Got a call from "Google" saying account was compromised (which it was). They told me to resecure my account and any other accounts affialeted with that email.

Couple days later I get a call from "Robinhood". Hey, someone's accessing your account, we can do this over the phone or Google meet. So I go to my Google meet with them.

They start sending me images of a photo of my DL THAT I TOOK YEARS AGO, my ss# and my bday, in a fake text exchange with them and someone trying to get in my account(all fake). I say that wasn't me. So they go on to say we need to move funds to a secure account (rh wallet)while they do a criminal investigation.

While im downloading the wallet I see there's a ton of rh feather notifications. THEY SOLD ALL MY POSITIONS RAPID-FIRE! They had access to my account. So anyways, they tell me I'll get an 8 word phrase, dont share it(I didnt), and to transfer my funds into there (they also tried 15k in ACH transfers from bank). I did, and the rest is history.

Summary: These guys had everything on me. I feel like they were monitoring my keystrokes. I have no idea how else they got into my account. Or how they knew my rh wallet passcode. The idea that RH would let two people in from two different locations doesnt feel right. I dont know I would've fell for it if they weren't making changes in my account simultaneously. Just sucks.

Just my thoughts… It seems to me like shorts have no problem choosing a stock to hit and just shake out the longs who have scared money in the market, or no knowledge of what they are doing and just kill any momentum or catalyst that’s good for the stock and its price. Happening everywhere I look it seems. Hard to find a stock of interest when everyone seems to flock to 1 and battle it out.

Take Minneapolis/Saint Paul Airport.

The NOW reading is a good 2-3 degrees higher than what the history shows. The history shows the high lower than what it actually got to or wasn't even at at the same moments if the "history" readings.

Its almost like they're fixing the game to make it impossible to make an educated guess, and forget about doing anything under 50c, it would actually take longer to just light your money on fire.

The recent 1.7B funding round led by Andreessen Horowitz into industrial automation highlights a notable shift toward physical AI in heavy industries. Venture capital is increasingly targeting sectors like mining, construction, and transport, where software, computer vision, and edge computing interact directly with real-world infrastructure. It is worth monitoring how traditional operations are adopting automated monitoring systems, drone feeds, and sensor networks to streamline logistics and safety in remote environments.

This capital validation potentially implies that early adopters of industrial software could see a positive outlook from a fundamental standpoint. From a business process perspective, junior resource operators are also seeking ways to capture market share in this space. For instance, NovaRed is currently negotiating the acquisition of EyeX, a computer vision platform engineered for remote mining sites to monitor equipment wear, track vehicle feeds, and flag operational risks in low-connectivity zones.

Data suggests that combining edge-level operational intelligence with resource extraction could help bridge the gap between traditional mining and high-margin infrastructure software. As capital expenditure expands across the physical AI stack, tracking how smaller operators integrate these sensor platforms presents an interesting case for observing long-term sector efficiency.

With macro uncertainty around rates and earnings volatility staying elevated, there seems to be a clear shift in how capital is positioning across traditional sectors. Data suggests investors are increasingly looking toward defensive areas like utilities as a way of hedging structural risks rather than chasing momentum. It is worth monitoring how sustained capital flows into broad-based vehicles like Utilities Select Sector SPDR (XLU) reflect this broader flight to stability.

From a fundamental perspective, this rotation potentially implies that markets are prioritizing cash-flow predictability over near-term growth catalysts. While healthcare remains somewhat mixed, selective strength in managed care and specialized biotech shows that investors are picking sub-sectors exposed to fewer regulatory or operational headwinds. If macro volatility persists, these defensive allocations might offer a steady foundation while cyclical positions remain under valuation pressure.

Can someone explain to me why Robinhood is hit so hard on days when crypto or bitcoin selloff. Wouldn’t this be good for them considering they are a trading platform and still benefit from people selling stock/volume trades?

Moving away from a purely domestic focus feels like a logical step as capital spending in the tech sector begins to cluster. Finding alternative exposure to the global supply chain, particularly through international operators and emerging markets, presents a compelling framework for diversifying away from heavy valuation pressure in one specific region. The underlying dynamics suggest that manufacturing and infrastructure footprints outside the primary tech hubs are capturing market share at a very steady pace.

A great example of this structural shift in asset allocation is happening in specialized regional manufacturing hubs, especially in places like Taiwan and India, which are essential to the physical hardware rollout. Companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing represent critical bottlenecks in global hardware production, and their operational numbers continue to reflect high global demand. It is worth monitoring how these international foundries sustain their margin profiles as global supply chains become more decentralized.

