Tom Lee: $4 Trillion of IPOs Are Coming. Are You Ready?

Added: 2026-05-21

[00:00:06]Welcome to the Med Favor Show, where the focus is on helping you grow and preserve your wealth. Join us as we discuss the craft of investing and uncover new and profitable ideas, all to help you grow wealthier and wiser.

[00:00:17]Better investing starts here. Metab is the co-founder and chief investment officer at Camry Investment Management.

[00:00:22]Due to industry regulations, he will not discuss any of Camry's funds on this podcast. All opinions expressed by podcast participants are solely their own opinions and do not reflect the opinion of Cambria Investment Management or its affiliates. For more information, visit cambriavestments.com.

[00:00:34]>> Today's show is sponsored by Cambria. Do you hold legacy investment positions with significant gains? What if you could transition into an ETF without facing a large tax bill? You can with a 351 ETF exchange. Here's how it works.

[00:00:49]Investors contribute stocks or other securities to a newly formed ETF in exchange for ETF shares. As long as the special rules and diversification requirements are met, the investor is essentially able to seed the launch of the ETF without an immediate taxable event. Because ETFs typically don't distribute any capital gains, investors don't face taxes until they sell their ETF shares, allowing for better control over the timing of the tax event. Are you ready to explore a 351 ETF exchange?

[00:01:17]Visit cambriafunds.com/351 to take the next step in innovative tax-savvy investing with Cambria today.

[00:01:25]Camry investment management LP Camry is a registered investment adviser. The information set forth herein is for informationational purposes only and does not constitute financial investment tax or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. All investments are subject to risk including the risk of loss of principle.

[00:01:36]Welcome back everybody. We got a great episode today. I'm super excited.

[00:01:40]Today's guest is Tom Lee, co-founder, head of research at Fundstrat Global Advisors. prior to co-founding Fund Stratey Service, JP Morgan's chief equity strategist from 2007 to 2014.

[00:01:51]Welcome to the show.

[00:01:52]>> Thank you. Thanks for having me.

[00:01:54]>> I thought we'd jump right in. I love listening to you talk macro markets. You guys had a comment where you're talking about selling the buildup and buying the invasion. I thought that'd be a good place to kick it off. Where do we go from here? A lot of investors are surprised because the US is in the midst of a war that could be a long war and oil prices are at record highs and I think a lot of folks at the start of this year would said that this would have been enough to trigger a bare market or even a recession but instead the S&Ps at an all-time high and the groups that led last year like AI and semis are the ones leading again. So I think it's really speaks to me about the resilience of the US economy and maybe the continued very weak conviction of most investors.

[00:02:48]>> I know you talked about, you know, S&P magic number 7,300 and we're there like, you know, what kind of led you to that call as you were thinking about it ahead of time? Well, in early December, we typically look at the year ahead and we write down what we think are the key drivers and kind of what the contours of the market would look like. So, December 2025, as we were thinking about this year, we just thought this year would look a lot like 2025, which is a difficult year for markets, but ultimately very strong. And but in the middle of that, we penciled in the idea that the market would test a new Fed and therefore we would have a sort of start to the year that would be strong. 7,300 was an aspirational number at the time because the S&P was in the 6,000s, but then we think that there'd be a pause and then the setup would still be positive because we think there were some structural tailwinds and so we thought we'd end the year 2026 at 7,700.

[00:03:53]So I the year is tracking the way we expected, although we're a bit above 7,300 right now. But if someone asked me today, well, first of all, can the S&P make its way to 7,800 first before it draw? I think anything's possible. But I think what I am mindful of is that stocks were a lot cheaper at the end of March at the market lows. They're a lot less cheap now. So, a lot of good news is priced in. And I still think that there is potential for turbulence in the middle of this year. And with maybe more reasons for it. One being of course the market testing a new Fed, but second is I think it's still hard for me to reconcile that oil prices are not reflecting the acute shortage that's developing for petroleum products around the world. So I think that there's going to be some reconciliation maybe later this year.

[00:04:45]>> Let's expand on that cuz you know I've heard you say at 100 bucks it doesn't kill the US economy. Do you think this resolves in a way where oil moves higher? Do you think it resolves where it's just it's not as much of an impact to us today because we produce so much or like what's the thesis behind that?

