After having closed a stock idea and after some time passes, it is interesting to take another look at it. An obvious question is the return since the exit. More importantly, though, is what can I learn from the exit and from the subsequent movements, up or down? To answer that, I am for the first time ever unveiling all my closed cases that once were member-exclusive stock ideas. With only one exception, I have not re-activated any case. How did they perform post-exit and what do I distill out of this exercise?

Summary and key takeaways from today’s Weekly
– I am unveiling for the first time ever all my closed cases (former member-exclusive ideas) and discuss the performance since my exits.
– With the exception of two cases, not much performance was left on the table, despite some minor regrets here or there.
– My key learning from this article is that I am not good at timing, and that I must improve my do-nothing skills when I have a strong contrarian, fundamentally solid case to not miss big rewards.

Occasionally, I get reminded of my awful exit out of Tesla (ISIN: US88160R1014, Ticker: TSLA) stock which I initially bought in May 2019. Unfortunately, I then-happily sold after a quick double, thinking this was a great return for such a short period of time. If I only had a crystal ball…

In my article about “Suffered Losses or Missed Opportunities” (see here), I discussed this case in more detail and also showed my first buying order. On a split-adjusted basis, this was at a share price between 13–14 USD in today’s terms when I got in. To my newer readers who don’t know this article, I recommend to read it for a different reason, as I explain why portfolio losses hurt less than missed gains.

You can imagine how painful this is until today to not have stayed on board.

While I cannot change that unlucky outcome, I can remind myself to stick to my thesis if it hasn’t changed. I would not buy Tesla stock anymore today, because everyone knows it. Back then, despite being riskier from a balance sheet perspective, I saw competitive and first-mover advantages. It was controversial, but it turned out to be right for a certain period.

Having said that, I thought it might be interesting to reassess my member-exclusive stock ideas that I have closed. For the first time ever, I am unveiling all these names I exited, and I analyze the returns of these stocks since their closing dates.

Luckily, there was no “second Tesla” case among them! 🙂

---

If you’re looking for attractive, overlooked stock ideas the majority has a blind eye on, look no further. I am offering compelling non-mainstream cases in concise 12-page member-exclusive reports.

Want to outsmart the market? Get active now! Become a supporting paid-member and receive my best stock ideas (plus updates).

Join me and my members on our journey to beat the markets!

^{both as per 01 October 2025 market close – since August 2022}

A critical look at my exits

In my previous articles about this wide-ranging topic of how to deal with mind-fuck positions in a portfolio, realized vs. unrealized losses and realized gains vs. those that were never made, I always came to the same conclusion.

It is better to get rid of the headaches quickly, while the winners must be kept.

Else, the result is often – not always, exceptions apply – that gains are capped. In the worst case, problems accumulate and the portfolio ends up with a bunch of losers, while the winners were sold out prematurely. As if this weren’t enough, this causes a not-to-be underestimated mental overload and stress leveraged negatively by throwing in good money after bad (averaging down into losers).

I am of the opinion that this has to be learnt and is the result of experience.

Personally, if I occasionally sell a loser in my portfolio I do not feel pain or regret – I feel joy and freedom as a I got rid of a problem that was blocking capital and mental capacity. While it can happen that I sell too early and the stock then starts to rise (as if it was waiting for me to throw in the towel) my experience is rather that most of these exists have been correct.

After this foreword, let’s go straight to the shop floor.

Here are uncensored all my closed cases that my paid-members once received as stock ideas from me. I will then break down and discuss my key findings further below. Framed are the individual closing and current share prices as well as the resulting stock return since closing (without dividends). Orange are cases where the company has been acquired. Returns in local currencies.

Starting with my Premium ideas:

First, I wanted to throw in the Vivendi case was a break-up into four new stocks. The sold Vivendi in the table above is the new entity post-breakup where the spin-off values are subtracted in the current share price, but not in the starting price. The “loss” of 71%, in reality is only a loss of 10% after adjusting for double counting and adding the new entities manually – which Yahoo Finance does not fix.

As of writing, I have closed 19 cases if counting the broken-up entities, and 17 if counting the pre-break-up Vivendi as of my initial report (one break-up piece is still active).

Anyway, to not get lost in irrelevant details, the first group I’d like cover are those positions that produced negative share price returns in local currencies after my exits.

There are in total six of them, namely:

• Deutsche Post AG / DHL (ISIN: DE0005552004, Ticker: DHL)
• Adecoagro (ISIN: LU0584671464, Ticker: AGRO)
• Petrobras A (ISIN: BRPETRACNPR6, Ticker: PBR.A)
• Arch Resources, merged with Consol Energy into Core Natural Resources (ISIN: US2189371006, Ticker: CNR)
• Paramount Class B, now Paramount Skydance (ISIN: US69932A2042, Ticker: PSKY)
• Louis Hachette Group (ISIN: FR001400TL40, Ticker: ALHG)

DHL is of little interest. After adding two subsequent dividend payments, barely anything happened, neither to the downside, nor to the upside.

