The hottest Financial risk Substack posts right now

Warren Buffett invested in tobacco businesses like R.J. Reynolds, showing a historical investment pattern.
Buffett sold his R.J. Reynolds stock in 1984, missing out on higher returns, showcasing his investment strategy.
Buffett made a successful investment in RJR Nabisco bonds in 1989, demonstrating his keen awareness of financial risks and rewards.

Some cryptocurrency firms were using tokens as collateral for loans, potentially allowing them to have infinite money, but this practice made the system very inter-connected and vulnerable to collapse.
Using tokens as collateral is similar to companies using shares as collateral; if the value of the token or coin drops, the collateral becomes worthless, leading to the collapse of the ecosystem.
The issue arises when multiple firms in the industry follow the same practice, creating a facade of liquidity, but in reality, the entire system is built on a risky foundation, vulnerable to collapses.

Investing $7 trillion in AI infrastructure would have significant energy and climate implications, possibly leading to heavy environmental costs.
$7 trillion for AI exceeds the economic resources allocated to critical areas like education or ending world hunger, highlighting potential opportunity costs.
Such a massive financial risk of a $7 trillion project could have severe consequences on the world economy, similar to the impact of the 2007-2008 financial crisis.

Valeant's growth strategy focused on buying other companies to quickly boost revenues. This approach worked for a while but relied heavily on acquisitions rather than innovation.
The rise and fall of Valeant shows how important ethical practices are in business. Many investors were drawn to Valeant's pricing strategies but faced backlash when those practices were exposed.
The company's complex structure and accounting methods led to confusion and skepticism among analysts and investors. This complexity ultimately contributed to its rapid decline as trust eroded.

Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

Default is not just about missing a payment; it can also involve lenders accepting losses to help borrowers avoid a formal default. This can include restructuring loans or adjusting payment terms.
Lenders may prefer implicit default over explicit default because it allows them to avoid recognizing their mistakes in assessing credit risk. It makes the situation less transparent and allows them to delay acknowledging losses.
For borrowers, sometimes it might be better to face explicit default and make necessary changes rather than stay in a cycle of implicit default, which can lead to worse problems down the line.

Relative valuation can be risky because if one company is valued poorly, it can affect the valuations of other companies that are based on it. This is especially true for big companies like Facebook.
Using relative valuation without careful analysis can lead to mistakes and potentially create market bubbles. Just looking at averages can be misleading.
A better approach to relative valuation is to consider differences between companies and analyze the data thoroughly. This way, it can provide useful insights rather than just being a lazy shortcut.