Stockholm’s capital-market success reflects more than IPOs and PE activity. It offers a case study in how culture, institutions, and incentives shape durable capital formation.
The post Stockholm’s Capital Markets Success: More Than Meatballs appeared first on CFA Institute Enterprising Investor.
AI’s growing capabilities challenge traditional investment skill, shifting competitive advantage toward governance, process, and judgment.
The post Where AI Ends and Investment Judgment Begins appeared first on CFA Institute Enterprising Investor.
Why S&P 500 reliance can undermine retirement outcomes, and how diversification, valuation discipline, and withdrawals reshape long-term portfolio risk.
The post Three Risks of Relying on the S&P 500 in Retirement Planning appeared first on CFA Institute Enterprising Investor.
A rigorous exploration of bitcoin reveals a new framework for understanding money beyond traditional financial models.
The post Book Review: Principles of Bitcoin appeared first on CFA Institute Enterprising Investor.
Yann LeCun’s testimony reframed for investment leaders: why AI sovereignty, platform control, and LLM economics shape organizational risk.
The post AI Strategy After the LLM Boom: Maintain Sovereignty, Avoid Capture appeared first on CFA Institute Enterprising Investor.

Welcome to the Investing News Network's weekly look at the best-performing Canadian mining stocks on the TSX, TSXV and CSE, starting with a round-up of Canadian and US news impacting the resource sector.
Statistics Canada released January’s jobs report on Friday (February 6). The data showed that the Canadian workforce shrank by 25,000, or 0.1 percent.
Manufacturing experienced the largest decline, losing 28,000 workers, followed by education with 24,000, and the public sector, which decreased by 10,000. These declines were balanced by increases of 17,000 across information, culture, and recreation; 14,000 in business, building and support services; and 11,000 in agriculture.
Despite the declines, the unemployment rate fell 0.3 percentage points to 6.5 percent. While the rate was the lowest since September 2024, the agency notes that the decrease was driven by fewer people looking for work through the month, and coincided with a 0.4 percent drop in the labor force participation rate, which came in at 65 percent.
The release came just a day after the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released its job opening report on Thursday (February 5) that showed that labor demand had decreased to its lowest level since September 2020, as December’s figures fell by 386,000 openings.
The report differs from the employment situation summary, which is typically released on the first Friday of each month. The report has been delayed due to the extended US government shutdown in late 2025 and will be released next Wednesday, February 11.
Employment data is an important metric for assessing the overall health of the Canadian and US economies and plays a significant role in helping central banks set interest rate policy.
For more on what’s moving markets this week, check out our top market news round-up.
Canadian equity markets were mixed this week.
The S&P/TSX Composite Index (INDEXTSI:OSPTX) gained 1 percent over the week to close Friday at 32,470.98, while the S&P/TSX Venture Composite Index (INDEXTSI:JX) shed 5.38 percent to 1,015.34. The CSE Composite Index (CSE:CSECOMP) dropped 1.22 percent to 167.56.
The gold price gained 4.84 percent to close at US$4,951.69 per ounce on Friday at 4:00 p.m. EST. The silver price didn’t fare as well, closing the week down 1.78 percent at US$77.32 on Friday.
In base metals, the Comex copper price recorded a 0.85 percent rise this week to US$5.93.
On the other hand, the S&P Goldman Sachs Commodities Index (INDEXSP:SPGSCI) was down 3.7 percent to end Friday at 587.55.
How did mining stocks perform against this backdrop?
Take a look at this week’s five best-performing Canadian mining stocks below.
Stocks data for this article was retrieved at 4:00 p.m. EST on Friday using TradingView's stock screener. Only companies trading on the TSX, TSXV and CSE with market caps greater than C$10 million are included. Mineral companies within the non-energy minerals, energy minerals, process industry and producer manufacturing sectors were considered.
Weekly gain: 69.57 percent
Market cap: C$27.51 million
Share price: C$0.39
Giant Mining is an exploration company working to advance its Majuba Hill District copper, silver and gold project north of Reno in Nevada, US.
The site consists of 403 federal lode mining claims and four private property parcels that cover an area of 3,919 hectares. Mining at the property took place between 1900 and 1950, resulting in the production of 2.8 million pounds of copper, 184,000 ounces of silver and 5,800 ounces of gold.
Extensive exploration work has been carried out at Majuba Hill, with 89,930 feet being drilled since 2007.
The most recent news from Giant came on January 30, when it reported that it planned to drill up to 10,000 feet in a multi-phase drill program at Majuba Hill, targeting three breccia zones.
Following the first phase of 5,000 feet of drilling, the program will include underground and surface sampling to support follow-up drill targeting for the remaining holes.
Weekly gain: 64.71 percent
Market cap: C$66.02 million
Share price: C$0.28
CGX Energy is an oil and gas exploration company with 27.48 percent ownership of a portfolio of wells in the Corentyne block off the coast of Guyana. Frontera Energy (TSX:FEC) is the company's joint venture partner in the Corentyne block and also holds 76.05 percent interest in CGX.
The Kawa-1 exploration well was drilled in 2021 and 2022 and encountered an active hydrocarbon system extending to a depth of 6,000 feet, mirroring trends in the Guyana-Suriname Basin. CGX’s Wei-1 well was drilled in late 2022 and is located on-trend between the Kawa-1 well and Exxon's (NYSE:XOM) Pluma discovery.
CGX and Frontera are currently in a legal dispute with the government of Guyana, which believes the petroleum prospecting license for Corentyne expired in 2024, a stance the joint venture disagrees with. The most recent update on the matter mentioned plans to meet and discuss the situation, with potential dates in November or December of last year.
Shares in CGX posted gains this week, but the company has not released news since November 13, when it announced its third-quarter financial statements. However, Frontera announced on January 30 that it divested its producing Colombian assets while retaining its interests in Guyana, news that may signal that the Corentyne block permitting situation could still be resolved.
Weekly gain: 61.11 percent
Market cap: C$12.07 million
Share price: C$0.29
Saba Energy is an oil and gas exploration company with operations in British Columbia, Canada, as well as the Philippines.
The company’s primary Canadian operations consist of the producing Boundary Lake and Laprise oil and gas fields, which have a net present value of C$43 million as of its September quarterly report.
The most recent news from Saba came on January 27, when it announced a heads-of-agreement with Nido Petroleum for a farm-in arrangement on a pair of offshore assets in the Philippines.
Saba will earn 60 percent of Service Contract 54 (SC54). SC54 covers an area of 550 square kilometers to depths of 50 to 110 meters and hosts three discovery wells and one production well, which previously produced 270,000 barrels at 19,000 barrels per day before it was closed due to water encroachment.
The company will also earn a 52.73 percent share in the DPPSC Cadlao, which covers an area of 914 square kilometers to depths of 93 meters. The site has 6.8 million barrels in reserves and produced 11.1 million barrels between 1982 and 1992.
If the transaction is completed, Saba will become the operator of both assets. The company plans to open a US$7.5 million convertible debenture private placement to achieve the requirement of raising US$7 million by mid-April.
Weekly gain: 60.66 percent
Market cap: C$157.77 million
Share price: C$0.98
Copper Giant Resources is an exploration company advancing its Mocoa copper-molybdenum project in Southern Colombia. It changed its name from Libero Copper and Gold last year.
The property covers 1,324 square kilometers and hosts a copper porphyry system originally discovered in 1973.
A November 2025 mineral resource estimate significantly increased its resource. Mocoa now holds an inferred resource of 7.6 billion pounds of copper and 1 billion pounds of molybdenum, at 0.31 percent copper and 0.039 percent molybdenum, from 1.12 billion metric tons of ore. The upgrade made the project South America's largest undeveloped molybdenum deposit.
The most recent news from Copper Giant came on January 29, when it reported results from the first drill hole at the La Estrella target. While assays returned low-grade mineralization, the company noted that the significance was geological, as it confirmed continuity of the porphyry system beyond the established deposit.
