Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Solana now beats Ethereum on trading volume, active users, and fee revenue. Ethereum still holds the money. Halfway through 2026, the question is no longer who is faster. It is whether the two chains are even running the same race.

Summary

Solana has overtaken Ethereum in Layer 1 activity with higher transaction volume, more active users, stronger DEX trading, and greater fee revenue. Ethereum continues to dominate in total value locked, stablecoin liquidity, institutional adoption, and developer activity despite losing ground in onchain usage. The rivalry has shifted from a direct competition into two distinct models, with Ethereum focused on settlement and custody while Solana leads in trading and execution. There was a time when the Ethereum versus Solana debate could be settled with a smirk and an outage screenshot. Solana was the chain that went down. Ethereum was the chain that mattered. Then Solana stopped going down, its trading volume flipped Ethereum’s, its ETF launched to institutional inflows while Ethereum funds bled for seventeen straight days, and the smirk changed sides.

Halfway through 2026, both tokens are deep in a bear market. ETH trades near $1,714 after a brutal second quarter that included a 29.5% thirty-day drawdown at the June lows, its worst quarterly stretch in years. SOL trades near $81, down roughly 78% from its cycle high, hit even harder in raw percentage terms. Price settles nothing here. The interesting story is underneath, in the on-chain data, where the two networks have diverged so completely that comparing them now requires deciding which metrics count.

So: is Ethereum losing the L1 race to Solana? The honest answer is that Solana has already won several of the events, Ethereum still owns the ones with the most prize money, and the race itself has split into two different sports.

How we got here: a short history of a long feud The rivalry has run through three distinct acts, and the current one makes no sense without the first two.

Act one, 2021 through 2022, was Solana as the venture-backed challenger: a chain built for speed, championed by Sam Bankman-Fried, and dismissed by Ethereum partisans as a centralized science project. The dismissal briefly looked like prophecy. Solana suffered repeated full-network outages, including the infamous February 2024 halt that lasted nearly five hours after a legacy loader bug forced a coordinated validator restart, and when FTX collapsed in November 2022, SOL crashed toward single digits as the market priced in guilt by association. Obituaries were published. Several were smug.

Act two, 2023 through 2024, was the resurrection nobody ordered. Solana’s developer community kept shipping through the winter, the Jupiter and Jito ecosystems matured, memecoin mania found its natural home on the only chain where a thousand trades cost less than a sandwich, and DEX volume began the climb that ended with the flip of Ethereum in late 2024. Ethereum spent the same period executing its own plan flawlessly and discovering the plan had a hole in it: the Dencun upgrade in March 2024 introduced blob space and cut L2 costs by an order of magnitude, which supercharged rollup adoption while gutting the fee burn that had underwritten the ultrasound money narrative. Activity exploded across the Ethereum stack, and ETH the asset captured almost none of it.

Act three is now: both chains institutionally legitimate, both tokens deep underwater, and the argument relocated from architecture threads to fund flow tables. Uniswap founder Hayden Adams warned back in 2025 that Ethereum’s confused scaling identity could hand DeFi leadership to Solana; in 2026 that warning reads less like a hot take and more like a memo the market already acted on.

The scoreboard, metric by metric Start with what Solana has flatly won: activity.

On a representative day in late June, Solana processed 127 million transactions from more than 2 million active addresses. Ethereum mainnet processed 2.8 million transactions from roughly 512,000 active addresses. That is not a gap. That is a different order of magnitude. Solana sustains 600 to 700 real transactions per second on average against Ethereum L1’s 15 to 20, at a cost of roughly $0.00025 per transaction against Ethereum’s dollars-per-swap mainnet pricing.

Trading volume tells the same story. Solana’s weekly DEX volume hit $11.49 billion in April against Ethereum’s $7.62 billion, a 51% lead. In February the monthly gap was wider still: $117 billion on Solana against $52 billion on Ethereum, more than double. Jupiter, the aggregator that routes the overwhelming majority of Solana order flow across Raydium, Orca, Phoenix, and Meteora, alone processes $2 billion to $4 billion in daily volume. Solana flipped Ethereum on DEX volume in late 2024 and has held the lead through every market condition since.

Then comes the metric that should worry Ethereum researchers most: revenue.

Solana generates over $1 million in chain fees per day. The major Ethereum L2s, where most Ethereum user activity now lives, generate under $200,000 combined, because blob-based data posting after the Dencun upgrade pushed L2 costs, and therefore L2 fee revenue, toward zero. Ethereum deliberately commoditized its own execution layer to win the rollup war. The result is a settlement layer with shrinking direct income and a rival that monetizes every swap on a single unified ledger.

Now flip the card, because Ethereum’s wins are just as lopsided.

Total value locked Ethereum L1 holds roughly $55.6 billion in DeFi deposits, around 68% of the entire global DeFi market, and the combined L1 plus L2 figure exceeds $80 billion. Solana holds between $8 billion and $12 billion depending on the week and the methodology, a figure that took a $270 million hit in April when the Drift Protocol exploit tore through its perps ecosystem. The deepest protocols in the industry, Lido at $27.5 billion, Aave at $27 billion, EigenLayer at $13 billion, all live on Ethereum, and Aave V4 launched on Ethereum mainnet in April to reinforce the point.

Stablecoins Ethereum hosts roughly 70% of all on-chain stablecoin supply, around $32 billion in USDC and $60 billion in USDT, and remains the venue where BlackRock, Franklin Templeton, and JPMorgan build tokenized products first. Solana carries about $14 billion in stablecoins, though each of those dollars turns over roughly six times faster than its Ethereum counterpart.

Developers Ethereum counted 31,869 active developers against Solana’s 17,708 at the latest Electric Capital reading, and added more new developers over the trailing year than any other ecosystem. Solana ranked second.

One chain has the users, the volume, and the revenue. The other has the money, the institutions, and the builders. Losing, it turns out, depends entirely on where you point the camera.

How the race split in two The reason the comparison keeps producing contradictory answers is that the two chains stopped competing on the same terms years ago, a divergence we chronicled when the ecosystems first collided in early 2025.

Ethereum abandoned the monolithic race on purpose. Its roadmap treats the base layer as settlement infrastructure while execution migrates to rollups: Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, and a long tail of zk systems that post proofs and data back to mainnet. Base alone captures nearly half of all L2 DeFi value, Arbitrum another 31%, and the top three rollups process close to 90% of all L2 transactions. Measured as a stack, the Ethereum ecosystem still dwarfs Solana on almost every capital metric. Measured as an L1, Ethereum mainnet is a slow, expensive chain that its own designers no longer intend retail users to touch.

Solana made the opposite bet: one ledger, one global state, sub-second finality at 400 milliseconds, and a relentless engineering campaign to make the single chain fast enough that nothing else is needed. The Firedancer validator client built by Jump Crypto, rolling toward full deployment late this year, is the endgame of that bet, with a theoretical ceiling measured in the hundreds of thousands of transactions per second. The network reliability problem that defined Solana’s reputation in 2022 and 2023 has largely disappeared; outages went from routine to rare, and the chain has traded its crash-prone image for something closer to an execution monopoly on retail flow.

The philosophical split produces the statistical one. Capital sits and compounds on Ethereum because that is what the architecture rewards: deep pools, long-duration lending, staking layered on restaking. Capital churns on Solana because sub-cent fees make churning free: high-frequency trading, memecoin rotation, dollar-cost-average bots, payments. Ethereum became the deposit ledger. Solana became the trading floor.

Follow the fees: two broken business models, one working one The revenue gap deserves its own examination, because it is the metric where architecture decisions turn into economics, and where both chains have problems they rarely advertise.

Ethereum’s fee engine used to be the envy of the industry. EIP-1559 burned base fees, high demand made ETH deflationary, and the ultrasound money framing wrote itself. The rollup migration dismantled the machine step by step. Execution moved to L2s, whose sequencers keep the margin between what users pay and what blob posting costs, and Dencun made blob posting cost next to nothing. The result in 2026: mainnet burns a fraction of its former fee load, L2s pay Ethereum pennies for security worth billions, and the value accrual question, what does ETH earn when Base wins, has replaced scaling as the ecosystem’s defining unsolved problem. Ethereum built a settlement business and priced its product like a public good.

Solana’s engine is simpler and currently stronger: one chain captures every fee at every layer. The base fee is fixed at 5,000 lamports per signature, roughly a hundredth of a cent, while priority fees let users bid during congestion, and stake-weighted quality of service plus local fee markets keep hot accounts from clogging the scheduler. On top of the protocol fees sits the Jito MEV economy, where searcher tips flow to validators and stakers, turning order-flow chaos into staking yield. Over $1 million in daily chain revenue against sub-$200,000 for the entire major L2 basket is the visible output.

The caveat is concentration of source. A large share of Solana’s fee revenue traces to speculative trading, memecoins above all, which makes the revenue line high-beta to the exact market segment least likely to survive a deep winter. Ethereum’s fee problem is structural but its demand is diversified; Solana’s fee machine works beautifully and runs on the most flammable fuel in crypto. Neither model is finished.

Fusaka and the second-half Ethereum upgrade path aim at scaling data further without answering value capture, while Solana’s validator economics, where thin margins already pushed the validator count down 68% from its 2023 peak, depend on fee and MEV income holding up.

The other front: stablecoins, payments, and tokenized everything DEX volume gets the headlines, but the war’s second front may matter more by 2027, because it is the one institutions actually fund: who carries the tokenized economy.

Ethereum’s position is incumbency at scale. Roughly 70% of stablecoin supply, the deep USDC and USDT float that institutional desks require, and essentially the entire first generation of tokenized funds. When Ondo debuted its SEC-aligned tokenized stock model with BlackRock ETF shares this week, the underlying rails were Ethereum-ecosystem by default. Stablecoin legislation cleared the path for bank issuance and for the consortium models now emerging among major institutions, and banks build where the auditors already have coverage, which is one more network effect compounding for the incumbent.

Solana’s position is velocity and consumer reach. Its $14 billion stablecoin float turns over roughly six times faster than Ethereum’s, because sub-cent fees make stablecoins usable as money instead of just collateral. USDC settles on Solana in under a second for a fraction of a cent, which is why Visa chose it for settlement pilots, why payment processors keep adding it, and why the Solana Developer Platform launched with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union rather than with hedge funds. Solana is also mounting a genuine RWA challenge through Token-2022, whose compliance extensions target exactly the issuer requirements Ethereum handles with bespoke contracts, and both chains now face a third competitor for the same institutional flow in the compliance-native stack being assembled on the XRP Ledger.

The stakes here dwarf the DEX war. Stablecoins are a $320 billion asset class growing through legislation, and tokenized funds are the institutional product with the steepest adoption curve. If Ethereum keeps the float while Solana takes the flow, the split-decision structure of this whole rivalry repeats at a much larger scale, with Ethereum as the vault and Solana as the checkout lane of tokenized finance.

The institutional tiebreaker For most of crypto history, the institutional column belonged to Ethereum without argument. That is the column where 2026 has produced genuine movement.

The regulatory sequence mattered first. The SEC’s March 2025 classification of sixteen digital assets including SOL as commodities dissolved the securities overhang that had kept allocators away, and spot Solana ETFs began trading on October 28, 2025, making SOL the third asset after BTC and ETH with U.S. spot fund access. The flows since then have been small next to Bitcoin’s but directionally embarrassing for Ethereum: through the spring drawdown, Solana ETFs crossed $1 billion in cumulative inflows while Ethereum funds posted a seventeen-day outflow streak that stripped hundreds of millions, and July has opened with ETF flow reports showing ETH and SOL products gaining together while Bitcoin funds bleed. Goldman Sachs disclosures showed over $100 million in SOL exposure, and CalPERS entered the asset class the same quarter.

Solana’s institutional push went beyond funds. The Solana Foundation launched its Developer Platform in March with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union among early adopters, shipped a quantum-readiness plan built on the NIST-standardized Falcon signature scheme in April, and rolled out on-chain, stake-weighted validator governance this week. Token-2022 extensions gave the chain the compliance hooks, confidential transfers, transfer restrictions, interest-bearing instruments, that enterprise issuers require. The pitch that Solana is a casino chain unsuitable for serious money has aged badly.

Ethereum’s institutional position remains the stronger one on stock rather than flow. It custodies the tokenized funds, hosts the deep stablecoin float, and runs the staking infrastructure through which more than 35 million ETH, nearly 29% of supply, secures the network across a million-plus validators. When a treasury desk needs to move nine figures with minimal slippage, Ethereum’s depth is still the only game available. BitMine Immersion bought its way past 5 million ETH this spring precisely on that thesis. But stock is what you accumulated yesterday. Flow is what you are winning today, and the flow has been tilting one direction for over a year.

The uncomfortable items on both ledgers Neither chain gets to run its highlight reel without the blooper file.

Solana’s validator count has collapsed to roughly 795 active validators from more than 2,500 in 2023, a 68% decline that concentrates block production and hands critics a decentralization argument with real teeth. Its DeFi remains thin and concentrated: one aggregator with 95% market share is a single point of failure wearing a market structure costume, and the $270 million Drift exploit showed what happens when a load-bearing protocol breaks. Its volume mix still leans on memecoin speculation, the most cyclical demand source in the industry, and February’s $117 billion month can become a $40 billion month without a single thing going wrong technically.

Ethereum’s problems are quieter and arguably deeper. Lido alone controls roughly 24% of staked ETH, a concentration risk of its own. The rollup roadmap solved scaling and created a value-capture puzzle nobody has answered: if execution fees accrue to Base and Arbitrum while blobs cost pennies, what exactly does ETH the asset earn from Ethereum the ecosystem’s growth? Retail has already voted, migrating to L2s so completely that mainnet active addresses look like a ghost town next to Solana’s. And the fragmentation tax is real: liquidity split across a dozen rollups with seven-day optimistic exits is a worse user experience than one chain with 400-millisecond finality, no matter how elegant the settlement theory. The KelpDAO exploit this spring, which erased $13 billion of TVL in 48 hours of contagion, showed that composability depth cuts in both directions.

Both assets, meanwhile, have been terrible investments this year, a market-wide condition tied to the macro regime we examined in the context of Bitcoin’s liquidity dependence. Fee revenue and active addresses have not protected SOL holders from a 78% peak drawdown, and settlement supremacy has not protected ETH holders from underperforming Bitcoin for most of the cycle. Whatever race is being run, neither token’s chart looks like a victory lap, and on-chain fundamentals have been decoupled from price across the majors for much of 2026.

So who is actually winning? Frame the question three ways and you get three defensible answers.

