbines, um, and that calls for things from Gnover where they can make a 250 megawatt or a 400 megawatt giant turbine. There's few people on the planet that can do that. Um, they run fantastically well. They're called Jersey Boys because they got this nickname from New Jersey. And there's these giant, you know, this thing is sitting a back of a flatbed and and uh they can power, you know, a couple of them can power the downtown Boston and that's what's needed. Their backlog is more than 5 years. Um they're able to sell at premium pricing because when a backlog of 5 years, they're saying, "Hey, if you don't pay our retail, you know, MSRP, if you will, then you don't get it." Also, every time they get another one installed, they get the servicing. These things require a lot of servicing. blades and things need to be uh uh repaired and and other things that leads to a long tale of revenue for GE every time one gets installed. So that five-year backlog doesn't just mean 5 years. It means many many years of really outsized revenue. And when you look at their stock price, even though it's up a lot, it doesn't anywhere anywhere add up to what their part their opportunity is and the potential is for the company. So you put in any forecast of where 5 years of backlog gets you for revenue and profitability at premium pricing and the stock is still really cheap. Momentum is great. It's up a lot. This is another one that's a double that could double again. >> I think it's important to contrast uh the from the accounting perspective that you guys are so great at doing of how this compares to an MP. Uh looking at what kind of revenue they're actually bringing in and looking at their books the way that you guys do. I mean is there any comparison in these two? >> Yeah. And this is the really interesting thing is if you look at it right from a perspective of the uniform uh accounting for G Vernova is really showing what happens when you have a company that actually can compete in the real world and have pricing power. This company has gone from when it spun out of GE it was around a 3 to 5% return on as a business. Last year return on assets approached 20%. Right? Corporate average is around 10 10 to 10 to 12 to 13. This company already is generating 2x corporate average profitability. And the really telling thing is because the pricing power that Joel mentioned around their ability to now just not charge for the charge a really good margin for all the maintenance that they do, but now also charge a really good price for the actual power generation that they provide also the generators and also all the other balance of power. You've got a company that's had massive expansion of margin and that's lasting expansion of margin because people need what Genova makes and really they're only one of three players in the whole entire world that make it. So they've got they've got basically the world beholden if you will. >> Yeah. I know we often talk about when we have the two of you on we talk about Moes and this is a perfect example of that. They can charge what they want because they are building something that very few people do and I think that that is what makes them so interesting for investors to look at right now. Uh, I just want to talk really quick about where they are in their chart right now. They have pulled back a little bit from the high that they were um at the end of June, early July time frame. Is it a good time to be buying this stock? Even though, like Jules said, they have run up, is this little pullback enough uh to entice people to be adding some of this to their portfolio? We think it's a really compelling time to get into Genova because you know what's happened right now is you've got an air pocket and if you look at basically anybody who's in the AI power or AI ecosystem buildout really since June July it's the exact same chart right all of them are that exact same way and we think that for right now is a phenomenal opportunity for Gernova. What what we will say is we wouldn't be surprised if there's continued volatility for the next month and a half until we get to I don't know magic date in early November. But when we get really past that, we think that this is a phenomenal opportunity because all of the data that we look at and there's a lot in terms of looking at investment cycles, financing cycles, and everything else says that the the AI buildout is going nowhere. And Genova and one of the other companies that we're going to talk about really solves some of the nimism problem of the idea of having to hook up to the grid for power that everybody's pushing back for data centers, which means they're going to keep on being a big winner from all this. >> All right. I love how bullish you are on this stock, but we've got a couple of new names to get to. We talked about Genova before, but Joel, what's the next company that you guys are recommending right now? >> Well, the the banking uh deregulation that's coming is going to lead to more consolidation. I mean, the US still has something like, I don't know, six, seven, 8,000 banks. When you go across the entire US, I think people don't realize there's that many banks. I remember when someone said, "Oh, the Signature Bank uh has has gone under." the FDI took it over and I said, "Which one?" And they said, "What do you mean?" I said, "There's five signature banks with the same name in different parts of the US. So when you strike any of this, we follow it. Um, and that deregulation is going to lead to consolidation and there going to be certain banks that uh are going to do well. One of those is Keycorp, uh, Ky. I was a teenager in Maine when Keycourt moved into Maine and used that as its base for moving to the rest of New England and is now truly a national bank player versus before it was really confined to kind of like New York. And so with that, we think he is doing a lot of cool things um that we like. >> Yeah. And I mean and to to kind of paint the picture here, what's really interesting on the banking side is there's a couple different levers that are being pulled from that idea of deregulation. One is when you look at, you know, even before um, you know, Wars came in, um, you know, when Trump first came into office, um, you know, uh, Michelle