My current positions

Gerald, Thanks, you reminded me that I haven’t posted my portfolio positions since the end of the year. Here they are again:

AMBA (MF RB) top four
UBNT (MF RB) top four
CELG (MF RB) top four
SYNA ------- top four (these were the top four last time as well, in slightly different order

MTZ (MF RB) next four
BOFI (MF RB) next four
ELLI (MF RB) next four
SCTY (MF RB) next four

WAB (MF SA) large
YHOO (MF RB) large
TSLA (MF RB, SA) large
CSGP (MF RB) large

INVN (MF RB) average
SZYM ------- average
WETF (MF SA) average
TMUS ------- average
PSIX --------average
LOCK (MF RB) average
HZNP -------average
AFOP ------- average

Z (MF RB) small
DPZ ------- small

GTLS (MF RB) very small
APPY---------- very small

Since the last report, I’ve sold out of SODA (early January), LNKD, AMAVF, and INBK. I mentioned selling each of them (I think) in posts on this board. The last three were below average positions last time.

I added LOCK, Z (again), HZNP and APPY. APPY is a very small company, not yet producing significant revenue. I wouldn’t buy much. HZNP is an interesting small pharma company, which is already selling three products, which are increasing sales rapidly.

I have always pointed out that SZYM is an exception to my not buying development level companies. Well they started commercial production in two large factories during the quarter. Analysts are raising target prices.

Hope this helps,



For perspective:

the average size of my top four positions is 7.5% of of my portfolio.

the average size of my next four positions is 6.0% of of my portfolio.

the average size of my four large positions is 4.0% of of my portfolio.

the average size of my eight “average” positions is 2.75% of of my portfolio.

the average size of my three small positions is 1.8% of of my portfolio.

the average size of my two very small positions is 0.6% of of my portfolio.

Since there are 25 positions total, 4% should actually be average, and the ones I called average should be “below average”.



Thanks for posting, Saul. Based on your posted portfolio, I went ahead and estimated your allocations by industry/sector. On some I made a choice on which sector to apply; for example, I chose to classify Z and ELLI as real estate as they are probably more influenced by what’s happening in real estate than anything else. Similarly, I classified SZYM as biotech rather than energy.

Tech 30.5%
Biotech 13.5%
Financial 11.0%
Real Estate 10.0%
Energy 9.5%
Infrastructure 7.0%
Telecom 5.5%
Transportation 4.5%
Food 4.5%
Auto 4.0%
Total 100.0%

I also manage my own portfolio. As you do, I limit any holding to 10% of my portfolio (have been doing this ever since I had the painful experience of my largest holding losing 99% of its value).

I also try to keep diversified across sectors. If any one sector grows above 25%, I think about reallocating. In addition, I pay attention of my distribution of

  1. market cap (I like 80-90% of my companies in the mid cap to small cap range because of the opportunity for better growth),

2)home country, geographic market (i.e. where does the company do business),

3)developed vs emerging market exposure (i.e. does the company serve customers in in developed or emerging economies); a large chunk of my companies do business globably and the majority are based in the US so the allocations aside from individual stock percentage and sector are what I pay the most attention to.

While I monitor the #1-3 above, I have found that these factors rarely affect by investment decisions.

Looks like you have your money spread across sectors nicely. Your tech allocation is the highest but does not seem to be a crazy over allocation.




Much appreciate you sharing your holdings and insight.


Have had SZYM, INVN, TMUS, WETF & UBNT on my watchlist.

Any reason one should be cautious w/entry on my watchlist
stocks now?

Thanks again.

Have had SZYM, INVN, TMUS, WETF & UBNT on my watchlist.

Any reason one should be cautious w/entry on my watchlist
stocks now?


Looks like you have your money spread across sectors nicely.

Thanks for the analysis, Chris

Thanks Mykie and iborg for your kind words.

iborg, I’d be most cautious with WETF and take only a relatively small position as it is heavily weighted on one Japanese fund, which is very popular at present. The others all look good for average size positions. But that’s just my opinion.


I should also say that most of these stocks have been moving up sharply recently, so you might want to buy in thirds to be careful.


I’m curious if you pay attention to any other allocations other than limiting the % of each position to 10% (12% with exceptions)?


I’m curious if you pay attention to any other allocations other than limiting the % of each position to 10%

Not consciously Chris, although I wouldn’t have put too much in a restricted area, like 3D printing when I was investing in it.


can you say what the RB return on UBNT has been?

and can someone give the Cliff’s Notes version of what it is they do, why they are the low cost alternative to traditional wifi delivery. From the 10k it looks like they are in the RF spectrum and that requires different technology. Is there enough “space” in RF to provide wireless to the underserved? Are there companies that want to live on the fringes in an unlicensed space and will they make money there? Is there a chance there will be future regulation in the RF space that puts UBNT out of business or cuts into their market?


It’s a recent req, +12.9% vs the S&P’s +1.1%.


Hi LeKitKat,

I can’t claim to be a UBNT expert, but I’ll take a stab at your questions.

can someone give the Cliff’s Notes version of what it is they do, why they are the low cost alternative to traditional wifi delivery

Their equipment isn’t for your normal home wifi router, but rather for internet service providers that are offering long-distance wifi to reach their customers over the “last mile” rather than leveraging traditional physical infrastructure such as wires or cables. Because these ISPs use wifi, they’re referred to as Wireless ISPs or WISPs.