If the L1 race means base-layer usage, Solana won it, and the margin is no longer close. Two hundred times Ethereum’s L1 throughput, forty times its transaction count, five times its daily fee revenue, and a lead in DEX volume that has survived every market regime since late 2024. By the definition of Layer 1 that existed when the rivalry started, the contest is over.

If the race means where value lives, Ethereum is not losing and may never lose within this cycle. A 68% share of global DeFi TVL, 70% of stablecoin supply, the institutional tokenization pipeline, and the largest developer base in the industry constitute a network-effect fortress that Solana’s growth has dented but nowhere near breached. Capital has inertia, and inertia compounds.

If the race means trajectory, the tape favors Solana with an asterisk. It is winning new users, new listed products, new enterprise integrations, and the ETF flow battle. The asterisk is that trajectory arguments assume the current regime persists, and Solana’s flow-heavy economy is more exposed than Ethereum’s stock-heavy one to the next collapse in speculative appetite. Ethereum’s Fusaka upgrade cycle and the second-half protocol roadmap that all major chains have queued for late 2026 could reshuffle the technical comparison again.

The most likely outcome is also the least satisfying for partisans: permanent coexistence with divided territory. Ethereum settles and custodies. Solana executes and trades. Builders already behave as if this is settled, deploying on both by default. The 2025 framing of an L1 war with a single survivor has quietly died, not with a bang but with two chains discovering they are optimized for markets the other cannot serve.

What could flip the board before December Split decisions invite the obvious follow-up: what would actually change the standings? Four live catalysts carry enough weight to move the argument rather than the noise.

Ethereum’s upgrade cycle is the first. The Fusaka window and the broader second-half protocol roadmap target another step-change in data capacity, and the ecosystem’s real prize sits next to it: any credible mechanism that routes L2 economic success back into ETH, whether through based sequencing, native rollup designs, or fee-market reform, would repair the value-capture hole that has haunted the asset since Dencun. Markets have front-run Ethereum upgrades before; a roadmap that finally answers the accrual question would be the first fundamental ETH catalyst in two years.

Firedancer completion is the second. Solana’s independent validator client moving to full deployment removes the single-client risk that institutions cite most, and its throughput headroom opens application categories, full order-book markets, high-frequency payment networks, that no chain currently serves. If even one breakout consumer or enterprise application lands on that capacity, Solana’s volume base diversifies away from memecoins, which neutralizes the strongest bear argument against its fee economy.

ETF mechanics are the third. Staking-enabled fund structures, under active regulatory discussion for both assets, would transform the flow picture: a spot product yielding 3% to 7% natively changes the allocator pitch entirely, and the asset that gets staking approval first inherits a durable flow advantage. Watch the filings, not the influencers.

Treasury companies are the fourth and strangest. BitMine’s multimillion-ETH accumulation and the emerging class of SOL treasury vehicles mean corporate balance sheets now sit inside both ecosystems as permanent, price-insensitive holders. The Strategy playbook applied to ETH and SOL is small today; its growth rate through a recovering market could make treasuries the marginal buyer that decides which token outperforms, independent of every on-chain metric in this article.

The verdict for the second half Ethereum is losing the L1 race as originally defined, and it forfeited that race by choice when it went all-in on rollups. Solana is winning everything measurable at the base layer while still trailing badly where the institutional money actually sits. Watch three numbers through December: whether Ethereum ETF flows recover once its next upgrade lands, whether Firedancer’s full rollout converts Solana’s throughput ceiling into new categories of application, and whether Solana DeFi TVL can hold above $12 billion without memecoin volume subsidizing it. The chain that answers its own weakness first will own the 2027 narrative. Until then, the war everyone expected has settled into something stranger: two winners, two different games, and one increasingly obsolete question.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile, and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.

Billions of dollars in prediction market positions settle every month based on a machine for deciding truth that most traders have never examined. This guide explains how UMA’s optimistic oracle turns real-world events into on-chain payouts, why the system usually works, the cases where it has failed spectacularly, and the rival settlement designs trying to replace it.

Prediction markets had their breakout year in 2026. Combined volume across the major venues hit $44.8 billion in June alone, driven by a World Cup that turned Polymarket into a multi-billion-dollar sportsbook. The trading side of these platforms is easy to understand: shares in Yes or No, priced between zero and one dollar, paying out one dollar if you are right. The hard part is invisible until it breaks. Someone, or something, has to decide what actually happened.

That decision layer is called resolution, and it is the load-bearing wall of the entire sector. A prediction market is only as good as its ability to decide truth, and a blockchain cannot observe the real world. It cannot see who won an election, whether a company sold an asset, or whether a bill passed. The bridge between reality and the smart contract is an oracle, and for the largest on-chain prediction market, that oracle is UMA. Understanding how it works, and how it fails, is the single most useful piece of due diligence a prediction market trader can do.

The oracle problem, event edition Crypto solved one version of the oracle problem years ago. Price feeds from networks like Chainlink and Pyth deliver asset prices on-chain by aggregating data from many independent publishers. That works because prices are public, continuous, machine-readable, and available from dozens of redundant sources.

Event markets break every one of those assumptions. The questions are one-off rather than continuous. The answers often live in press releases, court rulings, regulatory filings, or a referee’s whistle. And the phrasing matters enormously: a market asking whether a politician says a specific word five times needs a resolution process that can read, interpret, and withstand challenge. No price feed can answer questions like that. What the sector needed was an oracle for arbitrary facts, with a built-in way to contest wrong answers.

Enter UMA and optimistic verification UMA, short for Universal Market Access, is an oracle protocol built by Risk Labs. Its core product, the Optimistic Oracle, resolves outcomes for Polymarket’s main venue, which cleared around $14 billion in monthly volume during the World Cup peak. The word optimistic describes the design philosophy: submitted answers are assumed true unless someone challenges them, with economic incentives doing the policing instead of a central referee.

The flow for a typical Polymarket market runs through a version of the oracle called OOv2, and it has four stages:

Request. When a market’s end conditions are met, the market contract asks the oracle for the outcome, referencing the exact resolution criteria written when the market was created. Proposal. A proposer submits the answer, Yes or No, and posts a bond of $750 in USDC. If the proposal is wrong, the bond is forfeited. If it stands, the proposer earns a reward. Challenge window. The proposal sits open for two hours. Anyone who believes it is wrong can dispute it by posting a matching bond. Escalation. If a dispute lands, the question goes to UMA’s Data Verification Mechanism, the DVM, where UMA token holders research the question and vote on the correct answer. Voters who side with the final outcome earn rewards; voters who miss or vote against it lose a slice of their stake. The DVM’s ruling is final, the losing bond pays the winner, and the market settles. To make that concrete, follow one uncontested market through its whole life. A market opens asking whether a central bank cuts rates at its June meeting, with resolution criteria naming the official statement as the source. Traders price Yes at 70 cents through the month. The decision lands at 2 p.m., the statement confirms a cut, and within minutes an approved proposer submits Yes with the $750 bond. For two hours, anyone on earth with a matching bond could object; nobody does, because the statement is public and unambiguous. The window closes, the oracle reports Yes to the market contract, and every Yes share becomes redeemable for one dollar in USDC. Total elapsed time from event to payout: under three hours, no human authority involved, no appeal needed. That is the experience for the overwhelming majority of markets, and it is why the system scaled.

The bond arithmetic deserves a sentence of its own, because it is the whole security model in miniature. Seven hundred fifty dollars sounds trivial next to markets carrying tens of millions in open interest, and read one way, it is: a wrong proposal on a whale-scale market risks $750 to potentially swing a payout worth thousands of times that. The design’s answer is that the bond does not defend the market alone, the challenge window does. A false proposal only profits if nobody in the world notices for two hours, on a venue where every large market has thousands of position holders watching resolution like hawks and a matching bond waiting for whoever catches the error. The bond prices the cost of forcing a dispute, not the value of the market, and the escalation layer is supposed to carry the real weight. That framing also locates the true weak point precisely: the system is only as strong as the layer disputes escalate to.

The percentages favor the happy path. Roughly 99% of assertions since 2021 have gone undisputed, meaning most markets settle in the two-to-four-hour window after an event without any human argument. The system processes upward of 7,000 proposals per month, and Risk Labs has automated much of the pipeline: language models draft proposals for around half a cent per request, and bots like OOTruthBot summarize evidence threads and flag suspicious submissions, cutting routine resolution from hours to seconds.

Inside the DVM: what a token vote actually looks like Since the DVM is the backstop everything escalates to, its mechanics deserve a closer look than most traders ever give them.

When a dispute triggers a vote, the question enters a voting round for UMA token holders who have staked into the voting system. Voting runs in two phases. In the commit phase, each voter submits an encrypted vote, hidden from everyone including other voters, which prevents late voters from simply copying the visible majority. In the reveal phase, voters decrypt and publish what they committed. Votes are weighted by staked tokens, and the outcome that carries the stake-weighted majority becomes the oracle’s answer.

The incentive design is the load-bearing part. Voters who land with the final outcome earn rewards from protocol emissions. Voters who miss a round or land against the outcome lose a slice of their stake. The design intends to pay for diligence, and it mostly does, but it carries a known theoretical flaw inherited from every majority-rewarded oracle: the profitable strategy is voting with the expected majority, not with the truth, and in ordinary cases those two targets coincide. The failure cases are the ones where they separate, and where a large holder can make the majority whatever they need it to be.

There is also a timing cost. An undisputed market settles within hours; a disputed one waits for the full commit and reveal cycle, stretching resolution to days while positions stay frozen and traders argue in evidence threads. For anyone holding size, a dispute is not just a risk to the payout but a lockup on capital.

In November 2025 the system got its most significant overhaul, the Managed Optimistic Oracle V2. MOOv2 restricted the right to propose resolutions to 37 pre-approved addresses, a mix of Risk Labs staff and Polymarket users with high historical accuracy, while keeping disputes open to anyone. The change targeted premature and spam proposals, which had been a chronic source of delays and gamesmanship. Proposing became curated; challenging stayed permissionless.

Where the machine breaks The design has one structural soft spot, and 2026 has stress-tested it in public: the final arbiter is a token vote, and tokens can be bought, concentrated, and conflicted. The numbers behind that concern are not speculative. A Wall Street Journal investigation published in May found that in most disputed Polymarket markets, more than half of the UMA votes came from the ten largest wallets. At least 60% of active UMA voters could be linked to live Polymarket accounts, and roughly one in five disputes had at least one voter with a financial stake in the market they were ruling on. The dispute pipeline itself is swelling: Polymarket logged more than 1,150 disputed markets in the first five months of 2026, already past its full-year 2025 total.

Two cases show what that looks like in practice.

The first was a 2025 market on a United States minerals agreement, where a single large UMA holder cast five million tokens across three accounts, about 25% of the vote in that dispute round, pushing a contested market to resolve early against the plain reading of events. Traders on the wrong side of that ruling lost roughly $7 million. The vote was legal under the system’s rules. That was precisely the criticism.

The second came in June 2026 and drew more than $60 million in volume: a market asking whether Strategy would sell any Bitcoin by May 31. A regulatory filing published on June 1 disclosed that the company had sold 32 BTC between May 26 and May 31 at an average price of $77,135, its first disposal since 2022, inside the market’s cutoff. Two proposed resolutions were challenged, the question escalated to a token vote, and the market ultimately resolved No. Shares tracking the documented answer traded at 12 cents while the dispute ran. Critics across the industry framed the episode as a structural verdict: when ambiguous rules meet concentrated voting power, the payout can diverge from the facts, and the holders of the settlement token can be the same people holding positions in the market being settled.

None of this means most markets resolve wrongly. The overwhelming majority settle cleanly and fast. It means the tail risk is governance-shaped: the worst outcomes cluster in high-volume, ambiguously worded markets where a motivated whale has both the tokens and the position.

Why Polymarket keeps the system anyway Given the 2026 dispute record, the obvious question is why the largest on-chain venue has not replaced its oracle. The answer is a stack of practical reasons that critics tend to skip.

The happy path really is that good. Ninety-nine percent of markets settling within hours, at a cost of fractions of a cent per automated proposal, across every category from elections to award shows, is a service level no alternative currently matches for open-ended questions. Deterministic settlement cannot touch subjective markets at all, and regulated clearing brings jurisdiction constraints that would gut the international product.

The system also iterates. MOOv2 was a direct response to the proposal-spam era and measurably cut premature resolutions. The language model pipeline and evidence bots were responses to speed and quality complaints. Bond sizes, challenge windows, and proposer sets are all tunable parameters, and Risk Labs has shown willingness to tune them under pressure. Whether tuning can fix a voting-power concentration problem is the open question, since the DVM backstop itself is the part no parameter change reaches.

And there is a structural argument: for a venue whose regulatory story leans on decentralization, outsourcing truth to an external token-holder process is a feature. Polymarket does not decide outcomes, and that sentence has legal value. The company’s answer to the United States market was not to change the oracle but to split the product, running the domestic venue through a CFTC-regulated framework while the international book kept UMA. The two-track structure is itself a verdict on where each settlement model belongs.

The rival designs The dispute wave has made resolution architecture a competitive battleground, and three alternative models are now live at scale.

Deterministic validator settlement. Hyperliquid’s HIP-4 outcome markets, live since May 2026, remove the token vote entirely. Settlement runs through the chain’s validator set executing automated resolution against pre-specified objective data sources: no dispute window, no escalation, no path for a market participant to vote on a market. The constraint is scope, since deterministic settlement only fits questions with clean data sources, which is why the first HIP-4 contracts are Bitcoin price thresholds. Our companion guide to HIP-3 and HIP-4 covers the full design, and the market has been pricing Hyperliquid’s prediction market ambitions since the February announcement.

Regulated clearing. Kalshi reaches finality through the opposite architecture: a centralized exchange clearinghouse, registered with the CFTC as a derivatives clearing organization since August 2024, resolving markets under rules filed with a federal regulator and publishing results on-chain through Pyth and RedStone. Disputes go through exchange procedures, not token votes. The model trades decentralization for accountability, and its structured markets rarely face the ambiguity problems that plague open-ended questions. Polymarket’s separate United States venue, itself a CFTC-registered designated contract market that did $3.04 billion in June, follows the same regulated path, while the international venue still settles through UMA.

Purpose-built feeds. For objective, high-frequency questions, oracles built for prices work fine, and Polymarket already uses Chainlink to settle its fast crypto price markets, where no public discourse about the answer is needed. FIFA’s own licensed prediction market partner for the World Cup runs on Chainlink infrastructure, part of the tournament’s broader crypto buildout. Further out, web proof systems could let a resolution cite a cryptographically verified source document instead of a screenshot, a use case covered in our zkTLS explainer.

