Three Stocks to Hold in the Endless Void of Financial Expectations

by

One of the great fallacies that consume investors-those who are unknowingly shackled to their own expectations-is the urge to part with stocks too soon. A lingering sense of urgency pushes them to sell, a hasty decision, often based on arbitrary fears. One might wonder if such an impulse could be avoided, but it appears, after all, the world of investing is governed by rules that seem designed only to keep you in perpetual uncertainty, like an endless cycle of waiting for the inevitable.

Now, among these tortured souls, three voices-three seemingly knowing voices-stand up, or rather, speak from their respective silos, proclaiming that they have identified companies that can endure, even thrive, in this strange labyrinth we call the market. Their choices: AbbVie (ABBV), Eli Lilly (LLY), and Johnson & Johnson (JNJ). A comfort, or perhaps a brief illusion, in the unrelenting march of time.

A survivor, or merely an illusion of survival

Keith Speights (AbbVie): Not too long ago, AbbVie stood at the precipice, teetering on the edge of its own inevitable decline. The company’s flagship product, Humira, which had once thrived in the sterile confines of its monopoly, was now facing the encroachment of generic versions. This was, of course, no accident. Like a grotesque bureaucratic twist, the loss of Humira’s patent exclusivity was a fate sealed by forces outside of AbbVie’s control. Investors, like helpless participants in a Kafkaesque drama, prepared for the inevitable: a sharp decline in revenue, an existential loss that would tear through the company’s profits like a cold wind cutting through the walls of an empty office.

Indeed, Humira’s revenue faltered after biosimilar competitors emerged in 2023, and yet, AbbVie, in its typically methodical manner, did not surrender to fate. Instead, it scurried like a cog in the vast machinery of corporate survival, investing heavily in research and development. Now, AbbVie boasts two replacements for Humira-Rinvoq and Skyrizi-whose revenues, it is said, will surpass Humira’s peak sales. This, however, is not the story of innovation; rather, it is a tale of survival-survival that comes only after the grim realization that the company must replace its former triumphs with the mere echo of their past glory. AbbVie also diversified, acquiring other companies, which mitigated its reliance on any single product. But, in the end, it remains a company desperately scrambling to preserve a semblance of relevance, an illusion of continuity.

If you are an income investor, you might be drawn to AbbVie, for it offers the comforting illusion of stability with a 3% dividend yield and a legacy of 53 consecutive years of dividend increases. Yet, one must ask: does this not simply represent another cog in the endless cycle of corporate machinations designed to placate the masses, to keep them from questioning their blind faith in a system built on fleeting promises?

The beast that devours growth, yet remains ever hungry

David Jagielski (Eli Lilly): In Eli Lilly, we find a company whose success seems inexorably tied to the expansion of its own internal growth, like a parasite that grows fatter, yet never satisfied. With a dividend yield barely scraping 0.8%, it would be easy to dismiss as a fleeting presence in the financial landscape. Yet, it is not the dividend that is its true allure. No, it is the promise-the endless, elusive promise-of growth. Since 2020, Lilly has doubled its payout, yet the amount seems almost irrelevant in the grand theater of corporate absurdities that dominate this landscape.

The true attraction lies in its portfolio of drugs, which include weight loss treatments like Zepbound, diabetes medications such as Mounjaro, and an Alzheimer’s drug named Kisunla-drugs that, one might reasonably argue, represent nothing more than an exercise in corporate expansionism. These drugs, like all things in the corporate world, are mere numbers, figures on a page that fuel a relentless march toward profitability, each new product launched only to become another link in the endless chain of capitalist conquest. The future may be bright for Lilly, but for how long can such growth persist before it too is consumed by the same hunger that drove its creation?

Over the past year, Lilly has raked in more than $53 billion in revenue, which seems to validate its trajectory, yet one cannot help but question the underlying narrative. What of the cost? What of the damage wrought by this ceaseless pursuit of more? Its price-to-earnings ratio stands at an absurd 50, a number that appears so disconnected from any semblance of reason that one might wonder if the market is driven by forces that defy all logic, leaving the individual investor to wander in confusion.

A fortress amidst the ever-shifting tides

Prosper Junior Bakiny (Johnson & Johnson): And then there is Johnson & Johnson, the relic that somehow survives amidst the storm of corporate turmoil, its survival a testament to its ability to adapt, or perhaps simply to exist within the machinations of an ever-growing bureaucracy. Over a century has passed since its founding, and yet, it remains, a corporate titan that faces not only the march of time but also legal and regulatory challenges that seem to emerge from nowhere, like dark clouds gathering on the horizon.

Yet J&J persists, like a slow-moving bureaucracy that somehow maintains its relevance, driven by the relentless demand for medical products. Its pharmaceutical portfolio is as vast as it is diversified, and though it faces the specter of patent expirations and competition, its deep pipeline and substantial cash reserves ensure its survival. Its medical devices, too, remain a staple, providing a steady stream of revenue, even in the face of economic downturns. It is a company that can weather storms, even if the storms seem, at times, absurd in their intensity.

Loading widget...

The company’s financial strength is undeniable, its credit rating even surpassing that of the U.S. government. And yet, one wonders: is this strength a product of foresight, or is it merely the result of a system that rewards the strongest, the most able to survive? Johnson & Johnson’s streak of 63 consecutive years of dividend increases is certainly impressive, yet in a world where time seems to fold upon itself, where each victory seems to erase the next, one must ask: how long can this continue?

Johnson & Johnson stands as a paradox-a company that has survived for over a century not because it has changed, but because it has learned to adapt in ways that seem, at times, grotesque. The investor who clings to this stock may find solace in its history, but the question remains: what are they truly holding onto? Perhaps nothing more than a fleeting echo of a past that can no longer be reached. 🧐

Read More

2025-09-06 22:32