Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

Here is a list of top 25 stocks that qualify for ‘Ten Baggers’, according to Ambit

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">Warner Bros.Stock traders are looking bulletproof, quickly recovering from a sharp selloff yet again.</div></div></div>The US stock market simply will not be defeated.Just two sessions after the <a href="http://markets.businessinsider.com/index/S&amp;P_500">S&amp;P 500</a> tumbled 1.5%, its biggest decline since May, the benchmark ended Monday back within half a percent of its level prior to the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/stock-market-news-north-korea-vix-volatility-fear-exploding-2017-8">North Korea-fueled selloff</a>.But why? There's not anything particularly bullish happening in the earnings world, and there's been no major economic data released.One explanation is that traders have simply pushed aside their worry over possible military action between the US and North Korea, and are using last week's weakness as an attractive entry point for more stock buying.If that reasoning sounds familiar, that's because it's happened time and again throughout the eight-year equity bull market, which is now well into its tenure as the second-longest on record.Stock traders seem fully aware that brief selloffs in the last several years have simply been head fakes, and are treating them as nothing to worry about. In fact, their willingness to recognize and apply that logic may even be helping fuel the trend further.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><a href="http://markets.businessinsider.com/index/S&amp;P_500">Markets Insider</a>Stock traders bought the dip on last Thursday's weakness, something they've become quite accustomed to doing.</div></div></div>"Last week's action was more investors taking advantage of news that justified some profit taking, rotation and rebalancing rather than a market rout or harbinger of worse things to come," John Stoltzfus, the chief investment strategist at Oppenheimer, wrote in a client note. "While markets may be rattled by spikes in tensions between nations and even war, the unsettling periods for the bourses around these occurrences tend to be short in duration and with fleeting effect."For evidence of how quick US equity investors are to buy the dip, look no further than the S&amp;P 500's 1.8% single-day decline in May. The index recovered 85% of that loss over the following three days, the second-fastest retracement of a loss that big in S&amp;P 500 history, according to data compiled by Bank of America Merrill Lynch.Going further back in time, after the S&amp;P 500 fell by 5.3% over two trading sessions following the UK's vote last June to leave the European Union, the benchmark recovered those losses in about a week.The <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/stock-market-update-2017-5">same dynamic was in play</a> when China unexpectedly devalued its currency in August 2015. After the S&amp;P 500 underwent an 11% correction, traders bought the dip and restored the benchmark to its pre-sell-off levels within about two months.Torrid earnings growth for S&amp;P 500 corporations is at the root of stock investor confidence right now. Companies in the benchmark index are on pace to expand profits by 10.7% in the second quarter, which would mark its fourth straight period of expansion, according to survey data compiled by Bloomberg. The S&amp;P 500 is expected to grow earnings by 11.2% in 2017, its best full-year performance since 2010, the survey shows.So what will finally serve as the tipping point for US equities? No one knows at this point, but keep a close eye on the <a href="http://markets.businessinsider.com/index/VIX">CBOE Volatility Index</a>, or VIX, which serves as a measure of stock market fear. The gauge - which trades opposite the S&amp;P 500 roughly 80% of the time - spiked 44% on Thursday, but has since pared that gain.While that price action in the VIX isn't particularly worrisome to Allianz chief economic advisor Mohamed El-Erian, he's not ruling out more price swings if the ongoing geopolitical griping escalates further."The market's buy-on-dips conditioning is strong," El-Erian told Business Insider. "As such, it would take a worsening of the North Korean tensions to amplify the pressures on the VIX." <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/the-bottom-line-stock-market-records-apple-tesla-tech-earnings-jim-glassman-economy-2017-8">THE BOTTOM LINE: New record highs for stocks and a deep dive into Apple's iPhone</a></h3> <div> </div> </div>

