Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

SpaceX became one of the quickest additions ever to the Nasdaq-100 index, setting up a fresh wave of buying from passive investors less than a month after the company's blockbuster public debut.

Nasdaq announced after the close Friday whether SpaceX qualifies for inclusion in the benchmark technology index. Assuming the company meets the requirements, index-tracking funds and other product sponsors would begin purchasing shares after the market closes on July 6, with SpaceX officially joining the Nasdaq-100 before trading begins on July 7.

More than $800 billion tracks the index, including the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ), which is one of the most popular securities traded each day and is seen as a barometer for the artificial intelligence bull market.

The aerospace and satellite company is expected to enter the index with a weighting of less than 1%.

Adding SpaceX this quickly would make the Elon Musk company one of the first beneficiaries of Nasdaq's recently adopted fast-track inclusion framework for newly public companies. The changes allow some large IPOs to become eligible for the Nasdaq-100 after just 15 trading days, dramatically shortening what had historically been a far longer waiting period.

Under the previous framework, investors tracking the Nasdaq-100 could be forced to wait months before gaining exposure to newly listed market giants.

The inclusion could create another source of demand for SpaceX, which has been one of the most actively traded stocks since its June 12 debut. Index funds and exchange-traded funds tied to the Nasdaq-100 would need to buy shares to match the benchmark's new composition, while active managers who track the index closely might also adjust positions.

Because SpaceX's publicly tradable float remains small compared with its total market capitalization, even a modest index weighting could require meaningful purchases from passive investment vehicles.

Earlier this month, S&P Dow Jones Indices declined to create a similar fast-track process for the S&P 500. Therefore, SpaceX remains ineligible for inclusion in the S&P 500 because of that index's separate profitability and seasoning requirements.

— CNBC's Leslie Picker contributed reporting.

In this episode of Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing, Motley Fool contributors Travis Hoium and Lou Whiteman along with Motley Fool analyst Emily Flippen discuss:

Robinhood and Rivian layoffs.Are layoffs backfiring?Fox buys Roku, but why?SpaceX buys Cursor.World Cup of investing.Stocks on our radar.To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you're ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.

A full transcript is below.

This podcast was recorded on June 19, 2026.

Travis Hoium: Is there a new problem with the layoffs in tech? Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing starts now. Welcome to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing. I’m Travis Hoium, joined today by Lou Whiteman and Emily Flippen, and we are going to get to the hot topic of the day. That's the SpaceX IPO and the acquisition of Cursor that was officially announced this week.

But, Emily, I wanted to start with some of the layoff news around the market, around technology companies. We had Rivian announce some layoffs this week; we had Robinhood announce layoffs. The other big thing is Meta's layoffs, which was, I think, 8,000 people over the past couple of weeks, a rolling layoff that seems to be hitting their culture. Now, we're investors, and so we're looking at this from an investment standpoint. Typically, layoffs have been cheered over the past few years because it's cost-cutting, companies are going to be more profitable. But it seems like, especially at a company like Meta, we're starting to see the downside that, hey, if that comes at the cost of your culture and people actually wanting to work for you long term, maybe this isn't the right strategy. How in the world should we think about some of these layoffs as they're announced?

Emily Flippen: I'm just feeling shocked that Meta is still claiming to have a culture after all these years, with the number of directions that Zuckerberg has taken that company. I'm shocked that anybody at the company still feels like there's a cohesive culture. I understand the complaints there, but there's no doubt that layoffs, of course, reduce morale across the board. Nobody likes to see their friends, their co-workers, leave the company; nobody likes to feel like their own livelihood is threatened. But what I think is really interesting dynamic is that, to your point, this is really only a recent development, the idea of layoffs being cheered. I mean, prior to 2022, the market really didn't like layoffs. It usually meant a slower economy, less people employed. But after this pandemic, the narrative has really shifted. I think the narrative has become layoffs, Duce off lower inflation, which of course, everybody is concerned about. They also boost earnings, even temporarily, for a company. That’s all coming after what many perceive to be over-hiring that took place during and post-pandemic throughout 2020-2021.

There's actually been some research about this that I think is really interesting and reactions do, of course, and should, significantly change from company to company. But on average, layoff announcements do tend to be followed by poor stock returns for the companies that announce layoffs, and I think that, yes, culture has a part to do with that, Travis, but it might be interestingly enough, just that layoffs actually really produce less cost savings than a lot of people assume. They have the moment of being like, oh, maybe we're going to see a bump in EPS next quarter, but then it's followed by months and years of bad feelings.

Lou Whiteman: [OVERLAPPING]

Emily Flippen: Exactly.

Travis Hoium: Lou, it does seem like one of these things that's really new is, hey, we're announcing layoffs, but we're doing it from a position of strength, and that's supposed to be, it's the buzzword. That was what Robinhood said this week. Hey, we don't really want to do this, but we have a great business, a great balance sheet, lots of profits and we want to make sure that I don't know, we're getting ahead of what could be coming down the pipeline, it seems like an odd position.

Lou Whiteman: It is, I'm going to state the obvious here, but I think it needs to be stated because of some of what the companies say. Layoffs happen for a reason, and that reason normally isn't good. Sometimes an external reason, sometimes internal, you can make the case that right now it's happening because AI gives them cover, maybe. It might not be a warning sign, but there are very few CEOs out there who are going to just do layoffs for fun. If you were cutting people, it's probably because you see something. As Emily said, the reaction is relatively new, and it's far from universal. Just this week, we've had, companies doing layoffs where some it was cheered and some it wasn't, so it's not a universal thing.

Here’s the thing, though, at the end of the day, the market is always forward-looking. Layoffs, I take as a sign that things aren't going as well in this moment as they could be. But since I'm trying to invest in the future, the question is, is that does this position the company for success in the future? Rivian is one we talked about earlier in the week. Rivian, things are not going well today and they are doing layoffs because they need to save cash. But if they work, it could make them a better investment, so it's very nuanced. We never invest or we hardly ever invest on just the conditions today, we are always trying to take a look in the future. A CEO's job is to try to position their company to succeed in the future. Layoffs can be a part of that, so they can be a long-term positive, but they certainly aren’t just layoffs, so stock goes up or layoffs are fun, something like that. It is a sign that something isn't going to script.

Emily Flippen: Always drives me insane about this narrative is when companies say that we're laying off from a position of strength. What is that? If you actually look at the data for companies, the most expensive thing that a company can do is hire somebody. The resources, the time, and the literal money that is spent to bring a single full-time employee into the company’s universe, that is an expensive decision. What you're telling me when you laid off is that you made a lot of really bad decisions in the past. I care less about what that means for next quarter's earnings and much more about what it means for your ability to allocate resources effectively.

Travis Hoium: There always seems to be this narrative, too, that companies can easily pick out the top performers and the bottom performers. Lou, you probably remember, Jack Welch, what was it? Cut the bottom 10% every year, and that's a really easy thing to say, when you actually get into a company, the CEO, the vice president who is making these decisions. I've been in big companies as these have happened. They don’t really know what an entry-level person is doing, and who is a phenomenal engineer, and who just got put on a really bad project. It also seems like there's a level of randomness to it. If you are taking away from that long-term culture that you've been building, I'm going to pick on Robinhood here, but Robinhood has been a phenomenal growth business over the past few years, even since it started. If you start eroding that, like maybe Meta has over the past few years, Lou, that seems like a poor trade-off, short-term versus long-term.

Lou Whiteman: It is, but I mean, look, at the end of the day, Emily's right. If you overhired in the first place, shame on you, but you probably need to do something about it. But again, I don't think, no matter how they spin it, any CEO says layoffs are a good idea. I can think of one CEO who danced on stage after doing layoffs, but it wasn't his company, so I'm not going to even put that in there. It's a cautionary tale, but I think it's something CEOs already know, whether it's layoffs, buyouts, anything, these survivors are maybe looking over their shoulder a little. You've lost a friend, you've lost the person you eat lunch with. There's a lot of reasons why things can go even among the remainders, you have a net negative. Companies, again, if you want to signal as an investor, nobody goes through this if there isn't something else going on. I think the best signal is that, there's probably a reason if this press release came out.

Travis Hoium: Let's go to one of the interesting merger and acquisition items for the week. That is Roku being acquired by Fox. Emily, one of the things that was interesting as we got more news about this. I think it's fascinating that Fox is buying a tech company, and I think we can debate whether this is a great move or not, but there is also other potential buyers like Netflix, who are at least sniffing around this deal. It seems like Roku is a bit of a hot commodity despite being a dud for investors for quite a while here.