WISPs provide an important service in areas that either lack significant wired infrastructure (3/4 of UBNT’s revenue is derived internationally) or in areas where that infrastructure is tightly controlled by uncompetitive incumbents. Where I live, for example, the phone company controls all the fiber and won’t let anybody else have access to it, while offering only slow plans at high cost. So the only meaningful competition comes from our local WISP.

When it comes to the WISP industry, UBNT’s big advantage comes from their community-based design, sales, and support model. UBNT is very good at involving and leveraging the community, and that allows them to deliver products that are a great match for what the market needs (since the market had a lot of input) while skipping much of the traditional overhead like a large sales and support staff, since the community largely serves those roles. The result is the ability to sell high quality equipment at very low prices relative to the competition while maintaining much fatter margins.

Is there a chance there will be future regulation in the RF space that puts UBNT out of business or cuts into their market?

There’s always risk, of course, but UBNT’s revenue is largely derived internationally where it’s much more efficient to offer internet access wirelessly than to build out all the physical infrastructure needed to wire everyone up. We largely saw the same phenomenon with wireless phones versus wired landlines in many of these countries for the same reasons. Here’s how revenue was broken out in the latest quarter:

North America: 24%
South America: 20%
Europe, Middle East, and Africa: 42%
Asia Pacific: 14%

Here in the U.S., there’s always the risk of special interests crushing things that are best for consumers (prime example: cable companies convincing some state lawmakers to outlaw municipal ISPs). On the flip side, there’s also the possibility that large incumbents get their act together (or are forced to through regulation) and begin offering better internet service at competitive prices, making WISPs less relevant – though the wireless technology will also keep improving, of course.

Finally, I think it’s possible to view this business as one with a disruptive, community-based business model that happens to be leveraging that model in the WISP space. One could speculate that the company could take their expertise in community-driven design, sales, and support and disrupt other spaces as well in the future. Kind of like Amazon started as company with a disruptive business model that happened to sell books, but have since expanded into many other lines of business. Again, though, that’s all just speculation.

I hope that helps a little bit!



Hi LekitKat,

On this board, Andy (buynholdisdead) gave a very nice overview of UBNT’s business. See the thread here:


Neil, very nice explanation! Thanks!


1 Like

thanks much for the information.

Just a few more questions and I am using our wifi provider to try to get a handle on whether Ubiquiti would one of their suppliers–ie is my wifi service an example of what Ubiquiti targets as customers

There is no infrastructure around here. There is no cable and no fiber optic. If you want internet, it’s dial up, Hughes or a LAN from AT&T or Verizon.

The local guys that were dial up and route email went into wireless and they cover a patchy geographic area through a collection of towers. If you are lucky enough to be in a hot spot that can get transmissions from the tower, then you can hook up directly to the dish you put up to capture their signal. If you can’t get it directly and are close enough, you can put a router at your dish location and forward it a few hundred yards to your computer through your own wifi network.

The more people using the signal from the owner’s towers, the worse the speeds until it slows to a crawl and doesn’t stream anything and takes minutes to load pages. This happens right at the dish location and at the router location.

In short

The wifi providers own a tower
We have a dish that gets a signal from the tower
We also have a router (Netgear or Cisco) to send the signal from our dish to a secondary location.

Where in this scheme does Ubiquiti sell products? To wifi sellers like our provider? And is this equipment towers as well as other units capable of broadcasting the wifi signal? If so what are those pieces of equipment called in Ubiquiti speak i.e. names of products?

Is this stuff cheap enough that an individual could buy the whole system for their own use? I see they have routers around $100–cheaper than Netgear and Cisco

And what is the alternative band to RF? Is that overcrowded and RF provides better opportunities?

thanks again

Hi Neil and thanks for the comments on UBNT.

Are you comfortable with management and that they would be able to maintain their profitable business here in the USA given the nature of their competitors?

Thanks again,

Hello Lekitkat,
So your dish is WiFi right? Not Wimax. So UBNT has products that provide service all the way through. First I would like to ask you a couple of questions, how far are you from the nearest town? How far are you from the nearest tower? Do you know what the bandwidth is that your provider has at the tower? (Oc3, Oc48, Oc192, or is it 1 gig,10 gig?) When you get a signal from the tower to your dish does it have a max bandwidth? Is it possible to hook up directly at the tower for a higher speed? Is your router at your dish and then you run cat5 to your house?

I am curious if you went to the tower would your speeds be higher or the same? The problem might be with your providers bandwidth from the tower back to their colo site. Also can you estimate how many customers they serve from that tower?



I noticed you were in INBK at 12/31/13, noting “…the same for INBK (it hasn’t moved up since I purchased it), except I know why it hasn’t done well.

In you February holdings update (this thread), you noted that you sold out of INBK.

As you may have noticed, there has been a fair amount of discussion lately on the BOFI board, and this Board, regarding whether INBK can make a growth and productive run into a BOFI-like operational performer.

I’d certainly appreciate your thoughts on INBK as a past shareholder given BOFI is one of your larger positions, and some of us have or may take positions in the stock.


1 Like

Vic, with regards to INBK, I had also taken a position in INBK (a small one), hoping it would become a small BOFI. I was a bit naive thinking all internet banks were identical and would all grow in the same way. Then their 4th quarter earnings came in and had fallen hugely from the year before. It turns out that they had been primarily a refinance focussed bank, and when refinances dried up, they had to frantically try to totally reorganize themselves to new home mortgages. (You can read about it in their quarterly report). They also hadn’t seemed to be thinking much about getting consumer accounts, and really were a different model than BOFI. All internet banks weren’t the same, just because they were internet banks, so I decided to stay with the real BOFI.

That doesn’t mean that INBK won’t get it turned around, and do very well, but who knows?