Loading page
What we know about this company
A dated company review is availableTesla, Inc.
TSLA remains a profitable but capital-intensive EV, energy and autonomy platform whose next 3 months question is whether Q3 earnings and the Cybercab event show real deployment progress rather than another demo.
TickerYou is watching this company, but we are not currently recommending it. An earlier full review was negative 4/10, but that view is historical.
$365.44
last session
Price only · no current Idea
Quarterly results in 46 days · Oct 28 · Estimated date
This came from an earlier review. It is useful background, not a current Idea.
Tesla still mostly sells cars — 480,126 of them last quarter, more than ever before, bringing in $28.2 billion in three months. The problem is that after paying all the bills, only $398 million was left as profit — a tiny sliver on that much revenue, and about 57% less than a year ago. The company actually spent more cash than it took in, mostly because Elon Musk is pouring money into robotaxis, humanoid robots called Optimus, and a huge new chip factory in Texas with SpaceX. For this stock to work from here, one of those side bets has to become a real business fast. If it doesn't — or if the widely-reported plan to sell the China business turns out to be true and takes away a fifth of the revenue — the stock has room to fall meaningfully before those long-term bets can rescue it.
Loading company numbers
Loading latest quarterly results
Loading ownership and market expectations
Supplemental SEC filing context loads independently from the company evidence above.
Checking the newest complete filings from the large investors we follow. The rest of this page is ready while these delayed reports load.
TickerYou is checking this company, but no active investment Idea is open.
That review was negative with 4/10 research strength. It is history, not a current Idea.
Read the newest company check below. New facts can update the research, but watching a company does not turn it into a recommendation.
TSLA remains a profitable but capital-intensive EV, energy and autonomy platform whose next 3 months question is whether Q3 earnings and the Cybercab event show real deployment progress rather than another demo.
TSLA remains a profitable but capital-intensive EV, energy and autonomy platform whose 3m question is whether Q3 earnings and the Cybercab event show real deployment progress rather than another demo. Since the newest prior sweep as of 2026-08-30T13:17:00.685+00:00, I found no newer EDGAR filing, while the September 1 Waymo/Cybercab report adds competitive pressure around Tesla's camera-first autonomy thesis for the 1y horizon.
Loading research history
Earlier company review · Record saved Aug 12, 2026 · check date unavailable. The original research wording and date checks stay available inside.
These events and risks came from an earlier company review. There is no current Idea.
An event can change what investors believe. A risk shows how our research could be wrong.
Watch for a company announcement or filing that confirms or moves this date.
Expected from Tesla (TSLA) Earnings Date & Report - Investing.com · Jul 22, 2026
TSLA remains a profitable but capital-intensive EV, energy and autonomy platform whose next 3 months question is whether Q3 earnings and the Cybercab event show real deployment progress rather than another demo.
A company check updates what we know. It does not by itself turn this company into a current opportunity.
1 older quarterly-results date is hidden because a newer company check is shown above.
Computed by TickerYou from 1254 completed daily closing sessions supplied by Yahoo Finance, through Sep 10, 2026. The Sep 11, 2026 quote-session candle was excluded because a delayed feed cannot prove it was final. No company fundamentals enter this reading.
Shorter and longer price trends point in different directions, so there is no clear trend.
Price movement can help with timing and can warn when the market disagrees with our Idea. It does not tell us what the business is worth.
Watch whether the close and the 50-session average ($355.70) move to the same side of the 200-session average ($399.05).
Last closing price
$363.56
Sep 10, 2026
Average price over 20 trading days
$353.86
Close is 2.7% above this average
Average price over 50 trading days
$355.70
Close is 2.2% above this average
Average price over 200 trading days
$399.05
Close is 8.9% below this average
Recent price speed
53.7 · balanced
A 14-day speed reading; lower than 30 is low and higher than 70 is high
Is the trend speeding up?
Above signal
Shows whether the shorter trend is pulling ahead of or behind the longer one
The moving averages are simple averages over exactly 20, 50, and 200 daily trading sessions. RSI uses Wilder's 14-session smoothing; a flat series is neutral at 50. MACD uses 12- and 26-session exponential averages with a 9-session signal. A window is never shortened when history is missing. Every comparison uses the final dated daily close—not an intraday quote—so all figures share one observation boundary. A candle dated to an active delayed-quote session is excluded because it may still be changing. These are trend and momentum references, not a Buy/Sell score.