Emily Flippen: Hot commodity up until they made their decision to move to Fox. To be honest, I'm probably the worst person to talk to about this because I am not lacking emotion when it comes to this company. I'm a big fan of Roku. I've been a Roku shareholder and a big believer in really what has been happening in terms of the turnaround, especially as it relates to their ad business in recent quarters. I was incredibly shocked and disappointed to see the news that Roku was opening itself up for acquisitions here. I don't see the logic in my opinion, from Roku's perspective, but I do think it's a boon to whoever, in this case, Fox could purchase them. Roku's business has been massively turning around as they improve their ad stack. It seems like, in my opinion, founder and CEO Anthony Wood just wanted to free up time. That's the best guess I can get for why he would pursue this deal. He does own 55% of the voting shares for the company. The deal has already been approved by both boards. It seems like virtually nothing except for regulators, which I doubt will do anything,

could step in to stop this deal. Again, I can't rationalize this for Roku. Companies are still when I saw the deal announced, I saw articles from CNBC and others that were still referring to Roku as a streaming device hardware maker. Like, they don't understand the business at all. There's been this fundamental misunderstanding from investors about what Roku is and could be for the future. Fox is getting a good deal here, in my opinion, I think Roku shareholders like myself, are getting a bit of a dud deal, but you're right, share prices coming out of the pandemic have been obviously depressed for Roku for many years now, despite the fact that its business has performed strong. Don't understand the logic of combining with this legacy cable media business. Roku shareholders will own just under 30% of the combined company, so it won't be nominal to Fox's results, but you have to hope that Fox doesn't ruin the asset that they just purchased because part of the value of Roku was the fact that it was the only connected TV independent platform provider, and that will no longer be the case after this acquisition goes through.

Lou Whiteman: Emily is going to be disappointed to find out that I disable Roku as quickly as I can when I buy a TV because I just want my Apple TV to work.

Travis Hoium: You see, I'm the other way. I have a Roku stick working on Amazon Fire TV. I love it. But look, Emily, I'm going to try it, I don't know if this will pass the Emily Flippen smell test, but I will try to explain it. I don't know if I believe this, but this is my best guess.

Emily Flippen: Please convince me.

Travis Hoium: Well, we'll see about that. I think for the Fox side, it just confirms existing narratives. It's another reminder that traditional cable and television businesses are on the decline, and you need to jump onto a lifeboat, that's feature looking. I do think that that sort of works from that side. It is harder to figure on Roku, but I think it's possibly that they looked at that hardware business. I know it's not just a hardware company, but you need those boxes to get all of that add tech goodness. At the end of the day, you have to have those boxes out.

Emily Flippen: To be clear, it's not boxes, it's the actual TV itself.

Travis Hoium: Well, I know, but you have a lot of competition here, that's what I mean.

Emily Flippen: They have more market share than the next three competitors combined. They're killing it. Their market share has only gained since the company went public.

Travis Hoium: They do, but you also have Walmart in the game. You have Alphabet.

Emily Flippen: In their market share.

Travis Hoium: But what are they seeing that we haven't other thing is, too, and this is what I'm more thinking about. I always complain about how I can't switch channels the way I used to. If I want to watch two games and one's on Peacock and one's on Paramount, it's like a 10-minute process, and the future stinks versus the. The way I think that they're beginning to solve this is is that I have YouTube TV. YouTube TV is now integrating Peacock into that, and they're beginning to integrate ESPN and all of these things in it. I think we are getting back to the future where imagine just turning on your screen, and you just have basically go to the channel you want, you're living inside maybe the YouTube ecosystem.

I think there's a lot of ways where the future doesn't look better for Roku between these big-pocketed other systems and just bypassing it together. I think maybe that's what they're seeing, but otherwise, I don't have a clue. This is just of I'm dream casting the future I'd like to see, I think. It seems like everybody involved here does need to bring scale to the market. Whether you're Fox looking at advertising and competing at companies like Amazon now, or whether you're Roku going, hey, we've got a nice advertising business. It's growing, but it is absolutely nothing compared to all these other platforms, and that's something that advertisers think about. When we come back, we are going to get to the big news of the week that comes from SpaceX once again. You're listening to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing.

ADVERTISEMENT: Innovation has always kept the world moving forward, but it also comes with risk. As technology and AI evolve, AXA XL is facing into risk. As a leading global insurer, we constantly push the boundaries to protect your data and network from cyber risks. AXA XL, facing into risk for a future to be imagined. This advertisement doesn't constitute an offer or solicitation nor a description of any products or services of AXA XL.

Travis Hoium: Welcome back to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing. We know SpaceX, the newly public company that is controlled by Elon Musk as a space company. But this week, they finalized an agreement that is going to make it more of what it actually is, which is an AI company, Lou, buying Cursor for $60 billion. This is a deal that was pre-announced before the IPO, but we actually got the details, and it’s interesting that this is a huge acquisition, really finalized less than a week after going public.

Lou Whiteman: It was finalized before, basically, but they didn't want to have to go back and rip up the S1 and slow the process. This is just them doing what they want to do, whether or not it works. Look, I read the S1 and I still don't really know what the SpaceX AI business is. Can I admit that? Maybe I have reading problems, but {OVERLAPPING]

Travis Hoium: It does seem like one of those things where it can be whatever you want it to be as an investor, which.

Lou Whiteman: It was everything.

Travis Hoium: It’s a Neo Cloud, it's a model maker.

Lou Whiteman: Let's be honest, that is the only way you get a total but addressable market basically equal to U.S. GDP is to make it everything. But I do think at some point, they are going to have to narrow down exactly what they want to do with AI. I don't think the bull case is Grok is going to just whoop Cloud. I'm not even sure they're even trying with Grok anymore. If I'm honest with you, the way they're farming out data centers, things like that. The way I see it, though, Musk has a blank canvas with AI here, and he's got a big checkbook in which to spend. The idea now is to find a way to build value with AI and justify the valuation. Cursor feels like a step in that direction. I think, if anything, looking at this, I would expect it not to be the only step or the first step. I think they'll probably do more of this. Look, it's really hard to look at this business because the way we're looking at the AI business from xAI that we saw six months a year ago. But I think what will actually emerge, either good or bad is something very different that is still just now coming into focus internally and we don't have a clue what it looks like extern.

Emily Flippen: That's fair, Lou. I agree $60 billion, it's so much money, I don't want to say that it's not. SpaceX only raised around $85 billion through its public offering for context. It's not nothing, but it is just a drop in the bucket when we're talking about the valuation that is being attached to both xAI and SpaceX itself, given the fact that it has a market cap north of $2.5 trillion. It really doesn't actually move the acquisition itself, doesn't move the needle much for the company. This you only get to $2.5 trillion valuation by selling potential. That potential for AI includes things like data centers and space, which I've had way more conversations in the past two weeks of my life about data centers in space than I ever expected to if you had asked me just a handful of years ago.

But that is what's driving the perception of value. While I recognize that XAI looks bad, today, it looks lagging behind. Financially, it looks challenged, but I love to play devil's advocate. I can't help myself here, it's hard to SpaceX sometimes in its valuation, but I do think the biggest mistake investors make with this company and AI in general is that presuming that what is true today will be true tomorrow. A year ago, Grok's chat market share was less than 2% today. It's nearly 20, if you look at Google, it launched Bard and it was ridiculed for that. Then that has evolved into Gemini, which, in my opinion, is excellent. Same with Microsoft, and it's OpenAI. They struggle as Copilot, but now GitHub Copilot is dominating. The industry is moving fast, we shouldn't extrapolate what exists today as if that's always going to be the case for the future. But I do think to your point, Lou, they're using these resources to try to build the future AI business that is needed to justify today's price.

Travis Hoium: Emily, just a little pushback on that because it does seem like the Grok app and using that the way that you would use something like Gemini or Cloud is maybe not exactly the same. I assume a lot of that usage that you're talking about is people on Twitter going, hey, Grok, is this true or answer this question for me? It's always funny when you see a popular thread. There's 15 questions for Grok in that thread, so I assume that's a lot of that usage. But that isn't necessarily monetizable in the same way that it would be for paying a subscription fee for a cloud or something like that. Doesn't it seem like that's part of the challenge here is what's the actual use cases? What are people actually going to pay for it? At least Cursor brings something in-house that is a growing business, whether or not that has a mode around it with Grok now, in-house is maybe a bigger question, but is that at least part of the theory?

Emily Flippen: I was really hoping you just wouldn't push back on me there, Travis. Just take my market share data at face value and let's move on. You're certainly right as Grok has been rolled out, it's been rolled out in avenues for accessibility that are not directly being monetized right now. Twitter is a big one X, as well as obviously, Tesla vehicles themselves. Now, there's always an opportunity to put in subscription fees, that thing. But I do think the opportunity with AI. It's not monetizable, it's not a unique Grok problem. It's a challenge that all of these chatbots are experiencing. I think ultimately it comes down to the idea ever going to get from the consumer market, what you could get from the enterprise market. I think it becomes less, how do I get a user on X to pay for this and more, how do I get this where the real money is with the enterprises that are driving the vast majority of AI usage. It is a challenge Cursor is certainly a step in the right direction.

Travis Hoium: Lou, does this at least give some relevance to the addressable market that they talked about?

Lou Whiteman: Enterprise is what it is. What is their enterprise business, though? What I still look like it's Cursor. Is it, I guess, is that worth $27 trillion? We'll see.

Travis Hoium: The market thinks it does right now. When we come back, we’re going to play a World Cup-style game with investing. You're listening to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing.

