Apple's AI Ambitions and Market Dynamics: A Comprehensive Analysis

Apple's Getting Ahead Of Itself (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Looking for a helping hand in the market? Members of Crude Value Insights get exclusive ideas and guidance to navigate any climate. Learn More " The last few months have been a wild time for shareholders of technology behemoth Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL). In early April of this year, I wrote an article that took a rather neutral stance on the business. I talked about some of the weak points the company was experiencing, such as pain in certain markets like China. Ultimately, I argued that the long-term outlook for the firm would be positive. However, because of how shares were priced, I ended up rating the company a 'hold'. In the short window after that article was published, shares skyrocketed, soaring by 30.8% at a time when the S&P 500 is up only 5.6%. This is truly monumental upside for a company of its size. Generally speaking, the larger a business becomes, the weaker its growth prospects become. It would be a different story if the overall fundamental health of the business was improving. However, revenue is down year over year while the most recent profit figures provided by management have also contracted. But because of the hype surrounding AI, investors are throwing caution to the wind. This has caused shares to become rather expensive. At some point, if this continues, the company will warrant a bearish outlook. But I'm not quite to the point of pulling that trigger just yet. Against all odds, 2024 is looking to be a rather positive here for market participants. But for much of the year, technology behemoth Apple has severely lagged the competition. From the end of 2023 through June 10th, for instance, shares of the company barely budged, rising by only 0.6%. That is after factoring in the paltry distributions that shareholders get as well. By comparison, the S&P 500, inclusive of distributions, was up 13% over the same window of time. The NASDAQ was up slightly more than this at 13.4%. But from June 10th through the time of this writing, shares of Apple have shot up by 14.1%. It may seem that I am cherry picking the date of June 10th. But the fact of the matter is that it was on that day that the company revealed a long-awaited and, to many, overdue, push into the AI revolution when it announced, at its Worldwide Developers Conference, the launch of Apple Intelligence. Odds are if you're reading this article, you already know a good deal about exactly what Apple Intelligence offers. While some may be unimpressed with its features, I found them to be particularly attractive. Their generative AI capabilities centered around drawing and ideation should appeal to many users. The enhanced Siri capabilities will also be a big draw for many consumers. In short, I think that the company has a winner here. In the event that you did not see those details yet, you can check them out here. My problem with a lot of what is going on with AI right now is that I don't believe much of the value is in the models themselves. Rather, it's about owning the ecosystem that those models play in. The good news for Apple is that its largely-closed technology platform is one of the most massive and most valuable on the planet. While I have no doubt the company will find ways to easily monetize some of these developments, I imagine that the real value will be in creating additional stickiness with existing users and luring in new ones. The problem, though, is that the easy replicability of AI features will eventually commoditize functionality. And that could turn what is currently an exciting suite of features into a 'me too' situation. This is not to say that value does not exist in this market. According to one source, the global AI market was responsible for around $196.6 billion in revenue in 2023. From 2024 through 2030, this number is expected to grow at an annualized rate of about 36.6%. That should take the market up to $1.81 trillion. I suspect that many of the larger technology companies like Apple, Google parent Alphabet (GOOG) (GOOGL), Meta Platforms (META), and Amazon (AMZN) will be major beneficiaries on the service side. However, it is important to note that a big portion of this increase in revenue opportunity will come on the hardware side of things. So some of this market will certainly be captured by firms like NVIDIA (NVDA). Considering the size of the market and the players involved, it's difficult to imagine Apple capturing a large enough portion of this market to justify the $660 billion increase in market capitalization the company achieved since I last wrote about it just three months ago. Even though, in my last article, I stated that investors should not worry about short term concerns, there is no doubt that recent financial performance should weigh on the company. In the chart above, for instance, you can see financial results covering the second quarter of the 2024 fiscal year. You can see how those figures stack up against the same time of 2023. Year over year, revenue for the company fell by 4.3%, dropping from $94.84 billion to $90.75 billion. Net income dropped and two of the three cash flow metrics that I look at for the company also declined. In the next chart above, you can see results for the first half of 2024 relative to the first half of last year. In this case, the picture does look a bit better. Revenue is still down year over year, but profits and cash flows are still up across the board. This means that a lot of the weakness the company went through has come since I last wrote about it in April. In the image