We keep the original wording so readers can check the record. Any figures below belong to that older review and are not current guidance.
At $332.81 the risk/reward skews negative on a 3–6 month view. Margins are collapsed, FCF negative, China overhang unresolved, and Q3 has no credit backstop. Long-term optionality (Robotaxi, Optimus, Terafab) is real but not urgent enough to defend the multiple here. Bias: short, low conviction.
Each quarter is named by the fiscal quarter the company itself reported — the label its release used and its consensus estimate was quoted against — and by the month that quarter ended, taken from the filer's own XBRL period boundaries. A fiscal year need not follow the calendar, so Apple's Q2 runs January to March; naming the quarter end keeps that true in both calendars, and no quarter number is ever inferred from a date. Quarterly financials beside this card names the same quarter the same way. TickerYou takes the figures from the release and its filing; every word, sign and percentage is calculated by the app from those stored numbers. A post-release reaction appears only with the stored first-close measurement stamp; otherwise the card says the window is not established and computes no divergence. EPS here is on the basis consensus quotes — adjusted for most US names — so it can legitimately differ from the GAAP figure in Quarterly financials. Rows marked [backfilled] were confirmed from archived coverage after the fact — a lower evidence tier than live capture, and labelled so.
Q2 FY2026 · Jun 2026: EPS missed the stored consensus estimate, while revenue beat the stored consensus estimate. No post-release price reaction is asserted because its stamped measurement window is not established.
A surprise shows how the release differed from expectations, not whether the business is good or the thesis is right. The price reaction shows repricing, not its cause.
Watch whether the next comparable release repairs the miss, and keep the operating result separate from the market reaction.
Quarter ended Jun 30, 2026 · Reported Jul 22, 2026 · stock move after results · not shown
[backfilled] Record $28.24B revenue driven by 480K deliveries masked a margin collapse — adjusted EPS of $0.33 as operating income fell 57% YoY on a 47% surge in opex, $5.8B capex, and a 67% drop in regulatory-credit revenue, with free cash flow turning negative for the first time since early 2024.
Quarter ended Mar 31, 2026 · Reported Apr 22, 2026 · stock move after results · not shown
[backfilled] Gross margin recovered to 21.1% (up ~478 bps year-over-year) on 358K vehicle deliveries, but management raised full-year CapEx guidance above $25 billion and energy storage deployment fell 38% sequentially to 8.8 GWh, pulling shares lower after an initial after-hours pop despite the EPS outperformance.
Quarter ended Dec 31, 2025 · Reported Jan 28, 2026 · stock move after results · not shown
[backfilled] Non-GAAP EPS of $0.50 beat the $0.44 Wall Street consensus as energy-segment strength and sequential automotive margin recovery to 17.9% ex-credits drove total gross margin above 20%; revenue of $24.9B slightly exceeded the $24.77B consensus, though full-year 2025 marked Tesla's first annual revenue decline, and 2026 guidance called for CapEx exceeding $20B with CyberCab production starting April.
Quarter ended Sep 30, 2025 · Reported Oct 22, 2025 · stock move after results · not shown
[backfilled] Operating income fell ~40% year-over-year pressured by tariffs and lower regulatory credit revenue despite record deliveries of 497,099 vehicles and record free cash flow of ~$4.0B; management pointed to robotaxi expansion and autonomy as the primary 2026 growth catalysts.
Computed from SEC filings — never model output. Each quarter is named by the fiscal quarter the company itself reported and the month that quarter ended, through the same resolver the Earnings card beside this one uses; where no release established a fiscal label, the quarter is named by its end alone rather than by a quarter number guessed from the date. EPS is GAAP diluted, as filed, so it can legitimately differ from the adjusted figure in the Earnings card (consensus is quoted adjusted). Y/Y compares the same fiscal quarter a year earlier; a comparison that cannot be made honestly is an em-dash that says why.
Q2 FY2026 · Jun 2026: Revenue grew 25.5% year over year; net income fell 4.9% year over year; and net profit margin was 3.9%, down 1.3 percentage points.