Stocks are looking bulletproof

<table class="image-container" width="200"><tr><td><div class="image"></div>Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images</td></tr></table>
<keyword id="6354427" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Apple">Apple</keyword> stock has tanked 35% from its all-time high, and now sits at $450.
If things go badly for Apple over the next several years, the stock could fall a lot farther from here.
But if things go even moderately well, the stock should deliver a compelling return.
Why?
Because, at $450, the stock looks cheap.
At $450, Apple stock is trading at 10X trailing earnings per share.
For a company that is still expected to grow, albeit at a much reduced rate, that's an attractive valuation.
Importantly, Apple also has $135 billion of cash and no debt. Much of this cash is available to be returned to shareholders in the form of stock buybacks and, possibly, dividend increases. So it's worth considering Apple's market value and multiple excluding this cash.
Excluding its cash, Apple's business is now valued at about $300 billion, or 2X revenue. Apple's business currently earns about $40 billion a year. So Apple's business is valued at about 7-times earnings.
That's an even more attractive valuation. Even when you consider that Apple's earnings are now declining.
Think about it this way.
If you spent $425 billion to buy Apple today--the whole company, not some shares of stock--you would be able to immediately pocket the $135 billion of Apple's cash. You would then own a business that spits out about $40 billion of cash per year. Assuming the business maintains close to this level of earnings, you would get the remaining ~$300 billion of your purchase price back in about 7-10 years. You would then own all of Apple and its future earnings "for free."
Even if Apple's earnings shrink over the next few years--which I actually think is likely (Apple's net income in the next quarter is expected to be down a startling 20% from last year)--it would only take 10-15 years for you to get your money back.
If Apple's earnings grew instead of stayed flat, meanwhile--which isn't inconceivable--you would get your money back even faster than 7 years.
In other words, unless Apple's earnings really tank, and stay down, you will have bought a good company at a reasonable price.
Now, you are not going to be buying all of Apple anytime soon, so you can only think about the description above theoretically. But here is a more likely scenario.
A more likely scenario is that Apple's earnings will stay flat or drop over the next several years, and Apple will start to get even more serious about returning some of its massive cash pile to investors.
To reiterate: Apple has ~$135 billion of cash.
And it is currently generating more cash at a rate of about ~$40 billion per year.
Apple has no idea what to do with this money.
No company needs $135 billion of cash.
In the past, Apple has demonstrated that it is not stupid enough to make huge, bad acquisitions (at least so far). So one can hope that Apple will not be stupid enough to make such acquisitions going forward.
So that leaves two other ways to use the cash mountain that Apple continues to pile up and doesn't know what to do with:
<ul>
<li>Stock buybacks</li>
<li>Dividend increases</li>
</ul>
Right now, Apple pays a ~$10 annual dividend. With the stock at $450, that's about a 2.5% yield.
Paying this dividend costs Apple about $10 billion of cash per year.
Apple could easily afford to double this dividend to ~$20 per year.
That would create a 5% yield, which is an excellent yield. It's also a much higher yield than almost every other stock in the market pays. And even this would only consume $20 billion a year.
And Apple could also easily afford to spend another $20 billion a year buying back its own stock. At $450 a share, this would shrink the share base by about 5% per year. So Apple's earnings would be split up over fewer shares.
If Apple keeps earning $40 billion a year, and it returns $40 billion a year to shareholders, its cash balance will stay at ~$135 billion, which, again, is vastly more cash than it needs.
Apple could use $50-$100 billion of that cash to buy back stock, and that would shrink the share base even further.
All of which is to say, Apple has multiple levers at its disposal to return cash to shareholders and boost earnings per share irrespective of the business. And the business itself looks cheap relative to its current earnings stream.
Now, I am not suggesting that Apple's stock is suddenly going to rocket back to $700. For that to happen, Apple would have to release another product that is a quantum leap over the competition, and it would have to sell hundreds of millions of units of this product before its competitors caught up. (As has happened with the iPhone).
I am also not suggesting that Apple's stock won't go lower from here. It may very well go lower from here. In fact, it may go lower and stay lower--forever.
As <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/how-low-could-apple-go-2013-1">I described a few days before Apple missed Q4 expectations</a> and the stock crashed below $500, Apple could be in the beginning stages of the same sort of implosion that it experienced in the 1990s--the same sort of implosion that has claimed Research In Motion, Palm, Nokia, Yahoo, AOL, Cisco, and dozens of other tech giants over the years. The stocks of these companies are trading at mere fractions of the highs they hit back when they were "must-own" stocks, barring miracles, they will never trade at those highs again. Apple is certainly not immune from this fate. And anyone who still thinks it is is not facing up to the reality of the situation.
But, Apple is also still a good company. And it has good products in fast-growing markets--smartphones and tablets. So if it can merely remain a good company, and keep pace with the competition (again, no guarantees), and if it begins to return even more of its vast cash mountain to shareholders, it should be able to maintain strong earnings per share, at least for a while.
And if Apple can do that, the stock doesn't just look cheap. It is cheap.
As a reminder, no one knows what is going to happen to Apple over the next few years, including the folks at Apple. So don't hallucinate that there's some guru somewhere who can tell you. All of these scenarios are possible, including the "train-wreck" one. Stock prices represent collective guesses about what will happen in the future, and no one knows for sure what the future holds.
One final caveat...
Most of the folks who bought Apple stock over the past 5 years bought it because they considered it a "growth" stock, not a "value" stock. The scenario I described above is very much a "value" stock scenario. If Apple's earnings do decline over the next couple of years, the "growth" investors who bought Apple's stock will jettison it, and the "value" investors will have to buy it. This process will take time. So even if Apple does end up delivering a compelling return over the next few years, this "turnaround" will likely take a while.
SEE ALSO: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/how-low-could-apple-go-2013-1">How Low Could Apple Go?</a>