Adecoagro is more interesting, as I closed the case in times of relatively high sugar prices. Since then, the price of the commodity fell strongly, and with it the share price. AGRO is not just a sugar producer, but indeed a highly-complex case, depending on more than just the sugar price. But this together with falling energy prices – a second driver – has pressured the company.

In the meantime a big investor bought into the company, holding 70% of stock, making the already not-most-liquid stock even less liquid. In absence of extremely low commodity prices, this stock is not interesting for me. This exit was absolutely correct after a 33% return, plus small dividends. Since my exit, the position fell 24%.

I closed Petrobras for political reasons after in total +30.3% including dividends, in anticipation of payout restrictions – the main argument for the stock – and potential enforcements of investments into questionable projects, outside of the company’s core business.

I haven’t calculated it exactly, but plus / minus after dividends, this would have been likely a modestly positive outcome still (price –12.8% since exit), but nothing to freak out about. My still-active cases I this sector have done better. Occasionally, I am looking at PBR, but it is not highly ranked on my watchlist at the moment.

Arch Resources, respectively nowadays Core Natural resources is more interesting.

I capped the loss at –3.8% (+5.4% gain incl. dividends) after the stock in between had been down massively, then turned up, even significantly in the double digits percentage-wise. Arch was mainly a met coal producer which is needed for steel production. But with a weakening economic environment and no undersupply anymore, I pulled the plug.

While +5.4% does not sound spectacular, going out was absolutely the right move. Had I held on, the stock would have gone down from 140 USD to now 85 USD, with much lower levels in between. 15 January was the first trading day of the newly-formed CNR. The chart is based on the predecessor company Consol Energy which technically acquired Arch Resources. Arch shareholders received new equity.

All in all, this would have been a much bigger loss hadn’t I exited.

While it looks like met coal stocks might be about to turn, I remain skeptical as almost everybody is expecting this, while the world economy is weak and coal production in India and China, the two core buyers, is rising. There is no big undersupply, while these stocks trade above their book values.

Paramount is interesting. I closed due to a for me not calculable future post-merger with Skydance. The stock has jumped considerably since my exit and after the deal was closed, but I don’t get the hype, honestly. I missed some performance with this one, yes. But I don’t care much as it looks like the new Paramount Skydance wants to merge now with the noticeably bigger and hugely indebted Warner Bros. Discovery.

That’s not for me.

The small gain of 2.9% (+3.7% incl. dividends) is irrelevant in the big picture. Post-exit, the stock fell modestly until the merger, but since then went through the roof. The not-made gain would have nicely added to the overall return of all my ideas, yes, but I did not feel comfortable enough to remain engaged in a gamble I do not know what to expect down the road.

Louis Hachette is one of the Vivendi spin-offs. I closed it after a gain of 36.7% in EUR, and +52% in USD and including the dividend, as I saw fair value having been reached. At least in the short term, this seems to have been correct. The stock is down 8.6% in EUR since my close.

Nothing to regret.

The next group that deserves it to be discussed represents those stocks I closed at a loss, but until today they returned positively – in brief, I closed too early. Coincidentally, this applies to almost all my closed cases… I didn’t know that before.

In total, there have been seven such picks inside the Premium membership, and on top Arch which was also closed with a negative price return (positive after dividends as written above), but this exit was spot on.

So, exiting the following names was prematurely as it seems:

• Flow Traders (ISIN: BMG3602E1084, Ticker: FLOW)
• United Therapeutics (ISIN: US91307C1027, Ticker: UTHR)
• thyssenkrupp (ISIN: DE0007500001, Ticker: TKA)
• Kohl’s (ISIN: US5002551043, Ticker: KSS)
• Vivendi: (ISIN: FR0000127771, Ticker: VIV)
• Canal+ (ISIN: FR001400T0D6, Ticker: CAN)
• Signify: (ISIN: NL0011821392, Ticker: LIGHT)

At first sight, it looks like every decision was wrong.

Flow Traders from a performance perspective was wrong, yes. But my main arguments were that there’s no continuity in management (CEO changed recently), and that the company is losing market share in its most important region Europe, while it can’t get on its foot into the by far biggest market North America.

Adding that they started to use leverage to get more trading volume made this idea significantly riskier. In the short- to mid-term, my decision was wrong. But I have lost confidence entirely, so that I cannot be on board of this. No confidence and no conviction does not allow me to have an open mind.

I should have waited for a rebound as sentiment was very pessimistic. But I don’t regret the sale, it was even absolutely correct as my initial thesis was broken.

