Let's set the record straight on @CathieDWood - who appeared on @squawkbox late this week. (This is not ad hominem, it is factual. If anyone @CNBC or elsewhere disagrees with my analysis below, feel free to submit your comments on X). Cathie Wood "Cherry Picked" $ARKK Investment Performance In Her Interview This Week on CNBC To begin (and to be blunt), Cathie Wood's $ARKK is an active business media advertiser on @CNBC. Perhaps, resultingly, Fin TV (particularly @CNBC) -without exception - conducts softball interviews with Wood and allows her to rationalize her poor and extremely volatile investment performance by allowing her to "cherry pick $ARKK investment timeframes (as she did, again on @CNBC once again) - in support of her audacious risk taking. Unfortunately, @CNBC conducted an interview this week that was similar to every other past interview - it provided @CathieWood with a forum to gather even more assets at $ARKK without being critical of her risk taking and past investment performance. CNBC was Complicit With $ARKK in 2020-21 (it still is!) In Promoting Her Asset Gathering - That Was Followed By A -75% Drop in the Value of the $ARKK ETF @CNBC, stimulated by $ARKK good performance through the beginning of 2021, frequently gave @CathieDWood a ready platform to gather assets (and gather billions of assets she did - far more than any other active ETF, ever!) into the spectacular returns that ended about 2/1/2021. The words of uncritical praise by @CNBC leading up to early 2021 towards @CathieWood were often - anointing her as an investing icon. At that time $ARKK traded at $159/share. In less than 18 months (!!!), from 2/1/2021 to 7/1/2022, the price of her foundation ETF $ARKK fell from $159/share to under $40/share - a decline of -75%. So why am I not "cherry picking" her poor investment performance? Because combining her good returns leading up to early 2021 with a push by the business media (especially @CNBC), $ARKK took in an unprecedented amount of inflows JUST AT THE TOP. It is reasonable to assume that most of the billions of dollars invested in $ARKK (particularly by retail investors) in the $140-$160 area were little guys who were risk averse (and not ready for a -75% drawdown in $ARKK). They bought - full bore - into the media's praise and hyperbole. In a brief 17 months (and thanks to the publicity provided by @CNBC), $ARKK lost nearly $14 billion of investors money that was invested near or at the top. That $14 billion was the most money lost in an "active" ETF in HISTORY - as retail investors (and others) chose to follow the publicity (allotted by @cnbc) and mostly invested at just the wrong time. And, to quote Paul Harvey, that's the rest of the story. And that is what @CNBC should ask @CathieDWood about in every interview. Is $ARKK investment methodology that led to a -75% drawdown in less than 18 months to be encouraged? ... As it could happen again. Instead, they continue to provide Cathie Wood, an undisciplined risk taker, with an active and elevated platform (and $ARKK continues to actively advertise on the network). @cnbc moderators should do their homework, consider the above volatility (and downside) of returns -- and constructively criticize in her interviews the absence of historic risk management that resulted in $ARKK suffering the greatest multi billion dollar loss in active ETF history (in a prior cycle). Fool your viewers once, blame the viewers and @CathieDWood . Fool your viewers twice, blame @CNBC and @CathieDWood . @squawkbox @KellyCNBC @joesquawk @andrewrsorkin @cnbcfastmoney @cnbchalftime @TheJudgeCNBC @carlquintanilla @guyadami @saraeisen @tomkeene @lisaabramowicz1 @FerroTV @annmarie @business @KeithMcCullough @Hedgeye_HGRO @Hedgeye_HELS @HedgeyeDJ @convertbond @WhitneyTilson @peterboockvar @LanceRoberts @gnoble79 @MelissaLeeCNBC @realjimchanos