Welcome back to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing. We like to have a little bit of fun with investing in this segment, and we're going to play a World Cup-style game where we're going to have companies from around the world battle to see who is the ultimate champion. We've got a group of South American companies, European companies, Asian companies, and companies from the Americas. Lou, you have the first group from South America. We have Petrobras versus MercadoLibre. Who takes the championship there?

Lou Whiteman: This reminds me of an actual game we saw played in this World Cup. This is Morocco versus Brazil, where one of them is just the established Titan, and one of them is the plucky upstart, and they ended up playing to a draw, but we won’t do that here. The Petrobras is South America's largest energy company, they are the old school, the classic Titan, MercadoLibre didn't even exist when Petrobras was at its heyday, which you say about the Brazilian soccer team these days, too, I think. But it is the new up-and-comer, and I think MercadoLibre is the winner here. They are emerging as South America's champion. Who knows what's going to go on with them with their lending business? It is, if nothing else, I think, a speed bump. It's hard to do lending, especially at first. You need to adjust. But, Petro Boss, hopefully, we're getting back to normal in the Middle East, and I don't think maybe their momentum is going to carry. I'm going to go with MercadoLibre.

Travis Hoium: Emily, you are looking at Europe. We have ASML from the Netherlands versus Spotify.

Emily Flippen: I think both of these companies are probably upset they're going against each other in the first round here because I think they'd both rather go against the state-controlled oil giant. They're both incredible monsters in this bracket. ASML obviously the largest between the two market cap north of $700 billion; that's all because they have effectively a monopoly on EUV lithography, which is the only tool right now that can make the leading-edge AI chips that are needed to drive, I don't know, everything that we're seeing in the market today. It's really hard to go up against ASML, but I think Spotify is holding its own in this matchup. It's a beloved consumer story. It's a company that I think has a little bit of the underdog effect. Everybody said the gross margins will never get north of 30% because of the way that they have their contract and license set up with record labels, and that's true. Part of their business, but Spotify has said, Hold my World Cup beer here because there's so many different ways that we can pivot with the average consumer to monetize them more deeply.

I am unfortunately or fortunately, depending on which side of the side you're on, one of those consumers that is now paying extra on top of my Spotify membership every month to access things like audiobooks. While I do love Spotify, and I think that it's underappreciated, how do you beat ASML? I recognize they're getting a lot of the near-term benefit here as they sell these EUV machines, but the world that we're seeing today cannot operate without it. I think that level of market dominance is just hard to compete with. I have to give the edge to ASML, but let's say it's a close match.

Travis Hoium: I swear you must have had Spotify leading this entire match and then coming from behind ASML, because with that argument, I thought Spotify was going to come out ahead.

Lou Whiteman: I'm saying be honest, though, Sweden and Netherlands, that's a good match too. I'd pay to watch that once. I like it.

Travis Hoium: Emily, I'm going to stick with you. Let's turn our attention to Asia, Samsung versus Tencent.

Emily Flippen: Another really close match in my book. Samsung, obviously based out of South Korea, they're the cheap giant here. They're in the global Top 10, or at least we're in the global Top 10 in terms of market cap size, and a lot of that's being driven by the memory shortage that we're seeing right now that's driving prices up significantly. They're still chasing market share from the South Korean company Hynix and hide bandwidth memory. Hynix does hold the majority market share there, but it is incredible how much the operating profit has grown. Last quarter, I think it grew something like north of 700%, again, all driven by the same things that's driving ASML up today.

But Tencent is not to be underappreciated. I think it's a really quality business. This Chinese business owns WeChat, Weixin, has billions. That's billions with a B of monthly users and revenue that is still managing to grow in the double digits. I come down to what can the market not operate without? While I do think that Samsung is absurdly cheap, it's mining cash, but I also think it's a really cyclical business. Most virtually north of 90%, all of the profits here drive on this one commodity on memory. I think the mote that Tencent has built with its everything app, how integral it is to life in China and has been for years now is the one that advances in my book.

Travis Hoium: This is exactly like the World Cup because all of these companies, I know them as stocks, but I have never used any of their products. I've never bought an ASML machine. I have never shopped with MercadoLibre. I've never used a Tencent product. This just watching the World Cup and going, oh, my God, these players from Brazil are amazing, or the Netherlands, who I never see on my TV.

Emily Flippen: Well, hearing you say that makes me feel God, maybe Samsung should have won because you couldn't include Samsung.

Travis Hoium: I at least know them. Well, these two companies, I have used their products. Lou, you have America's Alphabet versus Nvidia.

Lou Whiteman: Quick shout out first to our colleague Jim Gillies and acknowledged that, yes, we could have put Enbridge, Brookfield, even TD Bank. There's a lot of good companies in Canada, but, yes, we are going with two U.S. companies here in North America, what a match up. This is like France versus Portugal. France is probably the deepest team in the tournament, all over the place. They can hit you from everywhere versus Portugal, who's best known right now for that one shining star, Ronaldo, but actually has a lot more depth than we give it credit for.

That's what I see with Nvidia. Both of them have held trophies up. They're both really, really great companies. At the end of the day, though, France usually wins this matchup because of their depth, because of their ways to win. Alphabet, we've been joking about this, but Alphabet is the cheat code for everything investing right now. You want autonomous, how about Alphabet? You want AI? Well, there's Alphabet, even chipmaking. Hey, you ever think of Alphabet, Internet search, maybe even programmatic advertising. Who knows? Get back to that in one day. Alphabet's going to win here in one of these all-time classics. Our grandparents will be talking about what a wonderful matchup that was and dreaming back to that day when they took the field against each other.

Travis Hoium: I like how my Easy Button in AI has caught on with you, Lou, so I still think that is the easy button in AI. We have now MercadoLibre versus ASML to go to the final. Emily, I'm going to start with you. Which one of these companies is going to win, and then I'll be the tiebreaker if we need one.

Emily Flippen: This comes down to, who is the judge standing on the sideline here and how are they making these calls? Because this is a really formidable match-up, and if I’m the judge on the sideline and closely examining, I don’t know too much about soccer or football, as I should say. But judging whether or not there's been any out of bounds plays, any penalty kicks here, will say, I think MercadoLibre does quietly as the underdog maybe pull ahead here and that's because the same challenge that I think Samsung has ASML has, it can be a bit of a cyclical business. They're selling EUV machines that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. There's large purchase contracts. While they done an incredible job of maintaining that, that can lead to a bit of lack of predictability, cyclicality. There's also the issue that a lot of these restrictions that the U.S. government and foreign countries have put on China has forced innovation within China itself, so they're in the process of trying to develop a competitor to ASML, whereas MercadoLibre has proven time and time again, there is no second in command. There can be no second in command. They go back to when C Limited tried to expand the Shape out across South America and failed miserably, no fence, C Limited.

But MercadoLibre is turning this flywheel effect from its ecommerce business into a financial powerhouse. Lou is right that there's risk associated with that financing business and I think it's one worth watching carefully. But the reason why that financing business is so important is because they're effectively working as a pseudo government agency in the countries in which they operate operate providing banking services where nobody else is, and they're doing so in really volatile times while also still growing their operating profit at record rates. It is just such a high-quality fintech business today that I think they score.

Lou Whiteman: This is the classic the young athletic team that might make some mistakes, but they can run all over the field versus just a strong fundamental team, solid in defense, not going to make a lot of errors. MercadoLibre looks flashy at times and I think we're wondering, but can they keep it going? At the end of the day, I think they do, and I think the cyclicality to make it a business thing instead of just soccer, Emily's spot on there, that ASML, just with the cyclicality, MercadoLibre is going to make more mistakes. They probably give up an own goal somewhere, but at the end of the day, they are the winner over 90 minutes, which is a long time if you have ever tried to run around that long.

Travis Hoium: To bring some analytics to this discussion, I think it's fascinating to look at ASML. I think David Gardner called it one of those companies that passes the SNAP test. If they disappear, a lot of the world changes very, very quickly. But they've only grown revenue at a 12.6% compound annual growth rate over the past five years. You look at MercadoLibre, that growth rate is 35.1%. MercadoLibre is the growth story, so I'm not surprised that it wins this battle. Lou, you're up first. We have Tencent versus Alphabet. Who do you have winning that one?

Lou Whiteman: This is a classic, too. To me, though, again, I hate rooting for France in these tournaments because it is so boring. But at the end of the day, you know France is going to look real good, and the other day against Senegal, they just looked so good. Alphabet, I almost hate rooting for them here, and it's almost like it's the boring choice. But boring wins for me. Alphabet is just, again, exposed to so many areas where we look like we're in the early stages of really interesting growth. They only need to get some of the things right. The depth they have on their bench, their just ability, if one thing isn't working to lean into another. Tencent is a great company, but Alphabet, I think they win here.

Emily Flippen: I will say, it doesn't seem like we're going to need your tie-breaking here, Travis. It's an unfair match-up because Tencent, I said, it's a quality company, pretty well diversified, but they're isolating their own AI losses here across a really profitable legacy business. When I compare the environment in China versus United States, I'll be seen so much incredible innovation in AI come out of China. I do not want to discount that. There are also more rules and regulations for the companies that are trying to develop models in that country than there are here in the United States, despite all the concerns we've had about the lack of access to mythos and tropics models, of course.

