Fintech Ant Group's $Alibaba(BABA.US)$ valuation is said to have been cut by 15% to below $200B by major investor Warburg Pincus.
Private equity firm Warburg Pincus, who was a large investor in Ant's 2018 fundraising, cut the company's valuation to $191B at end of September from $224B at the end of June, according to a Reuters report, which cited sources. The report also said there are signs that Ant's planned IPO won't be happening anytime soon.
Warburg changed its valuation methodology for the fintech giant, citing “regulatory developments and the impact of ongoing restructuring," according to Reuters.
Ant Group was ordered by Chinese regulators to restructure into a financial holding company, and Alibaba, which holds Ant Group stake, had to pay a record $2.75B antitrust fine in April.
Last year, Ant was valued at $315B ahead of its blockbuster IPO dual listing, which regulators pulled at the last minute in November. In May, Fidelity cut Ant Group's valuation to $144B implied valuation from its $300B heights.
Separately, the WSJ reported earlier that Ant has set up a new consumer finance company and has folded its credit business into the new entity as part of Ant's restructuring efforts aimed at appeasing Chinese authorities.
Ant Group director Fred Hu told Nikkei in July that he expected that the company will be able to resume its suspended IPO "before too long."
Earlier this week, Alibaba, Baidu among decliners in wake of Chinese government fines.

$Tesla(TSLA.US)$ Tesla first introduced personal auto insurance in California in 2019 through State National Insurance. More recently, the company took the next step forward in its insurance journey by offering personal auto insurance in Texas through the underwriting company Redpoint County Mutual Insurance. It's important to note that Tesla isn't an underwriting company, it is partnering with underwriting companies to offer its product under the Tesla Insurance name.
The premium is determined based on what vehicle you drive, your provided address, how much you drive, and what coverage you select. The company is not using traditional variables like credit, age, gender, and claim history to price their insurance. With Texas, Tesla also introduced their UBI program called the Safety Score as an additional factor in determining premium.
The Safety Score is based on driving behavior and assigns the driver a score from 0 to 100 based on five safety factors:
1. Forward Collision Warnings per 1,000 Miles: Audible and visual alerts provided to the driver in situations where a possible collision could occur due to an object in front of the vehicle. Maintaining a safe distance and paying attention to the traffic around you helps improve your score.
2. Hard Braking*: Defined as a decrease in the vehicle’s speed larger than 6.7 mph, in one second. Despite the definition, I think we all know what hard braking is. The Safety score can be improved by engaging the brake pedal early when slowing down, coming to a stop, or reacting to a change in the environment.
3. Aggressive Turning*: Defined as an increase in vehicle’s speed to the left/right greater than 8.9 mph, in one second. Again, we all know aggressive turning when we see it. The Safety Score can be improved by turning, changing lanes, or rounding a corner gradually instead of aggressively.
4. Unsafe Following*: Tesla vehicles measure their own speed, the speed of the vehicle in front of them and the distance between the two vehicles. Based on these measurements, Tesla calculates Headway, or the number of seconds you would have to react and stop if the vehicle in front of you came to a sudden stop. Unsafe following is the proportion of time where your vehicle’s headway is less than 1.0 seconds relative to the time that your vehicle’s headway is less than 3.0 seconds. Unsafe following is only measured when your vehicle is traveling at least 50 mph. The Safety Score can be improved by not tailgating or driving close to the vehicle in front of you so you have enough time to react.
5. Forced Autopilot Disengagement: If you remove your hands from the steering wheel during Autopilot, an audio and visual warning is sent to the driver. Three of these warnings result in Autopilot system disengagement for the remainder of a trip.
*Not factored into the Safety Score formula when on Autopilot
These factors are measured directly by the Tesla models using various sensors on the vehicle and Autopilot software. Although this is a significant step forward in Tesla’s insurance journey, The Safety Score isn’t something that’s new.
Many major U.S personal auto insurers have introduced optional UBI programs that assign a score to the driver. Nonetheless, there are a couple of meaningful items that differentiate Tesla.
Some of the factors introduced by Tesla in Texas are different to what other insurance carriers have. For example, Progressive doesn’t have forward collision warnings or unsafe following as factors. On the other hand, Progressive includes late night driving and driving less overall as factors within their UBI program. Tesla is likely to introduce new factors and tweak existing factors within the Safety Score as more data becomes available.
Unlike other major carriers, Tesla doesn't require and additional device to be installed in the vehicle to capture driving behavior. Tesla uses specific features within the vehicle to evaluate premium based on actual driving.
The Safety Score is updated daily to provide real-time feedback on driving safety. The daily Safety Scores are combined (up to 30 days) to provide a premium based on the months’ driving activity. Below is an example of how the premium could change based on the score by month. Traditional insurance carriers don’t offer daily updates and change in premiums by month. Instead, it’s typical to have a monitoring period of 6 months before receiving a score and change in premium.
Based on the introduction of the Safety Score and partnership with Repoint Insurance, Tesla Insurance is the cheapest option for full coverage in Texas.
Lastly, and most importantly, the company will be able to leverage first party data to predict collision frequency due to the technology within Tesla cars. Other insurance carriers will likely have to partner with different manufacturers to capture data within cars at the point of sale, Tesla already has first party data.
CFO, Zachary Kirkhorn, explained:
At Tesla, because our cars are connected, because they are essentially computers on wheels, there's enormous amounts of data that we have available to us to be able to assess the attributes of a driver who's operating that car, and whether those attributes correlate with safety.
We've been able to go back and analyze that data and we've learned 2 things coming from that. The first is that the probability of collision for a customer using safety score versus not is 30% lower. That's a pretty big difference.
It means that the product is working and customers are responding to it. The second thing that we've looked at is what is the probability of collision based upon actual data as a function of a driver safety score. And that is aligning with our models. Most notably, if you're in the top tier of safety compared to lower tiers, there's multiplex difference in probability of collision based upon actual data.
Tesla is looking at hundreds of different variables and billions of miles of driving history to predict loss frequency and price each risk individually. The dataset will continue to grow and get better as Tesla sells more cars and as people drive more. Tesla is planning to launch personal auto insurance in every major market in which they have cars.