[00:05:00]I'm penciling in my head just in a quote like unknown right now because to me the current price of oil doesn't seem to reflect what will be the clearing price later this year cuz we know inventories have been drawn down and we know there's a supply shortage and we know the straits aren't allowing normal traffic and these are going to affect a lot of economies outside the US and so I as much as I want to take some comfort from like the futures price of oil I don't think that that reflects the price that's going to exist later this year.

[00:05:34]So to me, I'm going to just put it as an unknown because for now, the market doesn't seem to be bothered by it. But it could be that there's a resolution before the shortages get too great or the market will be surprised in a negative way. So I actually don't know.

[00:05:50]>> That's a thoughtful response. I think the struggle with a lot of us as we look through the markets and macro and news is the thing that is everyone's focused on changes over time. You listed a handful of drivers, the US stocks, you got the White House, oil, inflation, private credit, Fed, and then of course earnings. Is there one that sticks out to you right now that matters most? I know we're mostly through kind of earnings, but any of those front of mind for you?

[00:06:14]>> All them matter, and at different times the market's going to care about something else. We've written about private credit recently. I do think that there is going to be losses and software has a little bit of uncertainty but I think the underwriting is probably better than most people appreciate for some of the private credit firms. So I think as a sort of as a our general view is I think private credit is a problem but it's not systematic and we've done a lot of work on the software stocks. I do think a lot of the bad news is priced in because on a relative price basis you're back to 15ear lows. So the entire software is eating the world thesis has been unwritten in just the last 6 months. So I think a lot of positive reward now exists in software stocks.

[00:07:00]And then with regard to the Fed, it's an unknown because um we've got a new Fed chair. He's got some very specific views about the sources of inflation that vary from existing Fed views and how to measure inflation also vary. So I think it's going to be now a time where markets want to understand how the Fed will interpret incoming inflation data and we know that looking at history 11 of the 13 new Fed chairs have seen a draw down of of at least 10% in the first year. So that's why I think later this year we could have some turbulence.

[00:07:33]>> Yeah. Going to be some normal jiggles.

[00:07:36]You know you talk about a fair amount about you know kind of the sectors and you were talking about software a little bit. It's interesting to to watch kind of the waxing and waning over time. You know, you I think you know, started a bit of your career and it's rare for me to hear this from most commentators where they talk about looking at a company and looking at the bonds too.

[00:07:56]And you've mentioned before some of your calls in prior seats where starting to look at bonds getting distressed and then, you know, maybe turning around before the equities do. How much of that do you spend time looking at today? Are there any insights into the equity versus kind of credit side of the world with a lot of these particular tech companies or software companies?

[00:08:17]Anything interesting stand out or not so much right now?

[00:08:20]>> I mean, I still think it matters a lot.

[00:08:22]I think credit is important signal often a leading indicator for equities. It's a long-standing debate because when I was at JP Morgan, our credit teams, whether it's high yield or even on the mortgages, said they used to look at the stocks to decide what it would mean for their for the credits. But I would tell them in the same I was always looking at high yield to figure out what would happen with the equity markets at turning points. And we've demonstrated this, high yield leads equity markets.

[00:08:53]So at on downturns, I think one of the best ways to always make a bottom call is when high yield spreads aren't widening, but equities are still weak because that tells us that the divergence is happening. So that we already know a structural bottom has taken place. You know, I know people are looking today at trying to discern what like credit for instance CDS is saying about stocks like Oracle where Oracle CDS spreads have really widened. It's hard for me to say that that's actually signal because for instance, you know, Oracle, if you look at where CDS stands now, it ranks 246th in the S&P 500. So, in other words, it's got the default risk of like the midpoint of the market.

[00:09:39]So, I mean, I think if someone's saying Oracle is bankrupt because the CDS spreads have widened and the totality of like the S&P, that means like half the market has the same sort of credit outlook. I think it's important, but it's not always that clear-cut for me.

[00:09:54]One of the things that is a curiosity and a head scratcher for me, and so I'd love to hear your thoughts. Markets at all-time highs. Traditionally, you see sentiment pretty euphoric. Doesn't even have to be euphoric, but just happy. And if you look at a lot of the sentiment indicators, the one that gets flashed on the screen all the time is Michigan, which is like at the lows. It's not even like hitting new highs. It not even average. It's like as low as it gets. Do you have any general thoughts on how to think about sentiment at this point in the cycle and particularly with US equities?