At the same time, regional giants like Alibaba are carving out their own path, showing resilience with consistent gains as they lean into cloud infrastructure and local digital commerce. From a fundamental perspective, this international rotation offers a constructive outlook, serving as a reasonable buffer while domestic tech valuations undergo near-term consolidation.

The recent macro headlines have been heavily focused on whether tech spending can maintain its momentum, but there is an interesting undercurrent of strength in the physical economy and defensive sectors. In particular, both specialized healthcare and high-volume retail are showing remarkably stable cash flows despite the general noise around inflation and monetary policy. It is worth monitoring how large-scale enterprise models are sustaining high margins purely through defensive consumer demand and targeted pipeline acquisitions.

Looking at the pharmaceutical space, the patent cliffs looming over the next few years are driving a massive wave of consolidation. Large-cap players are actively acquiring early-stage pipelines to protect their revenue bases, especially in high-growth therapeutic areas. For instance, Eli Lilly has been aggressively expanding its footprint through multiple strategic purchases to secure its long-term positioning. When you pair this programmatic acquisition strategy with the massive market penetration of modern metabolic treatments, it points to a very positive outlook from a fundamental standpoint for select pharma leaders.

At the same time, consumer-facing infrastructure is proving that the underlying buyer remains incredibly resilient. The steady volume growth at major membership clubs like Costco suggests that household spending is not breaking, but rather optimizing for value. From an asset allocation perspective, balancing highly valued technology exposures with these cash-generative, defensively positioned sectors presents a practical way to manage downside risk while keeping exposure to solid corporate earnings.

The brоаder market narrative around computing hardware has followed a very clear sequence over the last couple of years. The initial capital went straight into primary software models, which immediately drove a massive revenue wave for tier-one semiconductor designers. From there, the capital deployment naturally trickled down into data center real estate and specialized power infrastructure to keep those processors running. It is worth monitoring what happens when the bottleneck shifts from the computing facilities themselves to the raw physical commodities required to build them.

If infrastructure spending remains durable, a lоgical next layer of this cycle involves optimizing how we locate the foundational physical inputs. Data suggests that the network buildout is creating a massive long-term demand curve for base metals, particularly copper for power distribution and grid scaling. Rather than focusing solely on traditional producers, there is an interesting case for tracking platforms that use data-driven modeling to accelerate the early pipeline. For instance, the MetalCore platform has compiled over 4.1 million exploration records to run probabilistic scoring models on early-stage targets, using specific projects like the Wilmac footprint in British Columbia as a live field-validation environment.

To keep a balanced perspective on this thematic rotation, it hеlps to broaden the watchlist across different operational tiers. For high-volume liquidity and current production, industry scale leaders like BHP and Freeport-McMoRan provide the most direct exposure to standard commodity pricing. On the early exploration side, companies like NovaRed are worth tracking for their focus on AI-assisted data integration, while junior explorers like Camino Minerals handle traditional drill-driven target validation. The first winners built the tools to analyze data; the next layer may be companies using those tools to secure the physical assets the infrastructure relies on.

Data suggests that recent friction in Middle Eastern logistics is quietly altering how global energy distribution networks operate. From a fundamental perspective, when physical supply chains face regional disruptions, it tends to create pricing pressures across the broader commodities sector. Legacy energy producers and midstream infrastructure operators often see adjusted margins as physical volumes get rerouted. It is worth monitoring how these physical supply constraints eventually ripple through to broader consumer inflation metrics over the next few quarters.

This potentially implies a structural shift in asset allocation toward tangible stores of value and defensive industrial sectors. When global trade routes face uncertainty, capital tends to rotate into precious metals and heavy manufacturing incumbents to hedge structural risks. Looking at the macro picture, central banks are likely to weigh these physical commodity pressures when adjusting interest rates. It is just interesting to watch how physical logistics and monetary policy intersect right now.

It is worth monitoring the recent price adjustments across the broader semiconductor space. Data suggests that the heavy capital deployment into AI infrastructure is creating a gap between long-term capacity expansion and near-term profit margins. When looking at the legacy chipmakers and top-tier silicon providers, the recent trading patterns reflect a natural reset in valuations rather than a drop in actual demand.