But I do think in this case, Alphabet pulls ahead. Their pitch is the opposite of a lot of these chipmakers. They make money from search, but also chips and Cloud and YouTube and Gemini, it's the everything AI company. But even when you strip AI out from Alphabet, it's not like the thesis breaks down. It's not like the company ceases to exist and that's not to say that I think there isn't risk with Alphabet. I certainly think there is. But between these two, I should really knock on wood, but I’m going to say it’s hard to see a world where Alphabet does not outperform Tencent, and that alone, I think, gives me Alphabet’s bet.

Travis Hoium: It's wild that we can have this discussion about Alphabet, and I don't think either of you have mentioned YouTube, an absolutely massive business bigger than Netflix, and yet it's just an afterthought when you think about Alphabet. I agree this is just one of the best companies in the world and not surprised that it won this matchup. We now have for the Championship. Alphabet versus MercadoLibre, Lou, you're making your pitch first. Who wins this?

Lou Whiteman: What's funny is just for fun, I put into Gemini, who would win a soccer match between MercadoLibre and Alphabet in Gemini. Do you know what Gemini said? Gemini said three to one to MercadoLibre, which do their bosses know that? I don't know. I think Gemini took it a little too literally and just talked about the South American tradition of soccer and all of that.

Travis Hoium: I can't see the Silicon Valley elite playing a lot of great soccer game.

Lou Whiteman: I am going to have to go with Alphabet, I think, here, too. There's a classic case where the underdog wins in the semifinal and gets our hopes up, and we're wow, if they can beat ASML, they can beat anyone and then we are just again, it's the France analogy where God, they're good, and I respect them, but it's always so boring when they just show up and just overwhelm the opposition. That's what happens here. It's a good game. MercadoLibre deserves a lot of credit, but Alphabet takes the win.

Emily Flippen: Man, I spoke too soon, Travis. You are going to have to be breaking a tie here because I'm the judge here, and I think MercadoLibre by far pulls ahead. Let me see. I agree with the AI in this case. I'm kicking myself for doing it, and the way that I'm framing up this match off on my head is I'm putting, let's say, $500 behind a recommendation today. Am I putting that money behind MercadoLibre? Am I putting that money behind Alphabet? I think there's, of course, a valuation argument that is boring and not worth getting into today. But the real reason it comes down is to growth, and in MercadoLibre, the opportunity in front of it is a fraction the size of Alphabet while still innovating and its fintech offerings that are just barely getting off the ground. Last quarter, revenue grew nearly 50%. That was the fastest pace for this company in nearly four years. It's an accelerating business, and they're doing it without spending oodles and oodles and oodles of capital on AI. In fact, when you strip out all of the narrative around AI today, I think MercadoLibre's thesis, it remains exactly the same. The credit book is a risk, of course, but I don't think it's less or any more risky, I should say, than a lot of the valuation that's driving I guess, speculation behind companies like Alphabet. MercadoLibre, when's in my book.

Travis Hoium: MercadoLibre had some tailwinds from U.S. currency, which would be headwinds for Alphabet. I just wanted to bring that in, 50% is a massive growth rate, but we do have a relatively weak dollar. I am the decider here. I'm going to give this to alphabet, and I'm going to go to something that we haven't talked about. We've talked about their artificial intelligence, their chips. We talked about Waymo. We talked about YouTube. They also own, what is it, 100, $150 billion worth of SpaceX stock and another $150 billion worth of Anthropic stock. Alphabet is not only one of the biggest, most powerful operators in the world. They are arguably one of the best investors in the world as well, and all that value is just hidden on their balance sheet. We are going to get a line item now. We'll end up in their next quarterly report. Now that SpaceX has gone public, and they have to mark that to market. Something for investors to consider next time they release earnings.

This was a lot of fun. I think it's a good tour around the world and some of the most powerful companies in the world. Great investment ideas. Hopefully, their Alphabet coming out on top in penalty kicks. When we come back, we are going to get to the stock center radar. You're listening to Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing.

ADVERTISEMENT: AI risk isn't always easy to see. There are unapproved tools and agents with too much access to systems. Unmanaged AI exposure isn't just a threat. It's untenable. But with the right security partner, you can prioritize risk and take control. Get the context you need to take action and reduce your exposure. Take your AI risk from untenable to tenable. Tenable. Your exposure ends here. Learn more at tenable.com.

Travis Hoium: As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows The Motley Fool’s editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers. Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. To see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes. We like to end the show with the stocks on our radar. Emily, you are up first. What are you looking at?

Emily Flippen: I'm looking at Life Time Holdings. Ticker is LTH and this is the premium positioned JAM chain. They have massive big build-outs all across the country here. That's an asset-light sale leaseback model growing pretty rapidly. Double digits here. They target really affluent memberships. Their median household income is north of $150,000 a year, so it should be more resilient during pullbacks, but the real pitch I have for you here, Dan, and the reason why you think you should pick Lifetime is because you have children, if I'm not mistaken, right?

Dan Caplinger: I do, yes.

Emily Flippen: What sounds better to you than paying? You're relatively low, a couple hundred bucks, let's say, a month membership fee to go to a gym that will give you free child care while you and your partner go to the pool at Lifetime, sip a drink, lay back, and just have to spend a nice Saturday afternoon without your kids involved. That sounds really nice?

Dan Caplinger: I would probably be doing dead lifts and not going in the pool, but yes, that does sound nice.

Emily Flippen: Well, that's why you and I are different people, but, yes, that's my pitch here for Lifetime. They have a lot of affluent, child and child free, yes, but lots of people use it for their day care as well.

Travis Hoium: Dan, what do you think about Lifetime?

Dan Caplinger: It's a good pitch, Travis, I can't argue with that. Emily, is this one of those companies that also owns all their buildings and real estate stuff?

Emily Flippen: No, so they did initially, but they're in this process of doing sale-leasebacks to free up capital so they can build even more locations. That might hurt the long-term economics. I'm not gonna lie to you. But for the near term, it's actually doing a lot to improve their capital structure.

Travis Hoium: Emily is a rare occurrence where Emily brings something interesting and good to the show, so I'm very happy about that. Emily trying to get me to spend $659 a month on my local Lifetime membership.

Emily Flippen: Worth it?

Travis Hoium: Maybe no.

Lou Whiteman: Drinking by the pool is the workout I can get in.

Travis Hoium: Well, that's even more.

Lou Whiteman: Maybe.

Travis Hoium: Lou, what are you looking at?

Lou Whiteman: Dan, since Emily brought something good, I feel no obligation to do that to you. I'm looking at Rivian. I took her RIVN was supposed to be a fantastic moment for this maker of electric trucks and SUVs. The new R2 SUV, a mass market vehicle starting at a reasonable price of $58,000 is hitting the market. The R has a substantial waiting list, and the plan is for Rivian to see a huge uptick in cash flow and start that slow inch towards profitability. At last this week, the company said it was going to lay off about 2% of its workforce to save cash. The jobs they're laying off, marketing and customer support jobs, not the jobs you want to see go during a time when you're ramping up your customer list. This feels like a pivotal moment for Rivian, a company that lost more than $3 billion last year. It has been over time, almost impossible to build a new automaker from scratch. There's one big exception, and they almost went bankrupt. Rivian really needs this R2 to deliver on its promise and fast. I'm Just watching close here for the ride. Shall we say.

Travis Hoium: Dan, are you on the R2 reservation list?

Dan Caplinger: Absolutely not. Couldn't catch me dead in those dorky loser mobiles.

Travis Hoium: Well, at least we have a strong opinion. I assume Emily takes the cake today. We're gonna go with Lifetime Holdings today, Mr. Travis. Thank you to Lou and Emily and Dan behind the glass. I'm Travis Hoium. Thanks for listening. We'll see you here tomorrow.

Is the SpaceX IPO a buy or a late bloomer in the making? Kathy Donnelly, trader and co-author of “The Lifecycle Trade”, analyzes the post-IPO volatility and compares the current chart to Tesla's early trading days.

Qualcomm (QCOM 7.57%) has spent years trying to convince investors it can be more than a smartphone-chip company. At its investor day on Wednesday, it made its boldest case yet. The company nearly doubled its target for non-handset revenue in fiscal 2029, raising the goal to about $40 billion from $22 billion. And for the first time, it put hard numbers behind its data center ambitions, calling for more than $15 billion in data center revenue by that same year.

Investors liked what they heard, and shares jumped sharply on the news, rising as much as 15%.

The figures are bold for a company whose chips still sit mostly inside phones. But raising a target is the easy part. The harder question is whether Qualcomm, a relative latecomer to the data center, can build a business of this size in a market that Nvidia already dominates.

Image source: Getty Images.

A bigger bet beyond the smartphone Qualcomm's diversification push isn't new, but the scale of it is. The company's prior $22 billion non-handset goal, set in 2024, was already meant to loosen its dependence on smartphones -- a maturing market where it also faces the gradual loss of Apple as a modem customer as the iPhone maker shifts to its own in-house modem products. The new $40 billion target nearly doubles that ambition.

