A cheaper competitor isn't always the better deal. The speaker compares penny stocks to Apple: yes, penny stocks cost less, but Apple's more expensive share offers a reliable 10% return. Price alone misses the real calculation: risk-adjusted return.
There's absolutely someone who is less for sure. But the question is not that it's more or less, but what's the risk-adjusted return, which is that they cost less, but they're also less likely to help you hit your goal. And so it's actually a riskier move. So if you were to buy a penny stock, it's cheaper than buying, you know, some stock in Apple, but the risk-adjusted return is way higher in you getting a 10% return on Apple than you getting a 100x return on this penny stock. That's how I'd frame it.