below, you can see some of the financial results for the company broken up by product category. iPhone sales, for instance, dropped by 10.5% year over year, falling from $51.33 billion to $45.96 billion. Management is quite vague in its feedback to investors. All they said was that this was because of lower net sales of Pro models. The declines involving the iPad, as well as the firm's Wearables, Home, and Accessories segment were also rather painful to see. The only real bright spot for the company involved its Services segment, which saw revenue jump by 14.2% year over year because of higher net sales from advertising, as well as from cloud services and the App Store. Geographically speaking, Apple's results have been uneven. As you can tell in the image below, with the exception of Europe, the firm saw weakness across every geographical region that it provides data for. In Greater China, as well as throughout Japan and other parts of the Asia Pacific region, the firm saw a great deal of weakness. I touched on some of this in my last article that I already linked to earlier in this piece. When it comes to the global picture, the good news is that Apple is not exactly alone. Globally, the firm is the second largest smartphone manufacturer with a market share of 17.5%. This compares to the 20.1% stake in the market controlled by Samsung. Both of those firms, in their first quarters of 2024 (second quarter data is not yet available from this third-party source), reported a year over year decline in shipments. But this comes at a time when global shipments are actually up 11.8% year over year. The fact of the matter is that other players, such as Xiaomi and Transsion, are performing exceptionally well. This doesn't change my overall assessment of Apple for the long haul. But it is to point out that the company continues to face some issues they need to eventually be resolved. If shares of the company were trading on the cheap, I would be bullish. But those days are long over. In the chart above, you can see how shares are priced using data from both 2022 and 2023. For most companies, I would place this in the overvalued category. But for a business that is as high quality as Apple and that has a rather large chunk of its core market, we are still looking at a firm that is within the fair value range. Admittedly, it's at the higher end of that range in my view. But it's within the range all the same. At this point in time, there is a lot of hype surrounding Apple and what the company is working on. Its efforts will certainly create value for shareholders down the road, though I would argue that the increase in value is probably being overvalued by the market when reflected in the company's share price. Even though I maintain my previous opinion that investors should not worry about short term issues, it's hard to imagine shares rising so much at a time when revenue, profits, and cash flows, are all seeing weakness. As a whole, this makes me a bit wary. At some point, I may end up downgrading the stock to a 'sell' if fundamentals worsen and/or if the stock rises much further from here. But for now, keeping it rated a 'hold' seems appropriate.

How Apple Is Capitalizing On Its Balance Sheet To Drive AI Growth (NASDAQ:AAPL)

Initiation coverage with a hold given Apple the time it will take for Apple to capitalize on the new technology and overvaluation signals. Apple's (NASDAQ:AAPL) stock has been on a tear after the announcement of Apple Intelligence, its new AI platform. I find that Apple presents an intriguing investment thesis for my "value with potential portfolio". Its brand loyalty, history of innovation, and new AI platform, Apple Intelligence, position it for continued profitability and growth; however, in this research I will do a 360 review on the company and see if it's aligned with my investment style. Apple's core strengths lie in its passionate user base and innovative spirit. The company's loyal customer base and followers translates to consistent revenue and a launchpad for future adoption of AI-powered products. Additionally, Apple's massive cash reserves fuel further innovation and strategic acquisitions. I believe that Apple Intelligence holds the potential to significantly impact Apple's future: While Apple excels at innovation, managing products costs to maintain healthy profit margins is crucial. Additionally, integrating AI features seamlessly with existing revenue streams like the App store will be key. Exploring new markets like healthcare or smart home automation with AI expertise presents exciting growth opportunities. However, there are some challenges to consider: In this article, I aim to find if AAPL is a solid candidate for my value with potential portfolio. To accomplish this, I will explore various factors like Management effectiveness, corporate strategy, and valuation metrics to determine if it's aligned with this investment style. Tim Cook, Apple CEO, shows a high approval rating on Glassdoor. Cook has a long history with the company, having started in 1998, suggesting to me a strong alignment with the company's long-term goals. I also believe his significant stock grant compensation, which I estimate at about 80% of his salary and vesting upon reaching company targets, further incentivize his focus on Apple's success. Luca Maestri, Apple CFO, has overseen a period of strong financial performance. Apple boasts a healthy balance sheet, with an impressive ROA of 29.75% - vs sector median of 1.82% and an ROE of 147% meaning that every dollar reinvested within the company generates another $1.47! During the earnings call, he discussed maintaining shareholder value through dividends and buybacks. However, this