The data center, of course, is the centerpiece of the company's growing ambition. Qualcomm detailed a server processor called the Dragonfly C1000, built around more than 250 of its custom cores, along with a line of artificial intelligence (AI) accelerators designed to run AI models rather than train them. Management is targeting more than $15 billion in data center revenue by fiscal 2029 -- up from almost nothing today.

The most important validation came from a customer. Meta Platforms agreed to a multi-year, multi-generation deal to use Qualcomm's new processor in its data centers, with production starting in the second half of 2028. For a company trying to prove it belongs in the data center, landing one of the world's biggest spenders on computing infrastructure is a meaningful endorsement.

Qualcomm's other growth bets are further along. Its automotive revenue rose 38% year over year to a record $1.3 billion in its fiscal second quarter of 2026 (the period ended March 29, 2026), and management is targeting $10 billion in annual automotive revenue by fiscal 2029, backed by a design-win pipeline it now pegs at about $65 billion.

Today's Change

(

-7.57

%) $

-15.51

Current Price

$

189.39

A late start in a crowded market Still, the targets are a bet, not a result.

Qualcomm is arriving late to a data center market where Nvidia controls the vast majority of AI chip sales and where a deep software ecosystem keeps customers from switching. Qualcomm's HBC-based AI250 accelerator won't begin commercial sampling until mid-2027, and the Meta CPU production doesn't begin until the second half of 2028.

A lot can change between 2026 and the end of 2028.

The current numbers are a reminder of how far the company has to go. Qualcomm's fiscal Q2 revenue was $10.6 billion, and handset chips still accounted for the largest piece at about $6 billion. Data center revenue is a rounding error by comparison. The $40 billion goal assumes years of strong execution in markets where Qualcomm hasn't yet proven it can win at scale.

What makes the stock interesting, however, is that investors aren't paying much for any of this. Qualcomm's reported fiscal Q2 earnings were inflated by a one-time tax benefit, but on a non-GAAP (adjusted) basis the stock trades at about 17 times earnings -- well below the broader market and a fraction of what pricier AI chip names command.

The market, in other words, is treating Qualcomm as a mature smartphone-chip supplier and assigning little value to the data center business it just sketched out.

That mix of a modest valuation and a credible, if unproven, growth story is what makes Qualcomm worth a closer look. Sure, I wouldn't buy the stock on the strength of a 2029 target alone, and the competitive risks in the data center are real. But the Meta agreement suggests the ambition is more than a slide in an investor presentation -- and at this valuation, investors aren't being asked to pay up for a diversification story that finally seems to be taking shape.

, /PRNewswire/ -- ClaimsFiler, a FREE shareholder information service, reminds investors that they have until August 10, 2026 to file lead plaintiff applications in a securities class action lawsuit against  Zillow Group, Inc. (NasdaqGS: ZG, Z) ("Zillow" or the "Company"), if they purchased or otherwise acquired Zillow Class A or Class C common stock between February 11, 2025 and May 7, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period").  This action is pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Get Help

Zillow investors should visit us at https://claimsfiler.com/cases/nasdaq-z-3/ or call toll-free (844) 367-9658.  Lawyers at Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC are available to discuss your legal options.

About the Lawsuit

Zillow and certain of its executives are charged with failing to disclose material information during the Class Period, violating federal securities laws. 

The alleged false and misleading statements and omissions include, but are not limited to, that: (i) Zillow's agreement with Redfin was not a "partnership," but rather an acquisition of Redfin's business; (ii) as a result of the Redfin Agreement, Zillow faced a materially heightened risk of regulatory scrutiny and liability under federal antitrust laws; (iii) upon the filing of an antitrust lawsuit, Zillow continued to downplay its legal exposure; and (iv) as a result, Defendants' statements about Zillow's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

The case is Breidert v. Zillow Group, Inc., et al., Case No. 26-cv-02016.

About ClaimsFiler

ClaimsFiler has a single mission: to serve as the information source to help retail investors recover their share of billions of dollars from securities class action settlements. At ClaimsFiler.com, investors can: (1) register for free to gain access to information and settlement websites for various securities class action cases so they can timely submit their own claims; (2) upload their portfolio transactional data to be notified about relevant securities cases in which they may have a financial interest; and (3) submit inquiries to the Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC law firm for free case evaluations.

To learn more about ClaimsFiler, visit www.claimsfiler.com.

SOURCE ClaimsFiler

NEW YORK, June 26, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP reminds investors of its investigation on behalf of Accenture (“Accenture” or the “Company”) (NYSE:ACN) investors concerning the Company’s and/or members of its senior management’s possible violation of the federal securities laws or other unlawful business practices.

[LEARN MORE ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION]

What Happened?

On June 16, 2026, Morgan Stanley downgraded Accenture to Hold and cut its price target from $240 to $177, citing concerns that anticipated AI spending rationalization had “not played out.” Two days later, the Company’s own guidance revision confirmed that the growth trajectory management had projected just three months earlier was no longer achievable.

On June 18, 2026, Accenture reported third quarter 2026 earnings and cut its fiscal year 2026 revenue growth forecast to 3-4%, down from the 3-5% range it had previously provided. Accenture’s prior guidance, issued during its fiscal Q2 earnings report on March 19, 2026, projected 3-5% revenue growth for full-year fiscal 2026, uplifted from Q1’s previous 2-5% target. Also, third quarter revenue of $18.7 billion came in below analyst expectations of $18.78 billion. On this news, the price of Accenture shares declined by $28.03 per share, or approximately 18%, from $156.01 per share on June 17, 2026 to close at $127.98 on June 18, 2026.

What Should I Do?

At this stage, no lawsuit has been filed. The investigation is ongoing to determine whether claims may be brought under federal securities laws.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Accenture securities, have information, or would like to learn more about this investigation, please contact Lauren Molinaro of Kirby McInerney LLP by email at [email protected], or fill out the contact form below, to discuss your rights or interests with respect to these matters at no cost.

[LEARN MORE ABOUT SECURITIES CLASS ACTIONS]

Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs’ law firm concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer litigation. The firm’s efforts on behalf of shareholders in securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at Kirby McInerney LLP’s website.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.

Contacts
Kirby McInerney LLP        
Lauren Molinaro, Esq.
212-699-1171
https://www.kmllp.com
https://securitiesleadplaintiff.com/
[email protected]

On June 26, 2026, Willis Towers Watson PLC (WTW) shares rose 3.0% today, bringing the current price to $265.43. The stock has traded within a 52-week range of $

-

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico--(BUSINESS WIRE)--First BanCorp (the “Corporation”) (NYSE: FBP), the bank holding company for FirstBank Puerto Rico ("FirstBank"), is aware that a lawsuit has been filed against it in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging claims relating to banking services provided to Jeffrey Epstein following a bank acquisition in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Corporation and FirstBank categorically deny the claims alleged in the complaint and intend to vigorously defend against them.

First BanCorp and FirstBank are committed to maintaining the highest standards of compliance, governance, and ethical conduct. As a highly regulated financial institution, FirstBank maintains a comprehensive Bank Secrecy Act and Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML) compliance program designed to meet its legal and regulatory obligations, and, as a matter of ongoing practice, works cooperatively with its regulators and, where appropriate, with law enforcement authorities in support of the integrity and potential misuse of the banking system.

The Corporation is reviewing the complaint and will respond through the appropriate legal channels. Given that litigation is pending, FirstBank will not be providing further comment at this time.

About First BanCorp
First BanCorp is the parent corporation of FirstBank Puerto Rico, a state-chartered commercial bank with operations in Puerto Rico, the U.S. and British Virgin Islands and Florida, and of FirstBank Insurance Agency, LLC.

First BanCorp’s shares of common stock trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “FBP.”

Forward-Looking Statements
This press release may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are subject to the safe harbor created by such sections, including statements regarding the Corporation’s and FirstBank’s intent to defend against the referenced litigation and the possible resolution of the matter. Forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those expressed, including the inherent uncertainties of litigation. Additional information concerning these factors is included in the Corporation’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K. The Corporation undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as required by law.

More News From First BanCorp

Back to Newsroom

On June 26, 2026, Super Micro Computer Inc (SMCI) shares fell 3.3% to a current price of $30.63. Over the past year, the stock has experienced significant volat

On June 26, 2026, Okta Inc (OKTA) shares rose 4.2% today, bringing the current price to $124.28. The stock has experienced significant price movements over the

On June 26, 2026, Amkor Technology Inc AMKR shares fell 8.1% to a current price of $78.72. The stock has experienced a significant range over the past year, with a 52-week high of $96.68 and a low of $20.59, showcasing both volatility and substantial growth.

GF Value™ verdict: The current price is $78.72, which is 144.9% above the GF Value™ of $32.15.GF Score™: 74/100 (Above Average), indicating a generally favorable position compared to other stocks.Most notable signal: Insiders sold $8.9 million worth of shares in the last three months, with no buying activity reported. Is AMKR Overvalued or Undervalued? According to GF Value™, Amkor Technology Inc AMKR is significantly overvalued at its current trading price of $78.72, compared to an estimated fair value of $32.15. This indicates an alarming 144.9% overvaluation, suggesting that the stock is trading far above its intrinsic value. The GF Valuation label clearly identifies AMKR as significantly overvalued, reflecting the potential risk for investors who may be entering the stock at this inflated price level.

