Worst Stocks To Buy 2017
That is easier said than done, of course. After all, one of the first places value investors look for bargains is beaten-down stocks. But separating stocks that are just misunderstood from the ones that are cheap for a reason is no simple task.
worst stocks to buy 2017
Sears started 2017 with a plan to close 150 stores, including 108 Kmart locations, then in early November added another 63 to the list. To stay afloat, the company tapped $1 billion in credit around the start of the year, then secured another $200 million credit line in July. The retailer also was forced to sell its Craftsman tools business in July in a deal that could be worth $900 million, and announced a $1 billion cost-cutting effort in February.
That might not be the case for much longer, but nothing lasts forever. This bull market is destined to come to an end, like all the rest. But it's still worthwhile to stop and consider a run for stocks that shattered all longevity records.
A sleepy regional utility stock is generally a safe if somewhat boring investment. Unfortunately for PG&E shareholders, the company hit dire financial straits as a result of the wildfires that ravaged northern California in 2017 and 2018. Downed power lines owned by PG&E caused the fires that ultimately destroyed 14,000 homes and led to the deaths of 86 people (opens in new tab). The company was forced to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in early 2019.
Making matters worse, solar stocks were an investment fad bordering on an investment mania leading into the 2008 meltdown. Following a decade of high energy prices, investors had bid up the prices of FSLR and other solar stocks in the belief that solar energy was the future. Solar companies started this bull market with already inflated prices, just as the economics of the industry were about to collapse, turning them into some of the worst stocks of the bull market.
It has to be frustrating to be basically right and yet totally wrong in an investment thesis, but that's exactly what happened here. The world's solar terawatt (TWh) hours generated per year were 20.97 in 2009. As of 2018, that number had ballooned to 584.63, and that number is only expected to keep rising. There's hope out there for solar stocks.
It might be too early to call a bottom in energy stocks. Just this past week, brokerage firm Jefferies reported it was "giving up on energy," as the oversupply situation doesn't look to be resolving itself in the near future.
Like many of the stocks on this list, FLR had a spectacular run-up in the years leading up to the 2008 meltdown. Energy and mining were booming industries in the 2000s, and investors expected those days to last forever. In an 18-month stretch leading up to the 2008 peak, shares of Fluor soared by more than 150%.
FLR, one of the worst stocks of the 11-year bull market, currently sports a lower price than when it went public in 2000. Shareholders have nothing to show for Fluor's two decades as a public company.
Range Resources was emblematic of the shale boom. The stock was essentially a highly leveraged bet on energy prices. In April 2000, RRC traded for less than a dollar. By its peak in 2014, the stock traded for north of $90 per share. It frequently made "best stocks" lists, and anyone who had the good fortune of buying near the low made close to 100 times their money.
Domino's Pizza (DPZ (opens in new tab), $336.41) is the 11th-best performer in the Russell 1000 since the bull market started, up an impressive 5,771%. And indeed it might have some more room to go, given its status among top stocks to ride out the coronavirus outbreak.
Ulta's share price performance has been pretty mediocre of late, as the stock price has been parked at 2016 levels. But the shares' run-up from $5.62 on March 9, 2009, to $311 at the 2017 top was epic, easily making it one of the best stocks during that period, and the envy of other retailers.
Biotech and medical device names tend to have good representation on lists like these because of the nature of the industry. These stocks are like lottery tickets. Many never go anywhere. But it only takes one to really knock it out of the park with a major breakthrough that goes mainstream.
The past 11 years have been a lucrative time to be in the business of fighting diabetes. We've already covered Insulet Corporation and its OmniPod solution. Now, let's take a look at Dexcom (DXCM (opens in new tab), $286.56), one of the best stocks of the past decade-plus.
Since the 2009 stock market bottom, Exact Sciences has returned a staggering 8,307.7%, making it one of Wall Street's best stocks since that time. That's doing well by doing good. Remarkably, Exact Sciences' spectacular returns come in spite of the stock losing nearly half its value over the past eight months.
Perhaps no company more epitomizes the athleisure trend than Lululemon Athletica (LULU (opens in new tab), $218.55), which is among the three best stocks of the bull market at an incredible 9,635% return over the past 11 years.
