I think that trading based on these whimsical ideas of selling in a certain month is tantamount to trying to time the market. i think there are busier times and quieter times for the market, and times of greater volatility (ie following big news announcements like pre and post earnings announcements, M&A announcements, FED rate news, changes of US Presidents etc), but if you are really want to succeed in the market buy when the market is crashing and the news is doom and gloom, and when everyone else is selling. Takes a lot of guts but that's where the biggest gains have been made.

Whatever the Fed does with rates it seems the consumer is unlikely to benefit in the long run. If they raise rates, bank interest rates will likely go up providing more income on savings, but the hike will most likely also increase the cost of borrowing money for a mortgage or car loan. There are many other factors at play here, but for Mr Average in the US, is a rate hike a good or bad thing? Any thoughts?

Although climbing in the past month or so, I do think that Apple's more or less stagnant stock will continue to edge up and down based on rumors of new and improved versions of the IPhone. But I will say it again that I think Apple needs to move beyond its dependency on a single product and branch out to other ideas. In car media might be the growth phenomenon that it needs to boost the company. There are a number of really good competitors out there including Android and Parrot so the in car media space remains to be played out in full as yet. I do believe Disney is a broader investment choice with more room to grow as it grows market strength in China and the developing world. It too is vulnerable to the successes of its latest movie productions which can be hot or miss but in the long run, its a better growth stock. Worryingly also is that Disney's stock is rather stagnant down around 5% year to date and seemingly stuck around the $100 level. Stock analysts are also cautious with 14 out of 34 recommending only a hold position, with 5 strong buys and 13 buys. Interesting to see if these 2 stocks can break beyond their comfort zones?

You think Musk is right about that? I doubt they will be outlawed so soon but tax incentives and discounts may make it not economically worthwhile to buy and drive gas cars.

A threat to personal freedom, how so?

Doug, thanks for your important article. Its a very important topic but only begins to skim the surface. I was wondering if you could expand on the idea of risk and explain what numerical data one can look at to indicate the level of risk in an investment. I know mutual funds often have the risk table in their summary that explains the characteristics and riskiness of the investment, I was wondering if there's a similar metric for stocks to show the riskiness of that type of investment. Looking forward to seeing more articles on risk, thanks again.

I believe that even the giant oil companies such as Exxon will eventually feel the effect of cheap oil. While temporarily they can stockpile vast amounts of oil so as not to sell at low prices, eventually it will not be economically viable to keep doing so. Storing oil in tankers out at sea costs money and has its own risks. If oil prices stay low for extended period of time (years) I think we will see the stock prices also come down as a knock-on effect; its just a matter of time. The oil refineries who benefit from cheap oil to refine it into petroleum and other products are loving the low oil prices and will continue to see their revenues roll in. That is the place to sink your money, Warrren agrees with me too :>

Thanks for that entertaining article. Of course in reality, the future is way more uncertain than we can possibly imagine. Would love to see a follow up article on the effect Clinton would have on the economy. I think that Obama's policy of pulling out troops from Iraq, and Afganistan happened much to the chagrin of the defense industry. It seems like there were fewer military conflicts under Obama than almost any President before him in the past fifty years, am I right? In contrast, I can imagine Trump taking America into more than one foreign conflict if he keeps up with his hate speeches and extremist attitudes, so I could see defense stocks liking that! Damned if you damned if you dont. No good choices out there...

Ambarella is a tiny company with much larger competitors. It had income of only a shade under $90 million last year, has only about 600 employees and a market cap of just over $1.3 billion. Texas Instruments a competitor in the similar semiconductor field has 30,000 employees and a market cap of $57 billion! Perhaps Ambarella's tiny size is an advantage? Currently out of 10 analyst opinions this month, 3 are a strong buy, 4 a buy a, 5 a hold.

So yes you are probably right in some respects that cyber warfare and computer hacking will continue to be a major cause of concern in the US and throughout the world, but my question is; are the big players in the cyber threat defense field able to adequately provide a safe and effective protection against such threats. There is very little reason to invest the HACK ETF if few if any of the companies in its holdings have a proven track history and even with one, how long before the hackers outsmart the good guys? What kind of vulnerability did Sony have that left it so vulnerable? And even with software protection and security safeguards are there any 100% guaranteed ways to protect corporate America or the Government from the next major hack. What happens when all the banks get shut down by a gigantic cyber attack, I shudder to think. Is the entire internet vulnerable to a mega attack? If you watched any of the show "24" you can only hope that our computer run nuclear power plants and weapons are better protected than Sony was! But yes, if it makes you feel better, invest in a cyber security ETF :>