The margin of safety is critical to consider; purchasing shares at such a premium limits potential upside and increases vulnerability to price corrections. Given the substantial difference between the current price and the GF Value™, it is essential for investors to evaluate their risk tolerance and investment strategies carefully.

How Does AMKR's Valuation Compare to Its History? Metric Current Historical P/E (TTM) 45.0x 14.4x Forward P/E 38.5x N/A The current P/E (TTM) of 45.0x is 211% above its 5-year median P/E of 14.4x. This analysis indicates that AMKR is trading well above its historical valuation levels, aligning with the GF Value™ verdict that the stock is overvalued. The elevated P/E ratio suggests that investors are currently paying a premium that is not supported by historical earnings, reinforcing the caution advised by the GF Value™ assessment.

What Does AMKR's GF Score™ Tell Us? Metric Rating GF Score™ 74/100 Financial Strength 8/10 Profitability 7/10 Growth 7/10 Valuation 1/10 Momentum 9/10 The GF Score™ of 74/100 suggests that Amkor Technology Inc has a solid financial profile, particularly in its Financial Strength (8/10) and Momentum (9/10) ratings. However, the significant weakness in Valuation (1/10) highlights the concerns regarding its current pricing relative to intrinsic value. The Profitability and Growth scores of 7/10 indicate a healthy operational performance, but the overall score suggests caution due to the excessive valuation indicated by the GF Value™ analysis.

What Are Insiders Doing with AMKR Stock? Recent insider activity at Amkor Technology Inc shows that insiders have sold a total of $8.9 million worth of shares over the past three months with no reported buying activity. This pattern of selling without any buying may suggest a lack of confidence among insiders regarding the stock's current valuation and future performance. It is important for potential investors to consider this signal as part of their overall assessment of the stock.

What This Means for Investors Based on the analysis of the GF Value™, Amkor Technology Inc AMKR is currently overvalued. With a significant discrepancy between the current price and the estimated fair value, potential investors should exercise caution and conduct thorough due diligence before considering any position in the stock.

For the complete analysis, visit the Amkor Technology Inc AMKR stock page. You can also explore the GF Value™ page for detailed valuation methodology, or use the GuruFocus Stock Screener to find similar opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions What is AMKR's GF Score™?

AMKR has a GF Score™ of 74/100, indicating it is positioned above average compared to other stocks, with strong financial strength and momentum.

Is AMKR overvalued or undervalued?

AMKR is currently overvalued, with a GF Value™ of $32.15 compared to its current price of $78.72, indicating a significant premium in the stock price.

What is AMKR's P/E ratio?

AMKR's P/E (TTM) ratio is 45.0x, which is significantly higher than its 5-year median P/E of 14.4x, indicating that the stock is trading at a premium compared to its historical valuation.

This stock alert was generated using automated technology and GuruFocus financial data to provide readers with timely and accurate market reporting. This content was reviewed by GuruFocus editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

BellRing Brands (BRBR - Free Report) ended the recent trading session at $11.55, demonstrating a +1.4% change from the preceding day's closing price. The stock exceeded the S&P 500, which registered a loss of 0.05% for the day. Elsewhere, the Dow saw a downswing of 0.09%, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq depreciated by 0.24%.

The stock of nutritional supplements company has risen by 31.52% in the past month, leading the Consumer Staples sector's loss of 0.16% and the S&P 500's loss of 1.42%.

The investment community will be closely monitoring the performance of BellRing Brands in its forthcoming earnings report. On that day, BellRing Brands is projected to report earnings of $0.36 per share, which would represent a year-over-year decline of 34.55%. Alongside, our most recent consensus estimate is anticipating revenue of $551.27 million, indicating a 0.69% upward movement from the same quarter last year.

For the annual period, the Zacks Consensus Estimates anticipate earnings of $1.23 per share and a revenue of $2.33 billion, signifying shifts of -43.32% and +0.71%, respectively, from the last year.

Investors should also take note of any recent adjustments to analyst estimates for BellRing Brands. These revisions typically reflect the latest short-term business trends, which can change frequently. As a result, upbeat changes in estimates indicate analysts' favorable outlook on the business health and profitability.

Our research suggests that these changes in estimates have a direct relationship with upcoming stock price performance. Investors can capitalize on this by using the Zacks Rank. This model considers these estimate changes and provides a simple, actionable rating system.

The Zacks Rank system, which ranges from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), has an impressive outside-audited track record of outperformance, with #1 stocks generating an average annual return of +25% since 1988. The Zacks Consensus EPS estimate remained stagnant within the past month. BellRing Brands is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #5 (Strong Sell).

Looking at valuation, BellRing Brands is presently trading at a Forward P/E ratio of 9.28. This denotes a discount relative to the industry average Forward P/E of 14.46.

One should further note that BRBR currently holds a PEG ratio of 5.59. The PEG ratio is akin to the commonly utilized P/E ratio, but this measure also incorporates the company's anticipated earnings growth rate. The Food - Miscellaneous was holding an average PEG ratio of 2.39 at yesterday's closing price.

The Food - Miscellaneous industry is part of the Consumer Staples sector. Currently, this industry holds a Zacks Industry Rank of 193, positioning it in the bottom 21% of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank evaluates the power of our distinct industry groups by determining the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks forming the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

Ensure to harness Zacks.com to stay updated with all these stock-shifting metrics, among others, in the next trading sessions.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - June 26, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of Graphic Packaging Holding Company (NYSE: GPK) between February 4, 2025 and February 2, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important July 6, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Graphic Packaging securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Graphic Packaging class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=64523 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than July 6, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered billions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Graphic Packaging was experiencing, inter alia, significant inventory management issues, as well as significantly reduced demand and volumes and increased costs; (2) defendants downplayed the true scope and severity of the foregoing issues, which were likely to, and did, have a material negative impact on Graphic Packaging's business and financial results; (3) defendants likewise overstated the strength and sustainability of Graphic Packaging's business model and operations, as well as its ability to weather ongoing macroeconomic headwinds; (4) accordingly, Graphic Packaging's previously issued full year 2025 financial guidance was unreliable and/or unrealistic; and (5) as a result, defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Graphic Packaging class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=64523 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/303131

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

On June 26, 2026, LPL Financial Holdings Inc LPLA shares fell 3.1% to a current price of $268.86. The stock has experienced a challenging year, with a 52-week high of $403.58 and a low of $260.15, reflecting significant volatility and investor sentiment. The recent decline in share price underscores a broader downward trend observed over the past year, where LPLA has lost 26.0% of its value.

GF Value™ verdict: LPLA's current price is $268.86, which is 41.8% below the GF Value™ estimate of $461.79, indicating a significant undervaluation.GF Score™: With a score of 82/100, LPLA is rated as strong, suggesting potential for solid long-term returns.Most notable signal: Insider activity has shown a slight negative trend, with insiders selling $0.6M in shares over the last three months, indicating a lack of buying interest. Is LPLA Overvalued or Undervalued? LPL Financial Holdings Inc is currently trading at $268.86, which significantly deviates from its GF Value™ of $461.79. This positions the stock as 41.8% undervalued, suggesting a margin of safety for potential investors. The GF Valuation label categorizes LPLA as "Significantly Undervalued," indicating a compelling opportunity if the company can maintain or improve its operational performance. GF Value™ is GuruFocus' proprietary measure of intrinsic value, calculated from historical trading multiples, past business growth, and future performance estimates.

However, while the undervaluation presents an attractive opportunity, it is essential to consider the broader market context and potential risks. Factors such as the declining stock price and the recent insider selling may reflect underlying issues that could impact future performance. Investors should weigh these risks against the potential upside suggested by the valuation metrics.

How Does LPLA's Valuation Compare to Its History? Metric Current Historical P/E (TTM) 24.0x 24.9x Forward P/E 11.6x N/A LPLA's current P/E (TTM) of 24.0x is slightly below its 5-year median P/E of 24.9x, indicating that the stock is trading at a lower valuation compared to its historical average. The forward P/E of 11.6x further emphasizes this trend, suggesting that the market may be undervaluing future earnings potential. This P/E analysis aligns with the GF Value™ verdict, reinforcing the notion that LPLA is undervalued based on historical valuation metrics.

What Does LPLA's GF Score™ Tell Us? Metric Rating GF Score™ 82/100 Financial Strength 5/10 Profitability 9/10 Growth 10/10 Valuation 4/10 Momentum 2/10 The GF Score™ of 82/100 indicates a strong overall performance, particularly in the areas of Profitability (9/10) and Growth (10/10). This suggests that LPLA is effectively managing its operations and has a robust growth trajectory. However, the Valuation (4/10) and Momentum (2/10) scores indicate some concerns, particularly regarding market perception and stock price trends. The disparity between the strong growth potential and the weaker valuation metrics suggests that while LPLA has the operational capacity for success, external factors may be hindering its market performance.

