Memecoins not the ‘right move’ for celebs, but DApps might be — Skale Labs CMO

Skale CMO Andrew Saunders described memecoins as a player-versus-player situation where early investors get the most gains. 

from Blockchain – My Blog https://ift.tt/NqeJIuP
via IFTTT

Tick Sizes Are a Trade-off

The SEC is set to split U.S. ticks tomorrow

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has scheduled a meeting for tomorrow where they are expected to release final rules on their Tick Size Proposal from 2022. There have been a lot of comments — including Nasdaq’s — as well as academic data, showing how ticks work, so it will be interesting to see what experts the SEC has listened to.

The right tick size can make trading costs much lower

We already know tick sizes make a big difference to how stocks trade. We have spent a lot of time discussing the importance of tick size in previous blogs, including getting tick right improves valuation, the economics of tick regimes, and what ticks make spreads trade best.

But it’s not just us who have spent a lot of time analyzing ticks. Today, we focus on other people’s research. What they consistently find is that tick size and depth are a trade-off: smaller tick size reduces spread costs, but also reduces depth. That makes small trades cheaper, but large orders harder to trade. 

U.S. ticks haven’t always been 1-cent for all stocks

Historically, tick size was 1/8 of a dollar for more than 200 years in the U.S. equity market until 1997, when exchanges started to reduce the tick size from 1/8 to 1/16. In 2000, tick size was further reduced to 1 cent as electronic trading started to dominate all trading.

These reductions in tick size prompted the debate on the optimal tick size among the industry, regulators and academics.

Ticks make little difference to supply and demand, but change trading costs

Interestingly, research before decimalization tended to be more theoretical, while newer research uses real data and compares real examples. Overwhelmingly, though, most research discovered the same trade-off: smaller tick size reduces spread costs but also reduces depth. 

This is not all that surprising to an economist. The depth of book is a classic example of a supply and demand curve, with:

• Demand (buying increasing as prices fall) and
• Supply (sellers increasing as prices rise), and an
• Equilibrium price (where the last trade happened).

Clearing all volume below the equilibrium price results in a V-shaped supply and demand curve that is surprisingly linear (a straight line).

It would seem that changing the tick for trading just changes the increments along the supply and demand curve where trades can occur – but not the actual supply and demand for stocks. 

One study that proves this point clearly is the tick pilot report (Chart 1). The data from it showed that the cumulative volume for the 1-cent tick group (control, C group) and 5 cent tick groups (G1 & G2) remain basically the same.

The only group that saw both ticks and depth improve was the trade-at group (G3). Although some might say that the difference just represents the volume that is “hidden” in today’s more segmented markets.

Chart 1: Smaller ticks lead to lower depth in Tick Pilot stocks; only the trade-at group saw lit market quality improve

Key research on ticks

Since tick size reduction can make stocks trade very differently, it is important to understand if a smaller tick size improves market quality or increases the costs for large trades.

Good market design should balance the trade-off between minimizing the quoted spread and depth. A smaller tick size may be:

• Beneficial to retail investors, since it reduces the spread transaction cost.
• Worse for larger institutional investors (who manage retail investors funds), who may see more impact cost as they “work” their larger orders in thinner markets.  

We list the key studies from this topic in Table 1 below, but the findings worth knowing include:

Theoretical research: Predicts smaller tick size reduces spread and depth

Harris (in 1994) predicted that a reduction in tick size would lead to a decrease in quoted spread. 

Other researchers (Seppi in 1997) came to the same conclusion using different logic – they suggested that smaller tick size reduces the cost of queue priority, which reduces protection to liquidity suppliers, and thus results in reduction in their displayed depth.

Empirical findings: Smaller tick size reduces spread and depth

Many studies used “real” data coming from events that reduced U.S. tick sizes, such as:

1. Tick size reduction from 1/8 to 1/16 in 1997,
2. Tick size decimalization in 2001 and
3. Tick size pilot program in 2016.

Looking at the tick size reduction from $1/8 to $1/16, Goldstein and Kavajecz (2000) showed that a tick size reduction reduces the quoted spread, although they also saw a reduction in cumulative depth as well. Jones and Lipson (2001) found that although the tick reduction to 1/16 led to a reduction in both quoted and effective spreads, the total execution costs for institutions increased. 