Bowman was really given a lot of leash in terms of the idea of, hey, inside the Fed, let's think about how to clean up regulation and make things make more sense. Ever since what happened with the Great Recession, there were a lot of there's a lot of regulation put in place with meaningful reason. I mean, we were running with banks. And for anybody who nerds out on banks, the idea of banks having a 3% capital buffer or, you know, and being 33 times le and everything is nuts. That should never happen. But we got to so such high levels in terms of required capital levels, required regulation that it really ham it really just hamstrung the ability for banks to be able to make loans, which is their job, which is part of the reason why the Fed had to step in so much in terms of quantitative easing because they basically had to push a whole bunch of money into the banking system to get banks to loan. And so the goal is that by taking a lot of that back, taking a lot of that regulation and coming back to somewhere between where we were in 2006 and where we got over the last, you know, decade and a half, it's part of the thing that they that we think is really going to be beneficial in letting banks make more money. And the other interesting thing when Joel talks about the idea of when key you know went and bought um you know bought up in Maine they've bought right first Niagara in uh in the northeast they've bought some other very very um small niche players in terms of tech advisory and other areas but what um key and others are going to benefit from benefit from is uh the FDI is really rethinking their regulations around M&A for banks too. There's a group called Camels um is the is the acronym for it. But the M in Camels is one of the regulatory requirements that they have is to look at management quality, which is a completely subjective thing that they were looking at. And so all the banks would basically say, I'm not even going to waste my time trying to make an acquisition cuz if the FDI just wants to say no, they'll just point at the M and say no. They're pulling that back and they're going to that's going to allow a lot more M&A to happen. And then that M&A and also just allowing banks to make more money in terms of different regulations from the Fed, we think has an opportunity to really power a bank like key higher. So key for context, they've got around a 10% return on equity, which is middle to low for most banks right now. The really interesting thing is the market expects that to stay flat and all those catalysts that we just talked about and the fact that key is really really exposed to CNI lending which as Joel talked about between the re-industrialization of the United States AI data center buildout power plant buildout and everything else CNI lending is a big place that's going to grow and they are perfectly positioned for that especially as red tape is cut. That's why we think that key looks so compelling. >> Yeah. Now, when you're talking about financial any kind of financial stock right now, I I do wonder if there's any banking stock connection to what's happening with interest rates, the constant ongoing Fed discussion. Does that add to some of the volatility that we have seen a little bit anyway in the last few months for this company? >> Well, this is the funny thing is if you think about it, right, to your point, it's caused some volatility, but higher interest rates, especially on the longer part of the curve, that's great for a bank because I don't know for everybody if you know this, but the way that banks make money is what's called the spread, right? It's how much they borrow and then how much they lend that money out for. Well, as the 10-year gets higher relative to the 3month where they borrow money out or the 2-year, that only means more and more profits for them. And this is a really important thing is, you know, uh we talked about this last time that we were on Bridget when we talked about the idea is is this the bond vigilantes? What is what's going on in terms of driving interest higher? Most of the reason why interest rates are higher is not because of some panic about the US government's balance sheet. It's because US corporates are aggressively looking to borrow money to invest in themselves. That, by the way, also really good for banks. For banks to be able to make more money because they have a higher spread and more people asking them to borrow. That is a recipe that most people would think if you just were completely if you if you looked at this in a complete, you know, um, uh, you weren't biased by everything else going around and looked this from a neutral perspective, you'd be like, "Wow, I really want to buy the the banks right now." And everybody's just missing that story. >> All right. really interesting perspective and I love the variety of stocks that we are covering today. I know we have one other sector to get to for your last stock recommendation of the day. I do want to share that special offer one more time if you guys have missed this earlier. Not only do you get those special reports and the stocks that they are saying you need to buy before those major headlines are coming out, you also get to learn more from Joel and Rob. And clearly these guys have such a great view on the market and take a deep dive into companies. And along with those special reports, you'll get access to Alimemetry Research, which is a huge benefit of the special offer. So scan the QR code or again just go to that link and sign up for that today. Okay guys, what is this last company that you are recommending as a buy right now? >> Yeah, this last company is Pro Petra ticker pump pu. Probably the ticker gives away oil and gas company what it is exactly that they do. But what's really interesting about this company is so one, right? We understand in the US, we need even even before everything happened with Iran, but now especially with Iran, we want to be able to pump more oil. We want to be able to pump more natural gas. We need that natural gas to be able to power power plants. We need that oil for everything else. And so what ProPro does, their primary business is they run completion fleets. So when you basically punch a hole in the ground and then you're getting that hole