Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Smaller Industrials Names Seeing Surging Growth: Here's WhyDycom Industries NYSE: DY Chief Executive Officer Dan Peyovich said the company is seeing broad-based demand across fiber, long-haul networks and data center-related services, arguing that the company’s recent backlog growth reflects more than a short-term cyclical upturn.

Speaking with Guggenheim Securities analyst Joe Osha during a company discussion, Peyovich said Dycom’s nearly $12 billion in quarterly backlog reflects multiple demand drivers “coming in now on top of each other” and the company’s ability to supply a large skilled workforce. He said Dycom has more than 20,000 employees across the country and that customers need that workforce to execute ambitious build programs.

Get Dycom Industries alerts:

Hidden Gems: 3 Quiet Stocks With Loud Potential“We think that this has a ton of staying power,” Peyovich said. “These build cycles go well into the next decade.”

Long-Haul and Middle-Mile Opportunity Expands Peyovich said Dycom had previously sized the long-haul and middle-mile opportunity at $20 billion over five years, but said that figure has “grown considerably” as customers plan new routes and higher-capacity networks to support data centers and other connectivity needs.

The Top 5 Analysts Ranked by MarketBeat and Stocks They CoverHe said older networks lack the necessary capacity and routes for current and future demand, while customers and hyperscalers are increasingly discussing larger fiber counts. Peyovich said 864-count fiber has become more common, 1,728-count fiber is also common, and some customers are discussing routes with 7,500 to 10,000 fiber counts.

He also emphasized that the opportunity is not only about fiber count, but also route redundancy. That redundancy may include additional conduit in the same trench, a separate trench on the other side of the road or a different route altogether.

Peyovich said the long-haul and middle-mile build cycle remains “extremely early,” with the vast majority of the opportunity still ahead. He said Dycom is already seeing meaningful revenue contributions and backlog from the category, but expects activity to ramp next year and become more significant by calendar 2028.

BEAD Expected to Take Shape in 2027 On the federal Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment program, Peyovich said Dycom still expects some revenue contribution this year, but described it as upside because approvals and permitting are taking longer than expected.

He said calendar 2027 remains the period when BEAD should “really start to take shape.” Dycom estimates its addressable market from the program at about $17 billion, excluding materials and focusing only on work Dycom can perform. Peyovich said that figure could ultimately be higher and the program could last longer than the currently expected four-year delivery period.

Dycom previously discussed about $500 million of verbal BEAD awards, and Peyovich said that amount has grown. However, he said some awards have not yet moved into contracted backlog because they still need final approvals and must pass through customers’ internal systems.

Peyovich said Dycom will not pursue BEAD work at any price. If competitors bid aggressively at low pricing, he said Dycom will focus on opportunities that provide good returns on people and capital.

Starlink Seen as Limited Threat to Fiber Builds Asked about Starlink and low-Earth orbit satellite broadband, Peyovich said Dycom’s role is tied to growing data consumption and the need for infrastructure to move that data. Even satellite-based services require terrestrial connectivity, he said.

On fiber-to-the-home, Peyovich pointed to BEAD as the most relevant test case because it targets lower-density and harder-to-serve areas. He said low-Earth orbit providers took about 23% to 25% of that opportunity, which he described as a best-case scenario for the technology. He said Dycom does not expect the same level of impact in metropolitan markets.

Peyovich also said fiber-to-the-home programs have significant momentum, with more than 10 million passings completed annually. He said speed matters because the first fiber connection in a market tends to achieve the best penetration, and consumers have shown a preference for fiber’s high capacity and low latency.

Data Center Demand Supports Communications and Power Solutions Peyovich said data center growth is creating opportunities for Dycom both outside and inside data center facilities. On the communications side, he said new and expanding data center markets need to be connected back to long-haul networks, increasing demand for Dycom’s services.

He also highlighted opportunities to connect Dycom’s communications work with its Building Systems segment, including fiber opportunities “inside the fence” at data center sites.

Dycom’s Power Solutions business remains heavily tied to data centers, Peyovich said, with more than 90% of that business in the data center space and the DMV market. He said demand remains “absolutely insatiable,” and Dycom has had to turn away opportunities despite raising the growth outlook for the business to 35%.

Peyovich said Dycom is also seeking additional acquisition opportunities following its acquisitions of Power Solutions and NTI. He said the company is interested in expanding capabilities such as structured cabling and electrical work, while remaining disciplined on deal selection.

Capital Allocation Focuses on Growth and Acquisitions Peyovich said Dycom’s first capital allocation priority is investment in organic growth. After that, he said mergers and acquisitions are the current priority, given the opportunities the company sees. He noted Dycom bought back shares last quarter when it viewed the share price as dislocated, but said M&A is the larger focus today.

He said Dycom’s long-term net leverage target remains around two times, though the company could consider moving toward three times for the right acquisition if it believed leverage could be reduced quickly afterward.

Peyovich repeatedly pointed to Dycom’s skilled workforce as a competitive differentiator. He said the company can train someone with no experience in communications to become a contributor within about six months, while union electrical roles require a longer apprenticeship process. He said the company has invested in benefits, training and a flagship training facility to attract and retain workers.

Looking ahead, Peyovich said Dycom is positioned to benefit from ongoing growth in data consumption, communications infrastructure and Building Systems demand. He said the company aims to continue growing and diversifying, both organically and through acquisitions, while maintaining discipline.

About Dycom Industries NYSE: DYDycom Industries, Inc NYSE: DY is a leading provider of specialty contracting services to the telecommunications industry in North America. The company delivers engineering, construction, installation and maintenance solutions for communications infrastructure, supporting a broad range of network technologies and system architectures. Dycom's services span outside plant construction, cable placement, fiber optic deployment, wireless and wireline network engineering, as well as testing and turn-up services for voice, data and video applications.

Dycom's customer base includes major telecommunications carriers, cable operators, utility companies and competitive local exchange carriers.

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest reporting and unbiased coverage. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

Should You Invest $1,000 in Dycom Industries Right Now?Before you consider Dycom Industries, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Dycom Industries wasn't on the list.

While Dycom Industries currently has a Buy rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

With the proliferation of data centers and electric vehicles, the electric grid will only get more strained. Download this report to learn how energy stocks can play a role in your portfolio as the global demand for energy continues to grow.

Get This Free Report

Most of the attention in the AI chip boom lands on Nvidia and its graphics processing units. But there's an arguably more interesting corner of the market where two companies are building the chips the biggest tech firms want to design for themselves. Broadcom (AVGO 0.31%) and Marvell Technology (MRVL 2.90%) are the two names that dominate it, and while they chase the same opportunity, they go about it very differently -- and the market prices them very differently, too.

Image source: Getty Images.

Before comparing the two, it helps to understand what they do. When a giant cloud company like Alphabet or Meta runs enormous AI workloads, it can either buy general-purpose chips off the shelf or design its own chip tuned precisely to its software. That second path, a custom chip, sometimes called an ASIC or an XPU, can be cheaper to run and more power-efficient at massive scale. The catch is that these companies don't build the chips alone; they lean on a partner with the deep engineering expertise to turn a design into working silicon. Broadcom and Marvell are those partners, and demand for their help has exploded as hyperscalers race to control their own chip destiny rather than depend entirely on Nvidia.

Today's Change

(

3.90

%) $

7.90

Current Price

$

210.68

What Broadcom is doing Broadcom is the established heavyweight here, and its recent moves show why. It has assembled a remarkable roster of custom-chip customers that reportedly includes Google, Meta, OpenAI, Anthropic, and -- in a notable new disclosure this year -- Apple. In June, Broadcom and OpenAI even revealed their first jointly designed chip. Just as important, Broadcom doesn't just make the accelerators; it also dominates the networking gear that ties thousands of chips together inside a data center, having recently moved its latest switch chip into high-volume production.

What I find most reassuring about Broadcom's setup is its diversification. Beyond AI silicon, it runs a large and profitable infrastructure software business, which gives it a steadier foundation than a pure-play chip company. When one part of the market cools, the other can keep humming. Broadcom is essentially trying to be the one-stop shop for building the guts of an AI data center.

Today's Change

(

-0.31

%) $

-1.25

Current Price

$

399.87

What Marvell is doing Marvell is the smaller, hungrier challenger, and its strategy is more focused. It designs custom chips for a growing list of hyperscalers, but its real signature is wrapping those chips in optical interconnect technology -- the high-speed "plumbing" that moves data between processors. That combination is clever, because a customer using Marvell's building blocks inside its chip is likely to buy Marvell's connectivity products too, which makes the relationship harder for rivals to break.

To bulk up in that fight, Marvell has been buying capability rather than waiting to build it, closing acquisitions of interconnect specialists earlier this year. It's a more aggressive, acquisition-fueled approach that reflects a company sprinting to close the gap with Broadcom. Marvell was also recently added to the S&P 500, a marker of how far it has come.

Today's Change

(

-2.90

%) $

-7.04

Current Price

$

236.17

Here's where the two genuinely diverge. Marvell trades at a much richer valuation than Broadcom, suggesting the market is pricing in faster growth for the smaller company. Broadcom, despite its dominance and steadier profile, actually carries the more modest multiple of the two. So the "showdown" boils down to a classic trade-off: With Marvell, you're paying a premium for a purer, faster-growing bet on the custom-chip and interconnect boom. With Broadcom, you're getting the diversified market leader at a more reasonable price, with software revenue cushioning the ride.

Neither is risk-free. Marvell's lofty valuation leaves little room for a stumble, and its growth leans heavily on a handful of enormous customers and on integrating its acquisitions well. Broadcom's sheer size makes rapid growth harder to sustain, and it too depends on a concentrated group of hyperscaler clients whose spending could shift.

If you're choosing between them, the question isn't which company is better, as both are strong, but which trade-off suits you. Marvell offers higher-octane growth at a higher price and higher risk. Broadcom offers dominance and diversification at a more grounded valuation.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In Calix To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Calix between January 28, 2026 and April 21, 2026 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Calix, Inc. ("Calix" or the "Company") (NYSE: CALX) and reminds investors of the July 27, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: (1) the Company's first quarter margins had significantly benefited from advanced purchasing of memory components; (2) that the Company's advanced supply of memory components was dwindling; (3) that, as a result, the Company was experiencing negative margin pressure as it was forced to purchase memory components at rising market prices; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's margins, business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On April 21, 2026, Calix reported results for the first quarter of 2026 earnings, including that "Non-GAAP gross margin was 57.2%, down 80 basis points sequentially." Further, the Company reported "gross margin guidance for the second quarter of 2026 is between 54.25% and 57.25%" and "[f]or the year, we expect our non-GAAP gross margin to decline between 50 and 150 basis points."

In the accompanying earnings call, the Company's CFO stated "advanced purchasing had allowed us to avoid higher memory component costs during the first quarter. However, that advanced supply has run its course, and we now face market prices."

On this news, Calix's stock price fell $6.93, or 13.98% to close at $42.65 per share on April 22, 2026, on unusually heavy trading volume.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Calix's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Calix class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/CALX or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Investors Regarding the Calix Securities Class Action Lawsuit:

What is the Calix securities fraud lawsuit about?

The Calix securities fraud lawsuit is a federal securities class action alleging that Calix, Inc. (NYSE: CALX) and its executives made false and misleading statements to investors by concealing that the Company's strong first quarter margins were artificially inflated by advanced purchasing of memory components, that its advanced supply of those components was dwindling, and that it would soon be forced to purchase memory components at rising market prices - creating significant negative margin pressure. As the truth emerged on April 21, 2026, when Calix reported Q1 2026 results and its CFO disclosed that "advanced supply has run its course" and the Company would "now face market prices," CALX's stock price fell $6.93 per share, or 13.98%, causing significant losses for investors.