Studying the tick size decimalization, Chakravarty et al. (2001) also showed that reducing the tick size resulted in a lower spread and depth. They also found that institutional orders took longer to fill, which adds to opportunity costs.

A few recent studies explore the tick size pilot program. Statistically, the tick pilot was easier to analyze because some stocks remained unchanged (in the “control” group), meaning changes in markets over time, like periods of volatility, could be removed from the results.

Consistent with earlier studies, Chung et al. (2020) and Rindi and Werner (2019) implied that a smaller tick size would reduce the trading cost of small orders but increase the cost of large orders.

Studies also show that the same tick change can yield different impacts on tick constrained and unconstrained stocks. For:

• Tick-constrained stocks, a smaller tick size would lead to a reduction in the spread and depth (Albuquerque et al. (2020), Chuang, Lee and Rosch (2020) and (Rindi and Werner (2019)).
• “Too-many-tick” stocks show that sometimes a “too-narrow” tick size could actually increase the spread. This is why Blackrock and others have suggested 5-cent ticks should also be considered for wide spread stocks. 

Table 1: Comparing academic research and its key findings

Tick-constrained problem vs. Too-many-ticks problem

The results from the last two studies in Table 1 share the same finding we’ve noted before regarding stock splits: ticks that are too small are bad, too. That’s consistent with another set of studies we analyzed that suggest that 1-3 ticks wide spread is optimal.

In that context, it’s interesting to look at the U.S. stock universe. Just how many stocks are constrained…and how many have “too many ticks”?

In the chart below, we show each stock (as a dot), colored based on their average actual spreads. It shows that:

• About 764 stocks are tick constrained (blue group), which would benefit from a tick size reduction.
• About 943 stocks are optimally ticked (yellow group), of which the current tick size is optimal.
• About 1,526 stocks are slightly over ticked (light grey). They could benefit from a small tick size increase, although the benefit may not be worth the complexity.
• About 1,669 stocks have too many ticks (dark grey). They would benefit from a tick size increase.

Chart 2: There are more U.S. stocks that have “too many ticks” than are “tick constrained”

Ticks haven’t changed for 24 years — is depth and spread unchanged, too?

Looking at data since 2015, it would seem that spread and depth has been getting worse, even for liquid S&P 500 stocks.

Some of the increase in spreads (especially the sporadic spikes) is likely due to higher volatility. However, with volatility in the second quarter of 2024 back to unusually low levels, spreads remain elevated (blue line) while depth (pink line) remains near its lows.

Chart 3: Spreads and depth are worse, even with no recent changes in tick size

Given the tick size hasn’t changed in over 20 years, why is this happening?

Academics who studied cream skimming and market segmentation may have the answer. Their studies theorized that as markets segment, liquidity would rest elsewhere, available only to a more profitable subset of customers. As a consequence, “fair access” (lit) quotes would decrease.

Given the findings in today’s blog, that could result in either spreads widening or depth falling, or (plausibly) a combination of both. 

Not surprisingly, that’s the opposite to what we saw from the “trade-at” group in the tick pilot, which intentionally tried to unsegment the market and increase all-to-all trading.

What does this all mean?

There is lots of data on how ticks can impact market quality.

Their findings suggest we need to weigh the costs of retail and institutional investors (and issuers, too).

The data suggests we shouldn’t have ticks that are too large (creating tick constrained stocks), but we should also avoid having ticks that are too small (leaving too many ticks inside a spread).

At the end of the day, the NBBO is important to all kinds of investors, as well as the costs of capital for companies. Ticks alone might not affect supply and demand curves, but getting ticks wrong could increase costs for everyone.

from Finance – My Blog https://ift.tt/fLE1ZWw
via IFTTT

🌜To the moon and beyond, literally

*together with Colonial Metals Group

Good day, 360!

Here are some of our top movers today. And don’t forget to join us in Market Masters – the hottest trading room around . Be the best prepared trader on the Street!