What Are Insiders Doing with LPLA Stock? In the last three months, insiders have sold $0.6M worth of LPLA shares, with no insider purchases reported during the same period. This pattern of selling may suggest a lack of confidence among insiders regarding the company's near-term performance, which could be a red flag for potential investors. While insider selling does not necessarily indicate a problem, it is an important factor to consider in the overall assessment of the company's market sentiment.

What This Means for Investors Based on the GF Value™ assessment, LPL Financial Holdings Inc is currently undervalued. The significant gap between the current price and the estimated fair value presents a potential opportunity, although investors should remain cautious given the recent stock performance and insider selling trends.

For the complete analysis, visit the LPL Financial Holdings Inc LPLA stock page. You can also explore the GF Value™ page for detailed valuation methodology, or use the GuruFocus Stock Screener to find similar opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions What is LPLA's GF Score™?

LPLA's GF Score™ is 82/100, indicating a strong overall performance and potential for solid long-term returns based on its financial metrics.

Is LPLA overvalued or undervalued?

LPLA is currently undervalued, with a GF Value™ of $461.79 compared to its current price of $268.86, suggesting significant upside potential.

What is LPLA's P/E ratio?

LPLA's P/E (TTM) is 24.0x, which is slightly below its 5-year median P/E of 24.9x, indicating it is trading at a lower valuation than its historical average.

This stock alert was generated using automated technology and GuruFocus financial data to provide readers with timely and accurate market reporting. This content was reviewed by GuruFocus editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

Chewy's (CHWY +2.12%) management team lowered its 2026 growth expectations.

*Stock prices used were the afternoon prices of June 24, 2026. The video was published on June 26, 2026.

Parkev Tatevosian, CFA has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Chewy. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Parkev Tatevosian is an affiliate of The Motley Fool and may be compensated for promoting its services. If you choose to subscribe through his link, he will earn some extra money that supports his channel. His opinions remain his own and are unaffected by The Motley Fool.

TROY, Mich., June 26, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- The Editorial Advisory and Securities Review Committee of BetterInvesting Magazine today announced Deckers Outdoor Corp. (NYSE: DECK) as its "Stock to Study" and Euronet Inc. (NYSE: EEFT) as its "Undervalued Stock" in the September 2026 issue for investors' informational and educational use.

On June 26, 2026, SoFi Technologies Inc (SOFI) shares rose 3.2% to a current price of $17.88. This price is within a 52-week range of $14.92 to $32.73. Despite

On June 26, 2026, MKS Inc (MKSI) shares fell 5.3% to a current price of $388.61. The stock has experienced a range of price movements in the past 52 weeks, with

Sweetgreen, Inc. (SG - Free Report) closed the most recent trading day at $9.14, moving +2.01% from the previous trading session. The stock's change was more than the S&P 500's daily loss of 0.05%. On the other hand, the Dow registered a loss of 0.09%, and the technology-centric Nasdaq decreased by 0.24%.

Heading into today, shares of the company had lost 12.24% over the past month, lagging the Retail-Wholesale sector's loss of 7.87% and the S&P 500's loss of 1.42%.

Market participants will be closely following the financial results of Sweetgreen, Inc. in its upcoming release. It is anticipated that the company will report an EPS of -$0.13, marking a 35% rise compared to the same quarter of the previous year. Simultaneously, our latest consensus estimate expects the revenue to be $193.39 million, showing a 4.21% escalation compared to the year-ago quarter.

For the entire fiscal year, the Zacks Consensus Estimates are projecting earnings of $0.62 per share and a revenue of $708.46 million, representing changes of +154.39% and +4.27%, respectively, from the prior year.

Investors should also note any recent changes to analyst estimates for Sweetgreen, Inc. These recent revisions tend to reflect the evolving nature of short-term business trends. Consequently, upward revisions in estimates express analysts' positivity towards the business operations and its ability to generate profits.

Our research suggests that these changes in estimates have a direct relationship with upcoming stock price performance. To take advantage of this, we've established the Zacks Rank, an exclusive model that considers these estimated changes and delivers an operational rating system.

The Zacks Rank system, ranging from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), possesses a remarkable history of outdoing, externally audited, with #1 stocks returning an average annual gain of +25% since 1988. Over the last 30 days, the Zacks Consensus EPS estimate has remained unchanged. Sweetgreen, Inc. is currently a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold).

Digging into valuation, Sweetgreen, Inc. currently has a Forward P/E ratio of 14.37. This represents a discount compared to its industry average Forward P/E of 19.56.

It's also important to note that SG currently trades at a PEG ratio of 1.17. The PEG ratio is akin to the commonly utilized P/E ratio, but this measure also incorporates the company's anticipated earnings growth rate. By the end of yesterday's trading, the Retail - Restaurants industry had an average PEG ratio of 1.93.

The Retail - Restaurants industry is part of the Retail-Wholesale sector. This industry, currently bearing a Zacks Industry Rank of 193, finds itself in the bottom 21% echelons of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank gauges the strength of our individual industry groups by measuring the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks within the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

Don't forget to use Zacks.com to keep track of all these stock-moving metrics, and others, in the upcoming trading sessions.

Pagaya Technologies Ltd. (PGY - Free Report) closed at $15.87 in the latest trading session, marking a +2.52% move from the prior day. This move outpaced the S&P 500's daily loss of 0.05%. Elsewhere, the Dow saw a downswing of 0.09%, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq depreciated by 0.24%.

Shares of the company witnessed a gain of 10.89% over the previous month, beating the performance of the Finance sector with its gain of 2.3%, and the S&P 500's loss of 1.42%.

Analysts and investors alike will be keeping a close eye on the performance of Pagaya Technologies Ltd. in its upcoming earnings disclosure. It is anticipated that the company will report an EPS of $0.71, marking a 10.94% rise compared to the same quarter of the previous year. Meanwhile, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for revenue is projecting net sales of $358.15 million, up 9.73% from the year-ago period.

For the full year, the Zacks Consensus Estimates are projecting earnings of $3.23 per share and revenue of $1.48 billion, which would represent changes of -2.42% and +13.68%, respectively, from the prior year.

Investors might also notice recent changes to analyst estimates for Pagaya Technologies Ltd. These revisions typically reflect the latest short-term business trends, which can change frequently. Therefore, positive revisions in estimates convey analysts' confidence in the business performance and profit potential.

Research indicates that these estimate revisions are directly correlated with near-term share price momentum. To capitalize on this, we've crafted the Zacks Rank, a unique model that incorporates these estimate changes and offers a practical rating system.

The Zacks Rank system, spanning from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), boasts an impressive track record of outperformance, audited externally, with #1 ranked stocks yielding an average annual return of +25% since 1988. The Zacks Consensus EPS estimate remained stagnant within the past month. At present, Pagaya Technologies Ltd. boasts a Zacks Rank of #1 (Strong Buy).

Looking at valuation, Pagaya Technologies Ltd. is presently trading at a Forward P/E ratio of 4.79. This indicates a discount in contrast to its industry's Forward P/E of 11.12.

The Financial - Miscellaneous Services industry is part of the Finance sector. Currently, this industry holds a Zacks Industry Rank of 103, positioning it in the top 43% of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank evaluates the power of our distinct industry groups by determining the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks forming the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

Don't forget to use Zacks.com to keep track of all these stock-moving metrics, and others, in the upcoming trading sessions.

CleanSpark (CLSK - Free Report) closed at $16.33 in the latest trading session, marking a +2.9% move from the prior day. The stock exceeded the S&P 500, which registered a loss of 0.05% for the day. Elsewhere, the Dow saw a downswing of 0.09%, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq depreciated by 0.24%.

Shares of the company have depreciated by 12.51% over the course of the past month, underperforming the Finance sector's gain of 2.3%, and the S&P 500's loss of 1.42%.

The upcoming earnings release of CleanSpark will be of great interest to investors. The company's upcoming EPS is projected at -$0.29, signifying a 137.18% drop compared to the same quarter of the previous year. Alongside, our most recent consensus estimate is anticipating revenue of $158.26 million, indicating a 20.33% downward movement from the same quarter last year.

Regarding the entire year, the Zacks Consensus Estimates forecast earnings of -$3.2 per share and revenue of $642.95 million, indicating changes of -550.7% and -16.1%, respectively, compared to the previous year.

Investors might also notice recent changes to analyst estimates for CleanSpark. Such recent modifications usually signify the changing landscape of near-term business trends. Consequently, upward revisions in estimates express analysts' positivity towards the business operations and its ability to generate profits.

Our research shows that these estimate changes are directly correlated with near-term stock prices. To exploit this, we've formed the Zacks Rank, a quantitative model that includes these estimate changes and presents a viable rating system.

The Zacks Rank system, spanning from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), boasts an impressive track record of outperformance, audited externally, with #1 ranked stocks yielding an average annual return of +25% since 1988. Within the past 30 days, our consensus EPS projection remained stagnant. CleanSpark is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #4 (Sell).