Comparing the same fiscal quarter a year earlier controls for seasonality. Revenue direction and margin direction together show whether sales are translating into profit, but one quarter is evidence—not a complete thesis.
Watch whether the next comparable quarter restores margin; revenue growth with falling margin can be lower-quality growth.
| (USD) | Q2 FY2026Quarter ended Jun 2026 | vs last year |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $28.24 B | |
| Profit after costs | $1.11 B | |
| Profit per share | 0.32 | |
| Profit margin | 3.9% |
† derived: the fiscal year minus its three reported quarters — no 10-K reports a Q4 figure directly. For EPS this assumes per-share figures add across the year.
| Quarter | Revenue | Y/Y | Net income | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 FY2026 · Mar 2026 | $22.39 B | $477.00 M | 2.1% | |
| Q4 FY2025 · Dec 2025 | $24.90 B † | $840.00 M † | 3.4% | |
| Q3 FY2025 · Sep 2025 | $28.09 B | $1.37 B | 4.9% | |
| Jun 2025 | $22.50 B | $1.17 B | 5.2% | |
| Mar 2025 | $19.34 B | $409.00 M | 2.1% | |
| Dec 2024 | $25.71 B † | $2.13 B † | 8.3% | |
| Sep 2024 | $25.18 B | $2.17 B | 8.6% | |
| Jun 2024 | $25.50 B | $1.40 B | 5.5% |
Append-only company checks, newest evidence first. Evidence dates come from frozen research cutoffs; older rows without a cutoff are labelled by publication time instead. Multiple checks are preserved, never silently merged into one conclusion.
TSLA remains a profitable but capital-intensive EV, energy and autonomy platform whose 3m question is whether Q3 earnings and the Cybercab event show real deployment progress rather than another demo. Since the newest prior sweep as of 2026-08-30T13:17:00.685+00:00, I found no newer EDGAR filing, while the September 1 Waymo/Cybercab report adds competitive pressure around Tesla's camera-first autonomy thesis for the 1y horizon.
2026-10-28 (expected; not company-confirmed) earnings reporting date was listed by a third-party Investing.com calendar for Tesla Q3 2026; no company-confirmed schedule was established from an issuer source in this pass.
Checked Tesla SEC company submissions JSON for recent EDGAR coverage; current checks surfaced the July 2026 results filing set as latest relevant filings.
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR for revenue, cash flow, capex and liquidity disclosures.
TSLA remains an execution-heavy autonomy and robotics option layered on a profitable EV and energy base with high AI capex demands. Since the newest prior sweep as of 2026-08-28T04:56:05.992+00:00, I found no eligible post-prior fundamental item opened in this pass; the 3m focus remains Q3 earnings and Cybercab evidence, while the 1y focus remains whether autonomy scale can offset spending and competitive/regulatory pressure.
TSLA remains an execution-heavy autonomy and robotics option on top of a profitable but capex-intensive EV and energy business. Since the 2026-08-26T22:47:06.07Z prior sweep, the Cybertruck price article adds a small pricing/mix signal, while the 3m focus stays Q3 earnings and Cybercab proof points and the 1y focus remains whether AI, Robotaxi, Semi, and Optimus spending converts into measurable earnings power.
2026-10-28 (expected; not company-confirmed) earnings reporting date was estimated by a third-party calendar for Tesla Q3 2026.
Evidence checked Aug 26, 2026 · 2 recorded assessments
TSLA remains an execution-heavy long-term optionality story with near-term fundamentals still constrained by heavy AI, autonomy, and manufacturing capex. Since the 2026-08-26T17:39:11.92Z prior sweep, I found no newer eligible date-stamped change; the current check reconfirms robotaxi regulatory progress, Cybercab launch preparation, and the older August 18 Einride Semi order without treating those older items as new post-prior catalysts.
Evidence checked Aug 24, 2026 · 2 recorded assessments
TSLA remains an execution-heavy fundamentals case rather than a simple EV multiple story. Since the newest prior sweep, Nevada robotaxi approval and reported Austin unsupervised operation modestly support the autonomy thesis, while the reported bollard incident reinforces that safety, scale, and regulatory proof still matter before Cybercab can change 1y earnings power.