Biotech stocks such as Jazz are generally risky propositions. It's nearly impossible to know ahead of time which drugs will have successful clinical trials or which of a plethora of potential breakthroughs will actually pan out.
While Jazz tops this list of best stocks, substantially all of its explosive growth happened between 2009 and 2013. JAZZ shares have traded in a wide trading rage ever since, and today, they're actually relatively cheap at just 13 times earnings.
The worst of Warren Buffett's stock picks underscores a key lesson: A company is at its best if it has a viable competitive advantage. If there's no solid reason for customers to continue patronizing a brand, it's likely destined for failure.
Buffett has shied away from tech stocks in the past because he didn't understand their models. Still, he said he should have figured them out because he was effectively a client of the Google ad business.
According to Warren Buffett, there are only two rules of investing. Rule No. 1 is never lose money. Rule No. 2: Never forget rule No. 1. It may sound trite, and losing money in the stock market is unavoidable at times, but minimizing your losses is vital for a simple reason: just returning to break-even becomes a herculean task. On a loss of 20 percent, you need a 25 percent return to break even. And after losing 50 percent, you'll need a two-bagger! With that in mind, here are seven of the worst stocks to buy for 2018. Could they go up? Anything's possible. But the risk isn't worth it.
The firm predicts Amazon's North America sales will reach $100 billion by 2017, and account for nearly one-fourth of all U.S. online sales, excluding automobiles and gas. That would compare to 19 percent share in 2014.
This time last year, we were deep in the grip of the Great Recession, and the S&P 500 had fallen a spectacular 32% over the previous four months. Yet we had the nerve (or at least the editorial deadline) to call out 10 companies as the worst places to invest for the coming year.
Big gains for lousy stocksOf the 10 stocks we picked, only two -- Citigroup (NYSE:C) and Blockbuster (NYSE:BBI) -- actually lost money in 2009. Meanwhile, two of the picks -- Ford (NYSE:F) and Sirius XM Radio (NASDAQ:SIRI) -- more than quintupled in price. Several other picks, including Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), Sears Holdings (NASDAQ:SHLD), and Starbucks (NASDAQ:SBUX), more than doubled. Overall, a portfolio equally divided among those 10 stocks would have risen an astounding 146% in 2009. Not exactly what we expected to see -- especially after making much better picks for 2007 and 2008.
Moreover, despite some amazing returns over the past year, many of last year's worst-stock picks are still in some pretty bad circumstances. Ford has $13 billion in Voluntary Employee Benefit Association obligations that it has to pay over the next decade or longer, plus billions more in long-term debt -- it will take more than an award or two to take care of that. Bank of America still has a bunch of garbage on its balance sheet. As for Sirius ... well, it's still competing against free radio, and with the stock still trading at less than a buck, I just can't treat it as a serious (you'll pardon the pun) place for my money.
The good, the bad, and the uglyAmidst all this confusion, you still need to know which stocks deserve your money and which you should avoid. Well, we already covered that first part by calling out what we think will be the best stocks for 2010 (and you decided that the winner was a bit fruity). Now, we're here to give you our opinion on that second part. And, again, we're counting on you to choose which "wins."
So take a look at the list below, check out the arguments put forth by our writers and analysts, and vote in each article's poll on whether you think each of these will be the worst stock of 2010. Remember, we're a motley bunch of writers with motley opinions. But your votes will ultimately decide on the biggest loser. Check back here in a few days, after we tally up the results, to see what everyone considers to be the winner -- er, loser -- for this year.
The Dow Jones industrial average plunged more than 1,100 points Monday as stocks took their worst loss in six and a half years. Two days of steep losses have erased the market's gains from the start of this year and ended a period of record-setting calm for stocks.
Market pros have been predicting a pullback for some time, noting that declines of 10 percent or more are common during bull markets. There hasn't been one in two years, and by many measures stocks had been looking expensive.
The slump began on Friday as investors worried that creeping signs of higher inflation and interest rates could derail the US economy along with the market's record-setting rally. Energy companies, banks, and industrial firms are taking some of the worst losses. 041b061a72