The Financial - Miscellaneous Services industry is part of the Finance sector. This industry, currently bearing a Zacks Industry Rank of 103, finds itself in the top 43% echelons of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank is ordered from best to worst in terms of the average Zacks Rank of the individual companies within each of these sectors. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

Be sure to follow all of these stock-moving metrics, and many more, on Zacks.com.

-

SAN DIEGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Robbins LLP informs stockholders that a class action was filed on behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Futu Holdings Limited (NASDAQ: FUTU) securities between May 24, 2023 and May 27, 2026. Futu Holdings Limited engages in the provision of digitalized securities brokerage and wealth management product distribution service in Hong Kong and internationally.

Robbins LLP is Investigating Allegations that Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) Misled Investors Regarding its Business Prospects

ShareFor more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas, Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003.

The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating Allegations that Futu Holdings Limited (FUTU) Misled Investors Regarding its Business Prospects

According to the complaint, during the class period, defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) Futu was not in compliance with the requirements of the CSRC, including because the Company continued to conduct securities business, public fund sales business and futures business in mainland China without obtaining the requisite licenses or approval; (2) as a result, Futu was reasonably likely to face regulatory penalties, including the disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and other penalties; (3) as a result of the foregoing, Futu’s financial results were overstated; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

Plaintiff alleges that On May 28, 2026, before the market opened, Futu issued a press release reporting financial results for the first quarter 2026, including net income of HK$831.0 million (US$106.0 million) after giving effect to the proposed penalties comprised of: “(i) confiscation of illegal gains of approximately RMB470 million [approximately $69.21 million USD], and (ii) imposition of fines of approximately RMB1.38 billion, [approximately $20 billion USD] in an aggregate amount of approximately RMB1.85 billion.” The press release reported this adjustment under the Company’s financial statements as “Others, net” in its statements of comprehensive income for the applicable period. On this news, Futu’s stock price fell $5.31, or 4.8%, to close at $104.91 on May 28, 2026.

What Now? You may be eligible to participate in the class action against Futu Holdings Limited Shareholders who wish to serve as lead plaintiff for the class should contact Robbins LLP. The lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. You do not have to participate in the case to be eligible for a recovery. If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member. For more information, click here.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay no fees or expenses.

About Robbins LLP: A recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation, the attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been dedicated to helping shareholders recover losses, improve corporate governance structures, and hold company executives accountable for their wrongdoing since 2002.

To be notified if a class action against Futu Holdings Limited settles or to receive free alerts when corporate executives engage in wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today.

Attorney Advertising. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

More News From Robbins LLP

Back to Newsroom

Space Exploration Technologies (SPCX +0.15%), better known as SpaceX, has dominated the market headlines recently. It clearly made a splash when it went public as the largest IPO ever, and the stock immediately ran up to over $200 per share in the days following its debut. Now, it's down to about $153 per share due to an untimely announcement.

I think this was a major red flag for investors, and SpaceX would have been wiser to do this a few months down the road.

Image source: Getty Images.

What did SpaceX do to cause the sell-off? When a company goes public, it often issues additional shares to raise capital for the business. SpaceX was no different, issuing over 83 million shares in its IPO, bringing its total to just under 640 million. It raised $85.7 billion through this, creating a massive cash pile that SpaceX can use to pursue its goals.

For reference, SpaceX's capital expenditures during 2025 were nearly $21 billion. In 2024, that total was $11 billion, indicating a trajectory to double capital expenditures each year amid strong demand for its core products.

With that extra $85.7 billion, SpaceX can easily fund capital expenditures for over a year. So, whether SpaceX decides to build more computing capacity for xAI, launch more Starlink satellites, or invest in its space division, it has a ton of cash ready to deploy and shouldn't need to raise any more money in the near term.

Today's Change

(

0.15

%) $

0.23

Current Price

$

153.23

But that's exactly what SpaceX did.

The stock price crash in the last few days was caused by the announcement of a $25 billion bond issue. SpaceX raising an additional $25 billion after its IPO seems a bit untimely and looks bad, since it could have priced its stock higher during the IPO to easily raise that amount. The initial price of the SpaceX IPO was $135, even though it started trading around $150. There was also demand for the stock at $200 per share over the next few days.

This looks like bad financial management and makes me worried about how items like this will be handled in the future. As a result, I'm a bit wary to invest in SpaceX, and I think most investors should be too. SpaceX could still be a solid investment option, but it will take years for these long-term bets to pay off, and the time frame for these other businesses to come to fruition may make other stocks better picks in the meantime.

Toll Brothers (TOL - Free Report) closed the most recent trading day at $164.05, moving +1.22% from the previous trading session. The stock's performance was ahead of the S&P 500's daily loss of 0.05%. At the same time, the Dow lost 0.09%, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq lost 0.24%.

Heading into today, shares of the home builder had gained 17.33% over the past month, outpacing the Construction sector's gain of 10.65% and the S&P 500's loss of 1.42%.

The upcoming earnings release of Toll Brothers will be of great interest to investors. The company is expected to report EPS of $2.9, down 22.25% from the prior-year quarter. At the same time, our most recent consensus estimate is projecting a revenue of $2.6 billion, reflecting a 11.81% fall from the equivalent quarter last year.

For the full year, the Zacks Consensus Estimates are projecting earnings of $12.69 per share and revenue of $10.7 billion, which would represent changes of -5.93% and -2.44%, respectively, from the prior year.

It's also important for investors to be aware of any recent modifications to analyst estimates for Toll Brothers. Recent revisions tend to reflect the latest near-term business trends. With this in mind, we can consider positive estimate revisions a sign of optimism about the business outlook.

Empirical research indicates that these revisions in estimates have a direct correlation with impending stock price performance. To benefit from this, we have developed the Zacks Rank, a proprietary model which takes these estimate changes into account and provides an actionable rating system.

The Zacks Rank system, which ranges from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), has an impressive outside-audited track record of outperformance, with #1 stocks generating an average annual return of +25% since 1988. Within the past 30 days, our consensus EPS projection has moved 0.04% lower. Toll Brothers presently features a Zacks Rank of #3 (Hold).

From a valuation perspective, Toll Brothers is currently exchanging hands at a Forward P/E ratio of 12.77. This indicates a discount in contrast to its industry's Forward P/E of 16.76.

Also, we should mention that TOL has a PEG ratio of 1.34. Comparable to the widely accepted P/E ratio, the PEG ratio also accounts for the company's projected earnings growth. The Building Products - Home Builders industry had an average PEG ratio of 2.72 as trading concluded yesterday.

The Building Products - Home Builders industry is part of the Construction sector. This group has a Zacks Industry Rank of 231, putting it in the bottom 6% of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank evaluates the power of our distinct industry groups by determining the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks forming the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

Make sure to utilize Zacks.com to follow all of these stock-moving metrics, and more, in the coming trading sessions.

Although Tesla (TSLA +1.38%) has proven willing to split its stock in recent years when such a move made sense, conditions in 2026 don't resemble those that prevailed ahead of its two prior splits.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

Why shareholders cheer stock splits Fundamentally, a stock split doesn't do anything to enhance a company's value. For example, if a stock gets split 5-for-1 (as Tesla stock did back in 2020), each investor sees the number of shares they own quintuple, but their ownership stake in the company stays the same. A single pre-split share priced at $1,000 is the same as five post-split shares priced at $200,

Yet there are a couple of reasons why some shareholders want to see stock splits. The first relates to investor psychology: A split makes the stock appear to have a more favorable entry price. The hope is that the lower face value will attract more retail investors. And people may feel they are getting more for their money when they are able to own more shares.

There is also research suggesting that splits can help boost stock prices. Data published by Statista, sourced from Bank of America's Research Investment Committee, revealed that, over 40 years, companies that split their stocks saw average total returns of more than 25% in the 12 months following the announcement of a pending split. But companies generally only conduct splits after the stock price has risen significantly, and when management expects further strong business performances in the future.

With that context in mind, here are the key price points connected to previous Tesla stock splits.

Tesla's stock-split history When Tesla management previously chose to split its stock, its shares were at much higher prices than they are currently. On Aug. 11, 2020, when Tesla announced a 5-for-1 stock split, shares were trading at a bit under $1,400, and they shot up to above $2,200 before the split.

On Aug. 5, 2022, Tesla announced its second split ever, a 3-for-1. The day before that split, shares were trading at nearly $900. 

The stock is far from that level now, trading at around $375 on Thursday.

Today's Change

(

1.38

%) $

5.18

Current Price

$

380.30

The likelihood of a Tesla stock split in 2026 Based on the prices the stock traded at before its previous splits, it's improbable that Tesla will conduct one in 2026. History suggests that shares would need to nearly triple before such an action would even be considered.

Also, in the past, companies often chose to split their shares when they grew to prices that made them difficult for retail investors to purchase. But as fractional share investing is now available through most brokerages, companies may not see the need, even when shares reach unwieldy values. Instead, a higher stock price may be viewed as a strength, as it highlights investor demand.

For anyone considering investing in Tesla, its efforts in robotics, autonomous vehicles, robotaxis, and energy storage will be more important to the company's long-term returns on investment than any stock split.