History adds a warning label to all of it, because decentralized resolution has been tried before and the graveyard is instructive. Augur, the sector’s first major attempt, launched in 2018 with REP token staking where reporters earned by landing with the consensus outcome, and the platform learned quickly that rewarding agreement with the majority is not the same as rewarding truth, especially once invalid and ambiguously worded markets entered the mix. Omen outsourced disputes to Kleros, a decentralized juror court whose participants were likewise paid for voting with the crowd, and inherited the same incentive plus slow rulings and heavy gas costs. Both platforms also discovered that resolution is a liquidity problem in disguise: traders avoid venues where the payout rules feel lottery-shaped, so unreliable settlement starves the order books that make prediction markets useful at all. Every resolution design since is a wager about which failure mode is most tolerable: token capture, institutional discretion, or narrow scope.

What traders should actually check Resolution risk is checkable before entry, and the checklist is short.

Read the resolution criteria as literally as a hostile lawyer would, because the oracle will. The Strategy market turned on exact wording and an exact cutoff. If the criteria name a specific source, that source is the truth regardless of what every news outlet reports. Check the venue’s settlement path: UMA-resolved international Polymarket, a CFTC clearinghouse, a validator-settled chain, and a Chainlink price feed are four different risk profiles wearing the same Yes and No interface. Prefer markets with objective, single-source answers when size matters, since ambiguity is the raw material of every resolution scandal. And in a disputed market, watch the UMA vote rather than the news cycle, because the vote is what pays.

Two habits separate professionals from tourists here. The first is position sizing by resolution clarity: the same trader who is comfortable with six figures on a rate decision, where the source is official and the answer binary, keeps ambiguous cultural or political wording to entertainment-sized stakes. The second is tracking the dispute docket itself. Markets with pending UMA votes, and the wallets voting in them, are public on-chain information, and the recurring names in contested rulings are known to anyone who looks. In a system where the referee list is visible, not reading it is a choice.

One more number worth holding in mind: UMA’s entire token traded around a $63 million market capitalization earlier this year, while the markets it settles cleared billions per month. The economic security of a token-voted oracle is bounded by the cost of acquiring the tokens, and that ratio is the quiet argument behind every alternative design now gaining ground.

Truth as infrastructure Prediction markets are routinely praised as truth machines, better than polls and faster than newsrooms. The praise is half-earned. Prices aggregate beliefs brilliantly, but the settlement layer decides which beliefs get paid, and that layer is built from bonds, challenge windows, token votes, clearinghouse rules, and validator scripts, each with a distinct way of being wrong. The sector’s next phase will be decided as much by resolution engineering as by volume, because traders forgive losing on the outcome and do not forgive losing on the ruling. The machinery for deciding truth is now a product category of its own. It deserves to be read as carefully as the odds.

Frequently asked questions How does Polymarket decide who won a market? Polymarket’s international venue outsources resolution to UMA’s Optimistic Oracle. After an event, an approved proposer submits the outcome with a $750 USDC bond, and a two-hour challenge window opens. If nobody disputes, the market settles on that answer, usually within two to four hours. If a dispute lands, UMA token holders vote through the Data Verification Mechanism, and their ruling is final.

What is UMA’s optimistic oracle? It is an oracle protocol by Risk Labs for bringing arbitrary real-world facts on-chain. It is called optimistic because proposed answers are assumed true unless challenged during a dispute window, with bonds and rewards making honesty profitable and false proposals costly. Around 99% of assertions since 2021 have gone undisputed, and contested cases escalate to a token-holder vote.

What happens when a Polymarket resolution is disputed? The disputer posts a bond matching the proposer’s, and the question escalates to UMA’s Data Verification Mechanism. UMA token holders research the question and vote, with rewards for voting with the final outcome and penalties for missing or voting against it. The losing side’s bond pays the winning side. Disputes stretch resolution from hours to days, and the DVM ruling cannot be appealed.

Why is UMA’s system controversial in 2026? Concentration and conflicts. A Wall Street Journal investigation found most disputed markets saw over half their votes come from the ten largest wallets, and about one in five disputes included a voter holding a position in the market being judged. More than 1,150 markets were disputed in the first five months of 2026, and a $60 million market on a Strategy Bitcoin sale resolved against a documented regulatory filing.

What was the Strategy Bitcoin market dispute? A Polymarket contract asked whether Strategy would sell any Bitcoin by May 31, 2026. A June 1 regulatory filing showed the company sold 32 BTC between May 26 and May 31, inside the window. The resolution was challenged twice, went to a UMA token vote, and the market resolved No anyway. The episode became the leading exhibit in the argument against token-voted settlement.

What is MOOv2? The Managed Optimistic Oracle V2, deployed in November 2025, restricted resolution proposals to 37 pre-approved addresses with strong accuracy records while keeping disputes open to everyone. Paired with language model automation that drafts proposals for fractions of a cent and bots that summarize evidence, it cut spam proposals and sped up routine settlement without changing the token-vote backstop.

How do Kalshi and Hyperliquid settle markets differently? Kalshi resolves through its CFTC-registered clearinghouse under federally filed rules, then publishes results on-chain via Pyth and RedStone, with disputes handled by exchange procedure. Hyperliquid’s HIP-4 uses deterministic settlement by the validator set against pre-specified data sources, with no dispute window at all. Neither involves a token vote, and both are positioned as answers to UMA’s governance risk.

Can a prediction market resolve incorrectly and stay that way? Yes. DVM rulings are final, and Polymarket has honored controversial outcomes rather than overriding the oracle. The practical defenses are all pre-trade: read the resolution criteria literally, check which settlement system the venue uses, prefer objectively verifiable questions for larger positions, and treat ambiguous wording as a risk factor priced into the odds.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.

On 1 June 2026, attacker(s) exploited a vulnerability that directly affected software modules (Delay Module & Roles Module) used in connection with the Gnosis Pay card safe infrastructure. This resulted in certain user safe wallets, and the funds stored there, either being compromised or at risk of compromise.

The team quickly contained the issue, taking card services offline and co-ordinating with partners to isolate attacker accounts, while keeping partners and users informed, and guaranteeing user funds.

The attacker(s) were able to extract a total of $1.5m. An additional ~$300k was rendered inaccessible and we are exploring recovery options.

Gnosis absorbed the losses and all funds were restored to users.

The TimelineWhenWhat1 Jun 2026

Monitoring flagged the attacker's first large unauthorized transfer at 06:17 UTC and, following verification, the emergency response was initiated.

Root cause identified as a vulnerability in the Zodiac modules at 08:06 UTC.

1 Jun 2026

Card services taken offline. Bridge to Gnosis Chain paused by bridge validators. Attacker-linked addresses shared with stablecoin issuers to isolate where possible.

1–2 Jun 2026

Gnosis leadership proactively notified external projects that were at risk from the same vulnerability.

The Zodiac modules were repaired and shared with ChainSecurity for a focused review.

3 Jun 2026

On the evening of Wednesday, June 3rd, the first accounts were reactivated, including account balance restoration, card re-enabling, and resumption of normal operations.

An emergency fund was established and made available for users in extremis.

4 Jun 2026

ChainSecurity completed their review, the modules were also reviewed by internal teams, and we began the phased resumption of services.

4–7 Jun 2026

We deployed newly engineered card safe modules in tranches, linking to users' existing profiles. This was followed by phased restoration of full account balances and resumption of normal services.

6 Jun 2026

Full services restored to 99% of users, with the remaining accounts restored early the following week.

No users lost funds in the exploit.

Description of the ExploitThe attack was rapidly detected by treasury manager, NOCA, via their monitoring infrastructure. We immediately triggered our incident response protocol and identified the root cause within 2 hours.

The impact was isolated to the card safe software module components (specifically the Delay and Roles Modules provided by Zodiac). To ensure containment during the active triage phase, we systematically paused card transaction processing, authorisation systems, and new user onboarding.

To let an account owner move funds without holding native gas tokens, the account confirms requests with a signature check. It uses a standard method, ERC-1271, which asks a contract a yes-or-no question: is this signature valid?

The check read the answer the contract returned. It did not check whether the call had succeeded. Attacker(s) could deploy a contract that fails on purpose while still returning the "valid" code. To the account, a forged approval looked real. That let the attacker(s) queue withdrawals from accounts they did not own.

The vulnerability entered the Zodiac code in version 3.4.0, released on 30 October 2023, when signature support was added (commit 9a9e380).

The flawed check worked like this:

The fix is small. Also require the call to succeed:

The initial exploit contract is verifiable here: 0x5a77953caa27ed4638f4dfdc665b8064d0e97a35.

A signature patch was flagged as a security fix by the Zodiac team on 5 June 2026 (days after the exploit began).

The Amounts InvolvedAmountTaken by the attacker(s)

~$1.5M

Funds in inaccessible accounts

~$300k

Total

~$1.8M across 5,281 wallets with balance ≥ $1

Assets taken by the attacker(s):

AssetTaken (USD value)GNO

641,159

EURe

453,175

USDC.e

399,121

SAFE

2,202

WETH

323

xDAI

135

USDC

28

USDT

7

Total

~1,496,151

Actions Now UnderwayGrowing the security team.

We are growing the security team and bringing in external researchers to work alongside them, adding dedicated capacity.

Conducting a full internal review of our security practices.

We have an ongoing review of onchain and offchain systems: smart contracts, infrastructure, processes, and dependencies we rely on.

Completing an independent, holistic security assessment.

We are re-assessing our codebase and infrastructure end-to-end with an external security firm, giving us an outside perspective.

Widening our audit scope.

We have extended our smart contract audits to also cover external contracts we depend on.

Actively monitoring dependencies.

We actively monitor the dependencies we rely on, with a clear process to review and act on upstream security fixes quickly.

Rolling out the new Gnosis Pay product (known internally as v2).

We recently completed a full rebuild of the Gnosis Pay product and it is optimized for observability and streamlined operations. That observability ensures our ability to respond rapidly in future.

Key Takeaways Levi Strauss likely benefited from omnichannel initiatives, brand strength and growth in its DTC business. LEVI expected Q2 reported revenue growth of 4-5% and adjusted EBIT margin of 8-9%. Levi Strauss continued to face supply-chain, inflation and foreign exchange pressures on profitability. Levi Strauss & Co. (LEVI - Free Report) is likely to register top and-bottom line growth when it reports second-quarter fiscal 2026 earnings on July 8, before market open. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for revenues is $1.52 billion, which indicates a rise of 4.8% from the year-ago quarter’s level.

The consensus estimate for quarterly earnings has been stable over the past 30 days at 24 cents per share and indicates a rise of 9.1% from the year-earlier quarter’s tally.

The company has an average trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 21.4%. It delivered an earnings surprise of 13.5% in the last reported quarter.

Factors Likely to Influence LEVI’s Q2 ResultsLevi Strauss’ quarterly performance is likely to have benefited from omnichannel initiatives and brand strength, including jeanswear. The company has been strengthening its omni capabilities, including Buy Online, Pick-up in Store, line-queuing, same-day delivery, mobile checkout and return capabilities, including contactless returns. This ensures a seamless shopping experience for customers across online and offline channels.

The company is expanding its premium product offerings to attract higher-income consumers while maintaining value-oriented options for price-conscious shoppers. At the same time, Levi Strauss is streamlining its brand portfolio by placing greater emphasis on its flagship Levi's brand and other high-growth categories. The company continues to elevate its brands, invest in digital capabilities and diversify across geographies, product categories and distribution channels. These strategic initiatives, coupled with the strength of its direct-to-consumer business, are likely to have supported its quarterly performance. Such strengths, along with its solid direct-to-consumer business, are likely to have bolstered the quarterly performance.

On its last earnings call, management had expected reported revenues to grow in the range of 4-5% for the second quarter and organic growth of 3-4%. The company’s mitigation efforts are likely to have fully offset the tariff impacts. It had anticipated an adjusted EBIT margin in the range of 8-9%, with EPS of 22-24 cents.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for quarterly revenues is currently pegged at $785 million for Americas, $424 million for Europe and $275 million for Asia, indicating respective increases of 4.9%, 5.2% and 6.6% year over year.

However, a challenging operating backdrop, including supply-chain disruptions, inflationary pressures and foreign currency translations, is likely to have been a concern. These headwinds, coupled with deleveraged selling, general and administrative costs, are expected to have somewhat weighed on the company’s profitability. Management had earlier projected the gross margin to be slightly down owing to unfavorable foreign exchange.

What the Zacks Model PredictsOur proven model doesn’t conclusively predict an earnings beat for Levi Strauss this time around. The combination of a positive Earnings ESP and a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), 2 (Buy) or 3 (Hold) increases the odds of an earnings beat. But that’s not the case here. You can uncover the best stocks before they’re reported with our Earnings ESP Filter.

Levi Strauss has an Earnings ESP of -3.36% and a Zacks Rank of 2.

Valuation Picture of LEVI StockWith a forward 12-month price-to-earnings ratio of 15.30x, which is below the five-year high of 22.86x but above the Retail - Apparel and Shoes industry’s average of 14.33x, the stock is trading slightly higher than its industry. Additionally, the stock has a Value Score of B.

The recent market movements show that Levi’s shares have gained 14.6% in the past six months against the industry's 10% decline.

Stocks With The Favorable CombinationHere are a few companies, which according to our model, have the right combination of elements to come up with an earnings beat this reporting cycle:

Tapestry, Inc. (TPR - Free Report) has an Earnings ESP of +3.42% and a Zacks Rank of 1. TPR is likely to register a top and bottom-line increase when it reports fourth-quarter fiscal 2026 numbers. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for quarterly EPS of $1.23 suggests an increase of 18.3% from the year-ago fiscal quarter’s reported number. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

The consensus estimate for quarterly revenues is pegged at $1.87 billion, suggesting growth of 8.3% from the prior-year fiscal quarter’s reported figure. TPR has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 15.6%, on average.

Wingstop Inc. (WING - Free Report) currently has an Earnings ESP of +0.23% and a Zacks Rank of 3. WING is likely to register a bottom-line increase when it reports fourth-quarter 2026 numbers. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for quarterly EPS of $1.02 suggests an increase of 2% from the year-ago fiscal quarter’s reported number.

WING’s top line is expected to have improved from the prior-year fiscal quarter’s reported number. The consensus estimate for quarterly revenues is pegged at $190.3 million, suggesting growth of 9.1% from the prior-year fiscal quarter’s reported figure. WING has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 17%, on average.

