TSM
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
stock NYSE ADR

Tech Stocks From Record Highs:
1. Coinbase, $COIN: -69%
2. Oracle, $ORCL: -57%
3. Salesforce, $CRM: -57%
4. ServiceNow, $NOW: -56%
5. Netflix, $NFLX: -48%
6. Palantir, $PLTR: -48%
7. Microsoft, $MSFT: -37%
8. Meta, $META: -32%
9. Arm Holdings, $ARM: -27%
10. Broadcom, $AVGO: -26%
11. Marvell Technology, $MRVL: -20%
12. Nvidia, $NVDA: -19%
13. Amazon, $AMZN: -19%
14. Alphabet, $GOOGL: -17%
15. CrowdStrike, $CRWD: -15%
16. Apple, $AAPL: -14%
17. Taiwan Semiconductor, $TSM: -12%
Calculated Friday morning, source: The Kobeissi Letter

Actually mag 7 has performed horrible as of last, it's been AI stocks. Earnings change the direction in a heartbeat. TSM reports early, if they do well, it will take off again.

The next boom will likely be imaging sensors or Robotics. Just invest in Pacific Asia. The USA doesn't manufacture anything. NVIDIA, etc send everything to TSM to fab. Just buy $VXUS, $VPL, $EWJ, or $EWY, etc.
[https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2026-05-08/sony-tsmc-plan-new-japan-joint-venture-for-next-generation-image-sensors](https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2026-05-08/sony-tsmc-plan-new-japan-joint-venture-for-next-generation-image-sensors)

There is a diversification argument for REITS. The posts saying the components of VNQ are in Total Stock index at cap weight are correct. The big 'but', which goes far beyond REIT's, is that public stock companies represent only a limited % of all 'equity' in productive assets, and some kinds of equity are much more underrenepresented in it than others. Total equity in real estate globally was estimated in 2022 by Ilmanen at $200tril, public stock $100tril and that included significant value of 'non investable' public stock shares in places like China. RE's true weight anyway bears no resemblance to the few % in TSM (US or global). Although, looking at things this way, a lot of people might be cap weight or more in RE via their houses. And 'looking at it this way' requires more thought, research and debate. BH's rightly IMO favor simplicity, but can get carried away in cases where they insist the simplest way to look at things (eg. assume 'the market' just means public equity) is fundamentally correct \*because\* it's simple. The world doesn't always work that way
And this is more of a dilemma for some other asset classes. For example In the future more and more value may be created in private equity (or pre IPO), yet the high fees of PE/VC funds are a good reason to hesitate to buy them (though again the high fees don't actually mean TSM actually covers this risk, nothing to see here). Another one is Chinese equity. China might become the dominant tech country without its 'investable' weight in VT being vastly more than the 3% it is now. Yet it doesn't really help to overweight China because the more that country threatnes to overtake the US, probably the more likely it is some future crisin in relations aresults which causes the US and/or PRC govts to take actions which effectively expropriate US investors in Chinese stock. That risk is far smaller everywhere else with a significant stock market, yet none of those other places can plausibly replace the US as No .1.

I can definitely see that. Those three are all benefiting from AI, but in very different parts of the stack, Nvidia on compute, TSM on manufacturing, and Broadcom on networking/custom silicon. If AI capex stays strong, you don't necessarily need to pick one winner because they're all getting paid at different points in the value chain. That's a pretty compelling setup.

TSM MU NVDA AMZN

Nvidia, broadcom and TSM makes most sense to me at current valuations and estimated future cash flows/EPS growth.

It's also why I feel safer with TSM becsuse they still manufacture a ton of chips outside of just AI related products.

ASML has very few real competitors. ASML better forward P/E safer long term. Micron serves a diffrent customer base and is not even close in value. ASML is miles ahead of Micron. You'd be better off comparing Nvidia or TSM to ASML.

Value investing is just buying companies trading below their intrinsic value.  It doesn’t have to be a laggard.  
In the TSM example, it is outperforming the market by a good amount but I would argue it meets almost any definition of value 

i think you are confusing value with cheap. Generally, cheap stocks are more likely to be values but companies like TSM still carry considerable value at 22.2 forward P/E.  
My port is almost entirely AI stocks and most are not cheap but I consider them great values because I think the market underrated AI

Keep BTD in the Bag 7 stocks, Retail. I would hate to see the Bag 7 stocks run out of cash to spend on SK Hynix, Samsung, ASML, and TSM.
My port thanks you all for your sacrifice : )