is a continuous concern to me as FCF growth over the last 3 years has been flat, meaning Apple hasn't released a product that could replicate the success of the iPhone and generate larger amounts of cash flow and every dollar that is paid out to shareholders is a dollar that is not reinvested for future growth projects. Maestri also discussed the following Growth strategies: For challenges, he discussed the following pointers: Overall, I find that AAPL leadership delivered a positive message on their growth plans and showed signs of innovation in their WWDC event. I find the company is financially sound and well positioned for the future. I have confidence in the management due to the combination of tenure with the company and experience in the industry and due to their success in the last years, I'm inclined to give management a "Exceeds Expectations". I find that Apple's current growth strategy hinges in two pillars: They leverage their strong brand loyalty to sell high-margin iPhones, Macs, and wearables. This strategy is fueled by continued focus on AI integration across devices to enhance user experience and potentially unlock new revenue streams like personalized advertising. Looking forward, Apple is aiming to expand its services business, which already boost double-digit growth, and explore new markets like healthcare and smart home automation with AI. However, successfully balancing shareholder returns through dividends and buybacks with investments in these future endeavors is a key challenge they need to address. Here is a table I created with key differentiators between AAPL and some companies in the industry offering similar services: Source: From companies' website, presentations, Seeking Alpha, Bloomberg, Statista AAPL currently trades at around $227.57 The stock is up around 34% since its last reported earnings at the beginning of May and its hitting All-time highs. The stock is also up around 18.50% TR YTD, only slightly higher than the S&P 500 return of 17.90% Now, to assess its value, I employed an 11% discount rate, this rate reflects the minimum return an investor expects to receive for their investments. Here, I am using a 5% risk-free rate, combined with the additional market risk premium for holding stocks versus risk-free investments, I'm using 6% for this risk premium. While this could be further refined, lower or higher, I'm using it as a starting point only to get a gauge using unbiased market expectations. Then, using a simple 10-year two staged DCF model, I reversed the formula to solve for the high-growth rate, that is the growth in the first stage. To achieve this, I assumed a terminal growth rate of 4% in the second stage. Predicting growth beyond a 10-year horizon is challenging, but in my experience, a 4% rate reflects a more sustainable long-term trajectory for mature companies that should be close to historical GDP growth. Again, these assumptions can be higher or lower, but from my experience I will use a 4% rate as a base case scenario due to the nature of their business. The formula used is: This suggests that the market currently prices AAPL EPS to grow at 21.5%. According to Seeking Alpha, analyst consensus EPS over the next 3-5 years CAGR at 10.39%. This valuation looks very unrealistic, with the market expecting and demanding higher growth from Apple. Therefore, for me, it seems that AAPL is overvalued on a fundamental basis. Further, I'll also look at their forward price earnings to growth (PEG) ratio which sits at 3.40x -versus a sector median of 2.01x- implying the stock price is above the industry. However, when compared to a select group of companies, highlighted below, that are considered leaders in the industry, the company still looks overvalued given the higher growth expectations versus others in the industry. However, I believe this overvaluation is somehow justified as AAPL is more capital efficient with higher ROA and ROE. However, I find AAPL right now at the crossroads of AI. While Apple is expected to integrate AI across devices with Apple Intelligence, the company seems to be lagging and competitors are already growing faster as shown on the above growth grades by Seeking Alpha. The market is demanding similar growth from Apple but capitalizing on AI and driving significant phone upgrades to "AI iPhones" might take a few quarters. This lag creates a challenge: balancing shareholder returns with the investment needed to maintain their competitive edge in AI. AAPL has been on a positive momentum since they last reported earnings and after their WWDC event. The stock has been hitting all-time highs ever since. However, the stock looks slightly overvalued by now, on a technical basis, with its 1-year average RSI in overbought territory at 68.5 and below its 14-day moving average of 69, indicating the stock price might be changing trends. AAPL has formed a strong support level just below $210, and I will place the resistance level at its all-time high of $233.08. I believe the stock will move around this band, expecting results from the next earnings report on August 1. Apple presents a compelling investment thesis with a strong brand, financial health, and promising AI platform. However, the current valuation appears stretched, and I believe the company will face an uphill challenge on capitalizing on AI quickly enough to meet market expectations. The recent stock run appears to be a catch-up to meet S&P 500 returns, so the stock is no longer undervalued and find it more in the fair valued to overvalued range for now. Therefore, I am inclined to start my coverage of AAPL with a hold, as I don't believe it is aligned with my value with potential portfolio.