Designer Brands Inc. (DBI - Free Report) currently has an Earnings ESP of +0.09% and a Zacks Rank of 3. The company is expected to have registered a top-line increase when it reports second-quarter fiscal 2026 results. The consensus mark for revenues is pegged at $743 million, indicating a rise of 0.4% from the figure reported in the year-ago quarter.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for quarterly EPS of 25 cents suggests a drop of 26.5% from the year-ago quarter. DBI has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 112.8%, on average.

Cerebras (CBRS 7.31%), a producer of AI chips, went public at $185 per share on May 14. Its stock opened at $350, but it now trades at about $205. That's still 11% above its IPO price, but investors who chased its post-IPO gains are now underwater. Let's see why Cerebras' stock fizzled out -- and if it's worth buying today.

Image source: Getty Images.

What does Cerebras do? Cerebras doesn't produce small GPUs like Nvidia (NVDA 1.39%). Instead, it builds massive AI processors on a single silicon wafer without cutting them into individual chips. Cerebras chips are as big as dinner plates, while Nvidia's GPUs are the size of postage stamps.

Cerebras claims its bigger chips bypass the networking bottlenecks, data latency, and power constraints associated with connecting traditional GPU clusters. They also outperformed traditional GPU clusters in inference tasks (when applications accessed trained data). It generates its revenue by selling its wafer-scale processors and CS-3 systems, as well as providing customers with cloud-based access to its own wafers to run inference tasks.

Cerebras recently secured a multi-year $20 billion deal with OpenAI to deploy 750 megawatts of its wafer-scale inference systems. It's also integrating its CS-3 systems into Amazon (AMZN +0.55%) Web Services (AWS), the world's largest cloud infrastructure platform.

Today's Change

(

-7.31

%) $

-16.18

Current Price

$

205.09

How fast is Cerebras growing? Cerebras' core revenue (which excludes its "pass-through" revenue for passing the utility, power, and real estate costs paid by its customers to its data center landlords) surged 76% to $510 million in 2025. It expects that figure to rise 68%-70% to $855-$865 million in 2026.

Cerebras also has a backlog of $25 billion, which guarantees that its revenue will keep rising for the foreseeable future. However, its gross margins are shrinking because it's renting back some computing capacity from its own customers as it builds its own data centers. That pressure should ease as it expands its first-party infrastructure, but it will likely remain unprofitable.

With a market cap of $46.4 billion, Cerebras trades at 54 times this year's sales. But it also trades at just six times its projected revenue of $7.32 billion in 2028 -- which would represent a 143% three-year CAGR from 2025. Analysts also expect its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) to turn positive in 2027 and 2028.

Is Cerebras' stock worth buying? Cerebras' strategy of building plate-sized chips and renting out its processing power sounds wild, but its massive backlog indicates it's on the right track. Its stock will remain volatile in this choppy market, but it's worth accumulating as a long-term play on the booming AI market.

Key Takeaways GE received orders for over 650 commercial engines and signed a long-term materials deal with Ryanair.Commercial Engines & Services revenues rose 34%, with orders jumping 93% to $17.3 billion.GE expects mid-teens 2026 revenue growth in Commercial Engines & Services amid strong air travel demand. GE Aerospace’s (GE - Free Report) commercial aerospace market is playing a significant role in driving its overall growth. In first-quarter 2026, the company received orders for more than 650 commercial engines, including commitments from American Airlines, United Airlines and Delta Airlines. It also entered into a long-term materials agreement to support Ryanair’s fleet of about 2,000 CFM56 and LEAP engines.

In the first quarter, revenues from the Commercial Engines & Services segment increased 34% year over year to $8.92 billion. The gain was driven by services growth of 39%, with internal shop visit revenues up 35% on higher volume and workscopes. Spare parts revenues increased more than 25%, reflecting robust aftermarket demand. Total orders in the segment rose 93% year over year to $17.3 billion.

In response to these robust orders, GE has also been investing in its manufacturing capabilities, MRO facilities and new technologies. For 2026, the company had announced its plan to invest an additional $1 billion in U.S. manufacturing and technology. Also, in the same period, GE Aerospace plans to invest more than €110 million across its European manufacturing facilities.

With commercial aircraft programs expected to continue benefiting from the strength in air travel, GE is poised to maintain strong demand momentum in the quarters ahead. For 2026, adjusted revenues from the Commercial Engines & Services segment are expected to experience mid-teens growth.

GE's Peers in the Aerospace MarketAmong its major peers, RTX Corporation (RTX - Free Report) is benefiting from strength in the commercial aerospace market, with growth in both aftermarket and OEM verticals. RTX reported 10% organic sales growth in the first quarter, driven by solid momentum in the Collins Aerospace and Pratt & Whitney segments. Rising aircraft utilization and demand for sustainable technologies are supporting RTX Corp.’s growth.

Its another peer, Howmet Aerospace Inc. (HWM - Free Report) is benefiting from persistent strength in the commercial aerospace market. Revenues from Howmet’s commercial aerospace market increased 20% year over year (exceeding $1.2 billion) in the first quarter, constituting 53% of its business. Also, in 2025, revenues from the market increased 12% year over year.

GE's Price Performance, Valuation and EstimatesShares of GE Aerospace have gained 30.7% in the past three months compared with the industry’s growth of 1.1%.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

From a valuation standpoint, GE is trading at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 46.74X, above the industry’s average of 33.51X. GE Aerospace carries a Value Score of D.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for GE’s 2026 earnings has gone up 0.3% over the past 60 days.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The company currently has a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

Unity Software (NYSE:U | U Price Prediction) is trying to reinvent itself as an AI advertising platform, and the numbers are starting to back the pitch. The question is whether the company can close the yawning profitability gap with the AI ad-tech leader before the market’s patience runs out.

The Vector Bet Is Working Unity reported Q1 2026 revenue of $508.24 million, up 16.84% year over year, with Grow Solutions climbing 24% to $352 million. Adjusted EBITDA margin expanded to 27%, up from 19% a year ago, and free cash flow jumped to $66.46 million from $7.31 million.

The engine behind that is Unity Vector, the AI ad platform that uses behavioral data from Unity Runtime. It reached 56% of Grow Solutions revenue in Q4 2025 after three straight quarters of mid-teen sequential growth. CEO Matt Bromberg told investors, "We are delivering exceptional revenue growth and margin expansion while executing on the most exciting product roadmap in Unity’s history."

Management is cleaning house to focus on Vector. Unity took $279 million in impairment charges tied to the April 30, 2026 sunset of the ironSource Ads Network and a planned Supersonic divestiture, contributing to a $347 million GAAP net loss. Q2 guidance calls for strategic Grow revenue of $302M to $306M, up 50% to 52% YoY, with GAAP profitability targeted for Q4 2026.

The AppLovin Benchmark AppLovin (NASDAQ:APP) shows what a mature AI ad platform can produce. Q1 2026 revenue was $1.84 billion at an 85% adjusted EBITDA margin, with operating margin of 78% and net margin of 65%. Its AXON 2 engine has driven consistent 1 to 2 percentage point quarterly margin expansion. AppLovin shares are up 56.86% over the past year to $527.06, versus Unity at $29.32, down 33.62% year to date.

Roblox and the Platform Question Roblox (NYSE:RBLX) is the adjacent AI-gaming ecosystem risk, growing Q1 2026 revenue 39.3% to $1.44 billion with 132 million DAUs. Podcast commentary on Unity’s engine business framed the stakes plainly: "their newish launch of Vector, their new ad tech product, does seem to be turning things around. And there is very noticeable revenue momentum here." But the same analysis warned Unity and Unreal "have a lot of work to do in order to be more compatible with AI native workflows," opening the door for Godot, Replit, and middleware startups.

What to Watch Analyst consensus sits at $35.28, with 17 buys and 9 holds. Unity is an active recommendation in Eric Bleeker’s AI Investor Portfolio. The tell will be Q4 2026: hitting GAAP profitability while Vector keeps compounding would validate the pivot. Missing it, with $2.24 billion in convertible notes outstanding, would reopen every old question about the story.

Want Up To $1,000? SoFi Is Giving New Active Invest Users Free StockLooking to grow your money but unsure where to begin? SoFi Active Invest is offering a limited-time promotion—open an account, fund it with $50 or more, and you could receive up to $1,000 in complimentary stock for Active Invest accounts.

From $0 commission trading to fractional shares and automated investing, this app is designed to simplify investing for everyone, whether you’re just starting or already experienced. Its easy to sign up and secure your bonus. 

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

It has been about a month since the last earnings report for Broadcom Inc. (AVGO - Free Report) . Shares have lost about 14% in that time frame, underperforming the S&P 500.

But investors have to be wondering, will the recent negative trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is Broadcom Inc. due for a breakout? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at the latest earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important catalysts.

Broadcom Q2 Earnings Beat Estimates, Revenues Up Y/YBroadcom reported second-quarter fiscal 2026 non-GAAP earnings of $2.44 per share, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 1.67% and rose 54% year over year.

Revenues rose 48% year over year to $22.19 billion and beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 0.68%. The quarter benefited from accelerating AI semiconductor revenues, which reached $10.8 billion, up 143% year over year and exceeding the company’s outlook.

AVGO’s Q2 DetailsSemiconductor solutions revenues (68% of net revenues) totaled $15.01 billion, up 79% year over year. Management said the upside was powered by AI semiconductors, with networking representing almost 40% of AI revenues in the quarter.

Infrastructure software revenues (32% of net revenues) climbed 9% year over year to $7.18 billion. Management noted that software bookings stayed strong and the company sustained ARR growth of 17% year over year.

Profitability remained a standout despite mix headwinds. Non-GAAP gross margin was 77.1%, down 230 basis points year over year as semiconductors became a larger proportion of the mix.

Research and development expenses, as a percentage of net revenues, decreased 290 bps year over year to 7.2%. SG&A expenses, as a percentage of net revenues, decreased 130 bps to 2.6%.

Adjusted EBITDA rose 52% year over year to $15.24 billion. The adjusted EBITDA margin was 68.7%, up 210 bps year over year.

Operating margin rose 52.4% year over year to a record $14.9 billion, reflecting strong operating leverage as non-GAAP operating margin expanded 200 bps year over year to 67.3%.

AVGO’s Balance Sheet & Cash FlowAs of May 3, 2026, cash and cash equivalents were $19.63 billion, up from $14.17 billion as of Feb.1, 2026.

Total debt (including the current portion of $3.15 billion) was $66.06 billion as of Feb. 1, 2026 compared with $65.14 billion as of Nov. 2, 2025.

Broadcom generated $10.49 billion in cash flow from operations in the quarter compared with $8.26 billion in the previous quarter. The free cash flow was $10.26 billion compared with $8.01 billion in the prior quarter.

During the quarter, Broadcom paid stockholders $3.09 billion of cash dividends based on a quarterly common stock dividend of $0.65 per share. The company also repurchased $600 million of common stock under its repurchase program.

AVGO Offers Q3 GuidanceFor the third quarter of fiscal 2026, Broadcom expects revenues of approximately $29.4 billion, indicating 84% year-over-year growth. The company expects non-GAAP operating income and adjusted EBITDA to be approximately 67% and 68% of projected revenues, respectively.

Management also guided for semiconductor revenues of roughly $20.5 billion and infrastructure software revenues of about $8.9 billion for the third quarter of fiscal 2026. Within semiconductors, management expects AI semiconductor revenues to accelerate to $16 billion in the third quarter of fiscal 2026, soaring more than 200% year over year, as demand for custom AI accelerators and AI networking remains strong.

How Have Estimates Been Moving Since Then?In the past month, investors have witnessed a upward trend in estimates review.

VGM ScoresCurrently, Broadcom Inc. has a nice Growth Score of B, though it is lagging a lot on the Momentum Score front with a D. Following the exact same course, the stock has a score of D on the value side, putting it in the bottom 40% for value investors.

Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of C. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in.

OutlookEstimates have been broadly trending upward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions looks promising. Interestingly, Broadcom Inc. has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). We expect an in-line return from the stock in the next few months.

Performance of an Industry PlayerBroadcom Inc. is part of the Zacks Electronics - Semiconductors industry. Over the past month, Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd. (CRDO - Free Report) , a stock from the same industry, has gained 11.2%. The company reported its results for the quarter ended April 2026 more than a month ago.

Credo Technology Group reported revenues of $437 million in the last reported quarter, representing a year-over-year change of +157%. EPS of $1.16 for the same period compares with $0.35 a year ago.

For the current quarter, Credo Technology Group is expected to post earnings of $1.16 per share, indicating a change of +123.1% from the year-ago quarter. The Zacks Consensus Estimate remained unchanged over the last 30 days.

The overall direction and magnitude of estimate revisions translate into a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) for Credo Technology Group. Also, the stock has a VGM Score of C.

It has been about a month since the last earnings report for CrowdStrike Holdings (CRWD - Free Report) . Shares have added about 7.9% in that time frame, outperforming the S&P 500.

But investors have to be wondering, will the recent positive trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is CrowdStrike due for a pullback? Well, first let's take a quick look at the latest earnings report in order to get a better handle on the recent catalysts for CrowdStrike before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late.

CrowdStrike Q1 Earnings Surpass Estimates on ARR Strength, AI DemandCrowdStrike reported non-GAAP earnings per share of $1.10 for the first quarter of fiscal 2027, which surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 2.8%. The bottom line increased 50.7% on a year-over-year basis.

The company’s first-quarter revenues of $1,385.63 million surpassed the consensus estimate by 1.7%. The top line increased 25.6% year over year.

CRWD’s Top-Line DetailsSubscription revenues jumped 25.7% year over year to $1,320.85 million. Professional services revenues increased 23% year over year to $64.78 million.

As of April 30, 2026, annual recurring revenues (ARR) were $5.51 billion, up 24% year over year. The company added $255.8 million to its net new ARR in the reported quarter.

As of April 30, 2026, CrowdStrike’s subscription customers, who adopted six or more cloud modules, represented 51% of total subscription customers. Customers that adopted seven or more cloud modules accounted for 35% of the total, while those with eight or more cloud modules represented 25%.

CrowdStrike’s Operating DetailsCrowdStrike’s gross profit increased 27.1% to $1,089.8 million in the fiscal first quarter from $857.1 million in the year-ago quarter. The non-GAAP gross margin increased 100 basis points to 78.7%.

The non-GAAP subscription gross profit rose 27.1% year over year to $1.07 billion, while the gross margin expanded 100 basis points (bps) year over year to 81%. The non-GAAP professional gross profit increased 29.5% to $21.2 million, while the gross margin expanded 160 bps to 32.7% on a year-over-year basis.