United Therapeutics rose significantly since my closing in late 2023 (report came out in March 2023). Unfortunately, during this holding period, the stock went practically only sideways, but then exploded higher and doubled within a year.

After I exited of course.

But first, less than two months later in late 2023, I switched to Liquidia (ISIN: US53635D2027, Ticker: LQDA) which returned almost 31% during my holding period, somewhat compensating for the gains not made with UTHR.

And earlier this year, I flipped again and closed LQDA, switching back to UTHR which had given away half of its 100% gain, briefly dancing around 300 USD. It has risen 44% since I re-activated this case (the first and only so far) and is now around its all-time high. So in essence, this closing has not resulted in much lost performance, even though the timing was not optimal.

What would have been better? Keeping UTHR, and adding LQDA. LQDA is currently very hyped in my twitter timeline – I don’t like that.

I cannot turn back the time, so this was clearly ill-timed from my side.

The closings of Kohl’s and the post-spin Vivendi as of writing were correct, as nothing has happened. Except, that temporarily, Kohl’s was trading significantly below ten bucks and staged a massive rally which was driven by a massive short covering. I haven’t re-entered Kohl’s, yet.

Vivendi briefly spiked higher as rumors emerged the Bolloré family would need to make a mandatory takeover offer. But this has quickly cooled down again, and the stock is back to where I exited. Which by the way, adjusted for the spun-off entities, was after a decent return of around 50% from the lows since the first trading day as a standalone entity.

The sum-of-the-part combined entity (my initial Vivendi case before the breakup) is still around 10% in the red. One piece is still open. Let’s see how it plays out. But as a temporary summary, I was a bit too optimistic and too early into this at a too high price.

Which leaves us with Canal+, another part from the broken-up Vivendi, and Signify.

Canal+ was clearly ill-timed, as the stock has risen 36% since my exit. What went wrong? The stock was the only one of the four spins that fell strongly. The company had relatively high debt with more to come from a pending acquisition and the finances weren’t clean due to restructuring and many one-offs.

From a return perspective, I should have kept it (or better, thrown out on day one). I realized a loss of 39%, my until today by far biggest from alle cases I have ever published a report about for my members. Bad luck on timing, but again without confidence and the desire to cut losses at some point (should have been earlier), I had to choose between hoping or being consequent.

Signify looks like closed at a small loss, which is correct in EUR terms. I present my total return figures in USD, as the benchmarks are the two big US indices Dow Jones and S&P 500. In USD, there was on top a nice currency gain for a total return of +1.9% instead of –6.9% in EUR.

But, here again, I should have just held. The company paid a massive dividend of around 7% in relation to the price as of my initial report, it bought back shares, and the stock price advanced by 16% in EUR. Nothing tragic, clearly not a second thyssenkrupp-like miss.

Why did I close? I was unsure about the prospects in light of a weakening economy and related to that big, lucrative projects. The most profitable division, legacy non-LED lighting bulbs are being phased out. The rest can be quite volatile. The lack of full conviction drove me to this decision.

The third group is the rest of the pack I haven’t discussed so far:

• Bank of Butterfield (ISIN: BMG0772R2087, Ticker: NTB)
  price return since exit: +15%
• Pioneer Natural Resources
  (acquired by Exxon Mobil)
• Cousins Properties (ISIN: US2227955026, Ticker: CUZ)
  price return since exit: +26.6%
• Silvercrest Metals
  (acquired by Coeur Mining)
• Yellow Cake (ISIN: JE00BF50RG45, Ticker: YCA)
  price return since exit: +3.2%

Two companies have been acquired, both after I had closed the respective cases.

My reason why I closed Pioneer: I was expecting (and still am) a peak and subsequent tilt-over in the Permian Basin. If it happens, and it currently looks this way, it will put an end on the US’ shale growth story. Worse, as shale was the major driver for non-OPEC oil and gas growth over the last one and a half decades, this could create a supply shock even.

I was too early with this, but I remain convinced this will happen eventually. That’s why I have no more US shale ideas active.

Silvercrest Metals was clearly sold too early in hindsight as the buyout would have resulted in a higher return. After the strong run since I initiated this case – Silvercrest outperformed its peers – the valuation looked a bit stretched for me. The return of 85% in just nine months was phenomenal. But out too early.

Bank of Butterfield was my idea to get exposure to a much more profitable bank with unheard of industry metrics for returns on capital / equity, and at the same time a very defensive balance sheet. The latter due to the lack of central bank (Bermuda) bailing it out, in case of whatever calamity. The stock practically always trades for a substantial premium to its tangible assets.

Since my exit, the stock is up 15%. Dividends and buybacks come on top. These are certainly not huge returns, especially as this case has been closed for more than two and a half years now. I do not regret it and continue to have an eye on the company from time to time. But it’s too expensive.