Corning: Great Example Of An AI Bubble Stock (NYSE:GLW)

Occasionally, the signs of stock bubbles come from unexpected places. Corning Incorporated (NYSE:GLW), for example, isn't a particularly glamorous or exciting business. It isn't new, and its long-term returns haven't been great. Over the past 30 years, the SPDR® S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) has outperformed GLW by about 4-fold. Real annual total returns for GLW have only been about 3.70%. However, despite GLW's mostly underwhelming performance, we do see that the stock is not a stranger to bubbles. Around the year 2000, GLW experienced a massive bubble (the only time it has outperformed the S&P 500 index) that it has yet to recover from. GLW has started to show signs that the stock price is being driven by two common bubble dynamics, even if it's not yet in a bubble as big as the one in 2000. The first of those dynamics is that to the degree the stock is trading on fundamentals, they are short-term forward-looking earnings estimates rather than long-term historical earnings trends. The second is that the majority of the stock price movement is being driven by narratives rather than numbers at all. The recent stock price bounce is essentially about stories of the future rather than results of the past. Part of the current narrative around Corning's recent stock price jump this year has been around their production of fiber components for data centers, which in turn is expected to have higher demand from AI. But that narrative has yet to produce any real numbers improvement Corning. Over the past 10 years, Corning's revenues have essentially matched inflation. So for a decade, there has been no real revenue growth and the most recent trend is down, not up. Gross profit growth during the past decade has been flat in absolute terms and significantly negative in real terms. Net Income has been down -67% during the past decade and trending flat-to-down. So, there is no real sign in the numbers yet that data center fiber demand (or anything else) will be strong enough to justify GLW's current stock price increase. On November 28th, 2023 I wrote a bearish article on Corning titled "Corning: Stock Price Decline Is Justified." I was only the second bearish article published on Corning this decade on Seeking Alpha. Since that article, Corning's stock price has gone straight up. The initial bounce, where the stock more-or-less traded in line with the S&P 500, I think was pretty normal. Corning had at least appeared to stop its earnings declines and stabilize those two quarters. It's the big move since the end of April I think is a pretty clear sign of an AI bubble. I actually think one could justify Nvidia's (NVDA) stock move during this time because they are making a lot more money than expected. We don't know how long that will last, but at least the numbers are there. I for this reason, I categorize Nvidia's stock move as more of a cyclical boom than a bubble. Corning's stock move is more bubble-like. Let's start by looking at a FAST Graph I posted in my previous article so we can see what analysts were expecting from earnings this year. This is a FAST Graph I posted last November. I have added 3 purple circles to highlight analysts' earnings per share expectations. For 2022 they expected $1.70 per share, 2024 $2.00 per share, and 2025 $2.30 per share. One might think that a stock price appreciation of 60% in 7 months would be a sign that future earnings growth expectations might have improved. However, Corning hit 2023 EPS on the dot at $1.70, fell from $2.00 to $1.93 for 2024, and fell from $2.30 to $2.24 for 2025. Earnings expectations have gotten worse all while the stock price rallied. We have seen this sort of thing twice before. Once was in 1999 and 2000, a peak from which the stock has yet to recover more than two decades later, and in later 2020 into Q1 of 2021 during the Meme, SPAC, IPO, everything bubble coming out of the pandemic. The 2021 rally, of course, didn't last, as eventually Corning's earnings reverted to the long-term historical trend. It's at this point, that one needs to understand the difference between trading and investing. It's undeniable that GLW has been a good bullish trade over the past six months, just as it was in late 2020 and early 2021, and in 1999/2000. Investors who use fundamental valuations must use a longer timeframe, however, than traders do. Fundamentals are not very predictive over the short term, and only gain correlation with the stock price over time. I have found that if I use 10 years of earnings projections, then usually within 5 years we