---

FOCUS LIST

LUNR – Up over 50% in the pre-market after NASA Awards near space network contract with a maximum potential value of $4.82 billion    

VVOS – Up over 35% in pre after receiving groundbreaking FDA 510(k) clearance to treat moderate to severe pediatric sleep apnea and snoring

OMEX – Up over 80% in pre after reporting win in NAFTA arbitration case yesterday

---

*together with Colonial Metals Group

No confidence in the Market? Download THIS.

Buffett’s $277 billion vote of no confidence in the stock market is a warning to anyone with a 401(k) or IRA. Protect yourself while you still can.  Get your hands on this:

 

Disclaimer:  Colonial Metals Group does not provide investment, legal, retirement planning, or tax advice. Individuals should consult with their investment, legal or tax professionals for such services.

 

---

HOTLIST

LUNR – Up over 50% in the pre-market after NASA Awards near space network contract with a maximum potential value of $4.82 billion

Intuitive Machines Inc. (LUNR) designs, manufactures, and operates space products and services in the United States. Its space systems and space infrastructure enable scientific and human exploration and utilization of lunar resources to support sustainable human presence on the moon.

In the after-hours yesterday, the company announced NASA has awarded the Company a Near Space Network (“NSN”) contract for communication and navigation services for missions in the near space region, which extends from Earth’s surface to beyond the Moon.

he contract has a base period of five years with an additional five-year option period, with a maximum potential value of $4.82 billion. The incrementally funded base ordering period begins Tuesday, October 1, 2024, through September 30, 2029, with the option period potentially extending the contract through September 30, 2034.

The stock traded up over 50% in the pre-market in reaction to the news.

The $8 area acted as resistance in the pre-market and now becomes a potential support level.

Above it, targets to the upside are $8.50, $8.80 and then the pre-market high at $9.20. Beyond that, $9.59, $10, $10.50 and $12 come into play.

Below $8, targets to the downside are $7.50, $7.30, $7, $6.30, $5.70 and then a gap fill at $5.40.

---

VVOS – Up over 35% in pre after receiving groundbreaking FDA 510(k) clearance to treat moderate to severe pediatric sleep apnea and snoring

Vivos Therapeutics, Inc. (VVOS) is a medical technology company that develops and commercializes treatment modalities for patients with dentofacial abnormalities, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), and snoring in adults,

In the pre-market this morning, the company announced receipt of what is believed to be the first ever U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(k) clearance to treat moderate to severe OSA and snoring in children using Vivos’ proprietary flagship oral medical device.

The stock traded up over 35% in the pre-market in reaction to the news.

The $3.35 area acted as support in the pre-market and will be an important level to watch.

Above it, targets to the upside are $3.80, $4 and then the pre-market high at $4.19.

Below $3.35, targets to the downside are $3.20, $3 and then a gap fill at $2.80.

---

*together with Colonial Metals Group

Take it from Larry Kudlow…

Claim Your Free 2024 Gold Guide HERE

Disclaimer:  Colonial Metals Group does not provide investment, legal, retirement planning, or tax advice. Individuals should consult with their investment, legal or tax professionals for such services.

---

OMEX – Up over 80% in pre after reporting win in NAFTA arbitration case yesterday

Odyssey Marine Exploration Inc. (OMEX) together with its subsidiaries, discovers, validates, and develops seafloor mineral resources. It explores for phosphate and gold. The company provides specialized mineral exploration, project development, and marine services to clients.

Yesterday, the company announced an award in its arbitration with the United Mexican States under Chapter Eleven of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

OMEX received notification from the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) of the arbitral award on the claims involving Odyssey and its subsidiary, Exploraciones Oceánicas S. de R.L. de C.V. (ExO), against Mexico.

The award orders Mexico to pay US$37.1 million for breaching its obligations under NAFTA, plus interest at the one-year Mexico Treasury bond rate, compounded annually, from October 12, 2018, until the award is paid in full, plus the arbitrators’ fees and ICSID administrative costs. The amounts awarded are net of Mexican taxes and Mexico may not tax the award. Odyssey expects that most or all of the proceeds of the award will be used to satisfy its litigation financing obligations.

After closing down yesterday just over 89%, the stock is trading up over 80% in the pre-market this morning.

$1.08 acted as resistance in the pre-market and will be an important level to watch.

Above it, the first target is the pre-market high at $1.18. Beyond that round numbers such as $1.50 and $2 could come into play. Before the news OMEX was trading around $4.