Who may be eligible to participate in the Calix class action lawsuit?

Investors who purchased or acquired Calix (CALX) stock between January 28, 2026 and April 21, 2026 - the Class Period - and suffered financial losses may be eligible to participate in the Calix securities class action. Participation as a class member does not require taking any affirmative legal action; eligible investors may recover losses simply by remaining members of the class. Whistleblowers, former Calix employees, and others with relevant information about the Company's conduct are also encouraged to come forward.

What is a lead plaintiff, and how can I seek appointment in the Calix lawsuit?

A lead plaintiff in the Calix class action is a court-appointed investor - typically the one with the largest financial interest in the case - who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of all class members. Any Calix investor who purchased CALX stock during the Class Period may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice. The deadline to seek lead plaintiff appointment is July 27, 2026. Importantly, choosing not to seek the lead plaintiff role does not affect an investor's ability to share in any recovery obtained for the class.

What should investors do if they purchased Calix stock during the Class Period?

Investors who purchased Calix (CALX) stock between January 28, 2026 and April 21, 2026 and suffered losses should contact Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP immediately to discuss their legal rights. The deadline to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Calix securities class action is July 27, 2026. To speak directly with securities litigation partner Josh Wilson, call 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310), or visit www.faruqilaw.com/CALX for more information.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304735

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

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

Contact Us

Ares Management stands out as a top private credit pick, offering a 4.5% yield and robust long-term fee growth despite recent volatility. ARES benefits from 90%+ perpetual capital, 19% annual AUM growth since 2013, and is expected to deliver 20%+ annual earnings growth at a 22x P/E. Carlisle Companies is positioned for a 'golden age' of remodeling, with pent-up demand, high ROIC targets, and a nearly 50-year dividend growth streak.

For years, AST SpaceMobile (ASTS 0.70%) was a great story with almost nothing to show for it. It had a plan to beam broadband straight to an ordinary, unmodified smartphone from space. In 2026, the story is finally becoming an operating business, and that shift from promise to proof is exactly what makes this moment worth studying now rather than after the fact.

Image source: Getty Images.

Why the clock matters for AST SpaceMobile right now The reason I'd pay attention to this ticker today comes down to timing. In May, the FCC authorized the company to run commercial SpaceMobile Service in the United States, clearing the single biggest regulatory hurdle standing between it and paying customers. Then, in June, AST SpaceMobile launched three more of its BlueBird satellites, the large arrays that do the actual work of connecting to phones on the ground. The company aims to have roughly 45 satellites in orbit in 2026, with more than 20 additional units already in production.

A handful of satellites can only offer connectivity in brief, intermittent windows. It takes a critical mass of them circling the globe before coverage becomes continuous enough to sell as a real service. Crossing that threshold is what 2026 is about, and it's why the next couple of quarters are more consequential than any single earnings report.

Today's Change

(

-0.70

%) $

-0.52

Current Price

$

73.36

The partners de-risking the story AST SpaceMobile isn't trying to build a phone network from scratch, which I think is the underrated part of the setup. It plugs into existing carriers. Its authorization lets it use premium low-band spectrum in coordination with strategic partners, including AT&T (T +1.92%) and Verizon Communications (VZ +1.50%), plus the FirstNet public-safety network that first responders rely on. Letting satellites fill the dead zones where cell towers can't reach -- remote highways, disaster areas, open water -- is a genuinely useful problem to solve, and having national carriers already committed lowers the odds that AST will build something nobody wants.

The risks that could break the thesis Here's the honest counterweight, because this is not a safe stock. AST SpaceMobile still generates very little revenue against a market value in the tens of billions, so investors are paying today for results that are mostly still in the future. Reaching full global coverage will require many more launches, and building satellites is expensive. The company has repeatedly raised cash by issuing new shares, diluting existing owners. Launches can slip, hardware can fail, and Starlink's direct-to-cell effort is racing for the same customers. Any one of those could stall the story.

"Acting now" doesn't have to mean buying with both hands. To me, it means recognizing that AST SpaceMobile is at a rare inflection -- the window where a speculative concept either becomes a working network or doesn't -- and doing your homework before the outcome is obvious to everyone.

For investors comfortable with real risk of loss, a small, deliberate position sized for volatility makes more sense than chasing the stock on the next headline. The opportunity is time-sensitive, and that cuts in both directions.

The S&P 500 has soared 20% over the past year. As a result, dividend yields are down, with the S&P 500's yield near its lowest level in more than 20 years at around 1.1%.

However, not all dividend stocks have kept pace with the broader market's rally. Several are down sharply from their 52-week high, even though their businesses continue to perform well, enabling them to keep growing their higher-yielding dividends. Here are three high-yielding stocks that income-seeking investors should load up on right now.

Image source: Getty Images.

Brookfield Renewable Shares of Brookfield Renewable (BEPC 1.32%)(BEP 1.97%) have fallen nearly 20% below their 52-week high. That has pushed the top renewable energy dividend stock's yield up to nearly 4.5%. That's a compelling level for such an excellent dividend growth stock.

Brookfield Renewable has increased its dividend by at least 5% each year since 2011. The leading global renewable energy company expects to grow its payout at a 5% to 9% annual rate going forward. The company should have plenty of power to achieve its dividend growth target. It generates very stable cash flow (90% contracted for an average of 12 years), which it expects to grow by more than 10% annually through at least 2031.

Today's Change

(

-1.32

%) $

-0.47

Current Price

$

35.07

The company's growth drivers include inflation-linked contractual rate increases, margin enhancement activities (e.g., securing higher market rates as legacy contracts expire), development projects, and acquisitions. Brookfield expects to deploy $9 billion to $10 billion in capital over the next five years, split between development projects ($850 million annually) and acquisitions. With a lower valuation, higher yield, and robust growth prospects, Brookfield Renewable looks like a no-brainer buy right now.

Realty Income Shares of Realty Income (O +0.22%) have dipped more than 5% below their 52-week high. That has pushed the leading global real estate investment trust's (REIT) dividend yield up over 5%. That's a compelling level for a company with Realty Income's dividend growth track record. The REIT has raised its monthly dividend payment 135 times since its public market listing in 1994, growing it at a 4.1% compound annual rate.

Today's Change

(

0.22

%) $

0.14

Current Price

$

63.31

Realty Income's stock price has dipped even though the REIT's growth prospects have improved over the past year. It has formed a series of private capital partnerships that have provided it with new sources of capital and growth. For example, it formed a strategic partnership with Singapore's sovereign wealth fund, GIC, which included a cornerstone investment in its U.S. Core Plus Fund, the formation of a more than $1.5 billion programmatic joint venture (JV) to invest in high-quality build-to-suit logistics real estate, and a construction financing and takeout commitment of a Mexican industrial portfolio (its first investment in that country).

The REIT also recently took a major step toward capitalizing on the massive data center investment opportunity by forming another programmatic JV. It will invest up to $1.4 billion for a 45% equity stake in three data centers in Northern Virginia, with the opportunity to make future investments across the U.S. and Europe. These JVs position Realty Income for faster future growth, which the market isn't appreciating.

Main Street Capital Main Street Capital (MAIN +2.26%) stock has tumbled nearly 25% from its 52-week high amid concerns about the private credit market. As a result, the business development company's (BDC) dividend yield has spiked.

Today's Change

(

2.26

%) $

1.17

Current Price

$

52.84

Main Street Capital pays two dividends. It pays a monthly dividend set at a sustainable level that it aims to steadily grow. The BDC has grown this payment by 141% since its 2007 IPO, including a dozen increases since the end of 2021. Additionally, Main Street Capital periodically pays supplemental quarterly dividends. It has made these payments for 19 consecutive quarters, maintaining the same rate since early 2023. The current annualized rate on these dual payments is $4.38 per share, putting Main Street Capital's yield over 8.5% at the recent share price.

Despite concerns facing other private credit providers, Main Street Capital's loan portfolio is in excellent shape, with minimal exposure to the troubled software sector (2% of its portfolio). As evidence, the company recently exited an investment, realizing a $46.4 million gain on its equity investment. Meanwhile, the BDC continues to find attractive investment opportunities ($319 million of new or increased commitments in the second quarter). Main Street's strong, growing portfolio should continue to support its dividend payments.

It's time to buy these high-yielders Brookfield Renewable, Realty Income, and Main Street Capital are all down from their 52-week highs. That has pushed up their dividend yields to more attractive levels. Those dips are buying opportunities. They'll enable investors to lock in higher yields and position them to capitalize on the upside as these stocks recover.

Shares of European AI neocloud Nebius Group N.V. (NBIS +1.60%) rallied 229.9% in the first half of 2026, according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence.

It was a stellar first half of the year for most hardware and semiconductor stocks involved with artificial intelligence build-out. However, Nebius outperformed all of the other AI "neoclouds" due to its strong execution, large contract wins, and new AI-related acquisitions.

Oh, and the investment by Nvidia (NVDA +3.90%) in the company didn't hurt either.

Today's Change

(

1.60

%) $

3.45

Current Price

$

219.65

Nebius lands big contracts, impressing Wall Street Nebius has transformed into an AI neocloud over the past few years. Given that we are in the relatively early stages of the AI era, these stocks tend to react to large contract wins, as such deals help "de-risk" their current infrastructure build-out.

Nebius landed a few such deals during the first half. In January, the company was selected by the Israel Innovation Authority to build out the country's national supercomputer. Israel is perhaps the most technologically advanced place in the world outside of Silicon Valley and China. Hence, Nebius's winning the contract through a competitive bidding process is a strong endorsement.

Nebius also won a monster $27 billion, multi-year contract from Meta Platforms (META +6.16%) in March. Meta was already a Nebius customer, although on a much smaller scale. However, the five-year compute deal beginning in 2027 is significantly larger, and the news helped catapult Nebius' shares higher.

Nebius also received accolades on the investment side, as Nvidia (NVDA +3.90%) agreed to invest $2 billion into the company. As part of the deal, Nebius will gain early access to the latest Nvidia architectures, and Nvidia will help Nebius deploy five gigawatts of Nvidia-based capacity by 2030.

Nvidia had already invested the same amount on similar terms in Nebius rival CoreWeave (CRWV 0.87%) in January, so Nebius "evened the score" in a sense by landing this deal. Furthermore, Nvidia's backing seemed to increase the probability that Nvidia would help Nebius find customers and raise capital. The expanded Meta Platforms deal actually occurred just after the Nvidia announcement, so the Nvidia commitment to Nebius may have been a catalyst.

These big deals paved the way for Nebius's blowout earnings report in mid-May. In its first quarter, revenue surged 684% year over year, trouncing expectations. At the same time, the company's adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) flipped from a $54 million loss to a $130 million profit.

Not only did the quarter's results impress, but CEO Arkady Volozh also noted that demand for compute was still vastly outstripping supply, suggesting strong results ahead. That dovetails with research firm SemiAnalysis's April data, which showed older Nvidia H100 rental pricing had increased by some 40% in March compared with October.

A major fear for neocloud companies like Nebius is that older GPUs will depreciate and lose value as newer chips enter the market. So, the fact that older GPUs' rental prices were not only not decreasing but actually increasing is a strong sign that older GPUs hold their value. A longer useful life for each Nvidia chip thereby increases the value Nebius and other neoclouds will reap from their massive current investments, and therefore the value of their stocks.

Image source: Getty Images.

Nebius looks frothy, but not on 2027 estimates After its first-half run, Nebius trades at a frothy-looking 16.4 times this year's average revenue estimate; however, that price-to-sales ratio compresses to just five times the average 2027 revenue estimate for the company, and just three times the most optimistic analysts' estimate.