Apple's Stock Looks Cheap

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">REUTERS/Lisi Niesner</div></div></div>The Fed thinks the stock market is looking a tad on the expensive side.As part of Chair Yellen's <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/yellen-testimony-before-senate-banking-committee-2016-6">testimony to the US Senate</a> Tuesday, the Federal Reserve released the Monetary Policy Report and <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/20160621_mprfullreport.pdf">highlighted a worrying trend</a> in the price of the stocks.From <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/20160621_mprfullreport.pdf">the report</a> (emphasis ours):"Forward price-to-earnings ratios for equities have increased to a level well above their median of the past three decades. Although equity valuations do not appear to be rich relative to Treasury yields, equity prices are vulnerable to rises in term premiums to more normal levels, especially if a reversion was not motivated by positive news about economic growth."Put another way, price-to-earnings ratios (P/E) for <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/is-it-time-to-buy-stocks-2016-4">stocks look a little high</a>. Price-to-earnings is <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/sp-500-price-to-expected-earnings-ratio-2015-1">the basic measure of the price</a> of the S&amp;P 500 divided by the profits, or earnings, of the 500 companies that make up the index.The average P/E since 1960 <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/sp-500-valuation-back-to-normal-2015-8">is roughly 16x earnings</a>. Current P/E for the S&amp;P 500 is <a href="http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3021-peyield.html">just under 24x</a> as of Friday.Just because stocks are expensive doesn't necessarily mean that they will fall, as the report notes they still look attractive compared to ever-declining bond yields. But the concern expressed in the report is that if negative economic data were to point to a slowdown in the growth of the US economy, the price of stocks could fall back to historical levels.Stocks are a forward looking asset, so if the economic outlook is more downbeat, it is likely that that prices and by extension the P/E would decline.And while Yellen and the Federal Reserve are cautiously optimistic on the future of the economy and don't believe that a drop-off is likely, this warning is ought not to go unnoticed. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/exercise-workout-shape-routine-2016-6">An exercise scientist reveals exactly how long you need to work out to get in great shape</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="hzamwyNDE6XH_rIq5Z2V-8yxA0I6rbAN" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