[00:10:24]>> A few things. I'd agree with you. I mean, one of the reasons we've stayed bullish at Funstrat is that the market psychology isn't consistent with a market top. I think in general, as you know, uh when markets are nearing a top, bubbles form because investors become overly confident about continued gains and therefore when markets decline, sentiment stays strong and then of course, as you know, markets fall on a slope of hope. But that's not what we've seen every time. time I think the market falls 2 or 3% sentiment turns pretty bearish and we see it both in sentiment readings but also in positioning data in this most recent downturn Goldman's prime brokerage data showed the level of short increases was at the fastest pace in almost 15 years I think there's a few reasons for that one is I think it's become easier for both institutional retail investors to position square their entire portfolio like I think there's push button liquidity so now it's easier for people to quote rage sell and go to cash and because of that I think it means people's conviction levels are much more loosely held because they know everybody else has push button liquidity the second is I do think there's a political divide we've highlighted this but when you look at data from either Pew Research or others including Yugo the equity market today if you look at the professional money managers of roughly 60% are Democratic voters. So the market basically leans Democratic on the equity side. In the fixed income side, it's actually opposite. I think it's closer to 80% are Republican. And as we all know that the current White House is quite divisive and I think there is something, you know, there's many people who might have TDS. And so that I think has colored people's views of both actions taken by the White House and how investors unfortunately interpret the data because instead of being unbiased and evidence-based, I think a lot of people still have their own subjective overlay and how they see information. So for instance when this war started there's a lot of our clients who said like well this is Armageddon and they were um not even just worried about like with the stock market being down they were worried about their own personal safety. So I do think that there is an overreaction in markets. The University of Michigan I think has also become notoriously partisan. We've highlighted this that if you look at uh the composition of respondents now, University of Michigan went to no longer doing a phone survey. So, it's online only I believe. So, every respondent now only responds online. And the response rate now is roughly 66% Democratic versus 33% Republican. That's not a fair breakdown of the US overall because in general the size of the Democratic response and Republican are about equal both 30%. I think are 35 and then independents are in the middle. But that's not how the surveyed respondents reflect. So the record low sentiment for instance we highlighted this in a recent report for University of Michigan respondents hitting an all-time low.

[00:13:45]What was very inongruent about that was that the Democratic responses for current conditions is essentially unchanged since November and the Republican responses are unchanged since like the summer. The only reason that overall number kept dropping is that it's reflecting a greater percentage of Democratic respondents.

[00:14:05]And the survey itself allows a lot of latitude. Like if you look at the actual responses, I think it's 3,700 responses every month or between the you know bi-weekly it's but it's 3,700 total. If someone if you look at the inflation question I think 25% of Democratic respondents say inflation is currently running over 100% right now.

[00:14:29]>> That's right. I was trying to guess what you were going to say and I and I would have laughed the same if you said 10%.

[00:14:35]>> Yeah. It's kind of, I think, polluted in the sense that people might just be making up numbers when they respond to that survey.

[00:14:43]>> Yeah. Well, you know, it's interesting surveys, it's always fun for the color, you know, hey, chatting with your friends, chatting with the shoe shine guy. AI used to always be my favorite at extremes. It's super useful. There would be times, you know, the the highest bullish sentiment was in 99, the worst was in '08. Like, it got those right. I get a little curious sometimes, you know, over the years exactly what you're talking about where surveys become not polluted, but the ground has shifted and thinking about yes, maybe if it's at a generational low or high, we'll see the signal, but in the meantime, it can be pretty noisy and varies just by the method of how they pull. We did one recently where I was trying to determine what percentage of investors actually understand dividends and how they work.

[00:15:33]Because my my thinking was a not 0% of professional investors that you and I talk to daily actually still don't know how dividends work. They think it's like a free check they get in the mail. And I pulled my audience and 80% got it right.

[00:15:50]You know, both retail and pro. So, good for them. But that's kind of pre-selected, right? And then I paid a a company to go and uh poll both professionals in retail and those results were extremely dismal. It was like 3/4 of individuals don't understand the very basics of dividends. But it was like 40% of professionals don't either.

[00:16:13]They think you're just getting free checks. The stock doesn't go down. You know, it's just like it's like a bond.

[00:16:17]They're just paying this magical allowance almost. But the point was that it was totally different by the audience. Obviously, mine would be different than the broad base, but it's fun to watch the sentiment surveys, but I always scratch my head, try to figure out. But that's great insight that it's a different sample size essentially. You almost have to adjust for the political party nowadays. It's crazy.