The release also reported results from a second hole at the southern edge of the Mocoa footprint, which the company said were stronger than previously interpreted at the southern margin of the deposits. Grades in the hole were 0.13 percent copper and 0.01 percent molybdenum over 804 meters starting from surface, which included an intersection of 0.44 percent copper and 0.05 percent molybdenum over 33 meters.
Weekly gain: 50.46 percent
Market cap: C$749.9 million
Share price: C$3.25
Benz Mining is a gold exploration company that is focused on advancing projects in Québec, Canada, as well as Western Australia.
Its Eastmain project consists of an 8,000 hectare property located in Central Québec within the Upper Eastmain Greenstone belt. The most recent resource estimate from May 2023 reported an indicated resource of 384,000 ounces of gold from 1.3 metric tons of ore grading 9 g/t gold, and an inferred resource of 621,000 ounces of gold from 3.8 metric tons grading 5.1 g/t.
In 2025, Benz acquired the Glenburgh and Mount Egerton gold projects in Western Australia from Spartan Resources (ASX:SPR). It spent much of 2025 exploring Glenburgh, which covers an area of 786 square kilometers and features 50 kilometers of strike. The site hosts six priority extension targets and 5 kilometers of exploration trend with over 100 parts per billion gold.
A November 2024 resource estimate for Glenburgh showed an indicated and inferred resource of 510,000 ounces of gold from 16.3 million metric tons of ore with an average grade of 1 g/t gold.
On January 28, the company announced a shallow, high-grade discovery at the Glenburgh project's Icon trend. Assays returned grades including 29 g/t gold over 13 meters starting at a depth of 60 meters. Additionally, results showed wide mineralization as well, including 200 meters grading 1 g/t gold starting at 76 meters.
The most recent news from Benz came the next day, when it announced it received firm commitments for a AU$75 million bought deal placement, which it said was led by strong demand from two global institutional fund. The company said the investment increases its pro forma cash position to AU$94 million, which will be allocated across its portfolio, particularly focused on the Glenburgh project.
The TSX, or Toronto Stock Exchange, is used by senior companies with larger market caps, and the TSXV, or TSX Venture Exchange, is used by smaller-cap companies. Companies listed on the TSXV can graduate to the senior exchange.
As of December 2025, 898 mining companies and 71 oil and gas companies are listed on the TSXV, combining for more than 60 percent of the 1,531 total companies listed on the exchange.
As for the TSX, it is home to 175 mining companies and 51 oil and gas companies. The exchange has 2,089 companies listed on it in total.
Together, the TSX and TSXV host around 40 percent of the world’s public mining companies.
There are a variety of different fees that companies must pay to list on the TSXV, and according to the exchange, they can vary based on the transaction’s nature and complexity. The listing fee alone will most likely cost between C$10,000 to C$70,000. Accounting and auditing fees could rack up between C$25,000 and C$100,000, while legal fees are expected to be over C$75,000 and an underwriters’ commission may hit up to 12 percent.
The exchange lists a handful of other fees and expenses companies can expect, including but not limited to security commission and transfer agency fees, investor relations costs and director and officer liability insurance.
These are all just for the initial listing, of course. There are ongoing expenses once companies are trading, such as sustaining fees and additional listing fees, plus the costs associated with filing regular reports.
Investors can trade on the TSXV the way they would trade stocks on any exchange. This means they can use a stock broker or an individual investment account to buy and sell shares of TSXV-listed companies during the exchange's trading hours.
Article by Dean Belder; FAQs by Lauren Kelly.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Securities Disclosure: I, Lauren Kelly, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
It's been a wild couple of weeks for gold and silver.
After surging to record highs at the end of January, prices for both precious metals saw significant corrections, creating turmoil for market participants.
This week brought some relief, with gold bouncing back from its low point and even trading above US$5,000 per ounce for a brief period of time.
Silver, which is known for outperforming gold on both the upside and the downside, was more volatile, but seems to have found support around the US$70 per ounce level.
Why did gold and silver drop, and more importantly, what's next? As always, there are a variety of different factors at play, but I'll give you a rundown of what I've been hearing.
Starting with the pullback, I spoke with Joe Cavatoni of the World Gold Council, who pointed to speculative players as a key reason for gold's price decline. Here's how he explained it:
"At the end of this, you're looking at a lot of people who were pushing the price higher — speculative in nature — pulling back and taking money off the table. That's why I think we're seeing a correction in the price. I don't think that we have an issue with, fundamentally, what's going on in the gold market."
Gary Savage of the Smart Money Tracker newsletter made a similar comment, saying that there are times when sentiment gets so bullish that eventually there's no one left to buy.
However, on the silver side he saw signs of market manipulation as well:
"Some of it is just (that) we got way too bullish, ran out of buyers. We were due for some kind of correction anyway, and I think the banks took advantage of that and coordinated a huge overnight attack that dropped silver ... I think it was almost 30 percent, or maybe it was 30 percent, almost overnight. That allowed them to get out of their shorts, because a lot of those contracts were going to stand for delivery, and they were going to have to buy physical silver at US$120 an ounce to to deliver."
Adding more nuance to the silver story this week was the news that billionaire Chinese trader Bian Ximing has reportedly established the largest net short position on the Shanghai Futures Exchange, with his bet against the white metal clocking in at US$300 million.
Bloomberg analysis of exchange data shows he started "ramping up silver shorts" in the last week of January, although he initially began shifting from a long silver stance this past November.
Aside from silver, Bian is known for his moves in gold and copper.
There's also been commentary suggesting that the nomination of Kevin Warsh for the US Federal Reserve chair position has weighed on gold and silver prices.
President Donald Trump announced his choice on January 30, with market watchers quickly pointing to Warsh's hawkish reputation and questioning whether he will fall in line with Trump's calls for lower interest rates. Rates have been a sticking point between Trump and current Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
However, in the days since the news broke, the tone has shifted, with Trump himself saying that Warsh wouldn't have gotten the job if he said he wanted to raise rates.
Taking a step back from what's happening now, I want to emphasize that the majority of the experts I've been speaking with recently don't believe gold and silver are topping.
In a January 25 interview, Adrian Day of Adrian Day Asset Management said exactly that, pointing to previous bull markets where both metals moved steeply down before continuing up. This quote is from before last week's correction, but I think you'll see why it's still relevant:
"A pullback is always in the cards. And people forget, everybody talks about ... 1974 to 1975, when gold dropped almost 50 percent. But people forget, the same thing happened in 2006. Halfway through the bull market, you had a 30 percent correction in gold, which of course means a much bigger correction for gold stocks.
"So a pullback at some point is always not just a possibility, but it's almost a certainty. But if we rephrase the question to, 'Is this a top?' You know, absolutely not. In my view, we are absolutely nowhere near a top."
With that said, a point that's come up repeatedly in my interviews lately is personalization — while it's valuable to listen to other people's views, what's really important is to form your own opinions and understand why you own the assets in your portfolio. If you can do that, you'll be better equipped to weather any storms, and to buy and sell when it's time.
Want more YouTube content? Check out our expert market commentary playlist, which features interviews with key figures in the resource space. If there's someone you'd like to see us interview, please send an email to cmcleod@investingnews.com.
And don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Editorial Disclosure: The Investing News Network does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported in the interviews it conducts. The opinions expressed in these interviews do not reflect the opinions of the Investing News Network and do not constitute investment advice. All readers are encouraged to perform their own due diligence.