Published Aug 19, 2026 · 2 recorded assessments
Q2 2026 came in strong (~480k deliveries, record energy storage) and the autonomy narrative (Robotaxi live in Miami/Dallas/Houston, Cybercab production) is advancing. The just-approved ~$1T Musk pay package removes a key-person overhang but adds up to ~12% dilution over a decade tied to an aggressive $8.5T cap goal. Fundamentally intact and execution-driven; valuation now embeds heavy autonomy/robotics optionality. Watch the ~late-Oct Q3 print for margin trajectory and Robotaxi scaling.
Published Aug 12, 2026 · 3 recorded assessments
Tesla posted record Q2 revenue ($28.24B, +26% YoY) on record deliveries but badly missed EPS as operating expenses surged 47%. Management is openly entering its largest-ever investment cycle: $16.8B Terafab, a planned $10.1B solar factory, and Cybercab ramp simultaneously. The 3-month view is pressured by this cost inflation. The 1-year view turns on two binary outcomes: whether FSD unsupervised reaches customers ('probably Q4 2026' per Musk) and whether Cybercab autonomous-ride revenue starts in 2027. Both are plausible but unproven. The stock is pricing in execution on both; any slip extends the payback horizon materially.
Published Aug 11, 2026 · 2 recorded assessments
Tesla is in a strategic inflection: the core auto business faces ongoing margin scrutiny while the Robotaxi platform (Cybercab production ramping to 125,000-unit capacity, VINs building in August) is approaching the revenue event horizon. The $16.8B Terafab chip plant with SpaceX is a bold long-term bet — if built, it structurally reduces AI compute cost for FSD and Dojo — but it is years from operational and adds near-term capex pressure. Jefferies PT cut to $350 reflects consensus caution. The 1-year thesis hinges on two variables: Cybercab commercial launch execution (likely H1 2027 at current ramp pace) and Q3 automotive gross margin — if margins recover, the stock re-rates meaningfully. Moderate conviction; size accordingly.
Checked Tesla July 22, 2026 Q2 results 8-K directly on EDGAR.
Checked September 1 Waymo and Cybercab competitive-position report for Tesla robotaxi news.
Fundamental: the article frames Tesla's Cybercab as a scale and cost test against Waymo's larger multi-sensor robotaxi network, directly affecting Tesla's autonomy competitive-position thesis.
source ↗2026-10-28 (expected; not company-confirmed) earnings reporting date was listed by a third-party calendar for Tesla Q3 2026; issuer IR checked separately did not show a future company-confirmed Q3 date on the opened page.
Checked Tesla investor relations quarterly disclosure list for issuer-posted earnings history and absence of a future Q3 company-confirmed date on the opened page.
Checked Tesla SEC company submissions JSON for recent EDGAR filing coverage through the July 2026 results filing set.
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla July 22, 2026 results 8-K directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla issuer event page for Cybercab launch event and Robotaxi sweepstakes details.
Checked The Verge report on Waymo's challenge to Tesla's camera-only autonomy approach and possible regulatory implications.
Fundamental: Tesla's own event page confirms an Austin Cybercab launch event tied to Robotaxi ride participation, keeping autonomy commercialization in the 3m catalyst set while still not proving scaled unit economics.
source ↗Fundamental: Waymo's public challenge to camera-only autonomy and the article's discussion of possible multi-sensor regulatory requirements bear directly on Tesla's competitive position and market-access risk in robotaxis.
source ↗Checked Tesla investor relations quarterly disclosure list for issuer-posted earnings history and absence of a future Q3 company-confirmed date on the opened page.
Checked Tesla EDGAR company submissions for recent filing coverage through the July 2026 results filing set.
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla July 22, 2026 results 8-K directly on EDGAR.
Checked Business Insider report on Cybertruck price increases and lower-volume luxury positioning.
Checked TeslAnt report on Tesla Cybercab launch-event timing and autonomy context.
Checked MarketWatch autonomous-trucking competitor context involving Kodiak AI and Tesla's planned market entry.
Checked Tesla's official Cybercab sweepstakes event page for company-sourced Cybercab Launch Event and Robotaxi ride-entry details.