Below $1.08, targets to the downside are $1, $0.88, $0.75, $0.60 and then $0.42.

---

MARKET NEWS

---

P.S. Make sure you text “RAGE” to (888) 404-5747 to get all of our latest HOT STOCK ideas!

---

Questions or concerns about our products? Email Support@360wallstreet.io © Copyright 2022, RagingBull

---

DISCLAIMER: To more fully understand any Ragingbull.com, LLC (“RagingBull”) subscription, website, application or other service (“Services”), please review our full disclaimer located at https://ift.tt/zVaWZcH

*Sponsored content: We’re a proud affiliate for Colonial Metals Group, meaning if you click a link for a product or service, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.  We believe in the companies we form affiliate relationships with, but please don’t spend any money on these products or services unless you believe they will help you achieve your goals.

FOR EDUCATIONAL AND INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY; NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE. Any RagingBull Service offered is for educational and informational purposes only and should NOT be construed as a securities-related offer or solicitation, or be relied upon as personalized investment advice. RagingBull strongly recommends you consult a licensed or registered professional before making any investment decision.

RESULTS PRESENTED NOT TYPICAL OR VERIFIED. RagingBull Services may contain information regarding the historical trading performance of RagingBull owners or employees, and/or testimonials of non-employees depicting profitability that are believed to be true based on the representations of the persons voluntarily providing the testimonial. However, subscribers’ trading results have NOT been tracked or verified and past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, and the results presented in this communication are NOT TYPICAL. Actual results will vary widely given a variety of factors such as experience, skill, risk mitigation practices, market dynamics and the amount of capital deployed. Investing in securities is speculative and carries a high degree of risk; you may lose some, all, or possibly more than your original investment.

RAGINGBULL IS NOT AN INVESTMENT ADVISOR OR REGISTERED BROKER. Neither RagingBull nor any of its owners or employees is registered as a securities broker-dealer, broker, investment advisor (IA), or IA representative with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any state securities regulatory authority, or any self-regulatory organization. Employees, owners, and other service providers of https:// ragingbull. com or RagingBull.com LLC are paid in whole or in part by commission based on their sales of Services to subscribers.

RagingBull.com, LLC shall be entitled to recover attorneys’ fees, costs and disbursements. In the event that any suit or action is instituted as a result of doing business with RagingBull. com, LLC and/or its affiliates or if any suit or action is necessary to enforce or interpret these Terms of Service, RagingBull. com, LLC shall be entitled to recover attorneys’ fees, costs and disbursements in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled.

WE MAY HOLD SECURITIES DISCUSSED. RagingBull has not been paid directly or indirectly by the issuer of any security mentioned in the Services except possibly by advertisers in this email. However, Ragingbull.com, LLC, its owners, and its employees may purchase, sell, or hold long or short positions in securities of the companies mentioned in this communication.

from NYSE Updates – My Blog https://ift.tt/AgsNiMK
via IFTTT

Hemi Labs Raises $15 Million to Launch Advanced Modular Blockchain Network Powered by Bitcoin and Ethereum – Business Wire

Hemi Labs Raises $15 Million to Launch Advanced Modular Blockchain Network Powered by Bitcoin and Ethereum  Business Wire

from Blockchain – My Blog https://ift.tt/lJORN8E
via IFTTT

Microsoft, G42 Open 2 AI Centers in Abu Dhabi

Microsoft and G42, a United Arab Emirates-based AI firm, have established two new AI centers in Abu Dhabi. These centers aim to promote responsible AI in the Middle East and the Global South. They will identify best practices, support AI projects for societal goals, and strengthen the relationship between Microsoft and the UAE. G42’s partnership […]

from Bitcoin – My Blog https://ift.tt/tHi134s
via IFTTT

More major firms are dropping Human Rights Campaign’s LGBTQ+ rights report card

More than two decades ago, when gay men and lesbians were prohibited from serving openly in the U.S. military and no state had legalized same-sex marriages, a national LGBTQ+ rights group decided to promote change by grading corporations on their workplace policies.