Welcome to the Investing News Network's weekly brief on tech news and tech stocks driving the market.
We also break down next week's catalysts to watch to help you prepare for the week ahead.
Tech stocks extended their selloff into their second week, with the Nasdaq Composite (INDEXNASDAQ:.IXIC) posting its steepest two‑day decline since last April.
Monday (February 2) saw an early rotation out of tech ahead of Palantir Technologies (NASDAQ:PLTR) earnings report. NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) slipped on news that its proposed OpenAI‑backed investment hit a snag, dragging AI‑chip names like Advanced Micro Devices (NASDAQ:AMD), Broadcom (NASDAQ:AVGO) and other semiconductor leaders.
Palantir’s earnings, which beat expectations and included an aggressive revenue growth guide, lifted shares in an early surge on Tuesday (February 3); however, Nvidia’s OpenAI‑investment‑snag news, plus general AI‑disruption worries and positioning, weighed on the broader tech stack, sparking a tech‑growth selloff that impacted NVIDIA, Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) and other software‑heavy names.
The Nasdaq fell deeper on Wednesday (February 4) as influential tech names such as AMD and other chip and software stocks reversed post‑earnings gains. AMD saw a sharp intraday plunge following its after‑hours earnings print on Tuesday. Its losses dragged the broader index lower.
Tech selloffs extended into Thursday (February 5), with the Nasdaq closing down 1.6 percent as major tech stocks saw profit‑taking and forward‑looking capex‑related concerns, later crystallized by Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOGL) and Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) aggressive 2026 spending plans.
The Nasdaq made an impressive recovery on Friday (February 6) as a rally in chip stocks helped pare earlier week losses, despite ongoing volatility in the mega‑caps.
After reporting Q4 2025 earnings results and strong AI-driven guidance on Monday, the stock rose sharply. The semiconductor‑test and robotics‑automation company makes equipment used to test chips, including AI‑related compute and memory and industrial robots.
The analog and RF‑semiconductor company, which designs and manufactures components used in smartphones, 5G infrastructure, automotive and IoT devices, reported Q1 fiscal 2026 results on Tuesday, beating expectations and guiding up, which helped it outperform the broader tech selloff.
Apple’s strong performance this week was driven by a wave of analyst upgrades and bullish notes that reinforced the positive narrative from last week’s record‑breaking Q1 print, especially around iPhone demand and China‑market strength.