Non-GAAP sales and marketing expenses jumped 12.1% year over year to $413.1 million. Non-GAAP research and development expenses climbed 25.3% year over year to $273.4 million. Non-GAAP general and administrative expenses increased 12% year over year to $77.7 million.

Non-GAAP income from operations was $325.7 million, up from $201.1 million in the year-ago quarter. The non-GAAP operating margin expanded 530 basis points year over year to 24%.

CrowdStrike’s Balance Sheet & Cash FlowAs of April 30, 2026, cash and cash equivalents were $4.55 billion.

In the fiscal first quarter, CrowdStrike generated operating and free cash flows of $590.9 million and $468.5 million, respectively.

CrowdStrike Offers Q2 and FY2027 GuidanceThe company updates its fiscal second-quarter 2027 guidance, including total revenues of $1.43-$1.44 billion and ARR of $5.792-$5.794 billion.

Non-GAAP earnings are expected in the range of $1.16 to $1.17 per share.

The company also raised its fiscal 2027 net new ARR growth guidance by 520 basis points at the midpoint and updated its full-year guidance to include total revenues of $5.91-$5.95 billion and ARR of $6.53-$6.55 billion.

For fiscal 2027, Non-GAAP earnings are expected in the range of $4.88 to $4.96 per share.

How Have Estimates Been Moving Since Then?It turns out, estimates revision have trended upward during the past month.

The consensus estimate has shifted -11.8% due to these changes.

VGM ScoresAt this time, CrowdStrike has a great Growth Score of A, though it is lagging a lot on the Momentum Score front with an F. Following the exact same course, the stock has a score of F on the value side, putting it in the lowest quintile for value investors.

Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of D. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in.

OutlookEstimates have been broadly trending upward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions indicates a downward shift. Notably, CrowdStrike has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). We expect an in-line return from the stock in the next few months.

Performance of an Industry PlayerCrowdStrike belongs to the Zacks Security industry. Another stock from the same industry, Palo Alto Networks (PANW - Free Report) , has gained 24.6% over the past month. More than a month has passed since the company reported results for the quarter ended April 2026.

Palo Alto reported revenues of $3 billion in the last reported quarter, representing a year-over-year change of +31.1%. EPS of $0.85 for the same period compares with $0.80 a year ago.

Palo Alto is expected to post earnings of $0.97 per share for the current quarter, representing a year-over-year change of +2.1%. Over the last 30 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate has changed -6.5%.

Palo Alto has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) based on the overall direction and magnitude of estimate revisions. Additionally, the stock has a VGM Score of F.

Key Takeaways Dell's ISG posted record $29B Q1 revenues as AI servers, traditional servers and storage all grew.Dell booked $24.4B in AI orders and exited Q1 with a record $51.3B AI backlog.Dell expects fiscal 2027 revenues of $165B-$169B and non-GAAP EPS of $17.90, plus or minus 25 cents. Dell Technologies (DELL - Free Report) Infrastructure Solutions Group (ISG) has become the company's primary growth engine, driven by exceptional demand for AI infrastructure alongside continued strength in traditional servers and storage. In first-quarter fiscal 2027, ISG generated a record $29 billion in revenues, up 181% year over year, with operating income surging 206% to $3.1 billion. AI-optimized server revenues soared 757% year over year to $16.1 billion. Meanwhile, traditional servers and networking grew 92%, and storage revenues increased 8%, demonstrating broad-based demand across Dell’s infrastructure portfolio.

Dell’s growing footprint in AI infrastructure is strengthening its long-term growth prospects. The company booked a massive $24.4 billion in AI orders during the fiscal first quarter and exited with a record $51.3 billion AI backlog. DELL management raised fiscal 2027 AI server revenue guidance to $60 billion. The company continues to expand its AI Factory ecosystem with partners including NVIDIA (NVDA - Free Report) , Google Cloud, OpenAI, Palantir and ServiceNow, while new offerings such as Dell PowerRack, 18th-generation PowerEdge servers and the AI Data Platform position DELL as a full-stack AI infrastructure provider. Management emphasized that customers increasingly prefer integrated, production-ready AI infrastructure rather than standalone hardware, supporting continued market share gains.

Dell is also benefiting from enterprise infrastructure modernization. Management noted that most of its installed server base remains seven years or older, creating a significant refresh opportunity, while AI inference workloads and agentic AI are driving incremental demand for traditional compute. Storage continues to outperform the market, led by PowerStore, PowerMax, PowerScale and ObjectScale, with higher-margin Dell-IP products boosting profitability. Dell has highlighted visibility into customer demand extending into 2027 and parts of 2028, with demand continuing to exceed supply, reinforcing confidence in sustained infrastructure-led growth.

DELL’s near-term outlook suggests demand remains durable, with customers continuing to prioritize infrastructure needs and proactively lock in supply. For the second quarter of fiscal 2027, Dell expects revenues between $44 billion and $45 billion, with non-GAAP earnings of $4.80 (plus or minus 10 cents). For fiscal 2027, Dell Technologies expects revenues between $165 billion and $169 billion and guided to non-GAAP earnings of $17.90 per share (plus or minus 25 cents).

DELL Faces Tough Competition in AI InfrastructureDell is facing significant competition from the likes of Super Micro Computer (SMCI - Free Report) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE - Free Report) in the AI infrastructure space.

Super Micro Computer is strengthening its AI infrastructure business through its Data Center Building Block Solutions, which provides end-to-end data center solutions, including liquid cooling, networking, power systems, software and services. Super Micro Computer continues to expand its partnerships with NVIDIA, AMD, Intel and Arm, while increasing manufacturing capacity globally. The company is often the first to market with the latest AI servers, including systems built on NVIDIA’s GB300 NVL72, HGX B300 and RTX6000Pro platforms, as well as AMD MI350/355 systems, giving it a strong edge.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise is benefiting from strong AI and networking demand, with AI systems orders reaching $1.8 billion and expanding into orchestration, data movement and agentic AI workloads. Hewlett Packard Enterprise is benefiting from rising demand for high-memory servers and AI inference, while the Juniper integration is driving networking momentum and cross-selling opportunities. Management expects durable demand, sustained AI adoption and continued growth across its Cloud & AI and Networking businesses through fiscal 2027.

DELL’s Share Price Performance, Valuation & EstimatesDell shares have appreciated 213.2% year to date, outperforming the broader Zacks Computer and Technology sector’s rise of 16.8%.

DELL Stock Outperforms Sector
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The DELL stock is trading at a premium, with a forward 12-month price/earnings of 19.34X compared with Super Micro Computer’s 10.51X and HPE’s 10.79X. Dell has a Value Score of C.

Valuation - DELL vs. SMCI
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Valuation - DELL vs. HPE
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for fiscal 2027 earnings is currently pegged at $18.77 per share, up 0.6% over the past 30 days, suggesting 82.2% growth from fiscal 2026’s reported figure.

Dell currently sports a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

San Francisco, California, July 3rd, 2026, Chainwire

Boardwalk, a launch and market-formation protocol for token economies, announced plans to move its protocol-token systems to Arbitrum and introduce BWS as the successor to its legacy BMX protocol token.

Under the planned transition, BWS will anchor Boardwalk’s protocol-token systems on Arbitrum, including staking, Voter Points, Fee Direction, and primary protocol-token liquidity. Boardwalk’s application layer will remain multichain, with relaunches planned across six supported networks as integration work is completed.

The transition separates the protocol token’s operating environment from Boardwalk’s broader application infrastructure. Boardwalk will continue to support token-economy launches through its application layer, while protocol-token systems operate from Arbitrum.

Boardwalk’s launch framework is intended to provide a standardized structure for token-economy formation. Its described architecture includes published launch rules, seed liquidity designed to lock at graduation, contract-defined fee routing and vesting, fee-protection mechanisms, liquidity-provider participation systems, and Café Boardwalk, a public coordination space for launches.

Under Boardwalk’s described fee configuration, applicable trades include a 1.15% token fee and a 0.10% pool fee, totaling 1.25%. The token-level fee mechanism is designed to reduce incentives for alternative liquidity arrangements focused solely on capturing trading-fee flows. Fees are routed according to the applicable launch configuration and depend on protocol activity and market conditions.

Boardwalk does not select, vet, or endorse issuers or projects that use its protocol.

“BWS is intended to consolidate the protocol-token systems supporting Boardwalk’s next stage of development on Arbitrum, while the application layer remains multichain,” said Meowphasaurus, Co-Founder of Boardwalk. “The transition provides a defined operating environment for staking, Voter Points, Fee Direction, and protocol-token liquidity, while launches continue to be structured through the Boardwalk application layer.”

BMX holders who meet published eligibility requirements will be able to migrate 1 BMX for 1 BWS through Boardwalk’s official migration process when it opens. Migrated BWS is planned to be received as a staked position on Arbitrum. Boardwalk will publish official contract addresses, eligibility criteria, timing, bridge information, and step-by-step instructions before the migration process becomes available.

BWS is planned to use a token-contract design without an owner, administrator, minter, upgrade path, or post-deployment supply-increase function. Boardwalk expects to publish final contract details and verification materials through its official channels.

Boardwalk will release further information about the multichain application relaunch and protocol-token transition through its official website and communications. Users should rely on those sources for contract addresses, eligibility criteria, and migration instructions.

About Boardwalk

Boardwalk is launch and market-formation infrastructure for transparent token economies. Its protocol framework includes visible launch rules, seed liquidity designed to lock at graduation, contract-defined fee routing, vesting, participation systems, and public coordination through Café Boardwalk.

This release is for informational purposes only. Statements about future integrations, deployments, timing, migration, bridge availability, protocol activity, fees, or burns are forward-looking and subject to change. Migration availability is subject to published eligibility criteria, applicable law, technical availability, and smart-contract risk. BWS, staking, Voter Points, and Fee Direction do not provide ownership, equity, a revenue share, or a claim on Boardwalk or its assets. Voter Points are non-transferable and have no monetary value. Nothing in this release guarantees liquidity, fee amounts, token value, economic benefit, or any financial outcome. References to Arbitrum identify an intended deployment environment and do not imply sponsorship, endorsement, or partnership.

Image: Bigstock

Read MoreHide Full Article

Key Takeaways TRNO signed new and renewal leases across key logistics markets in Florida, California and New Jersey.Terreno Realty's Doral deals brought its 194,000-square-foot building to full occupancy.TRNO reported 96.3% first-quarter occupancy and a 22.4% cash rent increase on leases. Terreno Realty Corporation (TRNO - Free Report) has added another set of leasing wins to its 2026 story, led by fresh activity in Doral, FL. The company announced a 68,000-square-foot lease with a fresh produce importer and exporter, running from June 30, 2026 through July 2037. It also signed a 10,000-square-foot expansion with a neighboring tenant, bringing its 194,000-square-foot Doral building to full occupancy.

These moves benefit Terreno by improving occupancy, extending cash flow visibility and showing demand in core logistics markets like Miami. Earlier, the company announced 233,000 square feet of new and renewal leases at Countyline Corporate Park Phase III in Hialeah, FL. Buildings 26 and 28, totaling 422,000 square feet, are expected to remain fully leased after the new leases begin.

The company’s West Coast leasing activity also remained active. In late June, Terreno signed a 94,000-square-foot lease in Union City, CA, with an IT infrastructure, cloud and security solutions provider. The lease starts on Sept. 1, 2026 and runs through October 2033. Terreno also received about $2 million from a negotiated early lease termination tied to the prior tenant.

Before that, Terreno announced a 102,000-square-foot early renewal in Hayward, CA, with a moving and storage operator. The lease begins on Dec. 1, 2026 and expires in January 2032. The company also signed a 92,000-square-foot lease in Kearny, NJ, with a third-party logistics provider, running from June 30, 2026 through December 2031.

The leasing updates fit into a broader operating picture that looks stable, though not without risks. In its first-quarter 2026 update, Terreno reported 96.3% quarter-end occupancy, a 22.4% increase in cash rents on new and renewed leases, $101.8 million of acquisitions and $55.1 million of dispositions.

Wrapping Up on TRNOFor investors, Terreno’s recent activity points to a solid operating backdrop, supported by steady leasing, exposure to key coastal markets and financial flexibility. Still, a neutral view makes sense, as tenant turnover, project execution, interest expenses and the need to lease space at favorable rates remain important factors to watch.

Over the past six months, shares of this Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) company have gained 14.1% compared with the industry’s growth of 11.4%.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Stocks to ConsiderSome better-ranked stocks from the industrial REIT sector are Stag Industrial (STAG - Free Report) and Industrial Logistics Properties Trust (ILPT - Free Report) , each carrying a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) at present. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for Stag Industrial’s full-year FFO per share is pinned at $2.64, which calls for a 3.5% increase from the year-ago period.

The consensus estimate for Industrial Logistics Properties’ 2026 FFO per share is pegged at $1.34, which indicates year-over-year growth of 39.6%.

Note: Anything related to earnings presented in this write-up represents funds from operations (FFO) — a widely used metric to gauge the performance of REITs.

Published in finance reit

It has been about a month since the last earnings report for Thor Industries (THO - Free Report) . Shares have added about 2.2% in that time frame, outperforming the S&P 500.

But investors have to be wondering, will the recent positive trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is Thor Industries due for a pullback? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at its most recent earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important drivers.

THOR Q3 Earnings Miss ExpectationsTHOR posted earnings of $1.86 per share for the third quarter of fiscal 2026 (ended April 30), missing the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.88 by 1.1%. The bottom line declined 32.9% year over year.

THO’s quarterly revenues came in at $2.78 billion, beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $2.64 billion by 5.2% and decreasing 3.9% from the year-ago quarter. The results reflected a pressured RV retail backdrop, with industry retail tracking near 300,000 units in calendar 2026, weighing most heavily on value-oriented towables.

THO Margins Compress as Profitability SoftensTHO’s gross profit fell 19.9% year over year to $354.8 million, and gross margin narrowed 250 basis points to 12.8%. The downturn reflected lower consolidated volumes and cost pressures, particularly in North American Towables, alongside an unfavorable mix.

Net income attributable to THOR declined 28.1% to $97.2 million. The reported profitability benefited from favorable market value adjustments on certain investments and gains on the sale of select real estate tied to footprint optimization, while adjusted profitability excluded several nonrecurring items.

THOR Towable Segment Hit by Dealer CautionNorth American Towable net sales declined 24.6% year over year to $881.8 million as independent dealers stayed cautious in a strained retail environment. Unit shipments fell 25% year over year to 27,045 units, while gross profit declined 48.5% to $89.7 million. Segment gross margin contracted 470 basis points to 10.2%, pressured by lower sales, higher material costs and product mix. Pretax income decreased 46% year over year to $52.7 million.