I agree. I intellectually figured this is what would happen to me. Generally, it did but still feels surprising how differently I feel.
Saving I didn't mind risk at all. If things fall fine, I can buy more or I can accept that loss and move on. I have new money to invest every 2 weeks.
As time goes by that "new money" starts to be tiny compared to the growing investments. But it still feels like "new money is coming, where can I invest it."
A few years into full retirement I realized I was very focused on limiting long term downside risk. I was used to being 95+% invested in stocks (outside of real estate). Now I am at about 65% in stocks.
I still strongly believe stocks are the best place to be long term. But due to my desire to reduce risk and my belief that markets are very richly priced I am fine pulling money out of stocks. I am largely in money markets and t-bils with some series I bonds and other inflation protected bonds.
I am also building a portfolio of income producing stocks (ABBV, DAC, CWEN, GSL, LAND...). All but LAND I have owned for years but I have added to them and adjusted my thinking some.
While growing I was aggressive and didn't mind risk. And I had plenty of times I lost and was fine. Overall it worked very well. I bought large amounts of AAPL, GOOGL, ABBV AMZN... and held for more than 2 decades (though I sold way too much AMZN too early).
Now I have stocks I really like long term (MELI, NET, NBIS, TSM, CLPT...) but I am fine holding much smaller positions than I would have 30 years ago. So if MELI does spectacularly (which I think it may well do) I will make money but I would have made a lot more if I just bought more now. But I am happy to limit my position sizes and reduce my risk of any couple of those going very badly messing thing up for my whole financial picture. And I figure if they do as well as I think they might, I will still do very well.
One of the concepts I believe, but I think most people don't think about is that taking a bit of risk when you are 40 or 50 or 60... could lose you money but it could also grown your portfolio and reduce your long term risk of the portfolio being depleted. It isn't as simple as this but it kind of is like you increase the risk of year 1, 2 or 3 being down a bit but you also increase the chances you grow your portfolio and then you have that bigger portfolio that is more resilient to future losses (or increased costs). So say instead of increasing the chances the portfolio stays between 95 and 105% you increase the odds of a bigger decline but you increase the chances of a bigger gain by more than the odds you lose some. Again you have to balance the risk, but that gives a simple idea of how taking some risk can reduce your long term risk (or to view it another way increase the chances of your portfolio growing to the point it has only a tiny risk of not meeting your needs).

TSM

Neither- look into TSM. More stability and room for growth.

Fair, but that’s exactly why I’m talking about semis/shovel sellers, not necessarily every AI end user.
AI monetization can be uncertain while AI infrastructure demand is very real. NVDA, AVGO, MU, TSM, DELL, HPE, etc. are getting paid because the buildout is happening. The hyperscalers are treating compute capacity like strategic infrastructure, not a normal ROI project with a 12-month payback.
End-user margins may be the debate. But the hardware stack is still where the money is currently flowing.

There will probably be some price increases to pass through memory and other costs to get the margins back up because the memory companies and TSM are taking a big wet bite. 

Got out of my TSM calls early and now I'm balls deep in AAPL calls
Someone please hold me I'm scared

Portfolio:
Hyperscalers: GOOGL, AMZN
Semiconductors: TSM, NVDA, AVGO
Financials: SPGI, GS
Industrials: GE, GEV, CAT, NOC

Some of the stocks I hold I bought a long time ago with significant amount of gains, so I wouldn't buy them at today prices.

This year being overweight on Industrials have been a major success with my portfolio almost outperforming the Qs, I would argue my portfolio is at a higher quality than the Qs, and these stocks I bought just this year. I bought Sterling Infrastructure (STRL) that doubled in a month, so I took profits immediately. During Iran Dip, I pointed out that buying investment banks like GS and MS would be prudent from record high IB activities, which panned out exceptionally. I will be taking profits on GS after wave of IPOs like Anthropic, OpenAI, Databricks, Canva, or SK Hynix moving to US stock market.

This quarter, I decided to take profits on Caterpillar (60% gains in 3-4 months), because although it a momentum winner I lack conviction holding a cyclical Industrial at PE of 50. The swap for this would be Microsoft and Meta, which I will buy $5000 each. We can go into details why each of these names, but I supposed about 1000 other posts already mention why, so my thesis will be as simple as these stocks have wide moat with pricing power. Buying stocks that valuation go down while balance sheet strengthen (overtime) cannot go wrong.
Even though I am quite young, I try my best to follow Chris Hohn's investing principles. When the AI super cycle end, I would want to be in these forever moats that will outlive any crises. These principles value predictability, non-cyclicality, consistent cash flow, pricing power (non-commodity). This is why I will never want to hold memory like Micron, Samsung, SK Hynix, Western Digital, Sandisk because of commodity (no pricing power - margin pressure) and unpredictable cash flow, so I can't care less if these stocks go up into the right to me these businesses are inherently low quality. The same applies to utilities like Vistra Corps, NextEra, CEG high CAPEX to build out with low margin selling commodities so low quality businesses. Another example could be NVIDIA and AVGO, which is unpredictable cash flow, but more consistent because they don't sell a commodity.

Over the long term, I want to be holding long term predictable cash flow wide moats like S&P Global, Moody's, Visa, Mastercard, GE Aerospace, Ferrovial. The only semiconductor I think is almost forever moat would be TSMC. Of Course the hyperscalers.
STRONG BUY LIST: SPGI, META, MSFT
BUY: NVDA, GOOGL, NOC, AVGO

Watch List:
FER (Ferrovial) - wide moat, transportation, extremely high quality
V (Visa): wide moat, networking effects, extremely high quality

NVDA RSI is in the low 30s so it is nearing oversold. I recommend being patient and selling SMH when its RSI is closer to 70 if you want to carry less NVDA or generally less volatility.
The MU weighting is around 6% vs 8% respectively so a 10% increase in MU moves SMH 0.6% and SOXX 0.8%. 0.2% is not a big difference.
Keep in mind you lose much more weight in TSM and ASML when going from SMH to SOXX.
If you want more MU, better to buy DRAM instead of switching from SMH to SOXX. You really don't need much to heavily tilt a portfolio toward memory production.