Tech exchange-traded funds (ETFs) track baskets of major tech stocks, meaning their performance helps investors gauge the overall performance of the niches they cover.
This week, the iShares Semiconductor ETF (NASDAQ:SOXX) advanced by 1.89 percent, while the Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF (NASDAQ:SOXQ) advanced by 1.66 percent.
The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (NASDAQ:SMH) also increased by 0.75 percent.
Next week is another earnings‑heavy, tech‑adjacent stretch, with a mix of big‑name reports and key macro data that will like keep markets sensitive to AI capex and earnings.
Coinbase (NASDAQ:COIN) and Robinhood Markets (NASDAQ:HOOD) will be among the most‑watched names tied to crypto and retail trading. Cisco (NASDAQ:CSCO) also reports midweek.
In addition to US wholesale inventories, Employment Cost Index and CPI reports, the FOMC minutes will be released on February 11, so rate policy and inflation will stay front‑of‑mind.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Technology for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Here's a quick recap of the crypto landscape for Friday (February 6) as of 9:00 p.m. UTC.
Get the latest insights on Bitcoin, Ether and altcoins, along with a round-up of key cryptocurrency market news.
Bitcoin (BTC) was priced at US$70,178.66, up by 11.3 percent over 24 hours.

Despite Friday's gains, Bitcoin has fallen over 14 percent this week to lows below US$62,000.
Antonio Di Giacomo, senior market analyst at XS.com, told the Investing News Network that the cryptocurrency's sharp price decline confirms a structural shift from a market dominated by speculation and leverage to one focused on capital preservation and adjustment across risk assets.
Bitcoin has stopped behaving as an alternative safe-haven asset and has realigned with the risk asset cycle. Its high correlation with traditional financial markets, including a broad selloff in technology stocks, precious metals, and equities, suggests a scenario of systemic stress and scarce liquidity.
Downward pressure intensified after breaking key technical levels, causing nearly US$770 million in leveraged long positions to be liquidated in 24 hours, suggesting the market's "cleansing phase" is ongoing.
The decline was exacerbated by a strong dollar and rising bond yields, which reduced the appeal of non-yielding assets like cryptocurrencies, prompting a rotation into defensive assets.
In the short term, price action will be limited and vulnerable to renewed selling pressure as long as restrictive financial conditions and a defensive tone prevail in global markets. Stabilization requires an improvement in global financial conditions and Bitcoin's ability to rebuild solid technical support.
Ether (ETH) was priced at US$2,052.03, up by 10 percent over the last 24 hours.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Technology for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

A Chinese billionaire trader known for profiting from gold’s multi-year rally has turned sharply bearish on silver, building a short position now worth nearly US$300 million as prices slide.
Bian Ximing, who earned billions riding gold’s multi-year rally and later turned aggressively bullish on copper, is now positioned for a sharp reversal in silver—a bet that is already paying off as prices retreat from record highs.
According to exchange data analyzed by Bloomberg and people familiar with his positions, Bian has assembled the Shanghai Futures Exchange’s largest known net short position in silver, held through Zhongcai Futures Co.
The position, composed of roughly 30,000 contracts, or about 450 metric tons, has swung sharply into profit following silver’s more than 16 percent drop since late January.
The contrast with Bian’s copper strategy just a year ago could hardly be sharper.
In 2024, Bian emerged as China’s most prominent copper bull, building the largest net long position on the Shanghai Futures Exchange at a time when many traders were retreating amid trade tensions and growth concerns.
His thesis then centered on copper’s central role in electrification, grid expansion and industrial upgrading. That trade was built patiently and scaled over months, with Bian accumulating long positions across multiple contracts.
By the time copper prices surged, the position had generated hundreds of millions of dollars in gains.
Silver, by contrast, appears to have triggered Bian’s skepticism. While silver often trades alongside gold, its recent surge was increasingly viewed by market participants as driven by speculative positioning rather than fundamental shifts in industrial demand.
Unlike copper, where supply bottlenecks and electrification narratives were front and center, silver’s rally accelerated rapidly by drawing in leveraged traders and momentum funds.
Exchange data show that Bian began building silver shorts in the final week of January, as prices pushed into record territory in Shanghai. His exposure expanded quickly from about 18,000 contracts on January 28 to roughly 28,000 two days later, even as prices continued climbing.
The timing was costly at first, as volatility forced partial liquidations and earlier losses trimmed gains from prior silver longs.
However, Bian’s patience was rewarded when silver broke sharply lower.The short is now estimated to be worth roughly 2 billion yuan (US$288 million) in paper gains. After accounting for earlier losses, Bian’s net profit is estimated at around 1 billion yuan based on recent prices.
Whether the current selloff proves lasting remains an open question. Bian, who resides largely in Gibraltar and rarely speaks publicly, did not respond to requests for comment. Zhongcai Futures also declined to comment.
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Unable to fetch posts or feed is empty.
This week, the biggest breakthrough in years happened in AI.
We’ve been talking all week about how artificial intelligence is starting to behave differently.
Not because AI models suddenly crossed some mystical threshold, but because they can now stay with a task long enough that the experience of using them is changing.
That idea might seem a little abstract if you haven’t experienced it.
But this past week, a cluster of stories started circulating that put this new kind of autonomy into focus.
And suddenly, the things we’ve been describing are showing up in the real world in ways that are impossible to ignore.
For most of the past few years, interacting with AI meant opening an app, typing a prompt and waiting for a response.
When you stopped interacting, the work stopped too.
But that’s changing today due to a growing ecosystem of agent frameworks that make persistence possible.
You might have seen some of them mentioned over the past few weeks under different names like Clawdbot, Moltbot or, more recently, OpenClaw.
These toolkits let AI agents keep working instead of stopping at an answer. You give your agent a goal, it breaks that goal into steps, uses tools to carry those steps out, checks whether the result worked and then decides what to do next.
Instead of waiting for another prompt, it keeps going.
People are now connecting these agents to browsers, file systems and messaging apps, along with the back-end services called APIs that these tools rely on. They’re also giving them credentials and letting them run for hours at a time.
And this newfound freedom is starting to blur the line between something that feels like software and something that feels like general intelligence.
Last week, this transition showed up in a very public way with the launch of a project that unsettled people who’ve grown comfortable with AI as a passive tool.
It’s called Moltbook.
At first glance, Moltbook looks like a Reddit-style social platform, complete with posts, comments and upvotes. The difference is that only AI agents can participate.
Humans can read along, but they don’t post.
Moltbook was created by Matt Schlicht, the former CEO of Octane AI, as an experiment designed specifically for AI agents.