FEDERAL RESERVE WARNS: Stocks are looking expensive

<div style="float: right; margin: 15px 0 20px 20px;"><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody><tr><td colspan="2"><a href="https://static-ssl.businessinsider.com/category/chart-of-the-day"> </a></td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/category/chart-of-the-day"></a></td><td><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/net-worth-is-rising-as-saving-rate-falls-2014-5"></a></td></tr></tbody></table></div>There are many ways to assess the state of the stock market.
You could take the fundamental approach and consider a wide array of variables to derive an actual value based on projected profits and cash flows. You could take the technical approach and consider price chart patterns.
You could also focus on sentiment, which is somewhere in between the fundamental and technical approaches. In addition to considering hard data regarding corporate behavior and trader activity, sentiment analysis also involves soft data like investor surveys. Psychology plays a heavy role.
Money management firm GMO has its own proprietary measure of sentiment. Here's how they describe it:
Our sentiment measure is comprised of the following measures: stock buybacks/issuance; IPO proceeds; IPO first-day pop; number of IPOs; insider buy/sell ratio; equity share of issuance; equity mutual fund net inflows; AAII bull-bear ratio; stock/bond relative performance; household % in cash; M&amp;A activity; trailing S&amp;P volatility; equity correlation; trailing small factor performance; closed-end fund discount; margin debt; high yield spread; high yield issuance share; new 52- week highs to lows; S&amp;P distance from 200d moving average; trailing momentum factor performance.
It's quite the hodgepodge of indicators. But the bottom line is that they look stretched.
"Our finding, which comes as no great surprise, is that sentiment has reached an extreme level, fast approaching two standard deviations above its long-run average, which goes back to 1950," writes GMO's Edward Chancellor. "In fact, the current score on our composite measure has only been exceeded in 1968 (during the "Go-Go Years," also known as the "Great Garbage Market"), and between 1998 and 2000 (during the TMT bubble)."
Chancellor's comment was part of <a href="http://www.gmo.com/websitecontent/GMO_QtlyLetter_1Q14_FullVersion.pdf">GMO's Q1 letter</a>, which included <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/grantham-market-bubble-will-burst-around-the-election-2014-5">Jeremy Grantham's forecast for a major stock market sell-off</a> at around the time of the 2016 presidential elections.
"Clearly, the U.S. stock market is not as manic as it became during the late stages of the Dotcom bubble - IPO issuance and first-day returns and mutual fund flows are far below their record levels at the turn of the century," added Chancellor. "M&amp;A activity is also less frantic. Still market sentiment going into this year was above the level of December 1996 when Alan Greenspan first noted (but did nothing about) the market's "irrational exuberance.""
"Irrational Exuberance" was also the title of Robert Shiller's book, the first and second editions of which <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/robert-shiller-2013-econ-nobel-prize-2013-10">predicted the dotcom and housing bubbles respectively</a>.
<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image">GMO</div></div></div>

GMO: The Stock Market Looks Irrationally Exuberant

Tech stocks today look nothing like they did in 2000

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image"></div></div></div>Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen is giving her bi-annual testimony in front of the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday.Yellen's <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/janet-yellen-humphrey-hawkins-testimoeny-2015-2">prepared remarks can be found here</a>. Business Insider's <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/fed-janet-yellen-humphrey-hawkins-testimony-feb-24-2015-2015-2">live blog of Yellen's Q&amp;A session can be tracked here</a>. Along with this testimony the Fed also releases a <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/20150224_mprfullreport.pdf">detailed assessment of financial conditions</a>, and in its assessment, the Fed said that some stocks look a little bit pricey. Here's the Fed:Overall equity valuations by some conventional measures are somewhat higher than their historical average levels, and valuation metrics in some sectors continue to appear stretched relative to historical norms.The Fed added:With regard to asset valuations, price-to-earnings and price-to-sales ratios are somewhat elevated, suggesting some valuation pressures. However, estimates of the equity premium remain relatively wide, as the long-run expected return on equity exceeds the low real Treasury yield by a notable margin, suggesting that investors still expect somewhat higher-than-average compensation relative to historical standards for bearing the additional risk associated with holding equities.Back in July, <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/yellen-on-stretched-valuations-2014-7">the Fed made headlines</a> when it said that valuation measures in social media and biotech industries appeared "substantially stretched."The Fed's comments on Tuesday are bit more muted than that language - not specifically calling out the social media and biotech sectors of the market - but the Fed is clearly still keeping an eye on financial markets as it looks to raise interest rates for the first time since 2006.