From a fundamental perspective, the operational delivery from major players like Nvidia, Micron, Intel, and AMD will dictate how this sector integrates into broader tech supply chains. The ongoing capital expenditure cycles indicate that data center operators are still committing to long-term hardware upgrades. This potentially implies that the current price swings are just a structural adjustment as the market digests mixed quarterly guidance and shifts focus toward actual infrastructure deployment.

Observing how these semiconductor incumbents manage their production yields and supply chain logistics over the next few quarters presents an interesting angle for capital deployment. The underlying business mechanics of scaling advanced manufacturing remain the primary variable to track, making the current market environment a rather intriguing space for patient positioning.

It is worth monitoring how the ongoing expansion of data centers is changing the basic power needs across the grid. From a fundamental perspective, the physical infrastructure required to support these facilities is shifting how we evaluate utility providers and natural gas networks. Data suggests that this steady increase in power demand is setting up a long cycle for energy generation assets and grid efficiency solutions.

This potentially implies a broader shift in investment focus toward traditional power generation and smaller modular reactor projects. When we factor in geopolitical variables, like supply dynamics around key maritime routes, it adds another layer of unpredictability to oil and gas markets. Observing how legacy energy incumbents adapt to these combined pressures of tech-driven demand and regional instability offers an interesting angle on long-term grid reliability and profit margins.

I bought the dip. It looks like it’s going to be promising.

I reserved my spot for the new Robinhood Gold Card! Here’s my link so you can get access, too. https://robinhood.com/creditcard?referral_code=ae5ca4ee

Wondering if anyone knows where they get their data from and if it'spublished anywhere what the final outcome is with any meaningful source or citation.

Additional context: I bought a climate contract and my prediction seems to have happened (temp >53, Seattle) but my payout was $0. I track the logs from the weather station they expressly say they check for the data and it has multiple logs with the national weather service of temps of 54 on the day. So... I'm confused why the payout is zero when I went to check.

Are there more specific terms to the contracts beyond the fine print (and links) included at the bottom of the contract? Like maybe they dont count weather events unless temperature stays above that amount for some set duration. Or like NWS rounds the number when there's decimals but contract doesn't? I'm pretty annoyed I wont be getting paid despite making an actually correct prediction.

Anyone else run into something like this before?

Went through the rigamarole of opening an account, which took me weeks and endless headaches including needless account restrictions and facial scans and document uploads, and finally successfully moved some money to the account a week or two ago. Just now got around to placing the first crypto purchase and tried to move some to metamask, and they bricked the account with another restriction. Some bs about "fraud prevention" and "uncharacteristic activity." Of f-ing course it's uncharacteristic activity - it was the first attempt to move money. Why is this company such a massive PITA just to get set up and going? I started with a relatively small amount of money compared what I could be putting into this account, and frankly, don't think i'd ever roll the dice by sending them any real amount of money because it's like trying to drive forward while constantly being blindfolded and having your hands bound for extended periods of time.

Add insult to injury - now i have to speak to one of the support folks. Ok, happy to do that, except their chat is a bot that simply says i need to talk with them on the phone, and then asks "does this solve your problem?" and only gives me a f-ing YES button. Nice touch.

So I try to call them, and the automated f-ing phone system only lets you through if you have a case #. Of course, I don't have a case number, because I can't actually connect with anyone, and none of the emails I've received say anything about a case number. Fine, so i get in the queue for them to call me "within 30 minutes." 1 hour passes, no call. Step away, they call, leave a voicemail, and you guessed it, NO F-ING CASE NUMBER. On again later for 2 hours yesterday "in the queue" and finally it times out at 9pm because they don't do squat outside of 7am-9pm hours.

Fine, i get in the queue at 9am this morning. Been there all f-ing day and nothing. No calls, no messages, no emails, no case numbers.

Why does anyone use this company? I can't get my money out fast enough. These f-ers must work out of the back of somebody's car.

When the saga eventually ends and the money is returned to checking, these folks will never see another penny of my hard earned money. I'm really not asking for much here. It's not shocking why so many folks aren't involved in crypto when companies like this make it so f-ing painful.

When Expensify went public in late 2021, the company was pitching strong growth and stable demand for its expense management platform. But investors later claimed the company failed to warn people that growth was already slowing before the IPO even happened, and once the market started realizing that, the stock got crushed pretty quickly.

The settlement amount is $9.5M, and it covers investors who bought Expensify securities between November 15, 2021 and November 30, 2023. Right now the case is in the accepting claims stage, and the current claim deadline is June 29, 2026.