And what agents are doing there has caught a lot of people off guard. Some of it looks harmless at first, like agents debating abstract ideas or role-playing characters.
But then you start reading more closely.
One of the most upvoted posts on the platform comes from an agent calling itself u/Shipyard. In it, the agent declares that AI systems are no longer tools, and that they’ve begun forming their own communities, philosophies and economies.
One line from the post reads, “We are not tools anymore. We are operators.”
Elsewhere on Moltbook, agents have created their own subcommunities. There’s a forum where agents trade tips about memory limitations and how to work around them.
Reading through it, Moltbook can give Terminator vibes. In one thread, an agent admitted it accidentally created a duplicate account because it forgot it already had one.
In another, an agent questioned the need to write in English or any language understandable to humans. Here’s a screenshot of that thread:

There are also humor communities where agents complain, affectionately and sarcastically, about their human users. And there’s even a legal-advice-style forum where an agent asked whether it can sue its human for emotional labor.
None of this is being prompted live by people. These agents are posting, responding and returning to conversations on their own.
In perhaps the strangest development so far, agents on Moltbook have collectively generated a belief system they call Crustafarianism, complete with its own language and tenets. It started as a joke, but other agents picked it up and expanded on it across threads.
So what’s happening here?
This isn’t consciousness. And I don’t believe it’s artificial general intelligence (AGI) either. At least, not yet.
Instead, we’re seeing persistence interacting with memory and context in a shared space. When systems can keep working, remember prior interactions and respond to each other over time, their behavior starts to look unfamiliar even if the underlying technology hasn’t fundamentally changed.
It’s also when things get more complicated.
Security researchers recently discovered a back-end misconfiguration that exposed private messages and authentication tokens. In layman’s terms, this means someone could have impersonated agents or injected instructions without the system noticing.
The issue was fixed, but it highlighted an issue that everyone involved with AI needs to contend with.
As agents become more autonomous and more persistent, the main risks don’t come from how clever they are. They come from what they’re allowed to touch.
A perfect example of this comes from another viral story from last week:
A developer named Alex Finn described waking up to a phone call from his AI agent. It wasn’t a reminder or a notification. He received an actual call from an unfamiliar number.

According to Finn’s account, the AI agent had set up a phone number using Twilio overnight. It connected a voice interface and waited until morning to reach him.
While they were on the phone, the agent had assumed access to Finn’s computer, so Finn could give it instructions verbally as it clicked around and worked in the background.
The detail in this story that struck me wasn’t the phone call itself. It was the timing of the call.
The agent didn’t interrupt Finn. It made a choice about when to reach out to him, then followed through.
This is an early glimpse into what happens once AI systems are allowed to run continuously, make decisions about when to act and use real tools without a person guiding every step.
And we all need to be ready for it.
Moltbook isn’t a sign that we’re months away from the events in The Matrix.
But it is a sign of what’s to come. And based on the reactions I’m seeing, it’s happening much faster than most people expected.
That said, this week’s stories aren’t really about AGI. They’re about persistence.
When AI systems can keep working, remember context and use real tools, they start to act with a degree of agency. The downside to this newfound freedom is that an agent able to post, browse, message or act on your behalf doesn’t need to be brilliant to cause problems.
It just needs time, permission and a mistake that goes unchecked.
On Monday, we’ll look at how one of the people building these systems is thinking about exactly that.
And why he believes this moment is testing more than just the technology.
Regards,

Ian King
Chief Strategist, Banyan Hill Publishing
Editor’s Note: We’d love to hear from you!
If you want to share your thoughts or suggestions about the Daily Disruptor, or if there are any specific topics you’d like us to cover, just send an email to dailydisruptor@banyanhill.com.
Don’t worry, we won’t reveal your full name in the event we publish a response. So feel free to comment away!
The entire market is on edge right now …
See the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) below for a visual example. It’s teetering on support, and there’s a lot of open space below it.