That's actually a very reasonable valuation, although it implies a more-than-tripling of revenue next year, even in the average estimate. Therefore, investors need to hope Nebius's revenue trajectory continues on its hockey-stick like path, and that it can sell its compute profitably. Recent results and GPU rental pricing appear encouraging on that front; however, if the AI demand story changes in any material way, Nebius' current high valuation could cause the stock to experience a significant pullback.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In Futu To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Futu between May 24, 2023 and May 27, 2026 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Futu Holdings Limited("Futu" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: FUTU) and reminds investors of the August 25, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: (1) Futu was not in compliance with the requirements of the CSRC, including because the Company continued to conduct securities business, public fund sales business and futures business in mainland China without obtaining the requisite licenses or approval; (2) as a result, Futu was reasonably likely to face regulatory penalties, including the disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and other penalties; (3) as a result of the foregoing, Futu's financial results were overstated; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On May 22, 2026, pre-market, Futu issued a press release allegedly disclosing that it had received a notification letter from the CSRC stating that "certain Futu entities in mainland China and Hong Kong . . . without obtaining the requisite licenses or approval, conducted securities business, public fund sales business and futures business in mainland China" and that the CSRC "proposes to order the Related Companies to rectify or cease such activities, confiscate illegal gains, and impose fines, with the total proposed penalty amounting to approximately RMB1.85 billion (approximately USD271 million)." The Futu class action lawsuit further alleges that the regulatory authority "proposes to impose a personal fine of RMB1.25 million (approximately USD 183,575) on Mr. LI Hua, the founder and CEO of the Company." On this news, the price of Futu stock fell more than 27%, according to the complaint.

Then, on May 28, 2026, before the market opened, Futu issued a press release reporting financial results for the first quarter of 2026, allegedly including the proposed penalties comprised of "(i) confiscation of illegal gains of approximately RMB470 million [approximately $69.21 million USD] and (ii) imposition of fines of approximately RMB1.38 billion in an aggregate amount of approximately RMB1.85 billion." On this news, the price of Futu stock declined nearly 5%, according to the complaint.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Futu's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Futu Holdings Limited class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/FUTU or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Investors Regarding the Futu Holdings Limited Securities Class Action Lawsuit:

What is the Futu Holdings Limited securities fraud lawsuit about?

The lawsuit alleges that Futu misled investors by failing to disclose it was conducting certain securities, public fund sales, and futures businesses in mainland China without required CSRC licenses or approvals. According to the complaint, this exposed the Company to significant regulatory penalties, overstated its financial results, and made its public statements about its business and prospects materially misleading.

Who may be eligible to participate in the lawsuit?

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Futu Holdings Limited (NASDAQ: FUTU) securities between May 24, 2023 and May 27, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"), and suffered losses may be eligible to participate in the securities class action. Eligibility depends on the specific facts of each investor's transactions and losses.

What is a lead plaintiff, and how can I seek appointment?

A lead plaintiff is the investor appointed by the court to represent the interests of all class members during the litigation. Generally, the investor with the largest financial interest who meets the legal requirements may be selected. Investors seeking appointment must file a motion with the court by the August 25, 2026 deadline through counsel of their choice.

What should investors do if they purchased Futu Holdings Limited stock during the Class Period?

Investors who purchased Futu securities during the Class Period should review their investment records, preserve relevant documents, and consider contacting counsel to understand their legal rights. Those interested in serving as lead plaintiff must act before the August 25, 2026 deadline, while investors who do not seek that role may still remain eligible to share in any potential recovery.

Why should investors contact Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP?

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP has represented investors in securities litigation for decades and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders. Investors who purchased Futu Holdings Limited securities during the Class Period may contact the firm to discuss their legal rights, potential claims, and the lead plaintiff process at no cost or obligation.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304739

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

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

Contact Us

Coca-Cola (KO +1.05%) is the classic dividend stock. It typically has a high yield, it's as dependable as they come, and it has raised its dividend annually for the past 64 years. Here's how much money you would get annually if you'd invest $10,000 in Coca-Cola stock.

Coca-Cola is a Dividend King, meaning it has annually raised its dividend for more than 50 consecutive years. It's an exclusive status that implies reliability, which is an important feature for people who depend on passive income, like retirees.

The stock yields 2.5% at the current price, which is quite low for Coke stock; historically, it tends to yield around 3%. But the market is loving Coca-Cola stock right now, and it's up almost 20% this year, or about double the S&P 500's gain.

At today's price, $10,000 invested in Coke stock gives you 121 shares, and the company pays $0.53 quarterly since its latest raise. That comes to $256 annually. It may not seem like much, but there are a few things to keep in mind. Notably, since the stock is soaring, a $10,000 investment at the beginning of the year is worth $11,820 right now.

Today's Change

(

1.05

%) $

0.87

Current Price

$

83.50

On top of that, the dividend likely will be raised again next February. So $256 this year will increase next year, and every year after.

On its own, that wouldn't be something a retiree can live off, but it can be a healthy part of a diversified portfolio focused on passive income.

Jennifer Saibil has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA | NVDA Price Prediction) and SanDisk (NASDAQ:SNDK) delivered blockbuster quarters that pulled the AI infrastructure trade in opposite directions. Jensen Huang’s GPU platform posted $81.61 billion in fiscal Q1 revenue. Under CEO David Goeckeler, SanDisk’s NAND business is riding the AI storage boom. Fiscal Q3 revenue more than tripled, while Datacenter sales rose more than sevenfold from a year earlier. Jim Cramer noticed something odd about how the market is pricing them.

Cramer Calls the Multiple “Insulting” On the July 9 episode of Mad Money, Cramer took aim at the technical setup directly: “Some of the commodity chip companies like SanDisk now have price earnings multiples that are higher on next year’s earnings than Nvidia. I regard that as insulting.” He then added, “SanDisk is a commodity chip maker. Nvidia is the most proprietary chip company in the history of the world.”

Drama aside, the math backs his frustration. NVIDIA trades at a forward P/E of 23. SanDisk trades at a forward P/E of 28. The GPU monopoly is cheaper on next year’s numbers than the NAND supplier feeding its racks. It shows just how far the AI trade has widened, with investors now paying up for the memory suppliers that stock the very systems NVIDIA helped make indispensable. Even Jensen Huang has framed AI as essential infrastructure, a buildout that depends on more than GPUs alone.

It is a little A Few Good Men: Wall Street may not love the multiple, but the AI buildout still needs SanDisk in the supply chain.

Two Very Different Businesses NVIDIA’s Q1 FY27 performance was dominant. Data Center revenue reached $75.25 billion, up 92% YoY, with networking (InfiniBand, NVLink, Spectrum-X) revenue alone up 199%. Non-GAAP gross margin held at 75.0%. Huang framed the moment plainly: “The buildout of AI factories, the largest infrastructure expansion in human history, is accelerating at extraordinary speed.” Blackwell Ultra and the upcoming Vera Rubin platform anchor a full-stack roadmap that hyperscalers cannot swap out.

Don't wait: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just revealed his top 10 AI stocks. See the full list FREE now.

SanDisk’s Q3 FY26 was a different shock. Revenue jumped 251% to $5.95 billion, and gross margin exploded to 78.4% from 22.5% a year earlier. Datacenter revenue grew 645% YoY. Goeckeler credited a mix shift and a “New Business Model” of multi-year customer commitments. That margin sits on NAND pricing, which is cyclical.

Lens NVIDIA SanDisk Forward P/E 23 28 Latest Gross Margin 75.0% 78.4% Business Type Proprietary GPU platform NAND flash storage YoY Revenue Growth 85.2% 251% Where the Rally Diverges From Reality SanDisk shares have run 707.11% year to date to $1,915.92. Our internal price prediction model tags SanDisk with a negative 13.62% expected return from here. NVIDIA is up 13.25% YTD with an analyst consensus target of $301.62 against a current price of $210.96. One stock is priced for continued dominance. The other is priced for a super-cycle that has never held for a full decade in NAND history.

Also worth a look: our research on AI infrastructure names beyond chipmakers adds context to how the buildout is spreading beyond silicon.

Why Cramer Is Right NVIDIA sells software-wrapped compute with a CUDA moat, a $119 billion supply chain-driven book/commitments, and hyperscalers on allocation. SanDisk sells a commodity that trades on spot pricing and hyperscaler order timing. Paying up for the commodity while getting the monopoly at a discount feels backwards. If NAND pricing softens even modestly in 2027, that 78.4% gross margin compresses fast, and the premium multiple has nowhere to hide. On a valuation-versus-moat basis, NVIDIA screens as the more defensible setup of the two.

Don't wait: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just revealed his top 10 AI stocks. See the full list FREE now.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA | NVDA Price Prediction) and AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) both closed strong quarters, but the ground shifted this week when Perplexity picked NVIDIA’s new Vera CPUs over x86 server chips for its multi-agent AI coding stack, running 1.5 times faster than standard server processors. That decision reframes the earnings comparison. One company now sells GPUs, CPUs, networking, and software as one bundle. The other is still assembling its answer.

AI Factories Carry NVIDIA. Data Center Carries AMD, Barely. NVIDIA’s Q1 FY27 showed revenue of $81.61B, up 85.2% YoY, with Data Center at $75.25B (+92%) and Networking at $14.8B (+199%). Jensen Huang framed it plainly: “The buildout of AI factories, the largest infrastructure expansion in human history, is accelerating at extraordinary speed.” Blackwell, NVLink Fusion, and Spectrum-X are selling as one unified stack.

AMD’s Q1 FY26 was solid but smaller. Revenue hit $10.25B (+37.9% YoY), Data Center reached $5.78B (+57%), and non-GAAP EPS came in at $1.37. Lisa Su leaned on the pipeline: “Customer engagement around MI450 Series and Helios is strengthening, with leading customer forecasts exceeding our initial expectations.” The MI450 volume ramp lands in H2 2026.

Business Driver NVIDIA AMD Data Center Revenue $75.25B $5.78B Non-GAAP Gross Margin 75.0% 55% Networking Attach InfiniBand, Spectrum-X, NVLink Fusion Pensando (subscale) Full Stack Sovereign vs. Fast Follower The Perplexity win validates NVIDIA’s push into a new $20 billion CPU vertical that used to belong to x86 vendors. NVIDIA is parlaying GPU share into host-CPU sockets, exactly the margin territory AMD’s EPYC franchise defends. AMD fights a two-front war: chase NVIDIA in accelerators with MI450/Helios and protect server CPU turf from Vera.

Customer deals look close on paper (OpenAI signed 10+ GW with NVIDIA and 6 GW with AMD), but NVIDIA’s CUDA-X and Dynamo software layer keeps inference workloads sticky. ROCm 7 is improving but still short of moat status.

The Next Test Is Whether Vera Actually Ships First, whether MI450 shipments in H2 2026 meet the “exceeding expectations” language Su used, since AMD’s 184x trailing P/E leaves no room for a slip. Second, whether Vera CPU adoption spreads beyond Perplexity into hyperscalers. NVIDIA guided Q2 revenue to $91.0B, and analysts carry a target of $301.62.

Why I Lean NVIDIA While Staying Constructive on AMD I lean NVIDIA here. The Perplexity decision signals that inference buyers default to Blackwell plus NVLink plus CUDA when latency matters. That is a moat. AMD remains healthy. Data Center up 57% and free cash flow of $2.57B (+253%) show the business is compounding. But shares already ran 140.99% year to date, and last week gave back 11.15%. For the platform winner, NVIDIA is cleaner. For the higher-variance catch-up trade, AMD works, provided Helios ships on time.