[00:16:38]>> Yeah. I mean, well, you said a lot of things that I think are really interesting. I mean first foremost just on uh financial education. I think that it would be a really national benefit if secondary schools like high schools taught basic financial education like you said dividend power of compounding balancing a checkbook budgeting because I think that that fiscal responsibility pays dividends cuz you know the idea of like how a business works is actually how people need to run their lives because their own career is a small business anyways and a small and a is a small business. But on the surveys, I agree. That's why I've been finding a lot of value in alternative inflation series like Truflation. Trueflation measures, I think, 7 million products.

[00:17:28]It's all automated through APIs and it's capturing real time price move. In fact, Kevin Worsh in his testimony to Congress was talking about how he wants the Fed to move forward with their billion data set price analysis. And they want to just basically say inflation is the 500 millionth item. You know, the median of all that. And I think it reflects the idea that surveys may not if they're not conducted properly are really polluted. And then and the Fed and markets actually get really bad insights. I mean, um, is a great example because if someone was trying to manage money off the University of Michigan survey, both on the inflation survey, which is showing chronically high inflation expectations, or the sentiment, they would have gotten the stock market wrong because it's giving you very bad signal.

[00:18:17]>> This is a little disjointed, but we'll talk about it because it's to me, I can't get this out of my head. There was a podcast you did with our buds at the compound a couple years ago and I talked about this on Twitter because there was one little kind of almost a cast aside statement y'all made. You had a comment where it was talking about a survey but I think it was journal. We'll have to dig it up and put it in the show notes but it was asking and I may get this wrong cuz it's been a few years but it was basically asking people in different countries if it was a good idea to be to be an entrepreneur or to start a company something along those lines. And you know in the US it was like 90 but in then Europe and Japan it was you know much much much lower. But it I think it feels like that carries over to just this whole culture of ownership as well and equities and that compounding difference over time make it drives a huge wedge.

[00:19:13]Any any thoughts on that idea that topic?

[00:19:16]>> Yeah I think that's part of American exceptionalism. the journal survey. I'm going to try to find you this uh because this is it's a great article, but it was it showed that this was probably around the GFC. They asked people in different countries, you know, do you think it's a good idea to start a business? And the overwhelming like over 90% of Americans think it's a good idea to start a business. And it was the diametric opposite in Japan where like 98% of people think it's a bad idea to start a business. And that's because in Japan, of course, people want to have a corporate job. AI is going to favor those who want to start businesses because it's going to allow people to become superhuman. And so that's why I would probably fall in the camp and of course this is just my guess that AI is going to be very good for American labor and productivity because a lot of people are going to view AI as the ability for them to launch new businesses. And actually a lot of the good companies are going to use AI to their advantage. For me, in fact, that's why I'm not that bearish on software because I think the best software companies are going to basically say, "Let's just literally reinvent ourselves using AI, like one shot, just change our business model." And I think that that's why US companies actually continue to handle crises pretty well and disruption.

[00:20:42]>> You've been at this for a while and it's always tempting to look back at past cycles and our own lived experience. of course, you know, it's natural. And I was certainly coming of age in the investing markets in the late '9s. And and one of the things that you remember from that time is just there were so many IPOs. It was like every day a company it felt like was IPOing, but doesn't feel like we've had as much of that this cycle. But there was a article by Paul Kadski recently where he was talking about SpaceX and he said inflation adjusted terms SpaceX alone would rank as the second largest IPO in history just behind Saudi Aramco. And he said all three together which I assume means OpenAI and Anthropic would exceed the entire dot IPO wave from 95 to 2000.

[00:21:28]They will be at least half the value inflation adjusted of all IPOs since World War II. So theoretically, we'll see. there could be a lot of supply coming online that hasn't been there at this part of the cycle. Does that worry you at all? Do you see that no, this actually might draw more people into the market? How do you think about these big dudes waiting in the wings to uh come public? Paul Tudtor Jones was on a podcast recently where he said he knew that top was so easy to see in 99 because he knew there were all these IPOs out there that raised a ton of money but then the lockups were actually also expiring which happens I think it's 90 days. So when SpaceX does its IPO and it'll be one of the most anticipated IPOs in history and raise a huge amount of money in 90 days, 2 trillion of SpaceX stock becomes freely tradable. And so you can imagine there's a lot of seed investors that are going to take actions to hedge their holdings. I think they said the stat I saw was like 160 people in Austin, Texas, for instance, are going to make more than $100 million.