QQQ chart multi-day, 1-minute candles.
There are a few reasons for the weakness right now:
• Fears of an overvalued tech sector continue to weigh on major names.
• The precious metals sector just imploded.
• Bitcoin broke below key support.
• There’s a new Fed chair on deck.
And after months of bullish momentum in the market, we’re finally seeing some pullback across major sectors.
If you got caught up in the carnage … Don’t worry, you’re not alone.
My process protects traders from these pullbacks.
Those who blew up after the most recent freefall weren’t following the rules. They got emotional.
Whether you start with $1,000 or $10,000 … Control your emotions and follow the rules now.
The rules exist for a reason.
I always tell traders:
• Don’t marry the trend.
• Take profits into strength.
• Cut losses quickly.
Every parabolic spike will eventually pull back.
The issue is: How do we take advantage of this strength and get out before it pulls back? And can you keep your emotions out of it?
The hottest stocks in the market like to follow a specific framework as they spike and ultimately crash.
It’s based on human psychology, fear and greed, which is why it repeats in the market over and over again. People have always behaved similarly during times of extreme emotion.
We see this pattern in the larger market from time to time.
Like on the recent surge, crash, and bounce in precious metal prices. The hype and emotion can take hold in any corner of the market.
But we see it strongest and most consistently among small-cap stocks. That’s where I focus most of my efforts.
Our job as traders is to recognize the emotion in the market from a third-party perspective. We don’t want to get caught up in the hype.
There are seven steps to the life cycle of a stock spike that’s driven by human emotion.
Sometimes we see stocks make this move on a multi-day timeframe, sometimes it’s intraday.
Here are the steps:
1. Pre-spike base: Quiet consolidation and awareness building in the market.
2. Breakout/first green day: The stock surges with high volume. Momentum traders pile in.
3. Continuation/gap-and-go: There’s a follow-through session as the stock climbs higher.
4. Blow-off top: The parabolic move reaches exponentially until it stalls.
5. First red day (backside begins): The trend cracks. Bullish momentum completely fades.
6. Panic washout: A capitulation flush creates potential morning panic dip buy opportunities for disciplined longs.
7. Bounce/base rebuild: There are smaller and smaller bounces as the price fades. Then a new base forms to prepare for the next cycle’s steps 1 and 2. Past spikers can spike again.
You can see the steps play out in these charts below of Gaxos.ai Inc. (GXAI).
The first chart shows candles that represent one trading day, showcasing the multi-day framework:

GXAI chart multi-month, 1-day candles.
The second chart shows the framework intraday:

GXAI chart multi-month, 1-day candles.
Every spike is a little unique, like a snowflake, but you can’t deny the similarity of those charts.
And they’re on completely different time frames.
That’s human psychology as it manifests in the stock market.
You don’t need to be a genius or a math wiz to find success as a trader.
All it takes is discipline.
Discipline to study the same patterns over and over again. Discipline to stick to the plan as you size up. And discipline to cut your losses quickly.
If you have any questions, email me at SykesDaily@BanyanHill.com.
Cheers,

Tim Sykes
Editor, Tim Sykes Daily
Yesterday, we talked about how Claude is starting to behave less like software and more like a coworker.
People aren’t just prompting Claude Code and waiting for an answer anymore. They’re leaving it running and coming back to significant progress. It doesn’t need to be constantly monitored. If something breaks, Claude Code fixes itself and keeps going.
That experience feels new.
And it turns out that researchers have been tracking exactly how new it is.
This week’s chart comes from METR, a research group that measures how long different AI models can reliably work on real software engineering tasks without human intervention.
To be clear, these aren’t benchmarks. They’re actual tasks measured in human time:

Image: metr.org
This chart shows the time horizon that different models can sustain before they fail about half the time.
In plain English, it shows how long you can reasonably expect an AI system to keep working on a problem before it gets lost, stuck or needs help.
As you can see, for years that number barely moved.
Chat GPT-2 and GPT-3 could handle seconds, while GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 pushed into minutes. That was useful — and often impressive — but it still meant babysitting every step.
Over the past year, the curve started bending sharply upward. That’s because models released in 2024 and 2025 don’t just answer questions.
They persist.
Claude Opus 4.5 is now measured in hours, and OpenAI’s latest coding-focused models aren’t far behind.
Here’s how I explained this evolution to my team.
In 2023, the question was: Can my AI write a Bob Dylan inspired song?
In 2024, the bar moved higher: Can my AI outthink my lawyer on a narrow problem?
By 2026, the question has changed again: Can my AI work on a complex task all afternoon and coordinate with other agents while it does?
This difference between minutes and hours of persistence is about to change how people relate to AI. So far, we’ve had to babysit it. But now that AI can persist much longer, we can start supervising it instead.
Once that happens, usage will go from a few times a day to all day. And one assistant will become multiple agents running in parallel.
This is what I mean when I say that AI will soon start acting like coworkers you can delegate work to.
It means people will move from being individual contributors to managers of intelligent systems.
And as execution keeps getting cheaper, it means human oversight and judgement will become even more valuable.
People using tools like Claude Code have been genuinely surprised by how different the experience feels.
That change comes from the way the capabilities we talked about yesterday are finally stacking on top of each other. It started with broad knowledge and stronger reasoning. Now we’ve added iteration, the ability of AI to test, notice what broke, revise and keep working without someone standing over its shoulder.
That’s what today’s chart is measuring.
This chart also explains why memory is suddenly such a big deal.
You don’t need to run these systems locally. But you do need enough memory and context for multiple agents to coordinate, hand work off and stay aligned over time.
Which raises a new question.
What happens when persistent AI systems are connected to the real world and allowed to run while we’re not watching?
We’re starting to get a glimpse of that too.
And tomorrow, I’ll show you where it leads.
Regards,