see signs of the stock price gravitating toward the earnings trend. It can certainly happen sooner than that, but 1 or 2 years isn't enough to declare the thesis invalid. It has taken about 5 years for my bearish Nike (NKE) thesis from 2019 to play out. The same can be said of my Estée Lauder (EL) bearish thesis. But over the long term, stock prices follow future earnings, and what investors paid for those future earnings. All of this is important, but equally important is the data one chooses to use to project out earnings and how far one projects those earnings out. I typically use earnings data from the previous economic cycle as my starting point for projecting future earnings. I've found this works well about 80% of the time. Many analysts, however, use current forward earnings or recent trailing earnings and project those out longer term. I don't think this is the best way to project medium and long-term earnings, but usually, that's how the market operates. The flaw with this short-term approach is that there can be temporary dips and bumps in earnings that are unlikely to be sustainable in either direction, so they shouldn't be extrapolated out longer-term. Obviously, since the price has rocketed higher and earnings growth is expected to be the same or worse than it was since last November, my position on this stock as an "avoid" remains the same now as it was then. However, I've found it's a good practice to at least try to see things from the bullish perspective when I can. I perform a valuation analyses on about 50 stocks per week, plus any stocks that members of my Investing Group, The Cyclical Investor's Club, inquire about. This means that I get a pretty good read on the valuation the market is putting on the S&P 500 stocks. I express my earnings-based valuations in terms of a 10-year expected earnings CAGR, and I do this for all the less-cyclical S&P 500 stocks for which I have enough data. Usually, that's a little over half the S&P 500, which is about 2/3rds the weighting of the S&P 500. For the past couple of years, the market has been valuing the S&P 500 around a 5.5% 10-year earnings CAGR, give or take about 25 basis points higher or lower. Since I know that's roughly where the market is, it can sometimes be helpful to utilize that information in reverse if my valuation comes in far away from that 5.5% 10-year CAGR level. Currently, my 10-year earnings CAGR for GLW is about +3.03% because I think they will probably barely be able to grow earnings at all based on the past decade. My earnings growth rate estimate is about 0.49%. This might be a little low if we have higher than average inflation and GLW can pass it on to customers, since from 2015-2020 there wasn't much inflation and part of my future estimate is based on that historical period. So, my question is: Why is the market willing to pay more for this stock right now? Other than the AI narrative, which can serve as a sentiment catalyst, the other reason is that earnings are expected to grow at 14% this year. If I took that 14% earnings growth rate and extrapolated it out 10 years, I get a 10-year earnings CAGR of +5.73%. This is right in line with the market average. So, I think to the degree the market is using fundamentals to value the stock, what the market is doing is simply taking the short-term earnings growth estimate and assuming this level of growth can go on for the next decade. This is likely the error the market is making with the current price of the stock. As I noted earlier, I track hundreds of stocks and have written hundreds of valuation articles over the years. About 80% of the time, with the addition of a few control factors, historical earnings trends are a good guide to the future, and over 3-5 years, valuations tend to adjust to earnings for most stocks. This does mean that 20% of the time, the historical trend is broken, and earnings come in much stronger than expected. This happened to me with my Palo Alto (PANW) stock sell rating on 1/9/2023. It looked like earnings growth was slowing, and the stock price could re-rate as a result. Then, instead of earnings growing the expected 35% in 2023, they grew 76%, completely blowing expectations out of the water. Here is what the stock did after my sell article: So, there are times when businesses' earnings can surprise, and then they can maintain them going forward. However, this is the exception, and I don't think Corning stock has the same capability to back up the recent stock price move with a similar earnings move. For these reasons, for investors, I maintain my sell rating on GLW over the medium 2-5 year time frame.