ready to be able to produce oil or natural gas and pump it out, they're the ones you call. When you think about what their business is, which is really interesting really for all of oil, gas and gas equipment and services, the primary job that they actually have is taking mobile power, bringing it somewhere, hooking it up to something, and getting that stuff running. And so about 2 years ago, Pro looked around and said, "Well, wait a second. There's another industry that needs a lot of power right now and needs that power to not be connected to the grid, right, behind the meter power, and that is data centers." So, they stood up this group, this area called um what's called um Prop Power. And the great thing was they already had a backlog of um of of natural gas generation fleets that they were going to be getting in to be able to upgrade their completion fleet. But then what they said is, well, hold on. We can do is we can take some of those and we can start selling power to data centers. And the great thing about that is data centers need power all the time and they're willing to pay a really strong price for it. So what was amazing was they basically turned this cyclical business in terms of whether or not oil and gas needs to punch holes in the ground or not. And oil and gas can be very price sensitive when times are bad, though they will pay pretty much anything when times are good to all of a sudden now this very stable high visibility multi-year cash flow stream in terms of being able to power data centers. But then on top of that, so they already have this new business which is much more profitable than the legacy business. But on top of that, because of all the deregulation that we're seeing come through to try to push more oil and gas, not just more power for data centers, we're going to see a really strong cycle likely for the completion business. And if we do, you've just taken out a bunch of capacity out of that business because of power that you're now selling to somebody else just when you need a bunch, which means they're going to have really strong pricing in their cyclical business. So you're stacking a new higher return business with a business that has far far stronger cycles. And just to put this in perspective, what the market right now is pricing this company for return on assets, uniform return on assets, how we look at the business to be around 5%. That's around cost of capital, half of what corporate averages. In a really good cycle for completions, they get to 15 to 20% return on assets. Now, you put that on top of a business that probably is a 10 to 15 to 20% ROA stable business and selling power to data centers. And this is why we think this one is just a really compelling idea right now benefiting from multiple areas areas of uh of deregulation. Yeah, such an interesting timing for both of these last two stocks to talk about. One a week after that Fed decision and another uh a time when we're seeing uh huge headlines around oil starting out this week. Is that impacting what's happening with this company? I know it's more along the lines of natural gas, but looking at their chart, you can see a lot of uh downtrend in the price action over the last couple of months, even though the stock has already had a tremendous year. But I'm just curious about the volatility and the connection that this this stock and this company may have with all of the different headlines surrounding what's happening in Iran or just the whole energy picture in the country. >> Yeah, I mean certainly a big part of it has been um in terms of the selloff more recently has been around the pro power side of the equation in terms of again that idea of the AI data center buildout, but also right I mean there's constant questions that everybody has in terms of well is this going to be a short resolution? you know, are we finally going to open the straight and everything's going to be fine or, you know, this that or the other thing, you know, or are we going to see another Saudi pipeline blow up or another another straight mind or who knows? And what's important to note is when you think about what's happening with oil, right, specifically, um, now with everything that we've gone through for the last 6 months, and this is something that doesn't go away quickly, even if you bring all of the oil online from the UAE, where UAE wants to pump way more now. that's why they left OPEC want wants to pump way more now than they did before um the crisis you've got Iran coming online Iraq coming on online and Saudi let's say all of them come back online tomorrow well even with that what inherently happens when you live through what we've lived through for the last 6 months is you get a level of geopolitical premium right where people will say hey you know what cuz I don't know if oil is going to be shut off again in 3 months from something else happening no we're going to consistently have to pay a little more that's really important for the shell players in the US cuz what the shell players in the US really need their sweet spot is above $60 to $65 a barrel that they can trust looking out on the curve that it's going to be there. And the nice thing is if you look out on the curve now for oil, we're there right for a couple years that they're going to be able to get above $6570 if they basically hedge out the oil they're going to produce, which means it makes more sense for them to punch holes in the ground. Even though the market is unsure about the whole entire AI data center buildout story right now and is saying, well, will this last as long as it will? The fact of the matter is both of those structural moves are going to last longer. And again, red tape is being cut for the places that this company is going to, meaning they're going to be enabled to make more money there, not less. >> Such a fascinating conversation today, guys. We covered so much ground as we always do whenever you guys are on the show. I love the conversation. If you want to learn more from Joel and Rob, we had a completely different conversation on five other stocks. They shared the recommendation of three to buy and two to drop last month. It's getting a ton of views, but if you have not watched it yet, it is absolutely still worth a watch.