Fundamental: Cybertruck pricing is a direct unit-economics signal, though the same report frames the increase against weak first-half Cybertruck demand and a lower-volume luxury positioning.
source ↗Fundamental: the Cybercab launch is a concrete autonomy-product catalyst, but the opened source also cautions that an unveiling is not proof of scaled unsupervised paid-mile economics.
source ↗Not fundamental for TSLA by itself: it is mainly competitor and analyst context for autonomous trucking rather than a Tesla contract, filing, production milestone, or balance-sheet event.
source ↗2026-10-28 (expected; not company-confirmed) earnings reporting date was estimated by a third-party calendar for Tesla Q3 2026.
Checked Tesla EDGAR company submissions for recent company filings through the July 2026 results filing set.
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla July 22, 2026 results 8-K directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla Nevada robotaxi approval article as current fundamental news.
Checked Tesla Cybercab Austin launch report as current fundamental news.
Checked Einride and Tesla Semi deployment announcement as material older news surfaced in this sweep.
Fundamental: Nevada approval to offer commercial robotaxi services in Clark County expands Tesla's autonomy regulatory runway, although the report frames the initial deployment target as below the full permitted cap.
source ↗Fundamental: a purpose-built Cybercab rollout would be direct evidence on Tesla's ability to move from supervised FSD products toward autonomous ride-hailing assets, but the source says Tesla had not confirmed the exact public launch date.
source ↗Fundamental: the planned 500 Tesla Semi deployment gives Tesla a concrete commercial heavy-truck scale proof point and can support future Semi revenue if Tesla delivers the trucks on the announced rollout schedule.
source ↗TSLA remains a fundamentals-vs-optionality debate: current filings show a profitable but capex-heavy company, while recent robotaxi/Cybercab reports support the autonomy narrative without proving scaled earnings power. Since the August 24, 2026 prior sweep, I found no newer eligible TSLA item that changes the view; the 3m focus stays on Q3 results and autonomy proof points, and the 1y case depends on converting AI, Robotaxi, Cybercab, Semi, and Optimus spending into measurable returns.
2026-10-28 (expected; not company-confirmed) earnings reporting date was estimated by a third-party calendar for Tesla Q3 2026.
Checked Tesla recent EDGAR company submissions for last-month filings.
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla July 22 2026 results 8-K directly on EDGAR.
Checked Tesla Nevada robotaxi approval article for fundamental autonomy impact.
Checked Tesla Austin unsupervised Robotaxi report for autonomy execution evidence.
Checked Tesla Cybercab Austin launch reporting for near-term product timing.
Fundamental: Nevada approval for commercial robotaxi services in Clark County expands Tesla's regulatory runway for autonomy, a central driver of its long-term software and fleet economics.
source ↗Fundamental: the report says tracked Austin Robotaxi rides recently operated without onboard monitors, which is direct evidence on Tesla's ability to move the autonomy thesis toward a commercial service, though Tesla does not publish full fleet data.
source ↗Fundamental: Cybercab timing matters because the vehicle is purpose-built without steering wheel or pedals; the opened source says Tesla has an Austin launch event page but no formal exact launch date, keeping near-term autonomy execution uncertainty high.
source ↗Checked Tesla next earnings date after Q2 results
Checked Tesla recent EDGAR company submission list
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 results 8-K directly on EDGAR
Checked Tesla Austin unsupervised robotaxi report
Checked Tesla Cybercab and Semi rollout report
Checked Tesla Las Vegas robotaxi approval report
Checked Tesla robotaxi safety incident report
Fundamental: Nevada approval to offer commercial robotaxi services in Clark County expands Tesla's autonomy regulatory runway and can affect future software and fleet revenue if deployment follows.
source ↗Fundamental: broader unsupervised Austin operation is evidence on Tesla's autonomy execution path, which is central to its long-term earnings-power narrative and Cybercab rollout timing.
source ↗Not fundamental by itself: it is an execution and safety signal for robotaxi confidence, but a single reported low-damage incident does not yet change balance sheet, earnings power, or competitive position without regulatory or fleet consequences.
source ↗TSLA remains execution-heavy rather than cheap on fundamentals. Q2 showed strong deliveries and revenue, but operating margin and free cash flow were pressured by capex and AI/robotics spend; the August news keeps focus on whether Cybercab, Robotaxi, Semi, and Optimus can move from narrative to measurable earnings power by the late-October Q3 report and over the next year.