The Human Rights Campaign initially focused its report card, named the Corporate Equality Index, on ensuring that gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer employees did not face discrimination in hiring and on the job. Just 13 companies received a perfect score in 2002. By last year, 545 businesses did even though the requirements have expanded.

But the scorecard itself has come under attack in recent months by conservative activists who targeted businesses as part of a broader pushback against diversity initiatives. Ford, Harley Davidson and Lowe’s are among the companies that announced they would no longer participate in the Corporate Equality Index.

Emboldened by a Supreme Court decision last year that declared race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions unconstitutional, conservative groups have won lawsuits making similar arguments about corporations. They’re now targeting workplace initiatives such as diversity programs and hiring practices that prioritize historically marginalized groups, and widening their objections to include programs focused on gender identity and sexual orientation.

“We don’t believe that people should be identified as groups and that you should right past wrongs by advantaging one group and disadvantaging another group,” said Dan Lennington, deputy counsel for the Equality Under the Law Project at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty. His firm has represented dozens of clients in challenges to diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs.

Critics lament the rollback, saying it reverses years of hard-won progress.

“Almost all LGBT community members have been bullied when they were young, and the concept of being bullied is something that hits us really hard. … It feels like you’re you’re letting the bullies win,” said David Paisley, senior research director at Community Marketing & Insights, which helps companies market to LGBTQ+ consumers.

What is the corporate equality index?

While many challenges to DEI programs have been about race, activists working to change corporate policies they deride as “woke” have made a point of demanding that companies end their participation in HRC’s Corporate Equality Index. Most of the companies that recently announced changes to their DEI approaches did.

Like LGBTQ+ rights in the U.S., the requirements corporations need to meet to receive a high score on the annual index have expanded over the years.

In 2004, the index placed more emphasis on providing comprehensive benefits to domestic partners and improving health care coverage for transgender workers. Later it added categories that gave employers points for promoting equality in the broader LGBTQ+ community.

In 2019, it specified that supplier diversity programs, which encourage companies to work with minority-owned or veteran-owned businesses, must include LGBTQ+ suppliers. By 2022, the index said employers should offer same-sex spouses and domestic partners the same benefits as other couples for in-vitro fertilization and adoption, and that employers must create gender-transition guidelines, among other changes.

What has the effect been?

Experts say the index has helped improve workplace benefits for LGBTQ+ people. The index also prompted many companies to create employee resource groups, which are voluntary, employee-led diversity and inclusion groups for people with shared backgrounds or identities, said Fabrice Houdart, a consultant on LGBTQ+ issues.

The index is also a resource for LGBTQ+ workers to consult before deciding whether to accept a job, Paisley said.

“A company that’s getting 100% versus a company getting 25% is an indication to our community about which companies are treating their employees more fairly and equitably,” he said.

Why are companies leaving the index?

Several big companies announced they would end their participation in the index amid pressure from conservative activists who have threatened boycotts and firms such as the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty that have challenged DEI programs.

“We have no problem with nondiscrimination, but we’re worried about these policies going too far and harming innocent third parties who have either religious objections or they’re being excluded because they’re not LGBTQ or a certain race,” Lennington said.

Ford Motor Co. CEO Jim Farley told employees that the company stopped participating in external culture surveys, citing the wide range of beliefs held by employees and customers and the evolving legal environment. He said Ford does not use hiring quotas or tie compensation to diversity goals.

Harley-Davidson posted a statement on X about withdrawing from the index, adding that the company does not have hiring quotas or supplier diversity spending goals, and that employee resource groups would focus exclusively on professional development, networking and mentoring.

When Lowe’s announced its departure from the index, the company said it was combining resource groups into one umbrella organization. It also planned to stop sponsoring and participating in some festivals and parades to ensure that company policies are lawful and aligned with its commitment to include everyone.

Brown-Forman, the company that makes Jack Daniel’s whiskey, and beer and beverage maker Molson Coors, highlighted no longer taking part in HRC’s corporate survey in their announcements about scaling back their diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

Legal threats

Dozens of legal cases have been filed against employers for DEI initiatives, including complaints that target hiring practices, employee resource groups or mentorship programs that plaintiffs say prioritize people of certain races or sexual identities while excluding others.