Backlog for the Towable segment stood at $386 million as of April 30, 2026, down 39.1% from the prior-year period. Dealer inventory of THOR Towable products was 67,151 units, down 17.3% year over year, consistent with dealers managing risk into an uncertain selling season.

THO Motorized and Europe Deliver Better Top-Line TrendsNorth American Motorized remained a relatively bright spot. Net sales increased 7.7% to $717.7 million, driven by higher unit shipments. Unit shipments rose 9.1% year over year to 6,008 units. Gross profit slipped 10.5% to $62.9 million, while gross margin eased to 8.8% from 10.5% in the prior-year period, as higher volumes were more than offset by increases in material, warranty and overhead costs. Pretax income declined 22.9% to $25.3 million. The segment’s backlog was $766.1 million, down from $883.7 million as of April 30, 2025.

In the Europe RVs segment, net sales rose 11.8% to $987.6 million, aided by higher unit shipments and pricing, including currency effects. Unit shipments grew 4.2% year over year to 14,065 units. Gross profit edged down 0.6% to $142 million, while pretax income rose 21.3% to $56.2 million. European backlog was $1.36 billion, up 1% year over year, and dealer inventory was 20,400 units, down 11.2% year over year.

THOR Liquidity Remains Solid Despite Lower Cash FlowAs of April 30, 2026, THOR’s cash and cash equivalents totaled $371.9 million. Through the first nine months of fiscal 2026, net cash provided by operating activities was $77 million, down from $319.2 million in the prior-year period.

THO Lowers Full-Year Earnings View as Headwinds PersistTHOR maintained its full-year fiscal 2026 consolidated net sales guidance of $9-$9.5 billion, but lowered its diluted earnings outlook to $3.30-$3.80 from the prior $3.75-$4.25 range, citing prolonged macroeconomic and consumer-confidence pressures.

On capital deployment, THOR repurchased $50.5 million of shares during the quarter and paid $27.1 million in dividends, underscoring management’s intent to stay disciplined while investing in operational initiatives such as its North American RV realignment aimed at sourcing coordination, standardization and data integration.

How Have Estimates Been Moving Since Then?Since the earnings release, investors have witnessed a downward trend in fresh estimates.

The consensus estimate has shifted -35.83% due to these changes.

VGM ScoresCurrently, Thor Industries has a average Growth Score of C, though it is lagging a lot on the Momentum Score front with an F. However, the stock was allocated a grade of C on the value side, putting it in the middle 20% for this investment strategy.

Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of C. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in.

OutlookEstimates have been broadly trending downward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions indicates a downward shift. It's no surprise Thor Industries has a Zacks Rank #5 (Strong Sell). We expect a below average return from the stock in the next few months.

A month has gone by since the last earnings report for Five Below (FIVE - Free Report) . Shares have lost about 5.1% in that time frame, underperforming the S&P 500.

But investors have to be wondering, will the recent negative trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is Five Below due for a breakout? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at its latest earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important catalysts.

Five Below Q1 Earnings Top Estimates on Strong Traffic and CompsFive Below reported impressive first-quarter fiscal 2026 results, wherein the top and bottom lines beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate. Also, net sales and earnings increased year over year, supported by strong comparable sales growth driven by gains in both traffic and average ticket.

More on Five Below’s Q1 ResultsFIVE posted adjusted earnings per share of $2.22 in the fiscal first quarter, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.70. Also, the figure surged 158% from 86 cents in the year-ago quarter.

Net sales were $1,285.6 million, which increased 32.5% year over year from $970.5 million. Also, this metric surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1,205 million.

Comparable sales (comps) increased 22.7% year over year, surpassing our estimated growth of 15.6% growth. Comps growth was driven by a 4% increase in ticket and a 19% rise in transactions.

Insight Into Margins & Costs of FIVEAdjusted gross profit grew 46% year over year to $478.6 million from $328.4 million. The adjusted gross margin increased approximately 340 basis points (bps) year over year to 37.2%. The improvement was primarily driven by fixed-cost leverage from strong comparable sales growth, along with distribution efficiencies and a lower shrink accrual, which further supported profitability during the quarter.

Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) costs stood at $324 million. While SG&A costs, as a percentage of net sales, decreased approximately 250 bps to 25.2%. The improvement was primarily driven by strong comparable sales growth, which enabled fixed costs to be spread across a larger revenue base. These benefits were partially offset by higher incentive compensation expenses and increased store labor costs associated with April's physical inventory counts.

Adjusted operating income was $154.8 million, up 160% year over year from $59.6 million. The adjusted operating margin increased approximately 600 bps to 12%.

FIVE Provides Q1 Store UpdateThe company opened 49 net new stores and ended the quarter with 1,970 stores across 46 states. This represents a 7.9% increase in the number of stores from the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2025. The company expects to open approximately 50 new stores in the fiscal second quarter and 150 new stores for fiscal 2026.

Five Below’s Financial Snapshot: Cash & Equity OverviewThe company ended the fiscal first quarter with cash and cash equivalents of $638.9 million and short-term investment securities of $474.4 million. Total shareholders’ equity was $2,312.5 million as of May 02, 2026.

Inventory totaled $813.3 million, increasing approximately 16% year over year, alongside a 10% increase in units and a 7% rise in average inventory per store. Management attributed the inventory build to opportunistic purchasing in a favorable tariff environment and efforts to maintain a consistent flow of products amid a more challenging global supply chain environment.

What to Expect from FIVE in the Future?For the fiscal second quarter of fiscal 2026, the company expects total sales of $1.18 billion to $1.20 billion, supported by comparable sales growth of 7% to 9%. The company expects fiscal second-quarter gross margin improvement to be supported by higher merchandise margins, fixed-cost leverage and a lower shrink accrual. These benefits are expected to be partially offset by higher supply chain and fuel-related transportation costs. Adjusted SG&A is projected to delever slightly due to increased marketing investments and higher store labor expenses.

Adjusted operating margin is expected to improve to 7% at the midpoint, a 160-basis point increase driven by gross margin expansion. The adjusted net income is expected to be in the range of $65 million to $72 million, with adjusted earnings per share (EPS) expected to be between $1.17 and $1.29.

The company increased its full-year outlook following stronger-than-expected first-quarter results and an improved second-quarter sales forecast. Management expects sales of $5.4 billion to $5.48 billion compared with the previously guided range of $5.2 billion to $5.3 billion, and comparable sales growth of 6% to 8% for the year, compared with the previously guided range of 3% to 5%. Adjusted operating margin is projected to expand 170 bps to 11.6% at the midpoint  compared with 10.9% guided previously, driven by gross margin improvement.

Adjusted net income is expected to be in the range of $482 million to $504 million, compared with the previously guided range of $431 million to $459 million. Adjusted EPS is expected to be in the range of $8.65 to $9.05 compared with the previously guided range of $7.74 to $8.25, supported by continued sales and profitability growth. Capital expenditures are expected to be in the range of $230 million to $250 million.

How Have Estimates Been Moving Since Then?In the past month, investors have witnessed a upward trend in fresh estimates.

The consensus estimate has shifted 17% due to these changes.

VGM ScoresCurrently, Five Below has a nice Growth Score of B, though it is lagging a lot on the Momentum Score front with a D. Charting a somewhat similar path, the stock was allocated a grade of C on the value side, putting it in the middle 20% for value investors.

Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of B. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in.

OutlookEstimates have been broadly trending upward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions looks promising. It comes with little surprise Five Below has a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy). We expect an above average return from the stock in the next few months.

Performance of an Industry PlayerFive Below belongs to the Zacks Retail - Miscellaneous industry. Another stock from the same industry, Dick's Sporting Goods (DKS - Free Report) , has gained 8.5% over the past month. More than a month has passed since the company reported results for the quarter ended April 2026.

Dick's reported revenues of $5.16 billion in the last reported quarter, representing a year-over-year change of +62.7%. EPS of $2.90 for the same period compares with $3.37 a year ago.

Dick's is expected to post earnings of $3.80 per share for the current quarter, representing a year-over-year change of -13.2%. Over the last 30 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate has changed -1.1%.

The overall direction and magnitude of estimate revisions translate into a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) for Dick's. Also, the stock has a VGM Score of B.

Key Takeaways MNST is benefiting from strong global energy drink demand and broad-based international expansion. Monster Beverage is driving growth through new product launches and rising demand for zero-sugar offerings.MNST's Monster Energy Drinks segment posted 22.8% currency-adjusted sales growth in first-quarter 2026. Monster Beverage Corporation (MNST - Free Report) continues to benefit from the sustained expansion of the global energy drinks category and its steady cadence of product innovations. Robust consumer demand across key markets has supported strong momentum in MNST’s core energy portfolio. With category trends remaining favorable worldwide, the company is well-positioned to maintain its growth trajectory and continue gaining market share.

In first-quarter 2026, the Monster Energy Drinks segment's sales grew 22.8% on a currency-adjusted basis. Monster Beverage continues to leverage the Coca-Cola system to broaden distribution and improve execution across regions. International expansion, operational efficiency and product innovation are driving the company's overall performance.

Product launches remain central to Monster Beverage’s strategy to expand usage occasions and keep its core franchises relevant. In the United States during first-quarter 2026, the company highlighted launches such as Ultra Punk Punch, Juice Monster Voodoo Grape, Strawberry Shots in full sugar and zero sugar, and a nationwide rollout of Lando Norris Zero Sugar. Management also noted that the Ultra brand family grew 20% in the quarter and Ultra White grew 34%, based on Nielsen, underscoring continued consumer shift toward zero-sugar options.

FLRT entered select channels in late March, and Storm, a wellness-focused brand, began rolling out in early May 2026, targeting new consumers rather than only existing energy users. Internationally, management cited Juice Monster Viking Berry as the most successful innovation launch in EMEA, with additional zero-sugar athlete editions rolling into more markets. By using innovation to support both new and existing SKUs, Monster Beverage can drive incremental volume without relying solely on pricing.

At its core, Monster Beverage will continue to benefit from steady growth in the global energy drink market, supported by strong demand across convenience stores and other key retail channels. Its efforts to advance innovation, expand its international presence and enhance operational efficiency are expected to further strengthen its performance.

MNST’s Price Performance, Valuation and EstimatesShares of Monster Beverage have gained 29% in the past six months against the industry’s rally of 15.4%.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

From a valuation standpoint, MNST trades at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 39.64X compared with the industry’s average of 19.29X.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for MNST’s 2026 and 2027 EPS indicates year-over-year growth of 12.1% and 12.8%, respectively. The company’s EPS estimates for 2026 and 2027 have been stable in the past 30 days.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Monster Beverage currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold).

Stocks to Consider in the Consumer Staples Space The Chefs' Warehouse, Inc. (CHEF - Free Report) , which is a distributor of specialty food products in the United States, currently sports a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for Chefs' Warehouse's current financial-year sales indicates growth of 8.3% from the prior-year level. CHEF delivered a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 28.9%, on average.

Nomad Foods Limited (NOMD - Free Report) , which manufactures and distributes frozen foods, currently carries a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy).

The consensus estimate for Nomad Foods’ current financial-year sales is expected to rise 0.5% from the year-ago reported figure. NOMD delivered a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 8.6%, on average.

Medifast, Inc. (MED - Free Report) , which is a leading manufacturer and distributor of clinically-proven healthy living products and programs, currently carries a Zacks Rank of 2. MED delivered an average earnings surprise of 65.5% in the last reported quarter.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for Medifast’s current financial-year sales indicates a decline of 26% from the year-ago number.

Key Takeaways ARM generated 20% year-over-year revenue growth in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2026.Licensing and other revenues climbed 29%, highlighting strong customer demand for ARM's intellectual property.Royalty revenues advanced 11%, supported by wider adoption of Armv9 technology and data center processors. Arm Holdings (ARM - Free Report) continues to capitalize on robust demand for its semiconductor intellectual property, with its latest quarterly results underscoring the growing importance of its licensing business as a key growth engine.

In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2026, total revenues increased 20% year over year to $1.49 billion. Although royalties remain a significant contributor to the company's business model, licensing and other revenues once again delivered the strongest growth, reflecting healthy customer demand for ARM's processor designs.

The results illustrate the expanding adoption of the company's architecture across multiple high-growth markets. As semiconductor manufacturers increasingly develop custom chips for artificial intelligence, cloud infrastructure, smartphones and other advanced computing applications, ARM's technology continues to serve as a critical foundation for next-generation processor development. This trend is supporting a steady pipeline of new licensing agreements and strengthening long-term customer relationships.

Licensing momentum has become an increasingly important contributor to the company's overall financial performance. Licensing and other revenues rose 29% year over year to $819 million during the quarter, providing a significant boost to overall revenue growth. The improvement was supported by contributions from previously executed agreements as well as the signing of several large licensing contracts during the period.

At the same time, ARM's royalty business continues to generate a dependable stream of recurring revenues. Royalty revenues increased 11% from the prior-year period to $671 million, driven by broader deployment of Armv9 architecture, increasing adoption of Arm Compute Subsystems, and expanding use of Arm-based processors across data center workloads.

For investors, the latest results reinforce the strength of ARM's business model. Continued demand for new licensing agreements, combined with an expanding royalty base, provides multiple avenues for sustained long-term growth. As investments in artificial intelligence infrastructure and advanced computing continue accelerating, Arm Holdings appears well-positioned to benefit from both increasing design wins and higher royalty generation.

How ARM Stacks Up Against Key Semiconductor PeersAmong leading semiconductor companies, NVIDIA ((NVDA - Free Report) continues to dominate the AI accelerator market with its powerful GPU ecosystem, while Advanced Micro Devices (AMD - Free Report) has steadily expanded its presence across AI computing, data centers and high-performance processors. Unlike NVIDIA and Advanced Micro Devices, which primarily generate revenue through semiconductor sales, ARM operates a licensing-based business model that enables broad adoption of its processor architecture across the industry. As more chipmakers build products around ARM's designs, the company benefits from both upfront licensing fees and recurring royalty income, giving it a differentiated and highly scalable growth model within the semiconductor sector.

ARM’s Price Performance, Valuation and EstimatesThe stock has surged a massive 188% year to date, significantly outperforming the industry’s 51% rally.

                                                          Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

From a valuation standpoint, ARM trades at a forward price-to-sales ratio of 51.41X, well above the industry’s 9.51X. It carries a Value Score of F.

                                                                  Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for the company’s fiscal 2027 earnings has remained unchanged over the past 30 days.