"Regulation is coming to the crypto markets, but it will be a slow, measured process," writes Rosenblatt analyst Sean Horgan in a note summing up the firm's first two discussions with former markets regulators.
Brett Redfearn, former director of Division of Trading & Markets at the SEC and former head of capital markets at $Coinbase(COIN.US)$, and Dorothy DeWitt, former director of the CFTC's Division of Market Oversight and former VP and general counsel for Business Lines and Markets at Coinbase were the first two speakers in a series on cryptocurrency regulation.
Both thought it unlikely that the government would create a new federal regulator for cryptocurrency, as Coinbase has suggested, given that would be the most costly option. Redfearn expects that the SEC may get the mandate due to its sway on Capitol Hill and its investor protection focus.
DeWitt sees the potential for the Treasury and banking regulators overseeing stablecoin, while the SEC or CFTC may get oversight of non-stablecoin areas.
She expects stablecoin issuers will be treated like banks with heavy regulation going forward, given the proposals from the President's Working Group on Financial Markets earlier this month.
Redfearn suggests that larger banks need to delve into adopting crypto assets because of the threat from decentralized finance applications moving finance out of the banks and into the hands of individuals, who are trying to disintermediate banks, Horgan said.
He said that companies resisting regulatory changes may "capture more market share in the short term, but those who are proactive as they anticipate regulation will benefit in the long term," according to Horgan's note. The analyst sees that as benefiting $Robinhood(HOOD.US)$ and a negative for Coinbase, $Tether(USDT.CC)$, and BlockFi.
The two former regulators also discussed the potential for stricter regulations on payment for order flow (PFOF), which would affect stocks like Robinhood and $Virtu Financial(VIRT.US)$.
Redfearn expects crypto PFOF to be handled separately from equity and options PFOF. Most of the focus currently appears to be on equity PFOF; that's a positive for Robinhood, Horgan said, as its revenue from equity PFOF is shrinking as a percentage of its PFOF revenue.
In August, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler said a full ban on PFOF was on the table.
In crypto news today, U.S. banking regulators will focus on custody, trading, stablecoins in crypto sprint
$Bitcoin(BTC.CC)$ $Dogecoin(DOGE.CC)$ $Ethereum(ETH.CC)$

$Palantir(PLTR.US)$ 2.5 billion + in cash
Virtually zero debt (under 15 million)
FCF positive
Not profitable by choice and at that, net losses are just barely there.
Net income has always hovered between -100 million to -200 million.
^^ that is by choice.