Notable analyst calls this week: Apple, Tesla and banks among top picks

The S&P500 (SP500) closed in the green on Friday, after investors digested quarterly results from big banks and data showing consumer prices cooling down in June, bolstering bets for a September rate cut. For the week, the Nasdaq (COMP:IND) lost 0.7%, while Dow (DJI) advanced 1%. Wall Street had a slew of upgrades and downgrades from analysts. Here are some of the major calls for the week: Apple in focus after a slew of analysts' commentary made way during the week Needham raised its price target to $260 from $220 reiterated Buy rating, noting that Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) is spending its capital on share buybacks instead of generative artificial intelligence infrastructure. However, Needham analyst Laura Martin expressed concern that Apple's revenue growth rate could be at risk in the next three years and suggested that Apple build an advertising business similar to Amazon. Piper Sandler also upped its PT on the tech giant to $225 from $190. "From our perspective, the excitement is warranted, as AI could be a needle mover for upgrades," said Piper analyst Matt Farrell. Farrell noted that much of the recent good news is already "priced in." Meanwhile, Wedbush analyst Dan Ives, who has an Outperform rating and $275 price target on Apple, said iPhone is seeing more signs of stabilization across various market, with the brokerage believing that June will be the last negative growth quarter for China with a growth turnaround beginning in the September quarter. The stock fell marginally during the week. Overall, it gained over 18% since the start of the year. Tesla maintained the spotlight this week after UBS downgrade Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) was downgraded to Sell from Neutral by UBS on valuation concern. "While TSLA is investing heavily in AI and the tech is making progress, investment is costly, the pace of improvement may slow, and the payoff is long-dated," he warned. "If market enthusiasm for AI diminishes, this may impact TSLA's multiple," said analyst Joseph Spak and assigned a price target of $197. The electric vehicle giant dropped over 8% on Thursday due to a report of a possible delay in its August 8 robotaxi event. The stock has gained in 11 straight trading sessions before the downswing. Analysts offer clues on banks as earnings kick off Analysts throughout the week came out with a horde of commentary on what can be expected from banks, as big banks grabbed headlines with their first quarter results on Friday. Wolfe downgraded JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM) to Peer Perform from Outperform, adding "valuation appears full." The brokerage said the banking giant is more exposed to declining NII due to heavier short end gearing as compared to its peers. The investment firm also downgraded Raymond James Financial (NYSE:RJF) from Outperform to Peer Perform, adding it expects EPS growth to decelerate relative to peers. KeyCorp's (NYSE:KEY) rating was lowered by UBS to Neutral from Buy, saying lighter capital positioning could inhibit growth for the regional bank. UBS also lowered PT by $1 to $15. Meanwhile, Piper Sandler analyst R. Scott Siefers upgraded Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) to Neutral from Underweight and said he expects second quarter NII to fall to ~$13.9B then jump to $14.5B-$14.6B by the fourth quarter this year. Jefferies unsure about Darden's near-term growth Jefferies said weak traffic trends for Darden Restaurants' (NYSE:DRI) Olive Garden brand could continue and downgraded the restaurant chain to "underperform" from "hold." Jefferies also cut its price target to $124 from $154, citing risk to growth in the near term. The stock lost nearly 15% so far this year. Microchip Technology and ON Semiconductor receives downgrade on valuation concern ON Semiconductor (NASDAQ:ON) and Microchip Technology (NASDAQ:MCHP) got a downgrade from Morgan Stanley due to issues related to the automotive industry and valuation concerns. Analyst Joseph Moore said Microchip's valuation reflects "loft expectations" and lowered his rating to Equal-Weight from Overweight, while slightly tweaking his price target to $100 from a previous $102. Similarly, Moore downgraded ON Semiconductor to Underweight from Equal-Weight and cut his price target to $65 from $70, adding that there is "limited room" for multiple expansion. Competitive environment for music streamers worries Redburn; Jefferies has a different view Competitive environment for the music streaming industry and structural challenges made analysts at Redburn Atlantic downgrade both Spotify (NYSE:SPOT) and Warner Music Group's (NASDAQ:WMG) to Sell. The equity research firm also mentioned Universal Music Group (OTCPK:UMGNF), saying that the company is "most exposed" to industry risks. Meanwhile, Spotify is the top pick for Jefferies out of the three music streamers and the brokerage expects consistent price hikes, bundling, and gross margin expansion for the company. Jefferies rated all three companies to Buy. Analysts view the current entry point for the Warner Music Group stock as attractive, while Universal is seen to be "better positioned over the long term" due to its experienced management team, and superior artist roster, which includes Taylor Swift, the Weeknd, and Rihanna, among others. Microsoft's gets PT rise ahead of quarterly results Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT) shared some limelight this week, as BMO Capital Markets analyst Brian Pitz bumped PT to $500 from $465 on the tech giant ahead of quarterly results on rising expectation from its cloud business. Earlier in the week, Argus also raised its price target on Microsoft, citing its GenAI investments both internally and externally. Argus analyst Joseph Bonner added Microsoft is seen as one of the few technology companies that are considered a "haven" by investors in uncertain times, given its diversified assets. Other than the companies mentioned above, there were some other analyst actions during the week, including Carvana, which was upgraded by Needham to Buy from Hold, calling it a secular growth story with a cyclical recovery kicker. UBS and Wolfe Research raised their PT on Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA), noting that recent checks indicate that demand for its upcoming Blackwell line is "exceedingly robust." Analysts at Benchmark also raised PT more than 25% on Nvidia stock and reiterated Buy rating, saying that demand for its high-tech hardware powering the AI phenomenon shows no signs of slowing.