Checked Tesla next earnings date after Q2 2026 results
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 10-Q directly on EDGAR
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 results 8-K directly on EDGAR
Checked Tesla Q2 2026 shareholder update exhibit for operating metrics
Checked current robotaxi and Semi execution news for Tesla
Fundamental: the report speaks to Tesla's robotaxi deployment path and Semi commercialization, both of which affect the timing of software/fleet revenue and commercial vehicle expansion rather than near-term trading noise.
source ↗Directly affects the balance sheet and share count: full vesting would dilute existing holders by up to ~12% over 10 years, while securing Musk's retention (min 7.5 years). Materially changes the ownership structure and expected dilution.
source ↗Robotaxi commercialization and Cybercab production are the core of the autonomy earnings-power thesis; commentary rather than a new disclosure, but tracks a competitive-position driver.
source ↗Cybercab infrastructure is advancing but the Nevada permit cap is a real near-term ceiling on robotaxi revenue. Semi momentum is a bright spot. The $25 billion-plus capex year means the bull case depends on Cybercab and Optimus timelines materializing; execution risk is high and the October 28 Q3 print is the next hard data point.
Concrete infrastructure buildout for 80 wireless chargers on a leased Austin facility signals Cybercab launch is progressing toward physical readiness, not just software.
source ↗A regulatory cap 500x below the ask in a key early market creates a hard constraint on near-term Cybercab revenue ramp and signals regulatory friction that could replicate in other states.
source ↗A fleet commitment from a professional logistics operator provides a meaningful near-term revenue signal for the Semi program and validates commercial vehicle demand.
source ↗Material capital commitment on top of an already-elevated investment cycle. Strategic rationale is chip supply security for Tesla's AI products, but execution risk is high and this adds no near-term revenue. Changes the balance sheet and capex outlook.
source ↗Confirms Cybercab is being equipped for commercial passenger service and deepens Tesla-SpaceX ecosystem integration. Revenue from autonomous rides remains a 2027+ event per management guidance.
source ↗Analyst adjustment following Q2 earnings miss; reflects near-term cost inflation concern but does not challenge the long-term autonomous thesis.
source ↗Tesla is navigating a fundamental identity crisis: the legacy auto margin structure is eroding (1.4% op margin, -$1.09B FCF in Q2), while Elon Musk is pivoting the company toward AI and SpaceX merger logic. The China divestiture scenario — if executed — would remove 50%+ of deliveries and create a multi-quarter earnings hole while structural synergies with SpaceX take years to materialize. Terafab is a vision, not near-term earnings. Near-term risk/reward skewed negatively; not a buyer at current valuation with FCF negative and a potential major asset sale on the table. Hold and watch for merger timeline clarity.
Tesla is co-investing in a semiconductor fab with SpaceX — potentially reducing AI compute costs long-term but requiring massive upfront capital; Musk described it as 'the largest and most valuable building on Earth.' This accelerates merger logic between the two companies and changes Tesla's strategic identity.
source ↗Shanghai factory produces >50% of Tesla's global deliveries; a divestiture would gut near-term earnings power and delivery volumes even as it removes geopolitical risk for a SpaceX merger. This is a fundamental restructuring scenario that could cut EPS by half or more in the near term.
source ↗Core earnings quality is deteriorating — negative FCF and a sub-2% operating margin for an auto company with 30%+ historical margins signals AI buildout is consuming financial performance. Near-term earnings power is genuinely impaired.
source ↗Tesla's Q2 2026 revealed the deepest tension in the transformation story: record revenue at $28.2B (+26% YoY) alongside a profit collapse that missed non-GAAP EPS by 38%, compressed operating margin to 1.4%, and produced negative FCF for the first time since early 2024. Jefferies responded by cutting 2026 EBIT projections by 37%. The vehicle business is simultaneously growing deliveries and losing margin — squeezed by the expiration of US EV tax credits, intensifying Chinese competition, and surging AI/R&D spend. The Terafab commitment with SpaceX ($16.8B) is the boldest signal yet that Musk is re-rating Tesla as an AI company, but it adds massive capex on top of a quarter already burning cash. At a 1-year horizon, the bull case requires Cybercab to reach meaningful volume and Optimus to sign commercial agreements — neither looks likely before late 2027. The bear case is ongoing automotive margin erosion while the AI bet remains pre-revenue. Conviction at current price levels requires a 3–5 year patience horizon; the next 12 months are dominated by earnings headwinds.