Most American companies launched a review of their DEI programs last summer in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions vs. Harvard, said Jason Schwartz, co-chair of the labor and employment practice group at Gibson Dunn, a law firm that has helped more than 50 major corporations audit their DEI programs.

“The opponents to these efforts are winning the war of words, and they’ve got a lot of momentum in the courtroom, so I do think it’s a serious threat that needs to be responded to in a thoughtful way,” Schwartz said.

But there’s also a flip side. Companies built DEI anti-harassment programs in part to mitigate potential legal risks that come with a toxic workplace, and “abandoning these programs in fact opens them up to risk down the road if employees feel discrimination or harassment,” said Eric Bloem, vice president at the Human Rights Campaign.

Alienating a growing customer base

Companies that distance themselves from the Corporate Equality Index also risk driving away a growing customer group. A Gallup poll conducted in March found that 7.6% of adults in the U.S. identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or some other sexual orientation besides heterosexual, up from 3.5% in 2012. Among Generation Z, that number climbed sharply to 22.3%.

In a survey conducted in August, 80% of LGBTQ+ customers said they would boycott companies that are rolling back inclusion initiatives, and more than half said they would take concerns to social media or share negative reviews online, according to the Human Rights Campaign Foundation.

“I think they will lose, in the end, LGBT talent and LGBT consumers,” Houdart said. “And the parents of trans kids, which are an increasing population in the United States, they’re probably going to remember that those were companies who went out of their way to side with the bullies.”

from Finance – My Blog https://ift.tt/6T71Gk4
via IFTTT

Despite cautious guidance, Adobe may continue AI-driven growth

Adobe Inc. (NASDAQ: ADBE) has reported record-high revenues for the most recent quarter but issued fourth-quarter guidance that fell short of expectations, raising concerns about the prospects of its AI business. However, the company’s key growth drivers look intact, as recent advancements in AI deployment across Creative Cloud, Document Cloud, and Experience Cloud continue to enhance user experience.

Shares of the San Jose-headquartered design software maker have lost about 10% since the earnings announcement, reversing most of last month’s gains. Around $530, the last closing price broadly matched its value from a year earlier. The company is busy exploring options to effectively monetize its AI offerings, which have significant potential to drive shareholder value.

Record Revenue

Revenues came in at a record high of $5.41 billion in the third quarter of fiscal 2024, up 11% from the same period last year. Driving the top-line growth, Digital Media and Digital Experience revenues grew 11% and 10% respectively. Earnings, adjusted for one-off items, rose to $4.65 per share in Q3 from $4.09 per share last year. Unadjusted net income was $1.68 billion or $3.76 per share, compared to $1.40 billion or $3.05 per share in Q3 2023. Both earnings and revenue surpassed the market’s projections, as they did in every quarter in the past several years.

From Adobe’s Q3 2024 earnings call:

“We are amplifying creativity and productivity by enabling the convergence of products like Photoshop, Express, and Acrobat as knowledge workers and creatives seek to make content more compelling and engaging. We’re bringing together content creation and production, workflow, and collaboration, and campaign activation and insights across Creative Cloud, Express, and Experience Cloud. New offerings including Adobe GenStudio and Firefly Services empower companies to address personalized content creation at scale with agility and enable them to address their content supply chain challenges.”

Adobe has emerged as a dominant player in generative AI software, reinventing its popular products by incorporating several useful features. They are contributing to subscription growth, which in turn translates into revenue growth. The negative investor reaction to the management’s soft fourth-quarter guidance seems to be overblown. The company has the potential to overcome short-term headwinds, thanks to its strong fundamentals and continued dominance in the creative software industry.

Guidance

For the fourth quarter, Adobe leadership forecasts revenues in the range of $5.50 billion to $5.55 billion, which is below analysts’ consensus estimates. Reported and adjusted earnings per share are expected to be $3.58-3.63 and $4.63-$4.68, respectively. The management is looking for a Digital Media Net New ARR of approximately $550 million for the fourth quarter. The company attributes its cautious top-line guidance largely to the unfavorable timing of Cyber Monday.

ADBE traded slightly above $530 on Monday morning, which is below the stock’s 52-week average price. It has gained about 7% in the past six months.

from NYSE Updates – My Blog https://ift.tt/dbLSVOG
via IFTTT