Don't wait: the analyst who called NVIDIA in 2010 just revealed his top 10 AI stocks. See the full list FREE now.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

Shares of Gilead Sciences (GILD 3.72%) have lagged the S&P 500 average this year, rising only 9% despite strong financials and a pipeline that promises to elevate the pharmaceutical company's base beyond its core of HIV therapies.

Gilead has spent heavily on its acquisitions of Arcellx, Ouro Medicines, and Tubulis, and while it will take time to integrate them, the upside is that they add to the company's pipeline, particularly in oncology and inflammation therapies.

In its first-quarter presentation, the company said it has four potential launches this year. Instead of focusing on the cost of its purchases, investors would do well to look beyond that and see how these new launches and acquisitions will diversify Gilead's platform, reducing its reliance on its HIV franchise.

Three reasons to buy Gilead right now:

Image source: Getty Images.

The company's continued financial strength In Q1, Gilead reported revenue of $7 billion, up 4% year over year, mainly from higher sales of its HIV products. Earnings per share (EPS) were $1.61, up 54.8% over the same period last year. It's not as if the company's HIV therapies are slowing down. Biktarvy and Descovy continue to dominate market share, driving a 10% year-over-year increase in HIV product sales to $5 billion.

The company is also seeing significant growth in its breast cancer drug, Trodelvy, with sales up 37% year over year. This dependable revenue gives it product gross margins of roughly 79%. The company said it sees no major loss-of-exclusivity patent cliffs for its top drugs until 2036. This means at least another decade of secure cash flows to fund research and development and dividend growth.

Today's Change

(

-3.72

%) $

-5.01

Current Price

$

129.83

High-impact 2026 commercial launches The primary reason to look at Gilead right now is its massive, immediate product-launch calendar.

Bulevirtide was given accelerated approval on May 22 by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as the first treatment for adults with chronic hepatitis delta virus (HDV) infection who do not have cirrhosis (severe liver scarring) or who have compensated cirrhosis. The FDA on April 29 granted Priority Review for a once-daily, single-tablet combo regimen of bictegravir + lenacapavir (BIC/LEN) for adults with suppressed HIV, with a critical Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) action date set for Aug. 27, and launch expected shortly thereafter.

With its purchase of Arcellx, the company gains multiple myeloma therapy anito-cel, a BCMA CAR-T therapy with a PDUFA date scheduled for December. Trodelvy also continues to gain ground, with FDA approval on June 24 that allows it to move into crucial first-line metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) indication.

In addition, Gilead's twice-yearly injectable HIV prevention drug, Yeztugo, has entered its multimarket launch curve following a strong clinical performance, and the company said it expects $1 billion in 2026 sales from the drug.

The price is right, and so is its dividend Despite a strong five-year run and solid operational execution, Gilead's valuation remains highly attractive, trading at around 15 times forward earnings, well below its five-year average.

For income-oriented investors, Gilead pairs this growth inflection with a reliable 2.39% dividend yield at its current share price. The company has increased its dividend for 11 consecutive years, including a 3.7% bump this year.

Occidental Petroleum has been upgraded by Evercore, citing improved capital efficiency and successful deleveraging. Recent optimism is now driven by expectations of sustained higher commodity prices, making bullish theses more secure. Both Seeking Alpha's quant system and Wall Street analysts currently rate OXY as a buy.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In ZoomInfo To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in ZoomInfo between November 3, 2025 and May 11, 2026 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. ("ZoomInfo" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: GTM) and reminds investors of the August 24, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that the true state of ZoomInfo's slowing growth its legacy seat-based subscription platforms and weakening customer retention in its downmarket segment. Further, the Company minimized concerns that customers were moving towards consumption-based usage models and developing internal AI-driven go-to-market solutions.

On May 11, 2026, after the market closed, ZoomInfo announced its first quarter 2026 financial results, unveiling a sharp decline in growth outlook and accordingly lowered its 2026 full year financial guidance, and announced it was realigning its downmarket business, laying off 20% of its workforce, and expecting to incur approximately $45-60 million in restructuring costs. On this news, ZoomInfo's stock price fell $1.98, or approximately 33%, to close at $4.06 per share on May 12, 2026.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding ZoomInfo's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the ZoomInfo class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/GTM or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Investors Regarding the ZoomInfo Securities Class Action Lawsuit:

What is the ZoomInfo securities fraud lawsuit about?

The lawsuit alleges that ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: GTM) and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws by making materially false and misleading statements to investors during the class period. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants issued overwhelmingly positive statements while allegedly concealing the true extent of slowing growth in ZoomInfo's legacy seat-based subscription platforms and weakening customer retention in its downmarket segment. The complaint further alleges that defendants minimized concerns that customers were shifting toward consumption-based usage models and developing internal AI-driven go-to-market solutions, which allegedly masked material adverse trends affecting the Company's business. On May 11, 2026, after markets closed, ZoomInfo allegedly disclosed the severity of these conditions when it announced sharply lowered full-year 2026 guidance, a realignment of its downmarket business, a workforce reduction of approximately 20%, and anticipated restructuring costs of approximately $45-60 million — news that allegedly caused the Company's stock to decline approximately 33% the following trading day.

Who may be eligible to participate in the lawsuit?

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: GTM) securities during the class period — between November 3, 2025 and May 11, 2026, inclusive — may be eligible to participate in this lawsuit. Eligible investors are not limited to those who seek appointment as lead plaintiff; any class member who suffered losses during the class period may potentially share in any recovery obtained on behalf of the class. Investors are encouraged to review their trading records to determine whether their purchases fall within the applicable class period dates. Participation in the litigation does not require that an investor take an active role in the case or incur out-of-pocket legal expenses to be considered a potential class member.

What is a lead plaintiff, and how can I seek appointment?

A lead plaintiff is a court-appointed representative who acts on behalf of all class members in directing the litigation, including selecting and overseeing class counsel and making key strategic decisions in the case. Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, any investor who purchased ZoomInfo Technologies securities during the class period and suffered a loss may move the court for appointment as lead plaintiff. The deadline to file a motion seeking lead plaintiff appointment is August 24, 2026. Importantly, investors are not required to serve as lead plaintiff in order to be eligible to share in any recovery that may result from the litigation; the vast majority of class members participate without taking on that representative role.

What should investors do if they purchased ZoomInfo stock during the Class Period?

Investors who purchased ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: GTM) securities between November 3, 2025 and May 11, 2026 should promptly review their brokerage and account records to confirm the dates and prices of any relevant transactions. Investors are strongly encouraged to preserve all documentation related to their ZoomInfo securities purchases, including trade confirmations, account statements, and any communications concerning those investments. Given that the lead plaintiff motion deadline is August 24, 2026, investors who wish to explore their legal options — including the possibility of seeking appointment as lead plaintiff — should act in a timely manner. Investors may wish to consult with Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP or other qualified securities counsel to evaluate their rights and potential claims prior to that deadline.

Why should investors contact Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP?

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP has represented investors in securities litigation for decades and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders. Investors who purchased ZoomInfo securities during the Class Period may contact the firm to discuss their legal rights, potential claims, and the lead plaintiff process at no cost or obligation.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304745

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

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

Contact Us

Capital One (COF +0.71%) is best known for issuing credit cards. However, it demonstrated that it had wider aspirations when it bought Discover, a payment processing company. Although the merger is complete, the integration process is still a work in progress. July 27 will be a big date to watch, since that's when some Discover products will start being integrated into Capital One's back end.

Finance is hard, technically speaking The finance industry is highly regulated. The technology that supports financial businesses is complex, and each company typically has a proprietary system. Mistakes that affect customers are frowned upon by both customers and regulators. This is why July 27 is so important for Capital One shareholders to watch.

Image source: Getty Images.

While Discover cards will still exist in name, that is when they will start being supported by the Capital One back end. Strong execution will be vital, and it is highly likely that Capital One's tech team is under significant pressure to ensure a smooth cutover. If the transition process goes poorly, Capital One risks losing Discover customers.

However, there's another problem to consider, even if the cut over is flawless. If Discover cardholders don't like the Capital One back end, they might leave. So this isn't just a technical issue; it's also a product issue for the bank. To be fair, Capital One isn't making massive changes to Discover products, but it is making some changes, and more are likely in the future. One possible headache for cardholders is that new cards will be issued for authorized users, with the cards going to the primary account holder. This is being done to protect customers, but it means the primary account holder has to distribute the new cards. Capital One shareholders should probably pay extra attention over the next couple of quarters.

Today's Change

(

0.71

%) $

1.42

Current Price

$

201.52

Capital One has a big opportunity This is the first real test of Capital One's acquisition of Discover. If it goes well, there could be a very bright future ahead. Not only will Capital One have successfully entered the transaction processing business, but it will have added millions of new credit card relationships. If Capital One can retain those relationships, it opens up additional cross-selling opportunities for the bank and card issuer.

As noted, the problem is that the computer systems that support financial businesses are highly complex. So don't underestimate the difficulty and importance of the July 27 transition. Hopefully, Discover customers won't see much of an impact, but if they do, this merger could be far less beneficial than hoped.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In Commvault To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Commvault between April 29, 2025 and January 26, 2026 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 12, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Commvault Systems, Inc. ("Commvault" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: CVLT) and reminds investors of the July 17, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

Defendants provided investors with material information pertaining to Commvault's projected ARR growth for fiscal year 2026. Defendants' statements included, among other things, misleading guidance and projections related to the Company's new net ARR growth. Defendants provided these overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning the true state of Commvault's ARR growth environment; pertinently, Commvault knew or recklessly disregarded that the Company's ARR growth guidance failed to properly factor in crucial variables, such as the type of sale. Such statements absent these material facts caused Plaintiff and other shareholders to purchase Commvault's securities at artificially inflated prices.

On January 27, 2026, Commvault reported financial results for the third quarter of fiscal 2026 ended December 31, 2025, including "40% growth in SaaS ARR to $364 million," as noted by the Company's Chief Accounting Officer ("CAO") during the earnings call to discuss these results. Additionally, the CAO said "60% of our deals actually closed in the last few weeks of the quarter." According to Bloomberg Intelligence, "SaaS ARR growth of 40% represents a meaningful deceleration from 56%" reported for the second quarter fiscal 2026.

Following this news, Commvault stock declined over 31% on January 27, 2026.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Commvault's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Commvault class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/CVLT or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Investors Regarding the Commvault Systems Securities Class Action Lawsuit:

What is the Commvault Systems securities fraud lawsuit about?

The Commvault Systems securities fraud lawsuit is a federal securities class action alleging that Commvault Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: CVLT) and its executives made false and misleading statements to investors by providing materially misleading guidance and projections related to the Company's annual recurring revenue (ARR) growth while concealing that its ARR growth guidance failed to properly account for crucial variables - such as the type of sale - that significantly affected the Company's true growth trajectory. As the truth emerged on January 27, 2026, when Commvault reported Q3 fiscal 2026 results showing SaaS ARR growth of only 40% - a meaningful deceleration from 56% in the prior quarter - CVLT's stock price fell over 31% in a single day, causing significant losses for investors.

Who may be eligible to participate in the Commvault Systems class action lawsuit?

Investors who purchased or acquired Commvault Systems (CVLT) stock between April 29, 2025 and January 26, 2026 - the Class Period - and suffered financial losses may be eligible to participate in the Commvault securities class action. Participation as a class member does not require taking any affirmative legal action; eligible investors may recover losses simply by remaining members of the class. Whistleblowers, former Commvault employees, and others with relevant information about the Company's conduct are also encouraged to come forward.

What is a lead plaintiff, and how can I seek appointment in the Commvault Systems lawsuit?