A $16.8B capital commitment to a semiconductor fab — against Tesla's approximately $3.8B total annual profit — materially deepens the balance-sheet risk of the autonomy/AI pivot; if Terafab succeeds it could internalize critical chip supply for Cybercab and Optimus, but near-term it is another drag on FCF that is already negative.
source ↗Small recall with limited financial impact; NHTSA-mandated fix is still being determined, adding minor near-term cost uncertainty but immaterial at Tesla's volume scale.
source ↗Proprietary chip manufacturing at scale would structurally reduce Tesla's dependency on third-party AI compute for FSD and Dojo; a fundamental shift in vertical integration that could lower long-run compute cost structure.
source ↗Analyst commentary reflecting sell-side caution on near-term demand softness and Robotaxi timeline uncertainty; does not change underlying earnings power.
source ↗Visible production ramp evidence (125,000+ unit annual capacity installed) confirms Cybercab is progressing toward commercial launch; pace of VIN progression will be the key tracker for Robotaxi revenue timeline.
source ↗Small-scope recall with no material financial impact; keeps regulatory scrutiny narrative active but immaterial to earnings.
source ↗Tesla's auto business is under structural margin pressure — 1.4% operating margin, negative Q2 FCF, 67% drop in regulatory credits — while burning $5.8B in quarterly capex to fund speculative robotics and AI bets. The Optimus Gen 3 reveal expected in August 2026 is the single most important near-term catalyst: if it comes with production commitments and revenue timeline, it changes the thesis. Without it, this is a deteriorating-margin auto company spending its way toward an uncertain AI future.
Operating margin at 1.4% — down from 4.1% YoY — is a structural red flag, not a one-quarter blip. Negative FCF combined with accelerating capex means the auto business is currently destroying cash.
source ↗Regulatory credits were a significant prop to Tesla's net income in prior years; their rapid evaporation directly reduces earnings and is outside management's control under current U.S. policy.
source ↗Optimus is the central re-rating thesis for Tesla from auto to AI/robotics. A Gen 3 reveal with concrete production timelines would be the most important fundamental event for the stock since FSD launch.
source ↗Heavy capex at a time of 1.4% operating margin and negative FCF is a high-stakes capital allocation bet — only justified if AI and robotics revenues materialize before auto margins deteriorate further.
Complete SEC 13F filings only. These delayed reports show filed share amounts, not a manager’s full portfolio, intent, or a proven trade.
4 of 14 recent complete filings report ordinary shares. Compared with the prior report: 2 with more shares, 2 with fewer shares, and 1 that no longer report it.
A large, repeated position can support a research story, but these filings arrive late and do not show an investor’s full portfolio or reason for owning the stock.
Look for the same investor to keep a meaningful position across several reports.
No numeric score or recommendation is made from these delayed filings. They are one piece of background evidence, not a buy or sell signal.
14 current complete filings of 16 tracked managers. 2 investors have only an older filing and are left out of this current view. Current holding dates span Mar 31, 2026 to Jun 30, 2026.
TSLA is 7.5% of ARK Investment Management's disclosed portfolio ($1.16 B). Holdings as of Jun 30, 2026. Reported in all 6 quarters we can see.
TSLA is 0.64% of Renaissance Technologies's disclosed portfolio ($467.27 M). Holdings as of Jun 30, 2026. Reported in 4 consecutive quarters.
TSLA is 0.45% of Soros Fund Management's disclosed portfolio ($36.53 M). Holdings as of Jun 30, 2026. Reported in 3 consecutive quarters.
TSLA is 0.06% of Citadel Advisors's disclosed portfolio ($515.76 M). Holdings as of Jun 30, 2026. Reported in all 2 quarters we can see.
Market-neutral / multi-strategy: Citadel often reports shares, calls, and puts at the same time. These rows show reported exposure, not a simple bullish or bearish bet.
Citadel Advisors (Ken Griffin) reports a PUT option ($9.59 B). The filing does not prove whether it is a bet or a hedge, so options never count as ordinary shares above.