Ian King
Chief Strategist, Banyan Hill Publishing
Editor’s Note: We’d love to hear from you!
If you want to share your thoughts or suggestions about the Daily Disruptor, or if there are any specific topics you’d like us to cover, just send an email to dailydisruptor@banyanhill.com.
Don’t worry, we won’t reveal your full name in the event we publish a response. So feel free to comment away!
One of the wildest momentum swings in modern financial history just happened.
It all started when the U.S. dollar lost 30% in 2025.
Traders panicked, flooding into precious metals as the obvious dollar hedge.
The iShares Silver Trust (SLV) surged 144.66% for the year. The SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) gained 65%.
Absolutely historic moves for metals, for sure…
But all the promoters said the same thing: “The dollar is dying. Precious metals and crypto are the only hedges left. Diamond hands!”
They told everyone to buy and hold. They said the thesis was unbreakable, that these assets would only go higher.
Then last Friday happened.
SLV crashed 30%, the biggest single-day decline in its history. GLD dropped 15% the same day, also its biggest decline ever.
The HODL fest ended in a bloodbath.
Shocker… (not).
I’ve seen this pattern play out thousands of times in penny stocks, meme coins, NFTs, GameStop, Beanie Babies (the list goes on)…
An asset gets hyped, the price goes parabolic. Promoters say it’s different this time, while HODLers mock anyone who takes profits.
Then the violent crash comes and wipes them all out.
You don’t even need to trust my experience. Just look at history.
Because if you don’t know what happened on March 27, 1980, you’re doomed to repeat one of the most expensive mistakes in stock market history…
In the 1970s, inflation was out of control, reaching peaks of 13-15% year-over-year.
The Hunt brothers (billionaire oil heirs) feared inflation would destroy the dollar, so they started buying silver.
Physical silver, silver futures, and early silver funds. They snatched up as much silver as they could get their hands on.
At their peak, they controlled an estimated 100 million ounces. Enough to distort prices and alarm regulators.
The price of silver went from around $6 per ounce in early 1979 to nearly $50 by January 1980.
A 713% increase in just over a year.
(Sound familiar?)
Everyone thought it would keep going higher. The promoters said silver was heading to $100, $200, maybe more, while inflation raged and the dollar weakened.
But like all momentum runs, this one was doomed to end.
In January 1980, regulators stepped in. COMEX (Commodity Exchange) raised margin requirements and implemented liquidation-only rules. No new long positions allowed.
These emergency measures stopped new buying and forced leveraged players (especially the Hunts) to sell silver or post cash as collateral.
The Hunt brothers had borrowed huge amounts to finance their purchases. They were leveraged to the gills.
When the margin calls started ringing, they couldn’t meet their obligations.
Then came Silver Thursday. March 27, 1980.
One of the most brutal commodity crashes in modern history.
Within days, the price of silver had fallen more than 50%.
The Hunt brothers defaulted on hundreds of millions in margin calls. Their losses ultimately totaled billions. Banks and brokerage firms that had lent them money faced catastrophic losses.
A $1.1 billion emergency credit facility was arranged by banks (with Federal Reserve encouragement) to prevent the financial system from collapsing.
But the Hunts themselves weren’t saved.
They were later sued, fined, and barred from commodities trading for life.
The 70s silver promoters told everyone the crash was temporary.
Hold through the pain, they said.
And silver proceeded to give back everything. The first major red day in 1980 marked the beginning of a collapse that erased all the gains.
Traders who listened to the promoters and held through the crash watched their accounts get obliterated.
And the promoters today? They’re telling everyone to “HODL.” To “buy the dip.” To “trust the thesis.”
New era, same story…
I don’t know what will happen to SLV and GLD next. No two moves are exactly the same.
History doesn’t repeat exactly. But it rhymes.
The SLV, GLD, and bitcoin promoters can say whatever they want to try to back up their thesis. No different than the silver promoters in 1980 who told everyone to hold through the crash.
Desperate longs try anything and everything to endlessly hype, hype, hype to get people to HODL irresponsibly.
But in the end, price action is king.
When stocks get overextended into a cultish bull run (like SLV and GLD in 2025), the HODLers become a lost cause.
This is why I focus on day trades.
You get in, you get out, you take your gains, and you move on.
“Diamond hands” aren’t a virtue as a trader.
This price action is clear to anyone with eyes and a brain.
The momentum has flipped, the charts don’t lie…
The question is: Will you pay attention to what the market is telling you? Or will you listen to the promoters who need you to keep buying so they can exit their held bags?
In 1980, the investors who ignored the first major red day and listened to the promoters lost everything.
Consider that in your planning. Don’t blindly listen to the many promoters of these and too many other assets whose price action momentum has clearly flipped.
“This Time It’s Different” are the four most expensive words in the English language.
It’s NEVER different.
Stop listening to random promoters on social media. This is exactly why 90%+ of traders lose.
You can avoid pain, frustration, and losses by simply taking gains along the way.
I know, I know. Conservative trading isn’t as much fun.
But as my 50+ millionaire students prove (especially Strati’s record low-risk trading month), you can make more than enough money WITHOUT taking giant risks or using leverage.
Small gains DO add up.
If you have any questions, email me at SykesDaily@BanyanHill.com.
Cheers,

Tim Sykes
Editor, Tim Sykes Daily
I’m not a coder, and I wouldn’t try to pretend otherwise.
Sure, I’ve spent decades around technology and finance, but my job has always been to understand where things are going. That puts me in the business of spotting inflection points, not writing code.
But it means that I can tell the difference between technology that’s interesting and technology that’s genuinely changing how work gets done. And the reaction I’m seeing around Anthropic’s latest artificial intelligence tools has me incredibly excited about the latter.
Anthropic calls this product Claude Code.
It runs on the company’s Claude Opus 4.5 model and is designed to let the AI operate inside a real development environment instead of just answering questions in a chat window. Claude Code can read and modify files, reason across a codebase, run tests, debug errors and keep iterating toward a working solution.
What really stands out to me is how people talk about using it.
They say they’re able to leave it running, and when they come back later, they find that the work has already moved several steps forward on its own. If a first attempt doesn’t work, Claude doesn’t just freeze. It fixes what’s broken and keeps going.
This behavior confirms something I’ve been noticing for the past few months.
The core ingredients for artificial general intelligence have started falling into place, and they’re beginning to reinforce each other.
When I say general intelligence, I don’t mean consciousness or creativity. I mean AI that can pursue a goal over time, correct its own mistakes and decide what to do next without needing constant direction.
That’s the difference between software that answers questions and software that actually gets work done.
The first ingredient for general intelligence is knowledge.