A lead plaintiff in the Commvault Systems class action is a court-appointed investor - typically the one with the largest financial interest in the case - who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of all class members. Any Commvault investor who purchased CVLT stock during the Class Period may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice. The deadline to seek lead plaintiff appointment is July 17, 2026. Importantly, choosing not to seek the lead plaintiff role does not affect an investor's ability to share in any recovery obtained for the class.

What should investors do if they purchased Commvault Systems stock during the Class Period?

Investors who purchased Commvault Systems (CVLT) stock between April 29, 2025 and January 26, 2026 and suffered losses should contact Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP immediately to discuss their legal rights. The deadline to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Commvault Systems securities class action is July 17, 2026. To speak directly with securities litigation partner Josh Wilson, call 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310), or visit www.faruqilaw.com/CVLT for more information.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304736

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

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

Contact Us

NEW YORK, July 12, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --

WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of AeroVironment, Inc. (NASDAQ: AVAV) between June 25, 2025 and March 10, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”), of the important July 27, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline.

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

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the AeroVironment class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/aerovironment-inc/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than July 27, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

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

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) AeroVironment understated the likelihood that it would imminently face competition from other vendors for the work it performed in connection with the U.S. Space Force’s Satellite Communication Augmentation Resources (“SCAR”) program and the U.S. Space Force’s ongoing efforts to modernize the Satellite Control Network (“SCN”); (2) accordingly, defendants overstated AeroVironment’s business and financial prospects; and (3) as a result, defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the AeroVironment class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/aerovironment-inc/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

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

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

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

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        [email protected]
        www.rosenlegal.com

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

Data centers will consume up to 12% of U.S. electrical demand by 2028, and every EV on the road, every AI training rack and every solar inverter feeding the grid pushes current through a power semiconductor. Silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN) are the choke points on that demand curve. Five U.S.-listed names control the flow, and the money is already moving.

1. Wolfspeed (WOLF): The Turnaround Nobody Wanted Wolfspeed (NYSE:WOLF | WOLF Price Prediction) is the least obvious name on this list because six months ago it was in bankruptcy court. Today it is a leaner SiC pure-play with the first commercially available 10 kV SiC power MOSFET aimed at grid modernization, industrial electrification, and AI data center infrastructure. Its AI data center segment grew roughly 30% sequentially in Q3, on top of about 50% sequential growth the prior quarter. That signals a structural pivot away from a stalling EV cycle into the highest-value verticals in power.

Shares are up 86.42% year to date, though the last month punched the stock down 18.72% as the turnaround gets digested. Fiscal Q3 revenue came in at $150.2 million, edging consensus, while the company refinanced approximately $476 million of first-lien debt, cut total debt by $97 million, and stripped $62 million of annual interest expense. Shareholders’ equity swung to $1.02 billion from deeply negative in a single quarter and cash sits at $1.16 billion.

This is the highest-beta name in the electrification stack: It either compounds through 2027 or it breaks. The next stock runs the same SiC playbook, but at roughly 20x the scale and a fraction of the volatility.

2. ON Semiconductor (ON): The Scaled SiC Heavyweight ON Semiconductor (NASDAQ:ON) is the operator that already dominates the SiC supply chain that WOLF is fighting to defend. EliteSiC sits inside 900V EV architectures with Geely and NIO, and the company just landed a design win with Sineng Electric for a 430 kW liquid-cooled energy storage system plus a 320 kW solar inverter. Autos, AI, and grid, all built on one wafer platform. AI data center revenue more than doubled year over year in Q1 FY26 and grew 30% sequentially.

Q1 FY26 revenue landed at $1.513 billion, beating consensus, with the Power Solutions Group up 14% YoY to $736.6 million and non-GAAP gross margin snapping back to 38.5%, up from 20.3% a year earlier. Management guided Q2 revenue to $1.535 billion to $1.635 billion and has a $6 billion share repurchase authorization in place. Shares are up 69.24% year to date, trading at 31x forward earnings against an average analyst target of $113.72.

ON is the risk-managed way to own SiC. The next name plays the same thesis in GaN and has quietly doubled this year as industrial power conversion took over its revenue mix.

3. Power Integrations (POWI): The Industrial GaN Pivot Power Integrations (NASDAQ:POWI) has spent two years quietly redirecting its PowiGaN franchise into renewables, battery storage, home automation, and automotive. The result: industrial revenue grew 23% year over year and now sits at 41% of the revenue mix, up from 34%. That is a mix shift you cannot fake, and it puts POWI directly in the path of every grid-scale battery and rooftop inverter buildout.

Q1 FY26 EPS came in at $0.25 versus $0.23 expected, revenue at $108.3 million (+2.6% YoY), and PowiGaN products grew more than 40% across full-year FY25. Non-GAAP gross margin held at 53.5%, and Q2 revenue guidance is $115 million to $120 million. Shares are up 93.22% year to date, with the average analyst target at $76.20 and forward P/E at 48.

_________________________________

What's Your Number...?Here's a question most people 5y from retirement can't answer: at your current savings rate, how much do you need, and how long will it actually last? A good advisor can put a date on that in a single meeting. SmartAsset's free quiz matches you with up to three fiduciary advisors serving your area, so you can get YOUR retirement number now (sponsor)

__________________________________________

POWI is the industrial GaN pure-play. But the biggest AI-server design wins in this stack belong to the next name, and it is trading like a growth stock for a reason.

4. Monolithic Power Systems (MPWR): The AI Server Arms Dealer Monolithic Power Systems (NASDAQ:MPWR) is the power-management chip designer inside the AI server rack. Enterprise Data revenue nearly doubled year over year, up 97.7% to $262.8 million, and now represents 32.7% of total revenue. Management is guiding Enterprise Data growth of more than 50% for 2026, and the company just sampled its first high-speed DDR5 interface products alongside an 800V data center power solution.

Q1 FY26 revenue was $804.2 million, up 26.1% YoY, EPS of $5.10 beat the $4.90 consensus, GAAP operating margin expanded to 30.0%, up 3.5 percentage points YoY, and the board raised the quarterly dividend 28% to $2.00. Q2 revenue guidance is $890 million to $910 million, and Communications revenue grew 55.5% YoY to $111.5 million. Shares are up 44.48% year to date, trading at 55x forward earnings with an average analyst target of $1,789.23.

MPWR is the highest-quality name in this stack. If you want maximum torque on the same secular curve at a fraction of the market cap, the last slot is where the payoff lands.

5. Navitas Semiconductor (NVTS): The Payoff Trade Navitas Semiconductor (NASDAQ:NVTS) is the small-cap payoff: a pure-play GaN and high-voltage SiC operator that just staked its entire future on AI data centers, grid, and industrial electrification under a strategy management calls Navitas 2.0. At NVIDIA GTC it debuted 800V-to-6V and 800V-to-50V power delivery boards and demonstrated a 250 kW solid-state transformer with EPFL. NVTS is a formal NVIDIA power partner for the 800V DC architecture rolling out across next-gen AI factories.

Q1 FY26 revenue was $8.60 million, up 18% sequentially, with a fourth straight EPS beat at -4 cents versus the -5 cents expected. High-power markets grew roughly 35% year over year, non-GAAP gross margin held at 39.0%, and management is targeting a $3.5 billion serviceable market by 2030 growing at a 60%-plus CAGR. Cash sits at $221 million, and a long-term GlobalFoundries U.S. GaN foundry partnership comes online in late 2026.

Shares are up 60.74% year to date, with a beta of 3.815 and a 52-week range of $5.44 to $34.17. Smallest float, highest torque, most direct pure-play on the NVIDIA 800V build-out. It trades like a call option on the entire electrification thesis.

The Setup Electrification is a compounding demand pull across EVs, AI factories, and grid modernization, all funneling into SiC and GaN power silicon. WOLF is the boom-or-bust turnaround, ON and MPWR are the scaled compounders, POWI is the industrial pivot, and NVTS is the leveraged bet on the 800V data center architecture. These five span the full risk spectrum on the same secular curve. The demand curve does not wait, and the money is already rotating in.

If You’ve Been Thinking About Retirement, Pay Attention (sponsor) Retirement planning doesn’t have to feel overwhelming. The key is finding expert guidance, and SmartAsset’s simple quiz makes it easier than ever for you to connect with a vetted financial advisor. Here’s how:

Answer a Few Simple Questions. 

Get Matched with Vetted Advisors 

Choose Your  Fit 

Why wait? Start building the retirement you’ve always dreamed of. Get started today! (sponsor)  

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

Redwire (RDW 2.77%), a producer of space mission components, went public through a merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) on Sept. 3, 2021. Its stock opened at $11.07, set a record high of $25.90 on May 28, 2026, but now trades at $10.18 per share.

Redwire initially impressed investors with its robust revenue growth, but some concerns about its dilution, widening losses, and accounting accuracy crushed its stock. Does that 61% pullback from its all-time high represent a buying opportunity or a bright red flag?

Image source: Getty Images.

How fast is Redwire growing? Redwire develops critical navigation, power, and 3D-printing components for satellites, space stations, and other spacecraft. It also builds military drones and custom components for missile defense and military communications systems. Its customers include NASA, the Department of Defense, and large commercial space contractors.

Today's Change

(

-2.77

%) $

-0.29

Current Price

$

10.18

In 2025, Redwire's revenue rose 10% to $335 million, but its net loss nearly doubled from $114 million to $227 million. Those widening losses were caused by higher estimated project completion costs, goodwill impairment charges from its recent acquisitions, increased spending on its military drone projects, and higher stock-based compensation expenses.

From 2025 to 2028, analysts expect Redwire's revenue to grow at a 26% CAGR to $664 million as it narrows its net loss to $43 million. That growth should be driven by the construction of orbital data centers, more low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, new lunar missions, and the development of more sophisticated drones for the U.S. military.

What problems does Redwire face? Redwire ended the first quarter of 2026 with $175 million in total liquidity. But on June 9, it announced an at-the-market (ATM) equity offering to sell up to $500 million in new common stock. That's a lot of dilution compared to its market cap of $2.4 billion. It's already increased its share count by 232% since its public debut.

To make matters worse, Redwire received an "adverse internal controls opinion" from its auditor, KPMG, after its 2025 report. That opinion is a bright red flag, since it suggests Redwire's internal financial controls are unstable and could increase its risk of serious accounting errors.

Those headwinds, along with its persistent losses and a waning interest in space stocks after SpaceX's record-setting IPO cooled off, sent Redwire's stock crashing. It might seem reasonably valued at five times this year's sales, but its dilution and potential accounting issues make it an unattractive investment. I'd rather stick with some of the market's more resilient space stocks than this speculative supply chain player.

When Mark Zuckerberg walked into a Los Angeles courtroom on 18 February flanked by an entourage bedecked in Meta Ray-Bans, some people laughed. If this was an attempt at product placement for the company’s newest range of smart glasses, it was jarringly ill-judged: Zuckerberg was about to testify before a jury in a landmark lawsuit that sought to prove that Instagram and YouTube are addictive by design, and he had passed a throng of bereaved parents on his way into the courthouse. But the prosecution team, led by Mark Lanier, were not laughing.

This was a serious trial. For the first time, the most powerful names in social media were being held to account for the inherent design of their platforms, rather than the content hosted on them. They were accused of deliberately and maliciously building products that keep children hooked, with disastrous consequences for the mental wellbeing of young people. It was a landmark case – a big tobacco moment for big tech.

But there were specific reasons why the prosecution was deeply disturbed to see Meta Ray-Bans in court. “We had fought hard for an anonymous jury. We didn’t want the names disclosed in a way where Google could go pull up their Gmails, where Meta could go pull up their Facebook accounts,” Lanier tells me in his warm Texas drawl. “Then Zuckerberg shows up with security guards wearing Meta glasses. They can easily do facial identification and figure out exactly who the jurors are.” This was not product placement, Lanier says – it was the deployment of the most relentless form of digital surveillance the world has ever known.