Citadel Advisors (Ken Griffin) reports a CALL option ($13.70 B). The filing does not prove whether it is a bet or a hedge, so options never count as ordinary shares above.
Duquesne Family Office (Stanley Druckenmiller) reports a CALL option ($53.00 M). The filing does not prove whether it is a bet or a hedge, so options never count as ordinary shares above.
2 newly or higher reported, 2 lower reported, 1 absent. Reported amounts only; corporate actions are not normalized.
Reported by 4 of 14 managers with a current filing; at least 0.5% of disclosed 13F value for 2.
Largest reported position: ARK Investment Management (Cathie Wood) at 7.5% of disclosed 13F value ($1.16 B).
Across 6 quarters of stored filings: 8 newly or higher comparisons, 13 lower or absent, 0 unchanged, across 6 managers. Corporate actions are not normalized.
No numeric score is shown: filing comparisons are not adjusted for splits or other corporate actions, so reported changes cannot be treated as trades.
13Fs can arrive up to 45 days after quarter end. They omit short positions, cash, and securities outside the SEC's 13(f) list. Higher, lower, new, and absent describe filed share amounts, not proven purchases or sales; splits and other corporate actions are not normalized. This is context for a thesis, never a call by itself.
Three checks use SEC filings alone. The net-buyback check requires matching stated filing and quote currencies, a compatible single-ticker SEC share-unit receipt, and a dated provider quote; its row explains any refusal. One dated deep-review judgement is marked researched; missing checks are excluded, never treated as zero.
A score requires both core checks — what the share count did and pay in stock versus revenue — plus at least one other established check. Missing core check: pay in stock, vs revenue.
A company can grow while each shareholder owns a smaller slice. Share issuance and stock pay can offset part of the business gain.
Establish the missing core check first; other unestablished checks: buybacks net of new stock sold; will your slice survive the horizon; room left under the charter.
+22.4% between the 2025-07-17 and 2026-07-16 filing cover pages.
the two figures cover different periods, and a ratio across mismatched periods would be invented
repurchases are untagged — and missing is not zero, so no net can be computed
Not researched yet — this appears after the next dossier run on this company.
authorized shares are measured on 2026-06-30 while outstanding shares are measured on 2026-07-16; different dates cannot establish current headroom
1M
3M
6M
1Y
Computed from SEC filings — never model output. Blank means it cannot be computed honestly.
Revenue grew 11.8% versus the comparable filing period, while operating margin was 4.2%.
Revenue shows whether demand is expanding, while operating and free-cash-flow margins show how much of those sales becomes profit and cash. Net cash or debt affects how resilient that result is.
Watch whether the next comparable filing confirms the revenue direction and whether operating and cash-flow margins hold or improve.
Every figure comes from an SEC filing and carries the day it was measured. Nothing here is estimated.
The filed share count increased 22.45% over roughly a year. That is dilution: each existing share represents a smaller percentage ownership slice.
A growing business can still deliver weak per-share progress when the share count grows too. The count says what happened to ownership slices, not why the company issued shares.
Watch the next filing cover page and the cash-flow and stock-compensation disclosures to see whether issuance continues and what caused it.
3.95 B
total shares when last reported · Jul 16, 2026 · 58 days ago
The SEC’s structured data establishes the total share count but carries no count of the shares structurally excluded from ordinary trading. Control and affiliate holdings, restricted stock and locked-up shares are disclosed publicly — in proxy statements, prospectuses and 8-Ks — as prose with no tag to read them from, and have not been researched into a figure this card can pair with the total above.
Share count increased 22.45% — dilution risk: each existing share owns a smaller percentage of the company.
Both counts in full, exactly as each cover page printed them, and both bars measured from zero against the larger — so a small move looks small.
measured Jun 30, 2025, 14 months ago — from the 10-K filed Jan 29, 2026
Market value of shares held by non-affiliates under the SEC filing definition. This is a dollar amount, not a share count. It is never converted into one to fill the line above.
Not researched yet. Release dates, tranche sizes, the shares issued at IPO and the insider breakdown are prose in the prospectus and in 8-Ks, with no XBRL tag to read them from. They appear here once TickerYou research can quote the source clause behind each figure—never estimated in the meantime.