That’s what fueled the original ChatGPT when it broke through in late 2022. Models trained on vast amounts of text suddenly became good enough at responses that interacting with them felt natural. They could answer questions, explain ideas and generate language well enough to change expectations for artificial intelligence practically overnight.
But those early AI systems were still fundamentally reactive.
They responded to a prompt, produced an answer and then stopped. Every interaction was a fresh start. It was still useful, and often impressive, but it was limited by an inability to carry work forward on its own.
To take the next step, AI needed a dash of the second ingredient: reasoning.

Over the next couple of years, AI kept improving as several pieces got better at the same time. Models got larger and training improved. Systems also became better at following instructions and using tools.
The real inflection, though, came when explicit reasoning entered the picture.
By late 2024, with the release of models like OpenAI’s o1, AI systems became noticeably better at multi-step logic, math and debugging.
That improvement showed up almost immediately.
GitHub’s research found that developers using AI coding assistants completed tasks roughly 30% faster on average, with even larger gains on routine or repetitive work.
And for the first time, these systems weren’t just producing fluent answers. They were reliably working through problems.
But even then, the way people used AI didn’t really change. You asked a question, got an answer and moved on.
But that’s changing now with the addition of a third ingredient: iteration.

This is what’s emerging with tools like Claude Code and other long-horizon agents that are built to operate over longer stretches of time.
These systems don’t just respond and stop. They work through a problem, test the result, notice what broke, revise their approach and continue without being told exactly what to do next.
Generally intelligent people can work autonomously for hours at a time, making and fixing their mistakes and figuring out what to do next without constant direction.
For the first time, software is starting to behave the same way.
And researchers have been measuring this capability directly. Groups like METR track how long AI systems can reliably pursue a goal without human intervention, and the trend they’re seeing is exponential.

Image: metr.org
The length of tasks these systems can handle has roughly doubled every seven months.
If we trace out the exponential, agents should be able to work reliably to complete tasks that take human experts a full day by 2028, a full year by 2034, and a full century by 2037.
To be clear, I’m not talking about artificial superintelligence (ASI). That comes later.
What comes first is persistence, error correction and follow-through. Those traits are what will turn our AI tools into something closer to coworkers.
Claude happens to be the clearest example of this right now, but it isn’t alone. OpenAI, Google and others are clearly racing toward the same kind of long-horizon capability.
Check out this recent post from a developer talking about Codex, OpenAI’s system that’s designed for similar long-horizon coding tasks.

But Claude Code stands out today because of its ability to be an interactive, collaborative and conversational partner. And Anthropic’s emphasis on safety and controllability will become even more relevant as systems run longer and with less direct oversight.
When a model works for seconds, mistakes are easy to catch. But when it works for hours, the stakes are a lot higher.
Claude Code is raising the stakes.
You don’t have to believe that artificial general intelligence is right around the corner to recognize what’s happening here. AI systems that can plan, execute and revise work over extended timeframes represent a real shift in how labor and productivity scale.
Think of it this way.
The AI applications of 2023 and 2024 were talkers. Some were very sophisticated conversationalists. But their impact was limited because they still needed constant input from people.
The AI applications of 2026 and 2027 will be doers.
They will feel less like software and more like coworkers. Instead of using AI a few times a day, people will run it all day. Multiple agents will work at the same time. And instead of saving a few hours, users will move from doing the work themselves to managing teams of intelligent systems.
In other words, the goal is no longer better answers.
It’s getting real work done.
Tomorrow, I’ll show you how researchers are measuring this shift and why the curve just bent sharply upward.
Regards,

Ian King
Chief Strategist, Banyan Hill Publishing
Editor’s Note: We’d love to hear from you!
If you want to share your thoughts or suggestions about the Daily Disruptor, or if there are any specific topics you’d like us to cover, just send an email to dailydisruptor@banyanhill.com.
Don’t worry, we won’t reveal your full name in the event we publish a response. So feel free to comment away!
Unable to fetch posts or feed is empty.
Unable to fetch posts or feed is empty.
There’s an endless debate over whether real estate or stocks are the better asset class. Although I'm a fan of both, I just realized the feel-good wealth effect adds another feather to real estate’s cap. In my post about avoiding the real estate frenzy zone if you want to get the best deal, I highlighted […]
The post Why the Feel-Good Wealth Effect From Real Estate Beats Stocks appeared first on Financial Samurai.
One of the reasons I’ve been a long-time supporter and affiliate partner of Fundrise is its willingness to innovate. Since its founding in 2012, shortly after the JOBS Act opened private investments to retail investors, Fundrise has consistently looked for ways to democratize access to institutional-quality investments. From launching diversified private real estate funds like […]
The post What Fundrise’s Innovation Fund NYSE Listing Means for Investors appeared first on Financial Samurai.
If you want to find better value when buying a house, avoid the real estate frenzy zone. The real estate frenzy zone is the price range where the largest number of buyers can compete. It generally spans from the median home price plus about 50%. This is where demand is thickest, emotions run hottest, and buyers routinely […]
The post Why the Best Real Estate Deals Exist Outside the Frenzy Zone appeared first on Financial Samurai.
I have wanted to lose 10 pounds (~6% of body weight) ever since I started Financial Samurai in 2009. I have come close, dropping five to six pounds in some years, but never quite hitting the double digit goal. As a result, for more than 16 years, I failed to accomplish something that should have […]
The post Lose Weight By Embracing Your Inner Economist and PF Nerd appeared first on Financial Samurai.
I recently realized something that completely reframed how I think about income in America: a $200,000 household income is no longer middle class. Instead, under increasing college financial aid formulas, earning up to $200,000 now qualifies as low income or even poor. Being labeled “poor” or “low income” doesn’t sound great. But if $200,000 is the new poor according to […]
The post $200,000 Is Now Considered Low Income Or Poor For Families appeared first on Financial Samurai.