The prosecution appealed to the judge, pointing out that Zuckerberg’s entourage was breaking rules that forbade cameras in the courtroom. “The judge made them swear that they hadn’t taken any pictures.” Lanier says. “And then they took the glasses off.”

The case of KGM v Meta et al was always going to be as hi-tech as it was high stakes. KGM – also known by her first name, Kaley – claimed that an addiction to social media that had begun with YouTube at age six and Instagram at age nine had caused her to develop body dysmorphia, anxiety and depression. (Snapchat and TikTok, named in Kaley’s original complaint, had settled out of court for an undisclosed sum before the trial began.) Lanier’s team had to convince the jury that Meta and Google had engineered their products to be addictive. It was a test case that could blaze a trail for thousands more to come.

“I’d never been in court before,” Kaley, now 20, tells me in her first newspaper interview. “Seeing all those people, and having all their eyes on me, was very overwhelming.”

Mark Zuckerberg arrives at the Los Angeles court with two members of his entourage, who are wearing Meta glasses. Photograph: Jill Connelly/Getty ImagesLanier knew this was a case like no other – and that his opponents were prepared to use every power at their disposal to win it, including artificial intelligence. Google and Meta have their own AIs: Gemini and Meta AI, respectively. Lanier was determined to beat them at their own game. (A self-described “AI zealot”, his firm employs a team of five whose sole responsibility is to produce a weekly report for him on advances in AI over the previous seven days.) Lanier asked a company called BoodleBox to make him a bespoke AI incorporating a combination of Gemini, Claude, ChatGPT and other existing models. He used it in “30 different ways” for Kaley’s case, he says, but when he tells me about just one of them, my jaw drops.

The jury might have been anonymous, but the legal teams were able to gather a significant amount of data about each member during jury selection, Lanier explains. “We have questionnaires they filled out that tell us their age, their gender, their occupational history, their family status. But it gives us more insight: it asks, who are three people you most admire and why? Who are three you least admire and why? How do you feel about this or that on a scale of one to 10?” Armed with a dossier of information, Lanier’s AI created models of every juror, “a demographic and psychological exemplar” of each one that allowed him to try out potential arguments on individual members. At the end of each day in court, he would feed the transcripts to his AI shadow jury and ask questions. What did juror number 11 think of the witness? What did juror number seven think was important? Where did juror number three get confused? “Pretty cool,” he grins.

AI can be used for good or abused for evil, Lanier says – just like litigation, which he has been practising for 42 years, or religious faith, which guides everything he does. A devout Christian, Lanier believes he is on a divine mission to take on companies that enrich themselves by exploiting the vulnerable.

“The opposing side had unlimited resources. They had dozens of lawyers in the courtroom. To call it a David versus Goliath storyline is maybe giving too much credit to David, but it’s the best descriptor I can give,” he says; the disparity between him and his opponents was even larger than the biggest mismatch in biblical history. “This was a righteous case, without a doubt. It was a holy war.”

Lanier with his daughters Rachel (on left) and Sarah (right), who worked with him on the case, on the steps of the courthouse. Photograph: Ted Soqui/EPA/ShutterstockOn 25 March, when the (real, human) jury returned its verdict, Lanier stood on the steps of the courthouse alongside two of his five children – daughters Sarah and Rachel, who worked with him on the case – and hailed “a righteous moment”. The jury had found Google and Meta liable on all counts and had awarded Kaley $6m: $3m in compensatory damages and an extra $3m in punitive damages, because Meta and Google were found to have “acted with malice, oppression or fraud”. Meta will shoulder 70% of the bill, with Google picking up the rest. But these damages are only the beginning: more than 2,000 similar lawsuits are now being brought against social media companies, accused of harming the mental health of children with products that are addictive by design, using the legal route Lanier proved viable in Kaley’s case.

Ever since they stood behind Trump at his second inauguration, the power of the tech titans has seemed ever more unassailable. (Lanier tells me big tech now hires one lobbyist for every six members of the 441-strong US House of Representatives.) But Kaley’s legal victory is a reckoning – one that could threaten the entire social media business model.

“Politicians will never hold these people accountable. The only thing they fear is a jury,” Lanier says. “I get 12 ordinary people, and they’re empowered. And when they hear that evidence and they take their oath seriously – bam! – they can do something.”

I meet Lanier in Yarnton Manor, a grade II-listed estate in Oxfordshire, built in 1611 by Sir Thomas Spencer, a distant ancestor of Diana, Princess of Wales. He lounges on a teal sofa in one of the wood-panelled rooms, sometimes with a leg dangling over the sofa’s arm, sometimes hugging one of the velvet cushions, often leaning forward to gesticulate in animated ­excitement as he shares a biblical reference or damning piece of trial evidence. It’s a swelteringly hot day in late May, and Lanier, 65, flew in from Houston yesterday, but he looks fresh as a daisy. He only needs four hours’ sleep a night. “Sleep’s a bonus, but not one that’s necessary.”

Lanier’s charitable foundation bought Yarnton in 2021 and turned it into a centre for religious study. He preaches in a Baptist church every Sunday; he has another study centre in Houston. “In the US at least, Christian faith has a bad reputation of being vibrant only among uneducated, unenlightened, bigoted, narrow-minded people. Those of us who hold on to a faith are responsible for trying to bring out the good that can come from it – not the holier-than-thou stuff that seeds division,” he says. “I’m a lawyer who has funded all of this by trying to grab hold of people whose conduct has been destructive.” He draws a rectangle in the air above his head, tracing the corners of the ornate coved ceiling. “It was the Johnson & Johnson case that bought this,” he grins. “My wife and I call this the J&J Manor House.”

Before he took on Google and Meta, Lanier was involved in some of the most high-profile landmark litigation cases in the history of big pharma. In 2018, he won $4.69bn (reduced on appeal to $2.12bn) for 22 women with ovarian cancer and their families after Johnson & Johnson failed to warn them of the carcinogenic risk associated with the talc in their Baby Powder. Natural talc is often mined within close proximity of carcinogenic asbestos; Lanier argued that Johnson & Johnson had known this for decades without warning the public. (Johnson & Johnson said in 2018: “J&J’s baby powder is safe and does not cause cancer. Studies of tens of thousands of women and thousands of men show that talc does not cause cancer or asbestos-related disease.”) In 2019, he won an 11th-hour $260m settlement from opioid manufacturers and distributors on the eve of what would have been the first federal trial in the history of the opioid epidemic.

Lanier’s “bread and butter”, he says, involves ubiquitous, household-name products that can cause serious harms, which the companies behind them know about but choose not to act on. “Normally, I want an eye-popping verdict that causes Wall Street to recoil and causes in-house lawyers to lose their jobs and companies to respond differently,” Lanier told a podcast recently.

When he began his career, at a big Houston law firm, he just liked winning. He learned the psychological skills and rhetorical techniques that helped him excel in court: how to make things memorable, how to read a room and change the energy in it, “how to make word choices that will trigger visceral reactions, how to use story to bypass people’s natural defences”. But after five years of straight wins, he lost – in a case where he knew his client was in the wrong. Licking his wounds on the drive home, he had an epiphany. “I thought, what am I doing? Did I almost take my gifts, my talents, my skills and wield an injustice?” Aged 29, Lanier started his own firm so he could pick what he considered to be “righteous” cases. “You can do horrible things with this power, or you can do good.”

Lanier estimates that settlements from drug companies following his landmark opioid litigation are now in excess of $10bn. His victory in the Johnson & Johnson case opened the floodgates to tens of thousands of claims from people with cancer and their families – including one currently in the high court of England and Wales, with more than 7,000 claimants. J&J deny the allegations.

In the wake of Kaley’s win against Google and Meta, the former Facebook employee turned whistleblower Frances Haugen claimed that Meta could be on the hook for $1tn in future damages from tens of thousands of people who have been harmed by the use of their platforms as children. This might be an overestimation, Lanier says. “But tens of billions, easy. Part of it also is: are they willing to make real change? Reasonable change is something that a lot of us would put a high value on.”

At the time of the Johnson & Johnson verdict, Lanier remarked that suing in an initial test case with only a small cluster of plaintiffs allowed him to maximise the emotional impact of claimants’ stories on the jury. “It’s easier to get justice in small groups,” he said. “In small groups, people have names, but in large groups, they’re numbers.”

Kaley was a lone plaintiff, and a reluctant trailblazer. It was her mother who brought her case to the attention of lawyers. (Kaley was identified only as KGM in court because the alleged harms took place when she was a child.)

“I was really scared,” Kaley tells me in a video call; she has chosen to keep her camera switched off. “I had a lot of anxiety around the thought of them deleting my accounts as a punishment. And that did end up happening, at least with Snapchat.”

There’s a duality to the way Kaley speaks: giving evidence in the trial has prepared her to be able to answer difficult questions about the most challenging parts of her life, and that, combined with her low voice, can make her sound older than her 20 years. But her responses are often brief and staccato, and she sometimes struggles to find the right words, like a teenager.

Brought up by a single mother in Chico, California, along with an older brother and sister, Kaley grew up with learning disabilities, in a household without much disposable income. By the time she was nine, she had uploaded hundreds of videos to YouTube, and soon had dozens of accounts on both YouTube and Instagram. “I liked that I could post my own stuff and see how many likes I got. I liked being able to see what my friends were up to.” When Kaley wasn’t posting, she was scrolling. She stopped engaging with her family. She no longer left her home. Once, she spent more than 16 hours on Instagram in a single day.

“I was on it every day from the moment I woke up to the moment I went to bed. I was on my phone during class – I would get in trouble, I got bad grades because I was not paying attention.” She was terrified at the thought of anything happening to her phone. “If I was walking next to a lake or something, I’d be so scared that I was going to drop my phone and lose my social media.”

Her mother tried to intervene, activating screen time limits or confiscating Kaley’s phone altogether. “But I would freak out,” Kaley says. “I had withdrawal symptoms. It was just so hard to do anything else.” She would get up in the middle of the night to search for her phone, or “beg and beg and cry” until she got it back. When her mother removed Instagram from Kaley’s phone, Kaley sneaked a hand-me-down phone from her older sister so she could download the app again without her mother knowing.

Almost as soon as she joined Instagram, Kaley started playing with filters, enlarging her eyes, shortening her nose. “I’d take a selfie with a filter on, and then see myself – how I actually looked – and I would just feel really ugly,” she says. “It made me get all these new insecurities, and to see myself in a way that others didn’t actually see me.” Aged 10, Kaley started to cut herself. She went on to be diagnosed with depression, anxiety and clinical body dysmorphia.

Lanier didn’t want Kaley to sit through the entire trial. She gets easily distracted, he says; plus, it was his job to convince the jury that she had been seriously harmed by Google and Meta’s products. He didn’t want her to come away from it believing she was irredeemably damaged.

Delivering his opening statement, Lanier stacked three wooden ABC toy blocks on top of each other. “I thought, I will tell the jury this case is as simple as ABC – Addicting the Brains of Children,” he explains. “There’s a principle in psychology and learning called cognitive ease: we automatically assign credibility to the things we more easily understand. There’s a principle in rhetoric: the power of threes. Threes just seem to resonate within our soul and minds. ABC, one, two, three.” (In his opening statement at the Johnson & Johnson trial, Lanier used ABC Scrabble tiles to impress upon the jury that “Asbestos, Breathed or internalised, causes Cancer”.)

Then Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt delivered his opening statement, pushing back. “Was it Instagram or other causes?” he asked. He told the jury the root of Kaley’s mental health issues lay in her chaotic upbringing; that her home life and learning disabilities meant these problems would be inherent in her life anyway. Lanier bats away this idea. “Just because someone has a headache doesn’t give you the right to bash them over the head with a rock and say, ‘They already had a headache! Don’t blame me!’”

