Good morning dear Getquin Community, energy is one of the biggest levers for the transformation of our economy and independence from fossil fuels. Today I would like to introduce you to the exciting solar thermal power (CSP) project from China.

https://videos.winfuture.de/27754.mp4

In the desert, two huge solar towers use thousands of mirrors to concentrate the sun's rays, store the heat in molten salt and use it to reliably generate electricity. The special feature: By storing heat, energy is also provided at night or when it is cloudy. This is a step towards a more stable renewable power supply beyond traditional photovoltaics and wind.

The CSP value chain is broad. The project and turbine side is dominated by $ENR (-2.06%) Siemens Energy (ENR), $ANA (+1.51%) Acciona (ANA) and $GE (-1.24%) General Electric (GE). They supply turbines, engineering and EPC services for the majority of plants worldwide. On the materials and storage side $SGO (+0.26%) Saint-Gobain (SGO) for glass and mirrors and $YAR (+0.36%) Yara (YAR), $NTR (-1.53%) Nutrien (NTR) and $OCI (-0.19%) OCI (OCI) for the provision of salts. These components are essential for thermal storage and therefore for the competitiveness of CSP. In addition, there are developers such as Abengoa Solar, BrightSource and Aalborg CSP, which realize special projects.

Takeaway: While photovoltaics has long since arrived in the mainstream, CSP is opening up new niches through the combination of electricity production and storage. The companies that supply mirrors, turbines, chemicals and engineering - the industry's blade manufacturers - are particularly exciting for investors.

The crucial question is whether CSP will manage to establish itself with these players as a serious pillar in the future energy mix alongside PV and wind.

Source: https://winfuture.de/news,152708.html and own creation

$GE (-1.24%)

$GE (-1.24%) Big short opportunity after plane crash? They built the engines of the ill-fated plane. If the engines were the cause, things are likely to go downhill. We India had probably opted for the GE engines and not for those from $RR. (-0.16%) In $RR. (-0.16%) But I am already invested long. They are also falling today because airlines are probably allowed to decide which Boeing engines can be used for the Dreamliner. According to the article below, however, Air India has chosen the $GE (-1.24%) chosen

https://www.geaerospace.com/news/press-releases/commercial-engines/air-india-signs-agreement-become-genx-service-provider#:~:text=The%20GEnx%2D1B%20engine%20will,for%20more%20than%20four%20decades.

$PWO (+0.36%)

After a long holding period - I parted with the dividend stock.

Since my sales usually result in rising prices (see: $SDF (-0.09%) , $GE (-1.24%)
$2330 , etc) maybe interesting for you?

Great approval at the Annual General Meeting 2025 of the PWO Group

Carlo Lazzarini (CEO): "2024 was another record year for the PWO Group. We have initiated a lot in recent years and achieved even more. We are working very specifically on further forward-looking goals."

Unchanged dividend of EUR 1.75 for the 2024 financial year

Confirmation of the annual forecast for 2025

Presentation of the 2045 climate protection strategy

Oberkirch, June 5, 2025 - At the Annual General Meeting 2025, the successful development of the PWO Group was honored by the shareholders with great approval. All items on the agenda were adopted with large majorities. Around 66% of the company's share capital was represented.

In his speech, CEO Carlo Lazzarini reported on another outstanding financial year for the PWO Group. Despite the recession, revenue in 2024 matched the previous year's record level, while EBIT before currency effects rose to the highest level in PWO's history.

In the four years since the start of the realignment of the PWO Group, the automotive industry has faced many headwinds. At the same time, we have implemented far-reaching changes within our Group. Nevertheless, we have grown strongly and increased our EBIT. Last but not least, we were also able to significantly reduce our net debt, which means that our balance sheet is robust and our free cash flow is high.

The cornerstones of our development continue to be innovation-based, consistently high and profitable new business, careful internal management of profitability and cash flow and the determined exploitation of opportunities.

Our unwavering commitment to climate protection is also a key component of our strategy for the future. By 2023, we had already exceeded the SBTi-validated 2030 targets for emissions reductions from our own business activities and reduced our greenhouse gas emissions by more than half compared to the base year 2019.

No profit for me except dividends.

$GE (-1.24%)
$SAF (-0.96%)

USA blocks engine delivery

China's aircraft manufacturer Comac will no longer receive any engine components from the USA for the time being. The Trump administration's decision could slow down production of the A320 competitor Comac C919 in particular, which flies with LEAP engines from the West.

