ONE Stock I’m Buying in June BEFORE It Doubles

Joseph Hogue centers the video on Campbell Soup (CPB) as his single stock idea for June. His core thesis is that Campbell is trading at trough valuations after years of pressure on packaged-food companies, and that the combination of improving input costs, tariff relief, and an upcoming earnings report could trigger a meaningful rerating. He repeatedly frames this as both a tactical trade and a longer-term staple-stock investment, saying the stock has not been this cheap in decades and that the setup could produce a 15–20% move quickly or much larger upside if sentiment normalizes. He spends much of the video building the case that the whole packaged-food group has been punished together, not just Campbell. He lists peers like McCormick, General Mills, Hormel, and Kellanova and argues the broad decline suggests an industry issue rather than one company’s execution failure. …

1. Campbell Soup is presented as a beaten-down, high-quality consumer-staples name trading at historically cheap valuations.
2. The near-term catalyst is the June 8 earnings report, with June 12 options expiry creating a squeeze window.
3. Hogue argues industry-wide headwinds are easing: food inflation is cooling, tariff relief may help, and margins could recover.
4. He believes the stock could rerate sharply if sentiment normalizes, especially given high short interest and locked-up ownership.
5. He also frames CPB as defensive: it may hold up better than growth stocks in a market selloff.
6. The most aggressive idea in the video is a June call spread, but he clearly says it is risky and can expire worthless.
7. A lot of the thesis rests on valuation mean reversion rather than strong near-term revenue growth.

• The claim that a stock can ‘double’ is heavily valuation-based and not supported by fundamental growth acceleration.
• The short-squeeze thesis assumes a sufficiently tight float and coordinated buying, which may not produce the expected move in practice.
• He relies on historical multiples as a guide, but prior ranges may not be appropriate if the industry’s growth and margin profile has structurally changed.
• The options return example is presented in a highly favorable scenario and underplays the probability of a total loss.
• The notion that the stock is ‘beyond’ a quick return while also framing a near-term squeeze is somewhat inconsistent in horizon.
• The presentation of insider/institutional ownership appears simplified and potentially imprecise, which weakens the squeeze argument.