Lanier was not allowed to respond to the defendants’ opening statement in court. But as he walked out of the courthouse that day, he spoke to the throngs of media waiting there. “The next morning we get to court, and the bad guys want to have a discussion with the judge off the record.” In the judge’s chambers, he says, Meta’s team complained that Lanier’s rebuttal to their opening statement was being widely reported in the press, and called on the judge to prevent him from speaking to journalists.

Once again, Lanier deployed the power of three. “I said, ‘First of all, I didn’t do it in court – I’m on the sidewalk outside. Second of all, you’ve instructed the jury not to read any of the media. Third of all, the defendants in this case are social media. They’re producing press releases! They’re putting posts on Instagram!” (While the trial was ongoing, Meta had worked hard to spread the message that the company took the welfare of young people seriously, both on their own platforms and in their wider communications with the public.) “It makes my little comment on the courthouse sidewalk pale in comparison.’” Meta’s lawyers ultimately backed down. “The judge said, ‘You do realise there are four billboards up around the courthouse with your ads on them talking about how you care for children in all you do – and you’re complaining about Mr Lanier?’”

Lanier photographed in the library of Yarnton Manor, Oxfordshire. Photograph: Gareth Iwan Jones/The GuardianThe bereaved families outside the courthouse each day – some waving placards that read “We are KGM” – wanted the wider context of Kaley’s struggles to be recognised. But the defendants had argued that Lanier should not be allowed to mention other young people who had suffered harm as a consequence of social media use. “They wanted to make her the exception,” he says. “The sad part is, we’ve got a generation of Kaleys. Go to a restaurant and look how many people are sitting there in her age range like this …” He takes his phone from the coffee table and hunches over it. “It’s such a waste of human capital. All to make money flow to a handful of rich white guys who want to run the world.”

Parents buy the phones those kids are hunched over, I say. Shouldn’t they be able to establish and maintain ground rules? Lanier smiles. “It’s very naive to think that we have such awesome parents in this world that they can stand up against the trillion-dollar companies – with their algorithms and their deceitful tools – and be well enough informed to fight the most aggressive technology in the history of human civilisation. Kids get on YouTube at school. Kids go over to their friends’ houses. Kids have lunch with other kids. Does parenting make a difference? Of course it does. Can parents beat the machine? No way.”

skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion

Lanier was also not allowed to talk about the content hosted on social media; in the eyes of the law, YouTube and Instagram are not publishers, so are not responsible for the content they host. “But the content is part of what they use to addict you.” Imagine going into a bookshop and idly picking up a book from one of the display tables, he says, only to see every book on every table change to be something statistically proven to be interesting to people drawn to that kind of book – including some that might shock, enrage or titillate you. Touch another title, and all the books change again, as the bookshop narrows down your interests as effectively as it can. Unlike bookshops, the social media algorithms want you to browse for ever.

“The algorithms are amoral – they’re machines. They’re relentless. You’ll never find them wavering, or low on energy, or distracted. And their entire design is to try to keep your attention on their platform. They are scary.”

Meta and Google were damned by their own documents: the millions of pages of evidence the judge required them to hand over, and a few others leaked by whistleblowers. “Through the industrious hard work of a lot of young lawyers reading, and the industrious hard work of AI, we were able to find the lines of gold.” Lanier says it was an embarrassment of riches.

Internal documents showed the companies had deliberately sought out “casino science” to turn their products into what Lanier calls “addiction machines”. Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat and TikTok all use intermittent variable rewards, giving their users little unpredictable dopamine hits, just like slot machines with their micro-payouts that keep you sticking around for a big jackpot that may never arrive, endlessly scrolling on your phone instead of pulling a handle. A 2012 Google memo about YouTube said its “goal is not viewership; it’s viewer addiction”. Another document from Google referred to its products as “slot machines”. “These are attention casinos,” it read. “The house always wins.”

There were documents from Google and Meta revealing the “dark patterns” they deploy to manipulate their users’ behaviour. Take the features Kaley’s mother wanted to use to protect her daughter: they were not easy to find, and were switched off by default. “You’ve got to determine there’s a protective feature, go find it and toggle it on,” says Lanier. “The toggle itself is subject to dark patterns: people will toggle differently if there’s a blue dot when you toggle, versus if it doesn’t change colour.”

This makes me think of my own efforts to control my Instagram feed, by toggling the button requesting that it doesn’t show me suggested content. I have to go into my settings and toggle it again every 30 days, and given that it doesn’t change colour, I’m never really sure that it has worked. “It’s insidious,” Lanier says. “And let’s say, as a parent, you do this for your kid. Did you set a calendar reminder to go back to your kid’s phone 30 days later when it defaults back?” Even if you were organised enough to do this, he adds, the platforms change their settings so often that it’s impossible to keep up.

There was a Meta document from 2018 that read: “If we want to win big with teens, we must bring them in as tweens”; a YouTube slideshow featuring children as young as four and the suggestion that parents could use the platform as a “digital babysitter”; a 2019 research report commissioned by Meta that found teens had “an addicts’ narrative about their Instagram use”, and that “they wish they could spend less time caring about it”.

Then there was the testimony given on the stand. In a memorable exchange with Lanier, Instagram boss Adam Mosseri said that 16 hours a day on the platform might be “problematic”, but he would not call it an addiction. “You can call it problematic use. You can call it tweedledee,” Lanier says. “The issue wasn’t the magic word ‘addiction’ – it was the harm.”

But the prosecution had to prove that Kaley’s use of social media caused the harm done to her mental health, and that was a challenge. “Social media companies have seeded the literature with stuff that says their product’s beneficial. For decades, big tobacco said, ‘Tobacco doesn’t really cause lung cancer – look at all these studies!’ And what you didn’t know is big tobacco had ghostwritten them or funded them,” Lanier says. A psychiatrist and a therapist both testified that, in Kaley’s case, her body dysmorphia was caused by her social media use. “The other side argued it was the residuals of bad parenting.” The sad part, Lanier says, is that Meta’s own documents show they know that when adolescent girls from low socioeconomic backgrounds with existing mental health challenges spend extended periods on social media, their mental health deteriorates.

When Zuckerberg took the stand – the first time he had testified in front of a jury – Lanier put it to him that he “saw dollar signs written on the backs” of vulnerable kids. He presented Zuckerberg with an internal document, which showed that, in 2015, a third of all 10- to 12-year-olds in the US used Instagram, even though under-13s were not supposed to have accounts, and an email from an executive that said, “Mark has decided the top priority for the company is teens.” Zuckerberg said this was no longer the way the company operated, and that he had worked for years to address “problematic use” of his platforms “because it’s the right thing to do”.

At the end of questioning, six prosecution lawyers unrolled a 50ft-wide collage of some of the hundreds of selfies Kaley had posted on Instagram. Urging Zuckerberg to look at the heavily filtered images, Lanier asked him if Meta had ever investigated Kaley’s account for problematic use. Zuckerberg did not answer.

Lanier had planned to question YouTube CEO Neal Mohan on the stand, but ran out of time – the judge had given the prosecution only 43 hours to try the case. “I decided I didn’t need him,” Lanier says. But Google is just as culpable as Meta in Kaley’s case, he adds. “YouTube was a gateway drug.”

Time pressure was one of the reasons why they decided to settle with Snapchat and TikTok before the case came to trial. “I could have hit a good verdict against them,” Lanier says, a little wistfully. He planned to compare the safety features that are present in the Chinese version of TikTok and that aren’t present in its international platform: a limit on night-time use, no infinite scroll, mandatory time-outs once users have been on the app for a certain amount of time, and the deployment of AI to determine if users are children, “based upon factors including what you’re looking at, the size of your finger when you’re scrolling, how fast you scroll. There are tons of ways that they are required to be safer over there.”

Google claimed that the entire case misunderstood YouTube; that it is a streaming platform, not a social media site. “You have an ability to message, to like or dislike, to comment, to follow. It’s not just media – it’s social media,” Lanier declares. But just in case that argument wasn’t enough, the prosecution team asked Google’s very own AI what it thought. Gemini’s response was unequivocal – YouTube is social media.

On hearing the verdict, Kaley’s overriding feeling was relief – for herself, and for all the people who can now follow her. “I knew it meant that other cases would get to go to court, so I was feeling happy for the other families.” The thousands of cases that were poised to be brought against social media companies should she win have now been set in motion. She hasn’t received any damages yet; Google and Meta are appealing, and Lanier says the process will take seven years. “However long it takes is however long it takes,” Kaley says. “I’m OK with it.” Despite her ongoing struggles with her self-image, Kaley’s victory has helped her recognise the contribution she can make to the world, and how much people value her.

Should the case end up at the supreme court, Lanier doesn’t think that the politically appointed judges will be swayed by seeing this as a partisan issue. “It crosses the political aisle. Typically, Republicans are friendly to big business in the US, but some of the most stalwart folks on this are Republicans. It matters to anybody who’s a parent.”

Photograph: Gareth Iwan Jones/The GuardianIn the meantime, Lanier is helping other legal teams who are bringing cases against social media companies, while his firm is fielding new inquiries from people who say they have been harmed by compulsive social media use. “Those that have legitimate cases that I can do, I’ll represent. It’s got to be a child that was addicted. We’ve got to have some counselling or psychiatric records. If it wasn’t bad enough to go see a professional, then it’s not bad enough to bring a case. Within the framework of that, I’ll take those cases.”

Why does the focus have to be on kids? “Children’s brains are still developing, and the last part to develop is that ability for self-control that sees future consequences. With adults, it’s going to be hard to win. The jury’s going to think, You’re an adult, you ought to be able to weigh the consequences,” Lanier replies. “The problem is, once you get addicted, addictive pathways are easily transferable to other addictions. The child who’s addicted to social media can easily become addicted to pornography, sex, gambling, pills. Your body’s ultimately just craving the dopamine.”

Of course, Lanier will not be the lead lawyer on the thousands of new cases being brought against Google, Meta, Snapchat, TikTok and other social media companies. He is clearly very good at what he does, with the skills to win against giants in big pharma as well as big tech. I wonder whether his trailblazing victory for Kaley can be replicated in other courtrooms, by other lawyers.

“That’s a fair question,” Lanier replies. “Embedded in it is a kind of compliment – so thank you, that’s kind. Does the skill of the lawyer make a difference in these cases? Yes, it does. Am I the only lawyer who can win these? Absolutely not. I’m not necessary – but I’m useful.”

In June, Keir Starmer announced a social media ban for under-16s, due to take effect in early 2027, after nine out of 10 respondents to a government survey supported it. Lanier thinks Starmer’s plans are “brilliant. It eats away at the fabric of our society if children have access to materials that they are not mature enough to handle.”

“I think it’s the first step in the right direction,” Kaley says. “But kids are sneaky and they might still find a way to get back on it.”

Some who oppose the ban – including the campaigner Ian Russell, whose 14-year-old daughter, Molly, took her own life after being deluged with suicide and self-harm content – say the only way to protect children is to force social media companies to change their business models, which rely on addictive features and algorithmically driven content. Litigation may be the only way to bring those changes, Kaley says. “They’re only going to change if somebody forces them to.”

Lanier’s firm is now working on a claim against OpenAI brought by bereaved parents who say ChatGPT was instrumental in their son’s suicide. He also has a forthcoming suit against Roblox, the most popular online game platform among eight- to 14-year-olds in the UK. “It’s a breeding ground for child exploitation, a forum that allows child predators to thrive and to connect,” he says. The addictive features of the platform will be part of that case, too.