$Alibaba(BABA.US)$ In 1980 the PE on the S&P got down to 7 when the market crashed. The PE of Alibaba is now about 16.
Food for thought. Maybe value is not as much protection as we perhaps think.

In 2016-2017, the WS have criple $JD.com(JD.US)$ with story of CEO and some women…..i was in JD from 40 to 23$
Ju must know with who you play this game….
Just time, time is everything, in this case, $Alibaba(BABA.US)$ in 2025 is 300$ stock….they will do just 75 bill$ stock buyback in that time
WS is ruthles, but playing same story for years
Also Chipotle and food poising….😂😂😂😂😂😂🔝

$NVIDIA(NVDA.US)$ Technically, it's been over-valued for the past 5 years (at least.) Therefore, over-valuation isn't enough to call it quits. The real question is this: Is NVDA a trillion dollar company sometime in the near future or not? If it's not, then greener pastures lay elsewhere. If it is, trillion dollar companies tend to move even higher. There are certain qualities of companies that the market allows to join the coveted trillion dollar club and they tend to be more oriented toward innovation, not profits. Also, it helps if the CEO has worn a motorcycle jacket at some time in the past... I'm not sure exactly why that is, but that motorcycle jacket seems to be worth about $300 Million. Odd. Very odd...

$Bitcoin(BTC.CC)$ Can’t fault the president for trying here. He’s thinking outside the box. Sounds like he’s taking a page out of Iceland’s playbook. Iceland capitalized on their own natural resources (also geothermal energy) to build aluminum production and farming. Yes, farming. Like massive greenhouses using geothermal energy. I’ve visited the,. Pretty impressive what they accomplished. Oh yeah, Iceland mines a lot of cryptocurrency too. You folks don’t laugh at Iceland, do you? They’re a pretty wealthy nation.
Meanwhile, our country increasingly prints cash and politicizes our monetary policy, playing games with what should be a more objective, partisan institution. This could also turn ugly. Maybe BTC could offer us all some schmuck insurance. Maybe in the comments section of the El Salvador version of SA, they are laughing at us.

$ARK Innovation ETF(ARKK.US)$ $Tesla(TSLA.US)$ the problem is she could be right on everything.. probably is...yet she will still underperform. she does not understand investing. it isn't a charity for the future. people want to invest to live well today and near future.

Cathie Wood's flagship $ARK Innovation ETF(ARKK.US)$continues to feel the pressure as the fund ended in the red on Monday -4.19% and has now closed to the downside in eight of the last ten trading sessions.
Over the past ten days ARKK has fallen 12.44% and now trades -13.86% year-to-date.
The exchange traded fund touched an intraday low of $107.59, which it has not seen in well over a month, dating back to October 5.
Moreover, investors appear to be fleeing themselves from ARKK. Since November 1, the ETF has also witnessed an outpour of capital flows totaling $359.94M, according to etfdb.com.
Fueling ARKK’s recent selloff has been the rise of the $U.S. 10-Year Treasury Notes Yield(US10Y.BD)$yield, which has climbed 16 basis points over the same period. Traditionally as yields ascend, they put pressure on tech-heavy names which ARKK holds.
Below is a two-month chart of ARKK highlighting its recent ten day decline. Investors opposed to ARKK may look towards the $Tuttle Capital Short Innovation ETF(SARK.US)$, which is ARKK's inverse competitor fund that has returned +12.56% over the same ten-day period ARKK has slipped.
$Tesla(TSLA.US)$