C

chasengreg

Short-form, market-oriented commentary from chasengreg (@chasengreg) on housing supply, new construction financing, and urban/multi-family density. Views center on how regulations and financing practices affect homebuilding and the investment case for builder-related securities.

Trust score
0 / 100
Track record
0 / 100
Thesis calls
10
Evaluated calls
10
Average return
-6.99%
Win rate
40%

Past bets that played out

Consistently emphasizes a pro-new-construction/homebuilder supply thesis: projects commonly rely on buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”), and well-intentioned laws or regulations can unintentionally reduce housing supply. No single-stock calls; the actionable framing is sector-level — supportive of homebuilders and sensitive to regulatory risk.

BLDRwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 35 / 100Return: -29.41%Observed price: $76.56
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
LENwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 36 / 100Return: -24.56%Observed price: $89.71
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
ITBwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 42 / 100Return: -8.21%Observed price: $93.17
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...

What this channel is watching now

Focus on homebuilding and housing supply dynamics, with particular attention to ETFs and builders including ITB, XHB, DHI, LEN, BLDR, and LVDS. Commentary rates conviction modestly (avg convictions ~0.3–0.4) and is based on anecdotal and policy-observation evidence rather than detailed financial models.

Latest videos and market context

No video content was identified in the recent sources. Recent posts are short-form social commentary and tweet threads about housing finance, density preferences, and project financing norms.

g chasen @ChasenGreg Jan 10, 2025 Replying to @AMCKunneke Also no vents or eaves and tempered glass windows. Lucky th...

n/a

A personal anecdote about home/building features (no vents/eaves, tempered glass windows, concrete perimeter wall) and a neighbor’s car in a driveway—likely discussing fire/safety outcomes. No explicit market, company, or sector implications are stated.

Pinned g chasen @ChasenGreg Jan 9, 2025 No words really - just a horror show. Some of the design choices we made here...

n/a

The source text is a vague social post (Jan 9, 2025) describing an unspecified “horror show” where some design choices helped and luck played a role. It provides no identifiable company, product, sector, catalyst, numbers, or timeline beyond the post date, so it is not directly tradable as-is.

@DavidPiotrowski 3% 5 days

May 28, 2026, 1:54 PM EDT

The source contains no market, company, or ticker-specific information beyond the fragment “3% 5 days,” so there is no actionable thesis or tradable setup to extract.

@PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...

May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDT

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Proof-backed call history

Recent activity includes short social posts analyzing how buyer deposits finance condo projects, expressing pro–multi-family density preferences, and commenting on small-format market fragments. The archive contains no detailed company-specific research or tradable setups.

SLDPwrongbacktest DEMOTE

A personal anecdote about home/building features (no vents/eaves, tempered glass windows, concrete perimeter wall) and a neighbor’s car in a driveway—likely discussing fire/safety outcomes. No explicit market, company, or sector implications are stated.

Mentioned: Jun 17, 2026, 11:47 PM EDTConviction: 32 / 100Return: -3.11%
Source: g chasen @ChasenGreg Jan 10, 2025 Replying to @AMCKunneke Also no vents or eaves and tempered glass windows. Lucky th...
LUCKrightbacktest DEMOTE

A personal anecdote about home/building features (no vents/eaves, tempered glass windows, concrete perimeter wall) and a neighbor’s car in a driveway—likely discussing fire/safety outcomes. No explicit market, company, or sector implications are stated.

Mentioned: Jun 17, 2026, 11:47 PM EDTConviction: 32 / 100Return: +0.40%
Source: g chasen @ChasenGreg Jan 10, 2025 Replying to @AMCKunneke Also no vents or eaves and tempered glass windows. Lucky th...
ALSNZ.XCrightbacktest HOLD

A personal anecdote about home/building features (no vents/eaves, tempered glass windows, concrete perimeter wall) and a neighbor’s car in a driveway—likely discussing fire/safety outcomes. No explicit market, company, or sector implications are stated.

Mentioned: Jun 17, 2026, 11:47 PM EDTConviction: 32 / 100Return: +4.61%
Source: g chasen @ChasenGreg Jan 10, 2025 Replying to @AMCKunneke Also no vents or eaves and tempered glass windows. Lucky th...
SOMErightbacktest DEMOTE

The source text is a vague social post (Jan 9, 2025) describing an unspecified “horror show” where some design choices helped and luck played a role. It provides no identifiable company, product, sector, catalyst, numbers, or timeline beyond the post date, so it is not directly tradable as-is.

Mentioned: Jun 17, 2026, 11:47 PM EDTConviction: 32 / 100Return: +0.07%
Source: Pinned g chasen @ChasenGreg Jan 9, 2025 No words really - just a horror show. Some of the design choices we made here...
BLDRwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 35 / 100Return: -29.41%Observed price: $76.56
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
LENwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 36 / 100Return: -24.56%Observed price: $89.71
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
DHIwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 38 / 100Return: -7.22%Observed price: $146.71
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
XHBwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 40 / 100Return: -4.00%Observed price: $102.88
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
ITBwrongbacktest DEMOTE

Post argues that requiring meaningful buyer deposits/commitments (“skin in the game”) is a common way to finance/build new condo projects, and that well-intentioned housing laws/regulations can inadvertently reduce new housing supply, contributing to today’s housing shortage. No specific companies or tickers are mentioned; the actionable angle is a general pro-new-construction / pro-homebuilder supply thesis and a regulatory-risk framing.

Mentioned: May 28, 2026, 11:44 AM EDTConviction: 42 / 100Return: -8.21%Observed price: $93.17
Source: @PanchoPepeKage @realsaadasad Buyer skin in the game is how new condos get financed and built in most places. Laws th...
LVDSrightbacktest DEMOTE

Tweet expresses a personal preference for living in a high-density, multi-unit building on a large lot (7 floors), with no investment-relevant details beyond a generic pro–multi-family/urban density sentiment.

Mentioned: May 27, 2026, 1:04 PM EDTConviction: 32 / 100Return: +1.50%Observed price: $55.90
Source: @otter401 @LindsayJS Large lot with many units on each of 7 floors - I’d 100x prefer to live here. https://t.co/iYzIb...

About this channel

chasengreg publishes concise commentary on housing supply, construction financing practices, and the regulatory environment shaping new-home production. Posts aim to highlight supply-side explanations for housing shortages and the sectoral implications for homebuilder-related securities and ETFs.

Subscribersn/a
Videosn/a
Win rate40%
Average return-6.99%

@chasengreg

Unlock the full track record

Follow @chasengreg for succinct, supply-focused takes on housing and homebuilding. Use these views as a starting point for further, deeper due diligence before making investment decisions.