[00:22:42]Superficially, I would say the size of the IPOs coming, SpaceX opening an Enthropic and then the supply release 90 days later is something that we have to mechanically think about how the market absorbs all that cuz that's a lot of supply. I mean, that's collectively 4 trillion. It's like five, six, 7% of the S&P 500. You know, it's meaningful numbers of additional liquidity. But the one reason I'd say maybe it's not as bearish as it looks is that public stock allocations by high net worth individuals is at near record lows. Whether you look at family offices or pensions, they've allocated into alternatives.

[00:23:30]This is guessing, but in the last 10 years, for every dollar that went into public markets, $9 probably went into alternatives.

[00:23:39]So there is probably more money that is underallocated to public stocks and so I think that these IPOs along with how well memory and AI stocks a lot of the AI supply chain is publicly listed in Asia or US is going to trigger reallocation back into public equities.

[00:24:00]So, I think that there's turbulence, but ultimately all of this gets absorbed because one, there's finally some liquidity for some of the venture investors in SpaceX.

[00:24:12]But instead of those folks selling and maybe even triggering tax issues, I think they'll hedge or borrow. But I think future allocations are going to shift out of alternatives back into public equity. The future of compute may end up being in space, right? SpaceX may end up being like the galactic data center. So I think there's a lot of reasons we would love to have included it >> has infinite TAM Tom like that's the beauty like Elon like use space it's just it's endless. That's interesting. I love hearing about stocks where it's not like a oh god what was the South African Naspers? was the, you know, where these almost like holding companies that own other companies. And I love the businesses where their main business is actually not where they make all their money. Like the airlines are basically credit card companies now. I love hearing these stories where people look through and you're like, "Oh, that's sometime the assets are hidden. Sometime they're not."

[00:25:07]>> Yes. That's like the story of Zoom now, right? Zoom is maybe really just a derivative way to own anthropic. A fellow Angelino who is never short of opinions, Jeffrey Gunlock had a comment the other day that I would love to hear your opinion on. As someone who's steeped in the crypto community, he was on TV and he said, and I'm going to paraphrase, he's like, "The worst insult a millennial could give a boomer is that crypto is all about boomers now." And I was laughing about that because I was thinking about crypto in general and you spend a lot of time in the Ethereum world, but thinking about competing assets, whether it's equities, whether it's themes like AI.

[00:25:51]Give us a roundup of what's going on in that world today. How things looking in the crypto community? And is it all just a bunch of boomers now or what's the story?

[00:26:00]>> Crypto has underperformed expectations.

[00:26:04]If someone was to look at why crypto matters today, I think there's two stories that are really central to what blockchain does really well. One is of course instant settlement and the ability to sort of confirm transactions quickly and that's why Wall Street is tokenizing on the blockchain and it's not even just a theory anymore. I was at Consensus, one of the big conferences last week in Miami. actually was spent the first part of that week at Milin. And actually both at Milin and at Consensus, the corporates, the financial institutions were all talking about how tokenization is a big unlock for their business because not only does it allow trading to happen 24/7, it starts to allow leverage or borrowing or monetizing non-traditional financial assets, whether it's like real estate or art, etc. So, it's a real thing.

[00:27:03]And the second of course is AI is going to start to need a neutral way to both prove identity and to start to create transactions and to carry wallets. In fact, that's why Elon Musk kind of famously said multiple times in the last 12 months, you know, the future money is just mass energy. Meaning the nature of money is essentially comput and power.

[00:27:27]That basically it's all describing blockchains. And I think the reason it's becoming a boomer story is that the banks who are the most powerful movers of money in the world realize they can make a lot of money moving things on blockchains. So they they are kind of descending into crypto but at the same time blockchain is enabling the creation of new financial institutions that will compete with banks. And I think we did a presentation at Consensus highlighting this very collision. JP Morgan makes60 billion a year, the most profitable bank in the world with 300,000 employees.

[00:28:09]Jane Street is a firm that is newer, just moves money around, you know, trading with a lot of quant and compute, and this year is probably going to earn $40 billion. They just reported 10 billion in profit in the first quarter with 3,000 employees. So with 1 10,000th the number of employees, they're almost as profitable as JP Morgan and they're making more money than the second, third, fourth largest banks in the world. So they're more profitable than Goldman, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America. Tether, which is a cryptonative completely digital native bank selling a stable coin called Tether is going to make 15 billion this year, which would rank it as the eighth most profitable bank in the world with 300 employees. So I think that what's happening with blockchain is what happened with digital media where there were the traditional studios and then there was Netflix or with telecom where there was longd distance and local and then there was cellular and that the new entrance gained a lot of power relative to incumbency because of technological innovation and I think that's what's happening in crypto today. So it makes sense that the boomers are descending on crypto, but my guess is that in in 10 years, five of the 10 largest banks in the world will be digitally native companies. So it's still very early days. And I think there's a lot of opportunity.