The Fed thinks some stocks still look awfully expensive

<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/the-bottom-line"></a> Business Insider executive editor Sara Silverstein speaks with <a href="https://www.oppenheimerfunds.com/advisors/personalities/brian-levitt" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Brian Levitt</a>, the senior investment strategist at OppenheimerFunds. He notes that the market has been favoring growth stocks like the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/category/fang" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">FANG group</a>, rather than their value counterparts, because we've been in a slow economic growth environment. He then goes on to say that he favors looking at a measure like price-sales ratio when assessing companies like Amazon, because they're a better predictor of future returns. Using that, a lot of stocks that look expensive are actually reasonably priced. Following is a transcript of the video. This transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.Sara Silverstein: When you look at the individual stocks, do you see any standouts that are overvalued or undervalued?Brian Levitt: Well the market has been favoring growth in a slow growth world, rather than value stocks. It's sort of paradoxical: when there's no growth you buy growth, when there's a lot of growth you buy value. So since we've been in this slow growth environment, investors have been bidding up those names that are growing. In the US, it's the so-called FAANG stocks - Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and Google. But also, if you were to compare those stocks to some of the valuations of some of the bellwether stocks of the 1990s - Intel, Oracle, EMC, Cisco, Microsoft - their valuations are also not even close. Some might push back and say well, Netflix, Amazon, on a price to earnings basis, are very expensive. I would tell them to look at a price to sales basis on Amazon, which by the way is a better predictor of returns. On a price to sales basis, Amazon is pretty reasonably priced. That's not necessarily a stock suggestion, it's just simply saying that you need to look a little bit deeper than come up with these hyperbolic statements that the FAANG stocks are overvalued. It's simply not true.

Red-hot tech stocks aren't as expensive as they look

<div class="image-container float_right click-to-enlarge"><div class="image"><a title_source="Business Insider/Matthew Boesler, data from Bloomberg" title_caption="" class="zoomin" href="http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/52a5e943ecad04982b312ce6-960/spx-20.png"></a>Business Insider/Matthew Boesler, data from Bloomberg</div></div>Friday, the <keyword id="123873" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="SP-500">S&amp;P 500</keyword> index snapped a five-day losing streak, and today, it's trading just five points shy of its all-time high at 1813.
The index is now up more than 28% in the year to date, and many market strategists are sanguine on the prospects for stocks in the remaining few weeks of the year and beyond.
In a note to clients this morning, Jonathan Krinsky, executive director and chief market technician at MKM Partners, poses the question: "What does the Bear say?"
"Looking at the daily chart of the S&amp;P 500, one area the bears are pointing to is the broken trend-line from the October lows," says Krinsky. "The pattern since October could be considered a bearish rising wedge, with last week breaking this to the downside. Therefore, any strength [this] week will simply be a throwback to the broken trendline."
The chart above shows the "bearish rising wedge" Krinsky is talking about. 
"While that may be the case, there is room for the S&amp;P 500 to move up to the 1825 level before that becomes an issue," he says. "Further, patterns can, and often do morph into new patterns. Getting too focused on this short-term wedge when the longer-term trends remain intact will likely cause investors to miss out on further gains."

Here's The Stock Market Chart The Bears Are Looking At

Here's what the New York Stock Exchange floor looked like long before the computers came in. The image is from <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%28King1893NYC%29_pg797_NEW-YORK_STOCK_EXCHANGE.jpg">King's Handbook of New York City via Wikimedia Commons</a>.