Cousins Properties was my idea get a foot into the troubled office market, when the common narrative was that everybody would be working from home for the rest of their lives. We know it came differently, and many corporations ordered their staff back to the offices.

CUZ has of one of the lowest-levered balance sheets in the sector, while operating in the most dynamic markets, skipping many troubled epicenters like New York or the West Coast. I got out a bit too early in anticipation of a weakening job market. The stock advanced another 26.6% plus dividends.

Finally, Yellow Cake, my idea for the uranium sector. Since I left, the stock has first fallen strongly, but it recovered again. As of writing, the gain is only +3.2%.

I had left because sentiment was very one-sided with only blue-sky scenarios being portrayed. When my twitter timeline gets too full of certain topics or individual stock names, I get cautious. This was the case with uranium names which have suffered from brutal corrections, especially the miners which I have been criticizing all along as being too risky operationally.

We have seen a strong rebound, but I am seeing again the same posts that uranium can only go up with new all-time highs being just a question of time. Another issue I have with YCA in particular is their supply contract with Kazatomprom which is ending in two years. I’d like to hear an update on this.

And here are my two closes Premium PLUS cases (11 ideas published in total):

This is quickly discussed.

Burberry (ISIN: GB0031743007, Ticker: BRBY) despite some recent improvements has been struggling from crashed consumer sentiment in the luxury sector. Plus, the company made own strategic mistakes. Another new CEO is now trying to turn this ship around.

The stock is up 4.2% since I exited, so practically nothing happened.

But indeed, much happened, as the stock even twice lost 40–50%, only to rebound back. Or in other words, those who bought the bottoms could have doubled their money on two occasions.

The turnaround story is not convincing enough for me as it’s built on hope, not hard numbers. The valuation still a bit too high, given the new circumstances. The industry’s challenges proved to be bigger than I initially thought. That’s why I pulled the plug to limited the loss at –26.5% in GBP (before the dividend).

Fannie Mae Series S was my “Trump Trade” which was absolutely correct from the background story. The thesis started to play out quickly. I exited in late 2024 after this idea started to spread (and pop up aggressively in my twitter feed), and after Bill Ackman started to publicly push for it. I have never seen a hedge fund manager pounding the table so aggressively on a stock idea.

In hindsight, the exit was too early, despite the quick return of 178.5% in less than three months. Since closing, another 45% came on top. For us, had we held, this would have resulted in a return of 306%, instead of 178.5% – the lower cost basis is the deciding factor.

That’s by the way also a strong argument to be ahead of the pack early, not after an idea becomes mainstream. Even if I discuss one or the other name publicly at some point, the best returns can only be made if one gets in early enough.

So, what do I conclude now?

Most of my exits have not caused any big damage in the sense that a huge return was left on the table, resulting in a Tesla 2.0 moment for me. The only two cases where I should have definitely held longer are thyssenkrupp and the Fannie Mae story. Everything else is noise. And without looking at my spreadsheet, I honestly don’t even know and remember these cases negatively.

I have published subsequently multiple reports with ideas that generated strong returns.

For example, had you reinvested the proceeds from the Silvercrest Metals exit (which was a bit too early, yes), and bought stock of my first gold mining idea, the return as of today would be +176%, on top of the 85% from Silvercrest. Or my switch from Petrobras to Vista Energy, clearly a right move either.

The other thing that stands out is that I am not very good at timing.

Almost no fundamental investor is (except he has insider information). What I want to get better at is keeping cases open where the setup and thesis are strong, and my conviction very high, instead of closing them too early.

As a last point, maybe it makes sense to exit certain position even quicker, when they don’t play out as expected, to limit the losses. I had two cases that I concretely remember that were temporarily deeply in the red with 40–50% where I was still convinced of my thesis. One is Arch Resources which indeed made a phenomenal comeback (but I closed too late in hindsight).

The other is a still-active case for my Premium-Plus members. I published my report too early at a too-high price point of the stock. The story, however, evolved well, and especially from this year on got a major boost. Since then, the stock left its bottom and performed well. There’s still much to be done, but at least I am noticing progress.

All in all, I am not unhappy with most of my decisions.

Here and there, improvements are necessary. This is part of the learning process.

Conclusion

I am unveiling for the first time ever all my closed cases (former member-exclusive ideas) and discuss the performance since my exits.

With the exception of two cases, not much performance was left on the table, despite some minor regrets here or there.

My key learning from this article is that I am not good at timing, and that I must improve my do-nothing skills when I have a strong contrarian, fundamentally solid case to not miss big rewards.

By becoming a Premium or Premium PLUS Member, you get instant access to all my already published research reports as well as several updates.

Likewise, you qualify for eight, respectively four more exclusive reports with my best investment ideas plus updates on the featured businesses over the next twelve months.