China's own turbofan is not yet ready: the domestic CJ-1000A engine has been undergoing flight tests since 2023 and received approval from the Chinese aviation authority CAAC in the spring of this year. But until it is also approved for the Comac C919 airliner and can go into series production, there is still a lot of water flowing down the Yangtze River. For this reason, Comac is dependent on Western countries for the C919 for the time being - the new "China Airbus" has so far flown exclusively with LEAP-1C engines from CFM International. CFM, in turn, is a joint venture between the engine manufacturers Safran from France and GE Aerosoace from the USA.

This is precisely where the problem that the Chinese are currently facing begins for Comac and the C919. At the behest of US President Donald Trump's administration, they are no longer receiving any engine components from the United States for the time being. At least that's what the New York Times reports. "The Trump administration has suspended the sale of some critical US technologies to China, including those related to jet engines, semiconductors and certain chemicals and machinery," writes the daily newspaper on May 28. The US administration is responding to "China's recent restrictions on the export of critical minerals" to the US, which, according to New York Times informants, "threaten to cripple the supply chains of US companies."

China and the USA at loggerheads

This decision from Beijing is in turn a reaction to the punitive tariffs imposed by Washington on Chinese products. Although these have been suspended in the meantime, China has not eased its embargo on critical minerals to the satisfaction of the US government, according to the New York Times. President Trump has therefore "halted shipments to China of some key products and technologies that are made only in the United States, demonstrating the government's power over global supply chains."

Problem for Comac?

It is unclear whether Comac will directly feel the effects of the latest blockade on the production of the C919. The aircraft manufacturer has not yet issued a statement on the subject. The Chinese can presumably cover a certain period of time with engines and components that have already been delivered. Ideally, the disputes between China and the USA will have been settled at least to the extent that key components from both economies can be delivered to each other again. Nevertheless, the events are likely to provide China with further motivation to press ahead with its "import substitution" programs with increased vigour in order to make itself independent of foreign influences in aircraft construction in the long term.

Parallels with Russia

In the northern neighboring country of Russia, people are already reminded of their own fate when looking at China. The situation evokes "certain associations with the ban on the supply of American Pratt & Whitney PW1400G engines for the MS-21 aircraft", comments the website aviaton21.ru, for example. The USA, like all other Western countries, had put the export of aviation components to Russia on hold in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine at the end of February 2022. In response, Russia - out of necessity - threw itself fully into the development of the domestic PD-14 turbofan. "Thus, the Russian engine replaced the foreign unit and made it possible to continue the import substitution program, which will ensure the start of serial production and operation of the aircraft in a fully 'Russified' form next year," according to aviation21.ru. The fact that the Western sanctions set the MS-21 program back by years is another matter.

https://www.flugrevue.de/zivil/bekommt-der-china-airbus-c919-probleme-usa-blockieren-triebwerkslieferung/

$GE (-1.24%)
$AVIO (+1.95%)

GE Aerospace has had a new turboprop engine certified. Thanks to 3D printing, the performance figures are impressive.

Donald Trump will only be moderately enthusiastic about this: US engine giant GE Aerospace has had a new, highly efficient turboprop engine certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The flagship "Catalyst" engine is said to consume 18% less fuel. At the same time, it allows a 10% higher cruising speed. And who designed/built it? Europeans!

Several GE subsidiaries were involved in the development of the engine, above all Avio Aero from Italy. The parts came mainly from Turin, Warsaw, Prague, Bielsko-Biała and Cameri.

A third of the internal components are printed

The engine's exceptional key figures are made possible thanks to additive manufacturing. According to 3Dprint.com, almost a third of the internal components are built up in layers. This saves a lot of weight. But that is not the only advantage: assembly and maintenance costs are also significantly reduced. Where previously 855 individual parts were assembled, twelve printed components are now used.

The fuel costs for turboprop engines are between $250 and $600 per hour. Around 1800 turboprop aircraft are currently delivered every year in the USA alone.

Catalyst is the first turboprop engine of the 21st century to be certified to the latest standards. Riccardo Procacci, President and CEO, Propulsion and Additive Technologies at GE Aerospace, said: "The certification of the Catalyst engine is a significant milestone for our company and a proud moment for all of our team members who have dedicated themselves to the design, development and testing of this brand new European turboprop engine."