[00:29:42]But the base layer winner in the work we do is, you know, is Bitcoin is going to be arguably the most important blockchain because it's really good at storing value and then Ethereum because it's really the compute layer. It sounds like an insult. It sounds like a slight, but you start to think about it. You're like, "Well, who has all the money?" To me, this is a compliment. The boomers are getting into, you know, that's a great thing. And so, when the ETF started launching, to me, anytime I look at an asset or a strategy, there's two things I love to see. One is flows because that's real money. And so, starting to when when the ETF started launching and seeing the flows come in, I said, "Oh, that's interesting. That's not pennies anymore. Those are some big numbers. And second is like things that just can't be killed where you go through big draw downs. You go through cycles and it doesn't get taken to the woodshed. It survives. It's like just something that can continue on through the cycles. So to me, uh it's saying, "Hey, you boomer compliment instead of an insult." You've had a lot of interesting seats, roles, portfolio managers, strategists, but we like to talk about your most memorable investment. you know things you look back and so for you in your early days it could be a call where you say oh you know I I went bullish or bearish on this sector or this stock and I was right or wrong or whatever be so you can choose from the whole quiver of ideas over the years and you could talk about two if you want but anything come to mind >> I'm actually going to go like far back into the vault because many people might be more familiar with our more recent views and takes on markets but I'd say that my favorite call that I ever made in my lifetime was in 2004, over 20 years ago, but it was in the middle of a wireless bare market and all the wireless stocks, these were the carriers had gone from, you know, being $20 a share. I think my entire coverage universe was all under $10 a share. And so it was a very deep bare market driven by WorldCom and Enron and the loss of credit access. But the carriers I covered were actually pretty good businesses because they had this business called roaming. They had like rural territories and it was almost like a monopoly business. And one stock, Western Wireless, had fallen to a dollar 72.

[00:32:07]Okay. But I had called our our bond trading desk and those bonds had actually begun to rally. So like that was the divergence that the bonds were rallying but the stock was still getting shredded and there was all these rumors that the company was going to hit a wall. So I decided to upgrade that stock and basically I called the bottom to the day and then within 18 months it was bought by Altel for $40 a share. But that was the first of several upgrades I did where I then I upgraded Alamosa Holdings at 27 cents and then that was bought by Sprint for $22 within 18 months. And so the stock upside was great, but it was more because I knew these businesses and I learned something like Western Royals had probably a thousand employees. And what I learned was that when the stock was down, even though the company knew they were doing well, the fact that the stock was at like a $1.70 made everyone dejected. So I realized how important stock price was to how morale is. And similarly when stocks do well it really galvanizes the employee base. So that was a really important lesson for me and of course I was an equity analyst so I really was covering companies all the time. The second story was probably my bear rating my sell rating on company called Nexttel because I had a bearish view on this company. It was a very popular stock with investors and this the fact that I was at JP Morgan and had a sell rating on a stock widely held by institutions and a big client of JP Morgan made me realize sell ratings are not fun things to do because I I felt enormous pressure like I suddenly became someone that everyone hated because I did I had a negative view on something that they all like.

[00:34:01]So, I realized the power of being contrarian, but also like how much heat there is. We still do that today cuz we can turn bullish when everyone's bearish, and it's the same thing. But being contrarian is not always fun.

[00:34:14]>> Tom, this has been a blast. We'd love to have you back on in the future. We've uh been looking forward to this forever.

[00:34:20]Where's the best place for people to find you uh what you're up to, what's going on in your world?

[00:34:24]>> They can find me on Twitter. The handle is funstrat. f u n d s t r a t and uh I'll you'll see me comment about several things markets and other thoughts if they're interested in our research service that's fund stratdirect.com so it's f u n d s r a t d i r ect.com for the listeners of the show Tom and his team very generously provided a link for a 30-day free trial so we're going to put that in the show notes You can click on it. You can also visit funstrat.com/tom, but check out the show notes and sign up. There's a lot of goodies in there.

[00:35:07]Tom, thanks so much for joining us today.

[00:35:09]>> Yeah, thank you.