HIMS
Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
stock NYSE

If aim to beat the market, HIMS won’t get you there. No competitive advantage. May be a zero.
I’ll continue crushing the market over decades.

HIMS is a loser of a company

You're overlooking a couple of fundamental points here. Matching the S&P 500’s performance over the last five years without any exposure to the semiconductor sector is actually a major achievement. The broader market won't deliver these stellar, double-digit returns forever. If my portfolio simply maintains its current trajectory while overall market returns normalize, that alone will be a decisive victory. Beyond that, several of my holdings haven't even begun to unlock their true potential. Take HIMS, for instance, it still has a massive growth runway ahead. Once the market finally recognizes their intrinsic value and triggers a multiple re-rating, the upside in this portfolio is going to be explosive.

My current portfolio consists of the following 20 companies:
GOOG, IOT, TOST, LIN, WM, AME, CTAS, COST, APH, UBER, UNH, SHL, DHR, SYK, ROL, MA, HIMS, NOW, ZETA, MSCI
At first glance, this might look like a random assortment of stocks, but it was actually built around a very deliberate strategy. I firmly believe that consistently beating the market requires two main pillars: high conviction in a concentrated portfolio and extreme patience. To execute this, it is critical to pick exceptional businesses capable of sustaining long-term growth while maintaining strong structural diversification. To find these companies, I don't just plug metrics like "ROIC >= 15%" into a stock screener. I focus heavily on qualitative factors that cannot be captured by data or automated by algorithms, which is why I believe most "Quality Factor" ETFs are packed with mediocre businesses. Valuation certainly matters to me, but not in the traditional "deep value" sense. I don't sit around waiting for a market crash to buy, instead, I dynamically size my positions based on entry prices. Furthermore, financial statements don't capture a company's true qualitative moat, so relying solely on mathematical formulas to calculate intrinsic value is, in my view, a mistake. While there are still a few minor adjustments I plan to make, I am confident that this portfolio, even as it stands, has what it takes to outperform the market over the long haul.
Am I deluding myself? What adjustments would you make, and which other companies should I explore?

At the beginning of this year, I exited NVO at $50 and bought HIMS at $16 with that money. I rather invest in the company that Novo Nordisk was suing. NVO is too hard to predict with management so I peaced out.

If aim to beat the market, HIMS won’t get you there. No competitive advantage. May be a zero.
I’ll continue crushing the market over decades.

HIMS is a loser of a company

You're overlooking a couple of fundamental points here. Matching the S&P 500’s performance over the last five years without any exposure to the semiconductor sector is actually a major achievement. The broader market won't deliver these stellar, double-digit returns forever. If my portfolio simply maintains its current trajectory while overall market returns normalize, that alone will be a decisive victory. Beyond that, several of my holdings haven't even begun to unlock their true potential. Take HIMS, for instance, it still has a massive growth runway ahead. Once the market finally recognizes their intrinsic value and triggers a multiple re-rating, the upside in this portfolio is going to be explosive.

My current portfolio consists of the following 20 companies:
GOOG, IOT, TOST, LIN, WM, AME, CTAS, COST, APH, UBER, UNH, SHL, DHR, SYK, ROL, MA, HIMS, NOW, ZETA, MSCI
At first glance, this might look like a random assortment of stocks, but it was actually built around a very deliberate strategy. I firmly believe that consistently beating the market requires two main pillars: high conviction in a concentrated portfolio and extreme patience. To execute this, it is critical to pick exceptional businesses capable of sustaining long-term growth while maintaining strong structural diversification. To find these companies, I don't just plug metrics like "ROIC >= 15%" into a stock screener. I focus heavily on qualitative factors that cannot be captured by data or automated by algorithms, which is why I believe most "Quality Factor" ETFs are packed with mediocre businesses. Valuation certainly matters to me, but not in the traditional "deep value" sense. I don't sit around waiting for a market crash to buy, instead, I dynamically size my positions based on entry prices. Furthermore, financial statements don't capture a company's true qualitative moat, so relying solely on mathematical formulas to calculate intrinsic value is, in my view, a mistake. While there are still a few minor adjustments I plan to make, I am confident that this portfolio, even as it stands, has what it takes to outperform the market over the long haul.
Am I deluding myself? What adjustments would you make, and which other companies should I explore?

At the beginning of this year, I exited NVO at $50 and bought HIMS at $16 with that money. I rather invest in the company that Novo Nordisk was suing. NVO is too hard to predict with management so I peaced out.

What to add to this monster printer portfolio?:
RDDT, HIMS, RBLX, SLS

why the fck is HIMS up 10% - this market is absolutely crazy

I'm balding before 30 and that's low key got me fucked up. Calls on HIMS

Buy HIMS