GE Aerospace is also active in the defense sector

GE Aerospace is a global leader in aerospace propulsion, services and systems with an installed base of around 45,000 civil and 25,000 military aircraft engines. The number of employees currently stands at around 53,000 and the Group's metal printing operations are largely based on German technology. GE Additive, now Colibrium, acquired Concept Laser GmbH from Lichtenfels in 2016. However, Concept founder Frank C. Herzog is still very active in the field of additive manufacturing:

https://www.ingenieur.de/technik/fachbereiche/3d-druck/gedrucktes-triebwerk-verbraucht-18-weniger-treibstoff/

Last week, Saturday's episode of "All About Stocks" [1] featured an excerpt from the study "Do Stocks Outperform Treasury Bills?" [2], which sounded quite interesting and the contents of which I subsequently read again in more detail.

The essence of the study is that only a small proportion of companies are responsible for the majority of returns.

It therefore serves as a reminder that it is probably the best choice for the "average investor" to invest in a well-diversified ETF.

Here is a brief presentation of the results.

Hendrik Bessembinder from the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University has investigated which stocks really drive the market in the long term.

According to the study, since 1926 only 4% of all stocks have generated the total net profit of the US stock market [2].

The other 96% of stocks in total have only generated as much return as safe one-month US government bonds or even less [2]. The average monthly return here was 0.37% (which is roughly equivalent to an annual return of 4.53% when compound interest is taken into account).

Almost more interesting is the following:

The top 50 companies were responsible for 39.29% of the total value creation of the US stock market and.

... the top 90 stocks (only 0.36% of all companies) even generated more than 50% of the total market profit [2].

The 4% mentioned still represent just under 1,092 of over 25,000 companies. It doesn't seem so unrealistic to find them.

The only problem is:

The best stocks are usually only recognized in retrospect

• Apple, Mircosoft and Amazon were still small, unknown companies 30 years ago.
• Many investors would have bet on "safe" large companies back then, but some of them (e.g. Kodak or Nokia) are no longer among the top performers today.
• We will only know today's 4% winners in the future.

Even professionals often fail

• Active fund managers try to do just that: find the best stocks and avoid the bad ones.
• But most fund managers do not beat the market over the long term.

Timing is often extremely difficult

• Many of the best stocks looked like losers in the meantime.
• For example, the Amazon share fell $AMZN (-1.95%) after the dotcom crash by almost - 90 %, even after mid-2021 Amazon lost almost - 50 %, would you have held it?

More than half of all stocks have even generated negative returns over their entire lifetime [2].

That means: The average stock return we all know is not generated by the "broad" market, but only by these 4% of stocks.

Further results of the study:

Value creation on the stock market is extremely unevenly distributed.

• ExxonMobil $XOM (-3.47%) alone generated the most shareholder value creation with 1 trillion dollars and was responsible for 2.88% of the total market development from 1926 to 2016 [2].
• Apple $AAPL (-0.66%) ($745.7 billion), Microsoft $MSFT (-3.17%) ($629.8 billion), General Electric $GE (-1.24%) ($608.1 billion) and IBM $IBM (-0.15%) ($520.2 billion) are among the top 5 companies that together account for over 10% of total stock market value creation [2].

The question now for us as investors is:

Do I really think I can buy these 4% winning stocks early can find them early?

... and at the same time can I at least stay away from the biggest losers from the remaining 96%?

... or do I prefer to stick with John Bogle the founder of Vanguard, who gave the following famous quote:

🧠 "Don't try to find the needle in the haystack. Just buy the whole haystack."

The haystack is in that sense an ETF:

• ETFs are a self-optimizing system in which well-performing sectors and companies are overweighted and weak companies gradually lose importance.
• You don't have to find the 4% yourself, the ETF does it for you.

Conclusion

Yes, it is theoretically possible to find the 4% yourself, to time it correctly and to hold it, as well as to stay away from the biggest losers of the 96% in the long term.

The question is: do you want to bet your portfolio on it, or would you rather make sure you automatically profit from the 4%.

💡For most investors, a simple ETF investment as a "core" is therefore probably the best choice.

Thank you for reading 🤝

__________

P.S. The study was published in 2017 and last revised in 2018.

With regard to a more recent analysis, which refers specifically to the last few years, the study does not contain separate results for shorter periods. However, it does mention that this effect has been even more pronounced in recent decades, particularly since the 1980s. To get a detailed current analysis, one would have to search more recent research.

__________

Source:

[1] https://open.spotify.com/episode/7ik1W0e9zq7TBYacPW0eVl?si=Sw2Mu0XSSH2SQFp5cHtpLQ

[2]

published 01/2017, revised 06/2018
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2900447&utm_source=chatgpt.com

#Aktien
#ETF
#StockPicking