ARM currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

A month has gone by since the last earnings report for Ollie's Bargain Outlet (OLLI - Free Report) . Shares have lost about 0.4% in that time frame, outperforming the S&P 500.

But investors have to be wondering, will the recent negative trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is Ollie's Bargain Outlet due for a breakout? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at the most recent earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important drivers.

Ollie's Bargain Q1 Earnings Beat, Comps Rise 1.7%, EPS View UpOllie’s Bargain delivered first-quarter fiscal 2026 results, wherein net sales fell short of the Zacks Consensus Estimate, while earnings beat the same. Both top and bottom lines increased year over year, driven by new store growth, positive comparable-store sales, margin expansion and disciplined expense management. Management raised its fiscal 2026 earnings outlook following the stronger-than-expected performance.

The company’s value-focused business model continued to resonate with consumers against an uncertain macroeconomic backdrop. During the quarter, Ollie’s opened 27 new stores and ended the period with 672 stores across 35 states, reflecting 15.1% year-over-year growth. The Ollie’s Army loyalty program expanded 12.6% to 17.5 million members, highlighting continued customer engagement and acquisition.

OLLI’s Performance: Key Metrics & InsightsOllie’s Bargain reported adjusted earnings of 91 cents per share, which surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 87 cents by 4.6%. The figure increased 21.3% from adjusted earnings of 75 cents reported in the year-ago quarter.
Net sales rose 14.2% year over year to $658.9 million, driven by new store openings and positive comparable-store sales growth. However, revenues narrowly missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $666 million.

Comparable-store sales increased 1.7%, supported primarily by higher basket size. Food, general merchandise, hardware, seasonal décor and stationery were among the top-performing categories during the quarter, while weather-sensitive categories such as lawn and garden and summer furniture lagged due to unfavorable weather conditions.

Management noted that sales trends remained positive throughout the quarter, though elevated fuel prices and unseasonable weather affected customer traffic, particularly in southern markets. The company also highlighted continued strength in trade-down behavior among higher-income consumers, reflecting growing demand for value-oriented retail offerings.

What Margins Have to Say About Ollie’s BargainGross profit increased 16.4% to $276 million. Gross margin expanded 80 basis points to 41.9%, benefiting from lower supply-chain costs and a modest improvement in merchandise margins. The result exceeded management’s expectations as lower tariff-related costs and supply-chain efficiencies more than offset higher fuel expenses.

SG&A expenses, as a percentage of net sales, remained flat year over year at 28.6%. Effective cost controls and productivity initiatives helped offset investments in growth and customer acquisition.

Pre-opening expenses declined 3.2% to $6.4 million, primarily due to lower dark-rent expenses associated with previously acquired bankruptcy locations, partially offset by a higher number of new store openings.

Operating income climbed 23.8% to $69.6 million, while operating margin expanded 90 basis points to 10.6%. Adjusted EBITDA rose 21.8% to $87.9 million, with adjusted EBITDA margin increasing 80 basis points to 13.3%.

Ollie’s Bargain’s Financial SnapshotOllie’s Bargain ended the quarter with total cash and investments of $525.6 million, up 26.7% year over year. The company continued to maintain a strong balance sheet with no meaningful long-term debt, providing significant financial flexibility.

Inventory increased 12.3% year over year to $686.9 million, primarily supporting ongoing store expansion initiatives. Capital expenditures totaled $25.5 million during the quarter, with investments directed toward new store openings, existing store improvements and supply-chain infrastructure projects.

The company repurchased approximately $53.4 million of stock during the quarter, buying back 542,486 shares. Management increased its planned fiscal 2026 share repurchases to approximately $125 million from the prior expectation of $100 million, reflecting confidence in the business and cash-flow generation.

Ollie’s continued to advance key initiatives during the quarter. The company reported strong growth in its loyalty program, continued success in category productivity efforts and progress on distribution-center expansion projects in Texas and Illinois, which are expected to increase network capacity to more than 850 stores. Management also cited an improving closeout buying environment, driven by retail industry consolidation and increased availability of attractive merchandise opportunities.

What to Expect From OLLI in Fiscal 2026?Following the first-quarter outperformance, management raised its fiscal 2026 earnings outlook while maintaining its comparable-sales and store-opening expectations.

The company now expects adjusted earnings in the range of $4.45-$4.55 per share, up from the previous outlook of $4.40-$4.50. Net sales are expected in the range of $2.98-$3.0 billion compared with the prior outlook of $2.985-$3.013 billion. Comparable-store sales growth is still anticipated to be approximately 2% for fiscal 2026.

Gross margin is now expected to be approximately 40.7%, up from the prior expectation of 40.5%. Operating income is projected between $340 million and $348 million.

Management reiterated plans to open 75 new stores during fiscal 2026. Capital expenditures are expected in the range of $103-$113 million.

While management acknowledged continued uncertainty surrounding consumer spending, fuel prices and weather-related sales volatility, it expressed confidence in the company’s ability to deliver mid-teens earnings growth through strong execution, favorable availability of closeout merchandise, disciplined cost management, and ongoing investments in value and customer acquisition.

How Have Estimates Been Moving Since Then?In the past month, investors have witnessed a upward trend in estimates review.

VGM ScoresAt this time, Ollie's Bargain Outlet has a average Growth Score of C, though it is lagging a bit on the Momentum Score front with a D. However, the stock was allocated a grade of B on the value side, putting it in the top 40% for value investors.

Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of B. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in.

OutlookEstimates have been trending upward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions looks promising. It comes with little surprise Ollie's Bargain Outlet has a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy). We expect an above average return from the stock in the next few months.

Performance of an Industry PlayerOllie's Bargain Outlet belongs to the Zacks Consumer Products - Staples industry. Another stock from the same industry, BJ's Wholesale Club (BJ - Free Report) , has gained 0.9% over the past month. More than a month has passed since the company reported results for the quarter ended April 2026.

BJ's reported revenues of $5.66 billion in the last reported quarter, representing a year-over-year change of +9.9%. EPS of $1.10 for the same period compares with $1.14 a year ago.

BJ's is expected to post earnings of $1.15 per share for the current quarter, representing a year-over-year change of +0.9%. Over the last 30 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate has changed -1%.

BJ's has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) based on the overall direction and magnitude of estimate revisions. Additionally, the stock has a VGM Score of B.

A photo illustration of a One Tank disposable vape device with American branding reflects how some products marketed as "made in the USA" have emerged as Chinese manufacturers adapt to a U.S.... Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab Read more

CompaniesLONDON, July 3 (Reuters) - Payments platform Fiserv (FISV.O), opens new tab and service station operators including BP (BP.L), opens new tab have warned their U.S. partners and store owners not to deal in illegal vapes or ​risk heavy fines as a consequence, notices seen by Reuters show.

A coalition of ‌state and city law enforcement officials in the U.S. is pressuring shippers, e-commerce platforms and payment networks in a bid to clamp down on a booming market in illegal vapes worth $9 billion or more ​in annual sales according to some estimates.

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Backed by attorneys general from states including California, ​Illinois and Arizona as well as authorities from the city of New ⁠York, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, the crackdown has in recent weeks ​helped secure a ban on vapes by Shopify (SHOP.TO), opens new tab. Mastercard (MA.N), opens new tab has also warned its partners that it ​would investigate if they enabled illegal vape transactions on its network.

Now, the documents seen by Reuters show, this stricter approach to illegal vape sales is gathering pace.

"BP has learned that MasterCard has begun issuing... ​compliance violation notices to merchants throughout the industry for processing sales transactions for illegal electronic ​nicotine delivery system products," BP wrote in an undated notice to its gas station operators.

The notice seen ‌by ⁠Reuters said that selling illegal vapes was also a violation of a store's agreement with BP.

Gas station operators Marathon Petroleum (MPC.N), opens new tab and Valero (VLO.N), opens new tab issued similar notices warning that Mastercard or similar firms could issue mid-six-figure fines for a single violation or revoke their card processing services. ​Valero's notice was dated ​June 17.

CardConnect, a ⁠payment technology provider and subsidiary of Fiserv (FISV.O), opens new tab, issued a notice to its partners stating that vape sales must comply with all relevant ​laws or risk "corrective action".

The notice said that CardConnect would send out ​a message warning ⁠all merchants using its services not to sell vapes lacking authorisation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The FDA has granted only 45 vaping products authorisation to market legally, but unauthorised ⁠brands ​are sold illegally nationwide both online and face-to-face in ​locations including convenience stores and bodegas.

Fiserv, BP, Marathon and Valero did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Friday ​was a public holiday in the United States.

Reporting by Emma Rumney; Editing by Joe Bavier

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

HomeStock IdeasLong IdeasCommunication Services

SummaryMeta Platforms is rated a Strong Buy due to accelerating revenue growth, driven by AI-enhanced advertising and expanding monetization avenues.META's AI-powered Advantage+ campaigns deliver 17% higher ROAS and 32% lower CPA, fueling advertiser spend and supporting sustained revenue growth.Subscriptions and wearables offer incremental upside, while Reality Labs' AI glasses show rapid adoption, though profitability remains a wildcard.Custom ASIC investments are expected to mitigate long-term CapEx pressures, potentially boosting free cash flow margins and supporting high-teens CAGR returns. Kira-Yan/iStock Editorial via Getty Images

Investment Thesis Meta Platforms (META) has been investing heavily in AI infrastructure, which has investors concerned as to whether or not they will see a return on these massive investments. Despite these doubts, Meta is experiencing revenue growth acceleration, which is being driven

64 Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of META either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Key Takeaways Nokia will be the sole supplier for Orange Belgium's large-scale transport network modernization.NOK will merge Orange Belgium's fixed and mobile transport systems into one converged optical network.Nokia will deploy 1830 PSS and AI-powered WaveSuite to boost speeds, reliability and service delivery. Nokia Corporation (NOK - Free Report) has secured a multi-year contract with Orange Belgium to upgrade the latter’s transport network, strengthening its position in advanced telecom infrastructure and optical networking. The deal expands Nokia’s role in supporting high-capacity connectivity as demand rises from AI, cloud computing, 5G, streaming, gaming and remote work.

Under the agreement, Nokia will serve as the sole supplier for Orange Belgium’s large-scale network modernization project. The company will combine the operator’s fixed and mobile transport systems into a converged optical network, improving efficiency, resiliency and service readiness for future high-bandwidth services.

Nokia will deploy its 1830 Photonic Service Switch platform (PSS), supporting speeds from 1G to 400G and beyond for faster and more reliable data transmission across Belgium. It will also provide its AI-powered WaveSuite automation software to simplify network management, improve operational performance and speed up service delivery.

With global telecom operators accelerating next-generation infrastructure investments, Nokia is likely to capitalize on growing modernization opportunities, supporting its long-term growth prospects.

How Are Competitors Performing in the Networking Ecosystem?Nokia faces stiff competition from Ericsson (ERIC - Free Report) and Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO - Free Report) . Ericsson is focusing on 5G, network slicing, AI-driven networks and future 6G development. It is expanding private 5G solutions for enterprises. Ericsson is expanding Open Radio Access Network and automation capabilities across global markets.

Cisco is expanding its AI-ready networking solutions to support growing enterprise data traffic. The company is enhancing secure networking through automation and cloud-managed infrastructure. Cisco is investing in high-speed switching, routing and data center connectivity technologies.

NOK’s Price Performance, Valuation & EstimatesNokia shares have soared 132.5% over the past year compared with the  industry’s 40.1% growth.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

From a valuation standpoint, Nokia trades at a forward price-to-sales ratio of 2.78, below the industry tally of 5.07.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Earnings estimates for 2026 have remained static at 40 cents over the past 60 days, while those for 2027 have also increased 2.1% to 49 cents.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Nokia currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

Key Takeaways Delta is set to report Q2 results, with earnings expected to fall 31.4% and revenues to rise 6.5%. Strong consumer and corporate demand may have boosted DAL's revenues in the June quarter.Lower fuel costs may aid Delta's bottom line, while higher labor costs could weigh on profits. Delta Air Lines (DAL - Free Report) is scheduled to report second-quarter 2026 results on July 10, before the market opens.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for second-quarter 2026 earnings is pegged at $1.44 per share, indicating a 31.4% year-over-year decrease. The measure has been revised 4% downward over the past 60 days. The same for revenues is pegged at $17.72 billion, indicating a 6.5% increase from the second-quarter 2025 actuals.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

For 2026, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings is pegged at $5.36 per share, indicating a 7.9% year-over-year decrease, and has been revised 0.2% upward over the past 60 days. The same for revenues is pegged at $65.9 billion, indicating a 4.1% increase from 2025 actuals.

DAL has an impressive earnings surprise history, surpassing the Zacks Consensus Estimate in each of the trailing four quarters. The average beat is 5.4%.

Given this backdrop, let us examine the factors that might have influenced Delta Air Lines’ performance in the to-be-reported quarter.

The interim peace deal between the United States and Iran has resulted in a sharp fall in oil prices. This development is likely to have aided DAL’s bottom-line performance since expenses on fuel represent a key input cost for airlines.

Moreover, strong bookings are likely to have aided DAL’s top-line performance in the June quarter. Driven by strong consumer and corporate demand, Delta expects its second-quarter revenues to increase in the low teens year over year.

High labor costs are likely to have hurt the bottom line. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for non-fuel unit cost, or cost per available seat mile (CASM: adjusted), is pegged at 14.25 cents compared with 13.49 cents reported in the second quarter of 2025.

Despite having come down from the highs witnessed when the war between the nations was in full flow, oil prices are fluctuating, given the fragility of the interim peace deal. In this scenario, focus will also be on DAL’s guidance for the September quarter as well as for full-year 2026.

What Our Model Says About DALOur proven model conclusively predicts an earnings beat for Delta Air Lines this time around. The combination of a positive Earnings ESP and a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), 2 (Buy) or 3 (Hold) increases the odds of an earnings beat. This is the exactly case here.

You can uncover the best stocks to buy or sell before they’re reported with our Earnings ESP Filter.

Delta Air Lines has an Earnings ESP of +0.56% and a Zacks Rank #3.

Highlights of DAL’s Q1 EarningsDelta Air Lines reported first-quarter 2026 earnings (excluding $1.08 from non-recurring items) of 64 cents per share, which beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 61 cents. Earnings increased 39.1% on a year-over-year basis.

Adjusted revenues in the March-end quarter were $14.2 billion, beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $14 billion and increasing on a year-over-year basis. Passenger revenues, which accounted for 77.5% of total revenues, increased 7% year over year to $12.30 billion. 