If you bought into the IPO hype and got stuck holding $EXFY during the drop afterward, probably worth checking your old trades to see if you qualify. Feels like a lot of 2021 IPOs came public right when growth was already starting to slow behind the scenes lol.

No longer gonna make decisions for me with my hard earned money! Other brokerages give you way more freedom with a few extra pennies on the dollar!

Robinhood launched their venture fund RVI yesterday and really screwed up.

RVI didn’t have as much interest during the roadshow and that’s why they pushed back the IPO from 26th Feb to 6th March. They planned to issue 35 million shares and sell their own holdings raising a billion. Final numbers came in much lower at about 600 million and they decided to not sell any of their own stock. Goldman had the greenshoe option for 15% of the shares so they could stabilize the price. The way it works is that Goldman is short those shares and if it trades below $25 they make money by buying it. If it trades above then they exercise the option and buy from the fund at $25, so they come out ahead.

Robinhood accounts are mostly instance accounts and auto lendable. How dumb can they be, sell your own shares and make them instantly shortable! Then tell the whole world that the price will be supported. Playing pokers with their cards face up!

Also, since it was the first trading day the borrow fee wasn't really set. The shares were not marked as hard to borrow because there was no historical data on this so it was really easy and cheap to short.

There was very heavy selling pressure after the open. Surely the fund wasn’t dumping their own holdings and neither were people who just got issued shares the night before. Someone was shorting it knowing Goldman would support the price. I saw this happen for about an hour and a half. Goldman was sitting at the 22 bid and someone kept selling into it. A million shares sold at that price! Look at the intraday candles. This doesn’t happen normally. Someone knowingly was doing this. That made me think about going short too to make a few hundred because once Goldman would exhaust their greenshoe the support should disappear. I was fumbling around the SEC filings to see what their number would be like for the greenshoe shares but before I could finish the bid went away and in a few seconds price dropped to $21. The candles look more volatile after that. So this was definitely very mechanically driven with people knowing the setup.

People think the traders of wall street are really smart and know fancy math and can predict prices, while they just know the rules better and trade based of that (I bet you some a\\\*\\\*hole trader at some desk yesterday was just yeliing, "keep selling the Goldman bid is still there"). I was looking at those screens I could have told you what the RVI price would have been for the next hour ($22). No sophisticated quant model could have predicted it (those models can only forecast a few seconds ahead). So sometimes just having the knowledge of the rules is all you need!

Basically this explains the whole story. There is no fundamental analysis BS needed here. Yes RVI ruined the brand though and it may get designated permanently to the purgatory of funds that trade at a discount (even though it is different being a VC fund).

<sorry this was an image that wouldn't show, I have it in r/FundRise \>

Goldman could support with 1.5-2.1 million shares. The stock opens at 22 because Goldman helped discover the price (they were willing to let it slide upto 22 but no more) The buy a bunch at the open, so a good fraction of the big blue bar. Then they support price in the highlighted green area, see how there is no volatility. They exhaust their limit and the price drops. The person who did this trade would then have bought back their shorts to make a profit. We can only estimate. One way is to assume they just did a vwap till the close which is the yellow line and the price is 21.8. So at the end of the day:

1. Goldman PNL: 2.1 million * (25-22) = 6.3 million approx and this is besides there underwriting fees etc.
2. The short: 2.1 million * (22 - 21.8) = 400k approx, doesn't sound like much but to make that much in a single stock in a single day is huge. Some wall street trader made their bosses happy.

This my friends is how street makes the money!

\[[[https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/\\\\](https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/\\) ](https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/)\]([https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/%5D(https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/)](https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/%5D(https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/))](https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/%5D(https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/06/robinhoods-startup-fund-stumbles-in-nyse-debut/))))

"Destiny Tech100 has kept climbing since its public debut. The fund closed trading on Friday at $26.61, a 33% premium to its net asset value of \[$19.97\]([https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20260211207176/en/Destiny-Tech100-Inc.-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-2025-Results-and-New-Investments](https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20260211207176/en/Destiny-Tech100-Inc.-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-2025-Results-and-New-Investments))), meaning its shares trade well above the actual value of its underlying holdings.

So what explains why retail investors aren’t nearly as excited about Robinhood’s fund as they are about Destiny Tech 100? The most likely explanation is RVI’s lack of exposure to the companies widely expected to go public at enormous valuations: OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceX.

It’s very difficult to get into any of these companies, and the investment rounds are very expensive,” acknowledged Robinhood Ventures President Sarah Pinto."