Kaley tells me she has no idea what the future holds for her. She is still on social media, in the places that haven’t banished her in retaliation for taking legal action against them. She still posts selfies and videos; she thinks she always will, even though she hopes not to one day. “It’s very difficult.”

Lanier is considering writing a book about Kaley’s case. A documentary might be in the works. He has already starred as himself in a movie, the 2011 Chris Evans film Puncture (released as Injustice in the UK). It tells the true story of Michael Weiss, the Houston-based lawyer behind a class-action lawsuit against hospital syringe distributors in the US; after Weiss died from a drugs overdose in 1999, Lanier took on the case and won a landmark settlement in 2004.

Lanier is the first to admit that, in the past at least, he loved attention. “When I was a younger man, probably the quickest way to get hurt was to get between me and a camera,” he says, a twinkle in his eye. Perhaps that’s why, despite everything he has learned, Lanier is still on Instagram.

“I do a video thought for the day, five days a week, based on some biblical idea. They get posted on there for distribution and availability,” he says when I bring this up. “I’m not someone who thinks that social media is inherently evil. It’s like any tool: it can be used for good and it can be used for evil.”

His 15-year-old granddaughter watches his videos, he tells me. So how does Lanier see the future for her, and his 11 other grandchildren? Is the digital world going to be safer for them following Kaley’s victory?

“The optimist in me says yes. The realist in me says not so fast.” He leans forward. “Mark Zuckerberg has immense power, and power is as addictive as any drug. Do we really think that he’s going to readily abandon a portion of his power? The realist in me says this is going to be a war that will last my lifetime – and the lifetime of others.”

In the UK, the youth suicide charity Papyrus can be contacted on 0800 068 4141 or email [email protected], and in the UK and Ireland Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123. In the US, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline is at 988 or chat for support. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. Other international helplines can be found at befrienders.org

July 16 could be a very important day for investors in all sectors of the market. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSM 0.55%) (or TSMC) reports earnings on that day, and it will have implications beyond just its stock.

TSMC is the primary chip fabricator for nearly any company involved in the AI build-out and tech fields. If it raises a red flag that chip demand has fallen off a cliff, it could crash the stocks of many of the computing unit manufacturers, like Nvidia (NVDA +3.90%). On the flip side, if TSMC reports positive earnings and tells investors that business is continuing to ramp up, it could send shares of its peers rallying.

Nvidia investors have been disappointed in 2026 because of lackluster performance. However, if TSMC reports strong earnings, I think it could be one catalyst the stock needs to send it higher.

Image source: Getty Images.

What can investors expect from Taiwan Semiconductor? TSMC isn't much for surprises. While most companies on the public markets wait until their earnings report to let investors know how much revenue they generated, TSMC announces it monthly. While we don't have June's revenue figures yet (and won't until after earnings), investors already know what occurred in April and May. In April, TSMC's revenue rose 17.5%, and in May it increased by 30.1%, in New Taiwan dollars.

Today's Change

(

-0.55

%) $

-2.42

Current Price

$

434.54

Companies don't often report monthly revenue because the market can get wrapped up in slow or fast growth, but monthly revenue is highly affected by working days and when orders are placed. The information doesn't replace the quarterly results, which smooth out some of that effect. However, it shows that demand for chips is still strong and that TSMC continues to expand.

For the second quarter, Wall Street analysts expect 35% revenue growth, but they also expect guidance for 40% growth next quarter. If TSMC's results and guidance exceed expectations, the stock could soar, and pull Nvidia up with it.

Nvidia stock has had a weak 2026 so far There have been few stocks as disappointing as Nvidia during 2026. Its stock has lost to the broader market for the better part of the year, as measured by the S&P 500 (^GSPC +0.42%). However, it has closed the gap in recent days and is performing similarly right now. But if you look at its earnings results, you wouldn't think that was the case.

Today's Change

(

3.90

%) $

7.90

Current Price

$

210.68

Last quarter, Nvidia's revenue rose a jaw-dropping 85% year over year. Next quarter, analysts expect 96% revenue growth. The reason for the hesitancy to send the stock higher is that the market is worried about the health of the AI build-out. There are growing questions about whether companies should be spending as much capital on AI data centers as they are, and that negative sentiment is affecting Nvidia's stock, even if the sentiment doesn't reflect the company's results.

Strong earnings and bullish language on its future from Taiwan Semiconductor will help change that notion, and if it does, Nvidia's stock could be ready to soar. It trades for a relatively cheap price tag of 22.8 times forward earnings, which is barely more expensive than the S&P 500 at 21.7, and far cheaper than TSMC at 27.5.

TSM PE Ratio (Forward) data by YCharts

Nvidia is growing faster than TSMC and is projected to continue doing so. There aren't a whole lot of good reasons for TSMC to be valued at a premium to Nvidia, and that could leave the door open for Nvidia to rally to a 30 times earnings or so valuation. If that's the case, then there's nearly 50% upside in Nvidia's stock ready to happen at any given moment, making it a perfect stock to buy now before earnings season begins.

If Netflix (NFLX 2.76%) were a contestant on its popular Love Is Blind reality dating show, it wouldn't end with successfully exchanged vows at the altar. The world's leading premium streaming video service has loved and lost a lot lately, realizing that promising chatter with potential partners in the pod rarely pans out in the real world.

Netflix emerged with a firm commitment in the bidding war for Warner Bros. Discovery, only to be swept off its feet by rival Paramount Skydance offering a larger dowry. In the days following the Fox acquisition of Roku, there was a report that Netflix was outbid for the connected TV pioneer. The story was later updated to clarify that Netflix may or may not have been sniffing around, but it never submitted an offer. Rumors have swirled that Netflix might be interested in Lionsgate or any other storied content creator that may be on the block, but Netflix has either denied the courting or suffered silently in solitude. Netflix can't seem to make a love connection with potential acquisition targets. It also doesn't seem to be hitting it off with investors, given the stock's sharp slide in recent months. Help could be on the way, especially if the small ball game it seems to be playing starts to pay off.

Image source: Getty Images.

The road to perdition Netflix has delivered generational wealth to its longtime investors, a 600-bagger since going public 24 years ago. However, Netflix stock has been painful to own for more recent investors, down more than 40% over the past year.

The downticks aren't entirely due to Netflix's failure in recent whale-hunting expeditions. It has routinely delivered disappointing results or guidance, with shares trading lower in the weeks following each of its last four quarterly updates.

Netflix is going through a confidence crisis with investors, and that's been painfully clear whenever its name is tied to a potential acquisition target. The stock has declined after someone else walked away with a potential prize, but it's also taking a hit as a consolation prize when it falls short.

Netflix announces a deal for Warner Bros. Discovery? It gets hit. It gets outbid, meaning it collects a $2.8 billion buyout termination fee? It gets hit. It's damned if it says "I do" and it's damned if it says "I don't."

Today's Change

(

-2.76

%) $

-2.09

Current Price

$

73.39

The road to redemption Variety reports that Netflix is one of the parties in the running to acquire Letterboxd, a fast-growing film-review platform with a social-networking bent reaching 30 million members worldwide, a roughly 50% increase over the past year. Letterbox is reportedly looking for a price tag in the $250 million range.

It would be a good catch for Netflix, strengthening its ties with tens of millions of movie buffs. Netflix already has a strong global reach, with more than half of its 325 million users outside the U.S. market. Some may argue that a trendy reviews platform owned by a major streaming service could introduce bias, but it's not without precedent. Critic reviews hub Rotten Tomatoes was owned by Peacock-parent Comcast for years before its recent spinoff. Amazon continues to own the cast-and-crew database IMDb.

If successful -- and that's far from a lock with other players in contention, as we've learned before -- it would join Netflix's recent deal to acquire Radford Studio Center, a historic California film and television production studio. That deal is expected to close later this quarter.

A production facility enables Netflix to ramp up its content production. A film buff site enables Netflix to ramp up subscriber engagement. Neither deal will break the bank for Netflix. It might not move the needle, either, but Netflix is taking small steps to grow beyond its own organic efforts. Netflix doesn't need to find love by becoming a celebrity power couple. It just needs to focus on what has gotten it this far. Padding its empire with logical and cost-effective deals is just the cherry on top of a heart-shaped sundae that no one seems to be eating -- for now.

Rick Munarriz has positions in Comcast and Netflix. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon, Netflix, Roku, and Warner Bros. Discovery. The Motley Fool recommends Comcast. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

47 Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. 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.

Investors have flocked to artificial intelligence (AI) stocks in recent years to bet on the next game-changing technology -- and some of the first winners have been companies providing products and services essential to the functioning of AI. U.S. investors have had access to many of these players, from AI chip leader Nvidia to memory giant Micron Technology, as they trade in the U.S. on the Nasdaq.

And now, since July 10, U.S. investors also have easy access to SK Hynix, a South Korean company that's playing a major role in the AI revolution. This key Nvidia partner has been delivering triple-digit growth, and it just launched American depositary receipts (ADRs) on the Nasdaq. The shares advanced 13% during their first day of trading and closed at just over $168. Is SK Hynix a buy? Let's find out.

Image source: Getty Images.

A leader in memory for AI SK Hynix is South Korea's second-biggest company after Samsung, and it's seen earnings soar amid the AI boom. The company makes a variety of memory types that serve many devices you probably use daily -- such as smartphones and computers -- and are used across industries too. But where SK Hynix has truly stood out in recent times is in the area of high-bandwidth memory (HBM), which involves a stacking of memory close to a processor. HBM is in high demand from AI customers, and this has supercharged SK Hynix's growth.

In the recent quarter, for example, the company reported revenue growth of 198% to about $35 billion dollars, a record level. Net income soared 398%, and operating margin came in at 72%.

Of course, SK Hynix isn't alone in this market, as it faces competition from other memory providers such as Micron and Sandisk, and business has been booming for all of these players. But SK Hynix has secured leadership in the key market of HBM, and this is significant considering the need for this type of memory in AI. SK Hynix held 58% share globally of the HBM market as of the end of the first quarter, according to Counterpoint Research.

Another significant point is that SK Hynix is Nvidia's main memory partner, and considering Nvidia's dominance in the AI chip market, this is a big reason to be optimistic about SK Hynix's prospects. The two companies even reinforced their relationship recently, signing a multi-year technology partnership. It involves SK Hynix supplying memory across a broad range of areas, from AI infrastructure to personal AI and robotics.

"SK Hynix has been Nvidia's largest memory partner and will continue to be our largest memory partner," Nvidia chief Jensen Huang said at the time.

Today's Change

(

3.90

%) $

7.90

Current Price

$

210.68

Finally, SK Hynix trades at a discount compared to the industry and rival Micron. Prior to the ADR debut, SK Hynix traded at 4.8x 12-month forward earnings estimates, according to a CNBC report citing LSEG data. The industry median is 29.84x, and Micron's is 6.6x, the data showed.

Soaring demand Now, let's return to our question: Should you buy SK Hynix ADRs? Demand in the memory market is soaring thanks to the AI boom -- in fact, demand is so high that these companies don't have to worry much about rivals. There is enough need for memory to support enormous growth among leading memory players.

And the points I mentioned above make SK Hynix a compelling choice. But it's important to keep in mind that the memory market is known for being cyclical, with periods of intense demand followed by declines. The major question is whether this AI boom will be different, for example, leading to a much longer phase of growth than in past cycles, or less of a drop in demand in the later stages of the cycle.

This uncertainty means you should let your risk tolerance guide you. If you're a cautious investor and you're worried about the cyclical nature of this market, you may want to watch SK Hynix from the sidelines. But if you're a growth investor interested in diversifying across AI players, you might consider scooping up a few shares of SK Hynix at today's levels, as they may have room to run, particularly over time.

410 Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. 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.