Other Stocks to ConsiderHere are a few other stocks from the broader Zacks Transportation sector that investors may consider, as our model shows that these too have the right combination of elements to beat on earnings this reporting cycle. 

CSX Corporation (CSX - Free Report) has an Earnings ESP of +6.74% and a Zacks Rank #2 at present. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

CSX is scheduled to report second-quarter 2026 earnings on July 22. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for second-quarter 2026 earnings has been revised marginally upward over the past 30 days. CSX’s earnings beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate in three of the preceding four quarters and missed in the remaining one, the average beat being 3.2%. 

Union Pacific (UNP - Free Report) has an Earnings ESP of +2.09% and a Zacks Rank #3 at present. UNP is scheduled to report second-quarter 2026 earnings on July 23.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for second-quarter 2026 earnings has remained stable at $3.14 per share over the past 60 days. UNP’s earnings beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate in three of the preceding four quarters (missing the mark on the other occasion). The average beat is 2.3%.  

Key Takeaways QCOM has gained 8.7% in the past year, lagging its industry and peers Broadcom and Hewlett Packard.Handset weakness, China order pullbacks and U.S.-China trade curbs continue to pressure Qualcomm.Snapdragon, AI PCs, EDGE networking and Autotalks' V2X expertise offer Qualcomm key growth tailwinds. Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM - Free Report) has jumped 8.7% over the past year, underperforming the industry’s growth of 83%. It has lagged peers like Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE - Free Report) and Broadcom Inc. (AVGO - Free Report) . While Broadcom is up 31%, Hewlett Packard surged 93.2% over this period. 

One-Year QCOM Stock Price Performance

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Malaise of Demand SoftnessMuch of Qualcomm’s malaise is due to the challenging operating environment, with persistent weakness in the smartphone market and mounting margin pressures. While the company has made significant strides in diversifying beyond handsets through automotive and Internet of Things (IoT) initiatives, its core smartphone business remains a key earnings driver, leaving it vulnerable to sluggish consumer demand and industry-wide headwinds.

Qualcomm expects constrained handset revenues due to reduced chip orders and near-term uncertainty in memory supply and pricing for handset original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). Moreover, OEMs based in China are largely pulling back on new device orders and realigning their channel inventory owing to uncertain business conditions. Consequently, Qualcomm expects an adverse impact on device shipments as sell-in and sell-through growth rates realign and channel inventory levels are drawn down.

The bitter U.S.-China trade relations have added to the woes. The chip-making firm has a significant presence in more than 12 cities in China, aiming to drive advancements in semiconductors and mobile telecommunications for the larger benefit. The company has been a key supplier of chips and other related components to local smartphone manufacturers like Xiaomi, Huawei and its spin-off brand Honor. However, it appears that Qualcomm is increasingly finding it difficult to maintain its operations in China.

The U.S. Commerce Department has long imposed various trade restrictions on China, including bans on the sale of high-tech equipment, chips, components and related technologies used to develop high-end smartphones and AI-enabled chips. As Washington tightens trade restrictions, Beijing has intensified its push for self-sufficiency in critical industries. This shift poses a dual challenge for QCOM, as it faces potential market restrictions and increased competition from domestic chipmakers.

Waning Margins Pile Up PressureQualcomm's margins have declined over the years due to high operating expenses and R&D (research & development) costs. The shift in the share among OEMs at the premium tier has reduced the near-term opportunity to sell integrated chipsets from the Snapdragon platform.

In addition, Qualcomm faces stiff competitive pressures from Hewlett Packard and Broadcom. Aggressive competition from low-cost chip manufacturers and established players in the mobile phone chipset market is also likely to hurt Qualcomm's profits. Although the global smartphone market is expected to maintain its momentum over the next three to four years, a major portion of this growth is likely to come from the low-cost emerging markets, which may weigh on Qualcomm's margins.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Estimate RevisionsEarnings estimates for Qualcomm for fiscal 2026 and fiscal 2027 have declined 8.9% and 7.3%, respectively, to $10.77 and $10.96 per share over the past year. The negative estimate revision reflects bearish sentiment about the stock’s growth prospects.
 

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Key TailwindsDespite the gloom, Qualcomm envisions solid growth opportunities within the mobile space, driven by the strength of its Snapdragon portfolio. Leveraging multi-core CPUs, cutting-edge features, amazing graphics and worldwide network connectivity, Qualcomm Snapdragon mobile platforms deliver fast performance with superb power efficiency, brilliant camera capabilities and state-of-the-art security solutions. The company is also foraying deeper into the realm of AI capabilities within the laptop and desktop business with the launch of the Snapdragon X chip for mid-range AI desktops and laptops.

The company is increasingly focusing on the seamless transition from a wireless communications firm for the mobile industry to a connected processor company for the intelligent edge. Qualcomm is witnessing healthy traction in EDGE networking, which helps transform connectivity in cars, business enterprises, homes, smart factories, next-generation PCs, wearables and tablets. The company is gaining traction in the vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication systems market with the buyout of Autotalks. With seamless access to Autotalks’ comprehensive V2X expertise, Qualcomm has been able to offer an extensive suite of automotive-qualified global V2X solutions for installation in vehicles, as well as 2-wheelers and roadside infrastructure.

End NoteWith robust automotive and Snapdragon traction, Qualcomm appears to be relatively better placed in terms of its portfolio strength. A strong emphasis on quality, diligent execution of operational plans and continuous portfolio enhancements are driving more value for customers.

However, stiff competition and softness in key end markets are likely to put pressure on the bottom-line growth. High R&D costs erode its profitability to a large extent. With downward earnings estimate revisions, the stock is witnessing negative investor sentiment. Qualcomm is facing a tough operating environment in China amid escalating tariffs, raising questions about its long-term viability plans in the communist country.

With a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold), Qualcomm appears to be treading in the middle of the road, and new investors could be better off if they trade with caution. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

Key Takeaways Carnival kept cruise costs excluding fuel nearly flat through structural efficiency initiatives.CCL offset softer European demand with tighter cost controls and record pricing on booked inventory.Fleet upgrades, exclusive destinations and deleveraging support Carnival's long-term margin strategy. Carnival Corporation Ltd. (CCL - Free Report) demonstrated that disciplined cost management can offset external challenges, reinforcing confidence in its long-term earnings trajectory. Despite geopolitical disruptions, elevated fuel prices and weak consumer sentiment, the cruise giant delivered record second-quarter fiscal 2026 revenues, EBITDA, net income and customer deposits, while exceeding its March earnings guidance by $100 million.

The standout was Carnival's aggressive focus on operational efficiency. Cruise costs excluding fuel remained essentially flat year over year, outperforming prior guidance by roughly 250 basis points. Management attributed the improvement not only to favorable timing but also to structural initiatives that permanently lower the company's cost base. Hundreds of efficiency measures, ranging from supplier negotiations to operational process improvements, are expected to continue benefiting profitability in the coming quarters.

While the company lowered the full-year yield outlook due to softer European demand amid the prolonged Middle East conflict, it largely offset this pressure through stronger cost controls. Carnival now expects normalized cruise costs excluding fuel to rise only about 1.3% this year, reflecting embedded savings that should extend beyond 2026. Management also emphasized that booking trends have begun improving, with 93% of 2026 inventory already booked at record pricing levels and 2027 bookings running ahead of last year.

Beyond cost discipline, Carnival continues investing in high-return projects, including fleet modernization, exclusive destinations such as Celebration Key and RelaxAway, Half Moon Cay, and selective share repurchases. These initiatives, combined with continued deleveraging and structural efficiency gains, strengthen the company's ability to protect margins while supporting long-term earnings growth. If demand continues to normalize, Carnival's disciplined execution could provide additional upside for its shareholders.

How Do Carnival's Peers Compare on Margin StrategyAmong Carnival's closest competitors, Royal Caribbean Cruises (RCL - Free Report) continues to focus on premium pricing and operational efficiency to expand margins. The company has benefited from strong onboard spending, disciplined capacity additions and investments in private destinations such as Perfect Day at CocoCay, allowing it to maintain healthy pricing power while controlling costs. Royal Caribbean Cruises’ emphasis on high-return capital investments and technology-driven operations has supported robust profitability.

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings (NCLH - Free Report) is also pursuing margin expansion through cost discipline and fleet optimization. The company is streamlining operations, enhancing onboard revenue opportunities and modernizing its fleet to improve fuel efficiency and guest experience. At the same time, Norwegian remains focused on balance-sheet improvement and expense control to offset macroeconomic uncertainties.

Compared with these peers, Carnival's latest strategy stands out for its ability to offset temporary revenue headwinds through structural cost reductions. Its permanent efficiency initiatives, combined with disciplined investments in fleet modernization and exclusive destinations, position the company to protect margins while remaining competitive as industry demand continues to recover.

CCL’s Price Performance, Valuation and EstimatesShares of Carnival have gained 7.5% in the past three months compared with the industry’s rise of 13%.

Price Performance
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

From a valuation standpoint, CCL trades at a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 11.42X, below the industry average of 17.16X.

P/E (F12M)
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for CCL’s 2026 sales and earnings implies a year-over-year uptick of 3.9% and a decline of 2.2%, respectively. EPS estimates for fiscal 2026 have decreased in the past 30 days.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

CCL currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

Karp isn’t trying to build the next frontier AI model. Instead, he’s making the case that the most valuable part of the AI stack could ultimately sit above it—a software layer that lets enterprises switch between models without giving up control of their data, workflows or intellectual property.

Speaking to The Information after his CNBC appearance, Karp said businesses are becoming increasingly concerned that relying too heavily on proprietary AI providers could leave them vulnerable if those companies optimize models using customer insights or eventually compete against them.

“There’s just very deep frustration around…are they gonna optimize the models for me, or are they gonna take the alpha of my business, transfer in their weights, and compete against me?” Karp said.

Palantir Bets on the AI Application LayerThat philosophy is increasingly shaping Palantir’s AI strategy.

Earlier this week, the company launched a platform designed to help U.S. government agencies securely deploy and customize Nvidia Corp‘s (NASDAQ:NVDA) open-source Nemotron models through Palantir’s software.

Karp also told The Information that some U.S. government customers had recently switched from proprietary AI models developed by companies such as Anthropic to Nvidia’s open-source alternatives, although he declined to identify the agencies involved.

Rather than persuading customers to commit to a single AI model, Palantir is positioning itself as the software layer that manages whichever model an enterprise chooses. Its Evolve platform already routes workloads across multiple AI models based on customer priorities such as performance, cost or security.

Why the AI Moat Could Be ShiftingThe strategy reflects a broader shift emerging across enterprise AI.

As more open-source models reach competitive performance, businesses are increasingly looking for flexibility rather than vendor lock-in. If enterprises can switch between OpenAI, Anthropic, Nvidia’s Nemotron and future models without disrupting their applications, the value may increasingly reside in the software that orchestrates those models instead of the models themselves.

That doesn’t necessarily diminish the importance of OpenAI or Anthropic, whose proprietary models continue to lead many industry benchmarks. But it does suggest that enterprise customers may ultimately place a higher premium on governance, security and interoperability than exclusive access to any one model.

What Investors Should WatchFor investors, Karp’s comments point to a broader debate unfolding across enterprise AI: whether long-term pricing power will remain with foundation model developers or migrate to the companies helping businesses manage them.

Photo: DIA TV / Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

A 28% drop in Intuitive Surgical (ISRG +5.72%) stock this year has left investors anxious, but an analyst from Goldman Sachs argues the panic regarding the medical device maker is rooted in a misunderstanding of two major changes to Intuitive's instrument lifetimes.

Several analysts downgraded their positions in Intuitive after its first-quarter earnings, including those with Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and HSBC. David Roman of Goldman Sachs, on the other hand, upped the stock's price target to $558.

Here is what changed, why the market reacted defensively, and what matters next.

Image source: Getty Images.

The instrument changes: What they mean Intuitive recently adjusted the number of times that hospitals can reuse its surgical tools. While investors feared this would kill recurring revenue, the reality is more nuanced.

In the first change, Intuitive increased the lifespan of five out of its six force-feedback tools (which allow surgeons to feel the push and pull used on tissues during surgery) from six uses to 15 uses. This change has zero impact on revenue per procedure. It was simply done to ease supply chain bottlenecks, allowing more hospitals to adopt these high-demand healthcare tools. In addition, the company sees the move as likely to increase adoption of force-feedback instrumentation.

The second change could have a small impact on revenue, as Intuitive plans to increase the maximum number of uses of older, standard instruments to lower hospitals' costs. This change will chip away at instruments and accessories revenue, the money that Intuitive collects each time a tool is used, but it also builds customer loyalty. In the first quarter, the segment grew 23% year over year to $1.69 billion.

Overall revenue also grew by 23%, to $2.77 billion, while earnings per share were $2.28, up 18.7% over the same period last year.

Today's Change

(

5.72

%) $

23.03

Current Price

$

425.41

Why Goldman thinks investors are needlessly panicking Some investors viewed these extensions as a panicked defensive swipe meant to undercut companies such as Restore Robotics that refurbish and resell used da Vinci parts. However, it's an established pattern, not a panic move. Intuitive started extending instrument life cycles well before third-party refurbishers were ever a market factor. Past data shows resilience.

When Intuitive launched its Extended Use Program in 2020, bumping tool lifespans from 10 uses to 12 to 18 uses, it modeled a 7% drop in revenue per procedure. The actual hit was just 2% before bouncing back to revenue growth.

Goldman expects history to repeat itself. Premium, higher-priced force-feedback tools and other advanced instruments will likely offset the lower margins of the cheaper, older core tools. As a result, the bank is maintaining its target, modeling a negligible 1% annual decline in U.S. revenue per procedure.

Key factors for investors to watch Intuitive's underlying business remains robust. Its instruments performed 847,000 procedures, a 16% year-over-year increase in the first quarter. Its da Vinci surgical system installed base grew 12% over the same period a year ago to 11,395 systems, and its Ion endoluminal systems installed base rose 22% year over year to 1,041 systems. The Ion endoluminal system is a robotic bronchoscopy platform that enables surgeons to navigate more precisely into the lungs for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

There are legitimate concerns about the stock. It commands a premium valuation of more than 49 times trailing earnings, leaving very little room for error. To hit Goldman's targets, the company will need to better explain the logistics of the 2027 instrument changes, calming the market's biggest worry. The company is also facing rising competition from the Hugo system from Medtronic and the Ottava robot from Johnson & Johnson.

Goldman's outlook suggests that patience will be rewarded over panic. However, the upcoming July earnings report remains the ultimate test of whether investor fears are justified.