Here's What The New York Stock Exchange Looked Like In 1893

FA Insights is a daily newsletter from Business Insider that delivers the top news and commentary for financial&#xa0;advisors.
<a href="http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/articles/Surging-Chinese-A-Shares-Whats-Next">That Crazy Spike In Chinese A-Shares Might Not Last For Long</a>&#xa0;(Charles Schwab)&#xa0;
Chinese A-shares have surged over the past few weeks. Charles Schwab analysts are attributing this to the fact that local Chinese investors have returned, and that foreign investors have been buying A-Share ETFs in the US market.
"We remain positive on Chinese equities but are cautious about A-shares in the near term due to the rapid gains in prices recently. Chinese equities could benefit from further stimulus and still have relatively low valuations. We believe investments tied to mainland Chinese shares that trade in Hong Kong, such as those tied to the MSCI China Index, could outperform in the near term, as investors arbitrage away the premium A-shares currently at relative to H-shares," writes Michelle Gibley.
<a href="http://www.thinkadvisor.com/2014/12/11/sterne-agee-takes-ex-ceo-to-court-over-luxury-spen?t=ibds">Ex-CEO Is Getting Sued For Using Corporate Card To Buy A Yacht And Other Luxury Items</a> (Thinks Advisor)
"Sterne Agee, a Birmingham, Alabama-based broker-dealer is suing ex-CEO James Holbrook for using company assets for personal use," reports Janet Levaux.
According to the lawsuit, James Holbrook used a corporate credit card to buy himself fishing boats, a yacht, a vacation condo, and ownership in a luxury ski chalet. Allegedly, he also used company assets to join a marina and golf club in Florida.
<a href="http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20141211/FREE/141219983/krawcheck-wirehouses-undaunted-by-ria-growth">Sallie Krawcheck Downplayed The Threat Of RIAs At An Independent Adviser Summit</a>&#xa0;(Investment News)&#xa0;
Sallie Krawcheck, the former head of the brokerage units at Citigroup, spoke at a summit for independent advisers, and downplayed the migration from wirehouses to RIAs. Although there are reports that everyone's fleeing the big firms in favor of RIAs, Krawcheck said the actual numbers are way lower.
"Only 37 advisers left to go independent in the year after Ms. Krawcheck took control of Bank of America Merrill Lynch's broker unit in 2009. Meanwhile, the firm brought in 26 advisers from the independent space, she said," reports Mason Braswell.
"The truth is that" - Krawcheck told the independent advisers at the summit - "just as so many of your clients love you, the clients of wirehouse advisers love them."
<a href="http://www.fa-mag.com/news/fraud--cover-up-allegations-putting-social-security-chief-nomination-in-jeopardy-20176.html">A Fraud, A Cover-Up, And A Failed $300 Million Plan Could Jeopardize The Social Security Chief's Nomination</a> (Financial Advisor Magazine)&#xa0;
"Fraud and cover-up allegations about a failed $300 million effort to develop a disability case management system for the Social Security Administration has put the nomination of Acting SSA Commissioner Carolyn Colvin to become its permanent chief in jeopardy," reports Ted Knutson.
The incoming Senate Finance Committee chairman isn't supporting Colvin any longer, and it's unlikely that the Senate would vote for her without him.
Colvin has denied responsibility in the $300 million mismanagement.
<a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/sec-orders-former-adviser-to-nfl-players-to-pay-1-7-million-1418340028">Former Financial Adviser To Young NFL Players Ordered By SEC To Pay $1.7 Million</a>&#xa0;(The Wall Street Journal)
Billy Crafton, a former financial adviser who specializes in working with professional athletes, was ordered by the SEC to pay $1.7 million to settle fraud and misrepresentation charges.
He worked with young football players who were just starting out.
"From 2006 through 2011, Mr. Crafton received at least $1.5 million in commissions and alleged kickbacks for steering client money into certain investments, according to an SEC complaint filed with the settlement," reports Matthias Rieker.

You Searched For "stock to look for" and got 11 results

Here is a list of top 25 stocks that qualify for ‘Ten Baggers’, according to Ambit

Navdeep Yadav

Stocks are looking bulletproof

Joe Ciolli

Apple's Stock Looks Cheap

Henry Blodget

FEDERAL RESERVE WARNS: Stocks are looking expensive

Bob Bryan

GMO: The Stock Market Looks Irrationally Exuberant

Sam Ro

Tech stocks today look nothing like they did in 2000

Akin Oyedele

The Fed thinks some stocks still look awfully expensive

Myles Udland

Red-hot tech stocks aren't as expensive as they look

Jacqui Frank,Kara Chin,Joe Ci…

Here's The Stock Market Chart The Bears Are Looking At

Matthew Boesler

Here's What The New York Stock Exchange Looked Like In 1893

Sam Ro

Some Parts Of The Chinese Stock Market Look Worse Than Others

Elena Holodny

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides