The Street

Every big vision eventually shows up on a balance sheet.Investors have spent the past year listening to Mark Zuckerberg describe a future in which artificial intelligence (AI) becomes personal, universal, and roughly as ordinary as electricity. The pitch has been consistent. It has also been expensive.Meta Platforms (META) has poured money into data centers, chips, and researcher pay at a pace no consumer internet company has attempted.On Tuesday, July 28, Zuckerberg took that argument to a newspaper opinion page and made his fullest case yet for why superintelligence should belong to everyone.Roughly 24 hours later, his own company published the invoice.What Zuckerberg actually promised about superintelligenceThe essay, titled “The AI Future Is for Everyone,” was published by The Wall Street Journal.Zuckerberg organized it around three claims. Individual empowerment drives prosperity, invention rather than automation is the point of superintelligence, and a balance of power is the foundation of safety.The question is not whether superintelligence will exist, but “who will have access to it,” Zuckerberg wrote.That is the philosophy.Meta produced $31.86 billion in cash from operations during the second quarter and kept $784 million of it. Free cash flow fell 91% from $8.55 billion a year earlier, according to Meta.

Zuckerberg pitches personal superintelligence as Meta releases an AI essay, with cash flow now defining the investment case.Tippapatt / Getty Images

Meta’s second quarter shows what superintelligence costsThe top line was never the problem. Revenue rose 28% to $60.80 billion, ahead of the roughly $60.2 billion analysts had modeled, according to Meta.Everything underneath the top line was the problem. Diluted earnings per share (EPS) came in at $6.18 against consensus near $7.17, and operating margin fell to 31% from 43% a year earlier.Related: Mark Zuckerberg, Microsoft CEO just made major AI decisionCapital spending hit $31.08 billion for the quarter, including principal payments on finance leases. That is more than double the $17.01 billion Meta spent in the same quarter last year, most of it going toward the enormous data center buildout Zuckerberg has been assembling across the country, which TheStreet highlighted.When I ran the two quarters side by side, the arithmetic was blunt. Operating cash flow grew about 25% year over year while capital spending grew 83%.One of those lines cannot outrun the other for long.Here is what the quarter cost, based on numbers from Meta:Capital expenditures, including finance lease payments, of $31.08 billion.Free cash flow of $784 million, down from $8.55 billion a year earlier.Total costs and expenses of $42.03 billion, up 55% year over year.A Reality Labs operating loss of $4.62 billion on $431 million of revenue.Long-term debt of $83.66 billion as of June 30, up from $58.74 billion at the end of 2025.Full-year capital spending guidance of $130 billion to $145 billion, narrowed from $125 billion to $145 billion.Third-quarter revenue guidance of $61 billion to $64 billion put the midpoint below the roughly $63.1 billion analysts had expected, CNBC noted.Shares fell close to 10% in extended trading, according to Investing.com.Why free cash flow matters more than the earnings missMost of the coverage will lead with the earnings miss. That’s the least useful number in the release, however.Free cash flow is simply what a company keeps after paying to run the business and to build whatever it is building next. It funds dividends, buybacks, and acquisitions.At $784 million on $60.80 billion of revenue, Meta kept about 1.3 cents of every dollar it took in.For scale, that is roughly what a mid-sized regional bank clears in a quarter, produced by a company worth more than $1 trillion.More Artificial Intelligence:Korea’s chipmakers prepare big U.S. deals in Silicon ValleyWaymo vs. human drivers: Experts reveal which is saferOpenAl just disclosed something genuinely alarmingMeta is not alone in this. Alphabet reported its own cash-flow squeeze last week on the back of AI infrastructure spending, and the market punished the stock for it, according to Yahoo Finance.The pattern matters because it tells you this is a sector condition rather than a Meta stumble. Every hyperscaler is converting cash into concrete and silicon at the same moment.The company also bought back no stock at all in the first six months of this year, compared with $22.92 billion of repurchases in the same stretch of 2025, according to Meta.It raised $24.91 billion in long-term debt during the quarter instead. A company that earned $42.6 billion in net income over six months does not borrow at that scale unless the building program has outgrown what the business throws off.What struck me in my analysis of the segment tables was the split inside the company. Family of Apps, meaning Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger, earned $23.39 billion in operating income. Reality Labs lost $4.62 billion.Advertising is paying for the future. Superintelligence is not yet paying for itself.That gap explains a decision earlier this year that looked strange at the time, when Meta cut roughly 8,000 jobs while posting record revenue.If you hold an S&P 500index fund, you own a slice of this. Meta ranks among the largest companies in that index, which means Zuckerberg’s spending choices land inside retirement accounts that nobody deliberately pointed at AI infrastructure.What to watch as Meta funds the everyone futureZuckerberg is not hiding the strategy. He described AI as accelerating Meta’s core business already, according to a company statement.The narrowed capital spending range is the detail worth tracking. Lifting the floor from $125 billion to $130 billion takes the low-spending scenario off the table for 2026, whatever happens to the stock.Watch three things over the next two quarters: whether ad pricing holds at double-digit growth, whether the enterprise and agent products Zuckerberg described start arriving as revenue rather than roadmap, and whether free cash flow recovers or settles near zero as the new normal.The op-ed predicted that widely distributed superintelligence would create more jobs rather than fewer. The quarter answered a narrower question: Who funds the vision while the returns remain theoretical?Right now the answer is advertisers, bondholders, and shareholders, roughly in that order. Zuckerberg has bought himself a few more quarters to change it.Related: Meta, Anthropic drop bombshell news on AI market

Coca-Cola’s glass bottle has become one of the most recognizable pieces of packaging in history. PepsiCo has spent decades trying to create a similar connection with consumers.”Every consumer goods company wants to find a unique way to present itself to the public, and this, for us, has been the Holy Grail,” Phil Mooney, Coca-Cola’s company historian, told CBS News, speaking of the chain’s iconic glass bottle.And even though less than 1% of Coke has been sold in glass bottles since the early 1990s, Coca-Cola has leaned into using the iconic imagery in its advertising.”Coca-Cola’s advertising sought to evoke nostalgia, and for this the company used imagery of the old hobble-skirt glass bottle, often ice-cold with beads of condensation dripping down it. It had used the distinctive bottle since 1916,” according to Wired.It’s an image people know, even if that’s no longer what they drink their soda out of.PepsiCo has never had the same connection to glass bottles, but it has used them and recently tried to rival the success of a classic Coke product that’s still sold in a glass bottle.Pepsi Real Sugar, launched in 2009 as Pepsi Throwback, is essentially PepsiCo’s answer to Mexican Coke, a version of Coca-Cola sold largely in the country from which it derives its name, and also found on U.S. shelves.Now, while Coca-Cola has a new take on real-sugar Coke, PepsiCo has quietly pulled back its efforts in that emerging space.Americans say they want real sugar in Coca-ColaIn recent years, there has been pushback against the artificial sweeteners used in soda. A number of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo rivals, including Jones Soda and Jarritos, built their brands around the idea of using real sugar to sweeten their drinks.Americans do seem to prefer real sugar, according to a poll conducted by MarketWatch in July 2025.The website asked people, “Which sweetener would you prefer in your Coca-Cola?”Cane sugar was the overwhelming winner at 76%. “It doesn’t matter” came in second at 18.6%. High fructose corn syrup snagged only 2.8% of the vote, while corn syrup received 2.2%.”Some users shared alternative sweeteners they’d prefer — like monk fruit and stevia — while others claimed to either not have a problem with high-fructose corn syrup or not have a preference. Others pointed out the alleged health benefits of swapping out high-fructose corn syrup for cane sugar,” MarketWatch reported.Medical science actually doesn’t generally agree with the idea that one sugar is better than the other.”Added sugars come from a variety of sources and go by many different names, yet they are all a source of extra calories and are metabolized by the body the same way. A common misconception exists that some added sugars such as high fructose corn syrup are unhealthy, while others such as agave nectar (from the succulent plant) are healthy,” according to Harvard Medical School.

Coca-Cola still sells Coke in glass bottles. Shutterstock

Americans want real sugar sodasThe Food and Drug Administration also says there is no evidence of any difference in safety among foods sweetened with high fructose corn syrup as opposed to cane sugar, honey, or other traditional sweeteners.Despite what medical science says, there has been significant demand for so-called “real sugar sodas.” Coca-Cola has been offering a version of its classic product made with cane sugar for more than 20 years.”Coke has indulged U.S. fans by importing Mexican Coke, which is made with cane sugar, since 2005. Coke positions Mexican Coke as an upscale alternative and sells it in glass bottles,” Beverage Digest Editor Duane Stanford told the Associated Press.In addition, Coca-Cola recently added a cane-sugar version of its classic beverage that’s made in the United States.”As part of our ongoing innovation agenda, this fall in the United States, we plan to expand our trademark Coca-Cola product range with U.S. cane sugar to reflect consumer interest in differentiated experiences,” former CEO James Quincey said during the company second-quarter 2025 earnings call.PepsiCo quietly discontinued a cane-sugar PepsiPepsiCo launched its “Throwback” products in 2009 as an answer to Mexican Coke and an attempt to win business using a variation on its rival’s classic glass bottle.”Pepsi and Mountain Dew are offering consumers a taste of the past with their own versions of Throwback, two new limited time only products inspired by the ’60s and ’70s, sweetened with natural sugar in a retro-look package,” the company shared in a press release.At launch, the line, which in Pepsi’s case was renamed “Pepsi Made With Real Sugar,” was only sold in glass bottles. Cans were added to the line, and now, without an announcement, PepsiCo has stopped offering Pepsi Made With Real Sugar in glass bottles.That was confirmed using Pepsi’s Product Locator feature on its website.Pepsi’s strategy made sense, but Coca-Cola had too much of a head start in the category, RTM Nexus CEO Dominick Miserandino told TheStreet.”Mexican Coke in the iconic glass bottle became a cultural phenomenon and a restaurant staple precisely because Coke understood the power of tactile packaging and real cane sugar. Pepsi was moving in on that tactile real sugar market but everybody knows Mexican Coke,” he said.Pepsi Made With Real Sugar could make a comebackSometimes soda companies remove a product in order to get media attention when it returns. That’s what happened with the glass bottle version of Mountain Dew Throwback.“Mountain Dew eventually rebranded Throwback as Mountain Dew Real Sugar in November 2019, though this didn’t last very long. Despite limited regional availability in 2020, this flavor was finally discontinued as of February 2024,” according to Tasting Table.PepsiCo never issues press releases when it discontinues a product, but Mountain Dew Real Sugar is no longer listed on the Mountain Dew product page.The product, however, recently made a comeback at very select retailers.“Mountain Dew with Real Sugar just got a brand new look,” the Sodaseekers Instagram page reported. “Select retailers, including @kcsodaco in Kansas City, Missouri.”In addition to the Sodaseekers report, which references new inventory, Amazon, eBay, and specialty shops, including Concord Market, offer legacy or imported versions of Mountain Dew Real Sugar.Related: Costco’s members get 1 big benefit they may not even think about

Porsche has long occupied a rare position in the auto industry as a premium sports-car brand capable of delivering some of the industry’s strongest profit margins.But weaker demand, slowing sales in China, and the high cost of supporting electric, hybrid, and combustion-engine vehicles simultaneously are forcing the company to rethink its operations.Porsche has now reached a sweeping cost-cutting agreement that will eliminate another 5,000 jobs by 2035 while requiring employees to accept slower pay growth, smaller bonuses, and reduced remote-work flexibility.The reductions will primarily come through retirements, natural attrition, and voluntary severance rather than compulsory layoffs, Porsche announced.The agreement centers on Porsche’s core German operations and does not specify whether employees in the U.S. or other countries will be affected.The agreement comes as parent company Volkswagen Group pursues a much broader restructuring across its brands, factories, and German workforce in response to weaker profitability and rising competition from Chinese automakers.Porsche workers give up pay and benefitsThe 5,000-position reduction is only one part of Porsche’s new cost-cutting package.Employees who remain will accept slower pay growth, smaller bonuses, and less remote-work flexibility in exchange for protection against compulsory layoffs through 2035 and €2.1 billion of investment in Porsche’s key German sites.The reduction comes on top of measures announced in 2025. More Automotive:Uber changes key rule for drivers amid rider safety lawsuitsVolkswagen may cut 100,000 jobs in brutal resetHonda CEO withstands investor backlash after $9B EV misstepPorsche previously said it would eliminate about 1,900 permanent positions by 2029 and allow another 2,000 fixed-term jobs to expire.Together, the earlier measures and the new agreement could reduce Porsche’s workforce by nearly 9,000 positions. Porsche will defer 3.5% of current and future collectively negotiated pay increases until 2035, while senior managers will make a comparable contribution from compensation increases in 2027 and 2028.The voluntary company portion of Christmas bonuses will gradually fall from 45% to 5%, and employees will be allowed to work remotely for eight days per month, down from 12.Workers will receive a one-time €1,500 transformation bonus in August. IG Metall members will receive an additional €411.IG Metall said the agreement gave employees a role in shaping Porsche’s restructuring.“The employees are contributing, and this must pay off,” Tamara Hübner, a senior representative of IG Metall Stuttgart, said. She added that Porsche was now responsible for delivering the promised investments and returning the company to a stronger financial position.Porsche General Works Council Chairman Ibrahim Aslan described the agreement as “hard-fought” and said it secured investment commitments and employment protections for the company’s core German workforce through 2035.Porsche said the agreement supports its broader 2035 strategy to cut costs, speed up decision-making, and strengthen the appeal of its vehicles.

Porsche employees who remain will accept slower pay growth, smaller bonuses, and less remote-work flexibility in exchange for protection against compulsory layoffs.Brandon Woyshnis / Getty Images

Porsche struggles with weaker demandThe restructuring comes as Porsche faces a sharp decline in sales, particularly in China.The automaker delivered 122,306 vehicles during the first half of 2026, down 16% from a year earlier, as German luxury brands face tougher competition from Chinese automakers and weaker demand for high-priced vehicles.Porsche has also softened its electric-vehicle ambitions as EV adoption develops more slowly than expected. The company is now preparing to offer combustion-engine, hybrid, and fully electric models for longer, which will increase the cost of supporting multiple technologies at once.Porsche expects the restructuring to generate costs of approximately €300 million to €400 million in 2026, with similar expenses next year. The company expects more substantial savings to emerge from 2028.Volkswagen pursues deeper job cutsPorsche’s reductions are part of a much larger restructuring across Volkswagen Group, whose brands also include Audi, Škoda, Seat, Bentley, and Lamborghini.Volkswagen is officially targeting more than 35,000 job reductions at its German namesake operations by 2030. Reuters, citing people familiar with the plans and an internal message from CEO Oliver Blume, reported that the group is considering roughly 50,000 additional cuts.This potentially brings total reductions across Volkswagen Group to as many as 100,000.Volkswagen is also reviewing factory capacity and its vehicle lineup as it responds to high labor and energy costs in Germany, weaker sales in China, U.S. tariffs, and the heavy expense of investing in electric vehicles and software.The group reported €158.1 billion in first-half revenue, little changed from a year earlier, while operating profit fell to €5.9 billion and its operating margin narrowed to 3.8%.For Porsche employees, the agreement provides protection from forced layoffs for nearly a decade.But preserving the company’s German factories will come with some trade-offs as one of the world’s most profitable sports-car brands adapts to a far more difficult auto market.Related: Major supermarket chain closing more stores

JetBlue beat earnings estimates and projected a 2028 profit goal, but the airline’s debt, rising fuel costs, and negative margins still threaten JBLU investors.JetBlue Airways (JBLU) gave investors something the troubled airline has rarely lately offered: proof it can charge more without driving customers away.The carrier’s revenue in the second quarter rose 14.5% from a year earlier to $2.70 billion on higher passenger traffic, average fares, and demand across its cabins. Revenue per available seat mile, a key measure of airline pricing power, increased 10.9%.Those gains helped JetBlue recoup nearly half of the extra fuel cost it took on in the quarter, more than the 30% to 40% that management had previously estimated. Shares surged nearly 10% after the company exceeded Wall Street’s adjusted earnings estimate and restored its full-year guidance.A stock reaction makes sense. JetBlue demonstrated consumers’ willingness to spend more as the airline added capacity.But the financial statements show how narrow the way back still is.JetBlue’s quarterly fuel expense rose to $911 million from $504 million. Its net loss widened to $247 million from $74 million and the operating margin shrank to negative 5.2% from positive 0.3% a year earlier.Eventually, the company hopes those costs will be offset by higher fares, premium seats and a simplified retail strategy.“Given strong customer demand and our ability to adjust capacity, we believe pricing will provide an offset if recent fuel price increases stick,” JetBlue Chief Financial Officer Ursula Hurley said during the earnings call.JetBlue’s higher fares reveal real pricing powerJetBlue flew 10.48 million revenue passengers in the quarter, an increase of 5.1%. Average fare rose 8.6% to $237.38.The airline’s load factor edged up to 82.7%, indicating the higher rates did not come at the cost of much emptier planes. Passenger revenue per available seat mile grew 10.6%It wasn’t just one cabin that improved.Premium RASM was up nearly 13% and Main cabin RASM was up 11%. Loyalty revenue grew 13% aided by a roughly 40% increase in new premium credit-card accounts and 21% growth in loyalty cash remuneration.JetBlue now looks to capitalize on that momentum with a more fragmented retail model.Related: JetBlue Airways exits entire marketThe airline will create four onboard experiences: Main, EvenMore, BlueFirst, and Mint. Customers will then decide between up to three fare tiers based on seat selection, refundability, and flexibility.BlueFirst, JetBlue’s new domestic first-class product, is expected to begin rolling out later in 2026 on routes without Mint service. Sales are scheduled to start in the fall.Key numbers for JetBlue investors$2.70 billion: Second-quarter operating revenue10.9%: Growth in revenue per available seat mile8.6%: Increase in the average fare$911 million: Quarterly fuel expenseNegative 5.2%: Operating margin$1: Management’s minimum 2028 earnings-per-share targetThe retail rationale is simple. More options mean more chances for JetBlue to upsell passengers without adding flights. Price-conscious customers can choose a Base rate, while those desiring flexibility, larger seats or premium service can pay more for such options.More Airlines:Airline shuts down, all flights grounded after accidentAnother global airline cuts US flights due to low demandAnother low-cost airline files for Chapter 11 bankruptcyThe danger is that customers would reject the complexity or buy cheaper versions instead of moving up.JetBlue’s 2028 target comes with demanding assumptionsJetBlue introduced a target of at least $1 in earnings per share for 2028.By that time, management expects the initiatives to produce nearly $1.2 billion in incremental earnings before interest and taxes annually, up from a target range of $850 million to $950 million for 2027.The aim assumes ongoing robust demand and an average fuel price of $3 a gallon in 2028.That assumption matters because JetBlue paid $4.23 a gallon during the second quarter, up 76% from the prior year. Its current full-year forecast assumes $3.49 a gallon.The airline still forecasts an adjusted operating margin to be in the range of minus 2% to negative 5% in 2026. Management is predicting a better second half, but not an immediate return to annual profitability.JetBlue also has significant financial responsibilities.It finished June with $1.66 billion in cash, $512 million in investment securities and $8.48 billion in debt. Stockholders’ equity dropped to $1.59 billion from $2.12 billion at the end of 2025.The carrier obtained $500 million in aircraft-backed financing in April, with rates projected to range from 6% to 6.75%. Executives said JetBlue may be able to increase that credit by another $250 million and they may seek more secured financing if high fuel prices persist.

JetBlue’s earnings beat raises a more important questionBloomberg / Getty Images

JetBlue has proved pricing power but now it needs profitJetBlue’s quarter was a real turnaround signal.Passenger demand strengthened, average fares increased 8.6%, and revenue per available seat mile rose 10.9%. The airline also exceeded its own forecasts, recovering over half of its higher fuel costs by raising fares.BlueFirst, loyalty growth and the revised pricing structure could present more chances for JetBlue to convince consumers to pay for premium seats, flexibility and extra amenities.The challenge is converting those gains into sustainable earnings.Still, JetBlue recorded a negative 5.2% operating profit and its quarterly fuel bill rose to $407 million. It also hopes to make at least $1 a share in 2028, which depends on fuel prices dropping dramatically from the $4.23 a gallon it paid in the second quarter.The stock is up about 10% as investors trust management’s turnaround plan, even though it’s not over.Investors will want to see if higher fares can keep pace with fuel costs without hurting demand, if BlueFirst can attract profitable premium customers and if JetBlue can boost margins without taking on much more debt.JetBlue has proved that it can charge passengers more. Now it must show shareholders that increased ticket prices can finally lead to larger earnings.Related: Delta Air Lines axes more routes, offers refunds

Cathie Wood, chief of Ark Investment Management, often buys her highest-conviction stocks during sharp pullbacks. That’s exactly what she’s doing with Nvidia (NVDA), adding more shares after the semiconductor giant fell more than 6% over the past five trading days.In 2025, the flagship Ark Innovation ETF gained 35.49%, far outpacing the S&P 500’s return of 17.88% in the same period. But so far this year, Wood’s flagship Ark Innovation ETF (ARKK) is down 6.38% as of July 30, while the S&P 500 surged 8.65%, Yahoo Finance data shows.Wood gained a reputation after the Ark Innovation ETF delivered a 153% return in 2020. But her style also brings painful losses in bearish markets, as seen in 2022, when the Ark Innovation ETF tumbled more than 60%.Those swings have weighed on Wood’s long-term gains. As of July 29, her Ark Innovation ETF has delivered a five-year annualized return of -10.16%, while the S&P 500 has an annualized return of 10.61% over the same period, according to data from Morningstar.

Over the past 12 months through July 28, the Ark Innovation ETF saw roughly $1.3 billion in net outflows.Getty Images

Cathie Wood flags “the deflationary impact” of tech innovationWood focuses on high-tech companies across artificial intelligence, blockchain, biomedical technology, and robotics. She thinks these businesses have strong growth potential, though their volatility often causes fluctuations in the Ark’s funds.From 2014 to 2024, the Ark Innovation ETF wiped out $7 billion in investor wealth, according to a March 2025 analysis by Morningstar’s analyst Amy Arnott. That made it the third-biggest wealth destroyer among mutual funds and ETFs in Arnott’s ranking. The analyst hasn’t updated her ranking.Wood believes investors have been focusing on the wrong signals as they assess the outlook for inflation, interest rates, and stocks.In a June post on X, Wood said the bond market is increasingly reflecting the deflationary impact of technological innovation, particularly artificial intelligence, rather than the inflation risks many investors still fear.Wood pointed to the continued flattening of the Treasury yield curve despite a sharp rise in oil prices over the past year. In previous cycles, she noted, an energy shock of that magnitude would have pushed long-term yields higher. Related: Cathie Wood buys $50.1 million of tumbling megacap stockWood believes the bond market is “discounting something much more powerful: the deflationary impact of technological innovation, particularly artificial intelligence, which is beginning to increase productivity across broad swaths of the economy.
”She also said easing tensions with Iran and a decline in oil prices could push inflation even lower.”The next phase of this cycle could be characterized by accelerating growth, declining inflation, falling interest rates, and a strengthening U.S. dollar,” Wood said. “That combination would create a remarkably supportive backdrop for innovation-led equities and the technologies driving the next productivity boom.”Not all investors agree with Wood’s optimism. Over the past 12 months through July 28, the Ark Innovation ETF saw roughly $1.3 billion in net outflows, according to data from ETF research firm VettaFi. Cathie Wood buys $14.3 million of Nvidia stockOn July 28, Wood’s Ark funds bought 73,166 shares of NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA), according to Ark’s daily trade information. Based on the latest trading price of $195.04, the shares are valued at about $14.3 million.Nvidia stock dropped 6.57% over the past five trading days, bringing its year-to-date gains to 4.58%. But its chip-maker peer, AMD, gained 126.55% over the same period, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index rallied 57.66%.Big Tech capex spending has been a major focus for semiconductor investors. But recent earnings showed the market isn’t rewarding higher spending across the board.Related: Overlooked AI stock is growing faster than NvidiaMicrosoft kept its fiscal 2026 capex outlook unchanged, a rare show of restraint that investors rewarded. Meta only raised the low end of its forecast to $130 billion-$145 billion from $125 billion-$145 billion.Alphabet increased its capex outlook to $195 billion-$205 billion from $180 billion-$190 billion, but Google stock fell after the announcement.The SOX fell for five consecutive trading days after Alphabet’s earnings but bounced 8.2% on July 30 after Microsoft and Meta reported results.But AI spending isn’t the only story driving Nvidia stock right now.Nvidia is providing a backstop of up to $250 billion to OpenAI that would help it raise debt for a 10-gigawatt data center campus in Ohio, The Wall Street Journal reported. In total, the project could cost more than $500 billion.The size of the backstop appeared to unsettle investors, sending Nvidia shares down 5% on July 27 after the news.Nvidia’s first-quarter fiscal 2027 results also highlighted some underlying risks. Of its $58 billion in net income, $13.4 billion came from unrealized equity gains rather than operations, according to a report.More Cathie Wood:Cathie Wood buys $22.8 million of surging tech stockCathie Wood buys $2.1M of tumbling AI stockCathie Wood buys $5.5M of surging tech stockThe company also remains heavily dependent on a small group of big customers, with three hyperscalers accounting for 54% of revenue. Nvidia’s next earnings report is scheduled for August 26.Still, Nvidia stock looks cheap right now, with its forward price-to-earnings ratio of 17.53, its lowest since April 1, 2015, according to Barron’s. Wood hasn’t been so active on Nvidia shares this year compared to her other tech favorites. She bought 300,017 shares on June 1 and another 5,409 shares on May 18, while selling a combined 213,560 shares on March 26 and 27. Those are her only Nvidia trades so far in 2026.Nvidia is not one of the top 10 holdings in the Ark Innovation ETF.Top 10 Holdings in the Ark Innovation ETF by Portfolio Weight as of July 30, 2026:Tesla (TSLA) – 9.41%SpaceX (SPCX) – 5.11%Shopify (SHOP) – 4.95%CRISPR Therapeutics (CRSP) – 4.74%Tempus AI (TEM) – 4.67%Coinbase (COIN) – 4.60%Robinhood Markets (HOOD) – 3.81%Circle Internet Group (CRCL) – 3.77%Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) – 3.62%Roblox (RBLX) – 3.40%Other than buying Nvidia shares, Wood’s latest trades included buying Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), Kratos Defense & Security Solutions (KTOS), BWX Technologies (BWXT), X-Energy (XE), and a small amount of Tesla (TSLA).She also trimmed positions in Shopify (SHOP), BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), CRISPR Therapeutics (CRSP), Twist Bioscience (TWST), Robinhood Markets (HOOD), Natera (NTRA), Roblox (RBLX), Alphabet (GOOGL), Amazon (AMZN), 10x Genomics (TXG), Block (XYZ), Figma (FIG), Illumina (ILMN), and Bullish (BLSH).Related: The AI secret behind Qualcomm’s price hike

FIFA gave its 211 member organizations until mid-September to consider its proposal to “unleash the commercial potential and opportunity” of its flagship tournament by selling stakes in the World Cup to interested investors. But apparently, a significant portion of them don’t need that long to consider the proposal. Over 50 associations rejected the plan during a virtual meeting Thursday, ESPN reported, and UEFA, the European soccer league that features powerhouse countries like the world champion Spanish team, England, the Netherlands, Germany and France, says that it will boycott all FIFA competitions, including the World Cup, if the plan goes through.”UEFA and its 55 member associations stand as one. We unanimously and unequivocally reject FIFA’s proposal to transfer ownership interests in the World Cup and other FIFA competitions to private investors,” the group said in a statement. “The World Cup cannot be treated as an investment product. It is one of football’s greatest sporting legacies. It has been built over generations by players, national teams and supporters across every continent. No part of it should ever be surrendered to private investors. The World Cup is not for sale.What was FIFA’s proposal?FIFA President Gianni Infantino, with backing from investor Josh Kushner, brother of Jared Kushner, who is married to President Trump’s daughter, and JPMorgan, dreamed up this plan to maximize revenue from the once-every-four-years soccer tournament. The 2026 World Cup was a huge success, with the ostensibly non-profit organization reporting more than $15 billion in revenue during the entire 2023-2026 cycle that concluded with this year’s summer tournament in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.But the group is leaving money on the table, according to Infantino, and the new “opportunities we don’t use today” for investment in the sport could be used to “unleash the commercial potential and opportunity that FIFA has” to reach its ultimate goal, which it says is to “support global football development.”“In a similar way to other sports governing bodies with dedicated commercial subsidiaries, FIFA will invite third parties to make minority, non-controlling investments in FFE (FIFA Forward Enterprise),” FIFA explained. FFE is a new, FIFA-owned and controlled subsidiary that consolidates the group’s current commercial and event operations.But FIFA says it would retain sole control of FFE and exclusive authority over the tournament’s governance, so what exactly would the investors be buying? That’s just one of the questions UEFA and other critics are asking.UEFA, others pushes back against FIFA proposalFIFA is looking to raise as much as $4.2 billion in capital for the FFE and has already begun approaching investors, retaining JPMorgan as a strategic partner on the project. FIFA’s plan would involve over $80 million in payouts to each FIFA member association between now and 2037. But Infantino and FIFA say that any organizations that resist the plan ahead of the September 19 acceptance deadline, they could be left out of revenue sharing should the plan be ratified. The move has prompted backlash, as reported by Lindy’s Sports.”This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross. UEFA takes it extremely seriously. So should every National Football Association,” the group said in a statement. “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”Even Andrew Burnham, Britain’s prime minister, came out forcefully against the proposal, saying, “Let me say this very directly. Football does not belong to investors. It belongs to the people who fill the stands and who stand on the touchline week in, week out, rain or shine. The World Cup is not a product. It is the greatest competition in world sport, and it was never anyone’s to sell. Dress the deal up however you like. Once you have sold a piece of it, you have sold out. Football belongs to the fans. It always has, and it always will.”FIFA Member Associations begin to take sidesWith a 211-member caucus, there are plenty of opinions about the issue to go around.For many of them, the fact that FIFA kind of sprang this news on them through the media instead of contacting them separately seems to have rubbed more than a few soccer associations the wrong way. Consider these quotes from CBS Sports.The English Football Association seems on the fence, saying that the group was “completely unaware” of FIFA’s proposal and that while it doesn’t have the details of the plan, they are “deeply concerned about the lack of process and governance to get to this point, and the apparent substance and principles involved.”Related: The World Cup just rewrote the economics of sportsCONCACAF, the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football, also said they were only made aware of the proposal through news reports, and they are concerned about the “lack of due process” in the decision to pursue this path. While it also didn’t come down on the issue one way or another, it did warn that “Collectively, FIFA, the confederations and every member association have a responsibility to always act in the best interests of the sport. Every decision we make must be guided by good governance, robust processes and long-term stewardship.”The Asian Football Confederation also took issue with not being notified about the plan.“The AFC was not consulted on the proposal and is disappointed that a matter of such significance entered the public domain before the AFC family had been afforded the opportunity to examine and discuss it through the appropriate and established governance channels,” they said in a statement.What’s next for the FIFA plan?FIFA has until its own self-imposed Sept. 19 deadline to convince at least 106 of its members to vote for the proposal. FIFA just needs a simple majority to submit their written support for the deal for it to pass. In the meantime, the 55 organizations that have already said no and are boycotting FIFA events have an even sooner deadline to prove that they are for real. The FIFA U-20 Women’s World Cup is set to kick off in Poland on September 5. But Poland is a UEFA member, and without the European countries that account for six of the tournament’s field of 24, it is very unlikely that the tournament will be the success it could have been. “Nobody should be in any doubt: UEFA and its national associations will oppose these plans with absolute determination,” the organization said.”There are moments when institutions are judged not by what they are prepared to accept, but by what they refuse to compromise. This is one of those moments. Some things are simply too important to sell. The FIFA World Cup belongs to football. It always will. And so long as Europe has a voice, it will never be for sale.”Related: The IRS just got its own World Cup payday

A massive loss of satellite internet subscribers over the last six years has caught up with EchoStar’s Hughes Network Systems, forcing the company to restructure its huge debt obligations, which could lead the company to file for a bankruptcy reorganization in the days ahead.Satellite internet services provider Hughes Network Systems is planning to file for Chapter 11 protection with a pending $1.5 billion note due on Aug. 1, according to a Wall Street Journal report.Parent company EchoStar’s co-founder Charlie Ergen has decided to place Hughes Network Systems into bankruptcy to avoid paying the debt obligation, according to the Journal. Hughes only had $102 million cash on hand on March 31, a May earnings report said.

A substantial decline in subscribers has contributed Hughes Network Systems financial distress.krblokhin / Getty Images

Hughes may file for bankruptcyHughes Network Systems will reportedly file Chapter 11 bankruptcy without a pre-negotiated plan. A bankruptcy filing would impose on automatic stay on all litigation against a debtor.White & Case is Hughes Network’s bankruptcy counsel, and FTI Consulting is its financial adviser.A spokesperson for Hughes Network Systems did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Key to rural and underserved usersHughes Network Systems specializes in geostationary satellite broadband services for U.S. residential, business, and government customers. The company has been a key alternative for rural and underserved communities where terrestrial broadband is limited.Despite offering higher-speed consumer plans and low-latency hybrid offerings, geostationary satellite operators face increased pressure and loss of subscribers in the consumer broadband segment due to a rapid expansion of Low Earth Orbit satellite constellations, according to Cord Cutters News.Company’s subscriber count plummetsHughes Network Systems’ number of total broadband subscribers has declined from 1.56 million in on Dec. 31, 2020, to 681,000 subscribers on March 31, 2026. Hughes’ subscriber losses accelerated following the launch of Starlink in 2020 as competition in satellite broadband increased.The satellite internet industry is expected to grow from $14.26 billion in 2025 to $16.81 billion in 2026, driven in part by lower costs for low-Earth orbit constellations (LEO), which compete with Hughes’ geostationary satellite technology, according to analysts at Mordor Intelligence.”Operators are shifting investment from geostationary systems toward multi-orbit networks that blend LEO, medium-Earth-orbit (MEO) and GEO assets to balance latency, coverage and cost,” according to Mordor Intelligence analysis.The company’s high amount of debt obligations has also restricted its operational flexibility, contributing to the decision to file for bankruptcy.Hughes Network Systems’ bankruptcy filing would follow on the heels of another EchoStar subsidiary Dish Wireless’ prepackaged Chapter 11 filing on June 30, 2026, which included a restructuring support agreement that will reorganize the company and facilitated a $23 billion sale of parent EchoStar’s wireless spectrum licenses to AT&T.EchoStar sells spectrum licensesEchoStar closed the wireless spectrum licenses sale to AT&T, according to a July 28 statement. The sale added about 30MHz of nationwide 3.45 GHz mid-band spectrum and about 20 MHz of nationwide 600 MHz low-band spectrum to AT&T’s portfolio.AT&T and EchoStar unveiled the wireless spectrum licenses sale on Aug. 26, 2025, which covered over 400 markets across the U.S., or virtually every market nationwide. Under the deal, EchoStar would operate as a hybrid mobile network operator providing wireless service under its Boost Mobile brand.SpaceX also buys spectrumEchoStar also in September 2025 agreed to sell its AWS-4 and H-Block spectrum licenses to Elon Musk’s SpaceX for $17 billion, consisting of up to $8.5 billion in cash and $8.5 billion in SpaceX stock.The parties will enter into a long-term commercial agreement, which will enable EchoStar’s Boost Mobile subscribers to access SpaceX’s next generation Starlink Direct to Cell service.Related: Major burger dining chain closes more locations

Anyone who has shopped for a new phone, laptop, or VR headset this summer probably noticed something odd.The usual discount that comes with an aging model never showed up. Prices held steady, and in some cases climbed. Apple just did it, and the trend is spreading everywhere.That is backward. A chip inside a six-month-old device is supposed to get cheaper over time, not more expensive.This year, the opposite has been happening across consumer electronics, and the reason has less to do with tariffs or inflation than a fight over memory chips.Qualcomm sits in the middle of that fight. The company does not make phones, but its Snapdragon processors power most non-Apple flagship Android devices, along with a fast-growing lineup of cars and headsets. On July 29, Qualcomm confirmed just how much that fight is costing it.The chipmaker reported fiscal third-quarter revenue of $9.95 billion, ahead of the $9.67 billion analysts expected, according to CNBC.Guidance for the current quarter landed well short of expectations, with adjusted earnings projected between $2.05 and $2.25 a share against a consensus estimate near $2.36, according to Bloomberg.CEO Cristiano Amon did not soften the message on the earnings call. He told CNBC costs went up, so prices are going up, too. That comment confirmed what Bloomberg had already reported five days earlier: Qualcomm sent customers a letter announcing a double-digit percentage price increase on chips shipped after Sept. 1.The memory shortage was never really about phonesQualcomm did not create the pricing pressure it is now passing along. Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron have redirected production toward the high-bandwidth memory used in AI servers, where margins run far higher than in consumer devices.Data-center demand accounted for roughly half of global DRAM consumption in 2025, up from about a third five years earlier, according to Bloomberg Intelligence data cited by Bloomberg.That reallocation left phone makers competing for a shrinking pool of standard memory. Qualcomm’s handset chip revenue fell 20% year over year to $5.1 billion, which the company tied directly to what it called unprecedented memory pricing and supply constraints in its SEC filing.

Qualcomm confirmed double-digit chip price hikes starting Sept. 1 as an AI-driven memory shortage squeezes its smartphone business.Bloomberg / Getty Images

Investors are pricing in something longer than a bad quarterQualcomm (QCOM) shares fell roughly 5% in extended trading after the report, compounding losses for a stock already down double digits this month. That reaction reads less like disappointment in one earnings print and more like a bet that the input cost problem sticks around.Qualcomm’s own foundry partner backs that read. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing has told customers it will raise contract prices by up to 10% starting next year, citing AI-driven demand that outstrips supply, according to Nikkei Asia.More Qualcomm:Qualcomm’s datacenter ambitions win over Goldman SachsQualcomm eyes $10 billion AI shortcut as smartphone growth slowsQualcomm deepens ties with major Apple rivalWhen the company that fabricates Qualcomm’s chips and the companies that supply Qualcomm’s memory are both raising prices at once, no single earnings call fixes the math.Qualcomm is not alone in passing the cost down. Google confirmed its Pixel lineup will get more expensive this year, citing a roughly sixfold jump in memory costs, according to 9to5Google.Qualcomm’s own guidance also reflects Apple’s modem revenue declining faster than expected, as Apple continues insourcing its own chip designs.Qualcomm is trying to outrun the smartphone cycle entirelyThe memory crunch is accelerating a pivot Qualcomm was already making. The company doubled its fiscal 2029 non-handset revenue target to $40 billion, and it just closed its acquisition of Modular, an AI software infrastructure company, to build out its data-center ambitions.A new automotive chip deal with BMW adds to a business Qualcomm expects to keep growing at a triple-digit clip.None of that helps this quarter’s margins. But it explains why Amon sounded unbothered delivering the price hike news. Smartphones are no longer the business Qualcomm is betting its future on.The bigger story here is not Qualcomm’s quarter. It is the first clear evidence that the AI buildout has a direct, traceable line to what ordinary consumers pay for everyday devices.SK Hynix has warned the shortage could stretch past 2030. If that holds, the price increase Qualcomm announced this week will not be the last.Related: Qualcomm’s datacenter ambitions win over Goldman Sachs

Ford Motor Company (F) has failed to attract many Wall Street players for most of the past year. Now one firm has decided to reconsider its stance on it.Jefferies upgraded Ford to buy from hold on Monday, July 27, and raised its price target to $17.50 from $14.50.The call landed one day before Ford reported its second-quarter results, and Jefferies’ new target sat roughly 21% above where the stock traded early Monday, near $14.46.The upgrade matters because Jefferies did not wait for the numbers to confirm the thesis. It bet that Ford’s second quarter would mark the low point for margins and volume before things improve.For anyone holding Ford, or watching it, the question was simple: Did the setup justify buying before the print? The July 28 report gave the first answer.What Jefferies changed on Ford and why the timing stands outAnalyst Philippe Houchois lifted Ford two notches in one move, from the sidelines to an outright buy, Investing.com reported.He raised his 2026 adjusted EBIT forecast to $10.3 billion, near the top of Ford’s own guidance range of $8.5 billion to $10.5 billion.More Auto Stocks:General Motors analyst sets new stock price target after earningsFord set to challenge Tesla after big new deal with tech giantVolkswagen may cut 100,000 jobs in brutal resetThe bank made the same call on General Motors (GM) the same day, moving it to buy and lifting its target to $99 from $90, Benzinga reported.What separated the two calls was confidence versus conviction. GM already delivered a strong quarter and raised guidance, so Jefferies was following the results.However, with Ford, it stepped in ahead of them.

Micron expands automotive memory output for Ford as DRAM prices climb roughly 70% since December on surging AI data center demand.hapabapa / Getty Images

Why Jefferies thinks Ford’s second quarter is the low pointThe core of the thesis rests on one word: normalization.Jefferies projected second-quarter adjusted EBIT of about $2.5 billion, a 5.4% margin, even with wholesale volumes falling around 10%, according to CNBC.The firm expected that quarter to mark the floor. A big reason is Novelis, an aluminum supplier whose New York plant feeds Ford’s F-150 line.Two fires knocked that facility offline and affected F-150 output for months. Novelis restarted production, and Jefferies sees post-Novelis volume climbing back from here.In plain terms, the trucks Ford could not build during the shortage are the ones it can start building again.That pointed to a possible guidance raise, which Houchois flagged as likely, given healthy demand in the U.S. market.What Ford’s second-quarter report actually deliveredFord backed the thesis when it reported on July 28.The company posted adjusted earnings of $0.42 per share, clearing the $0.36 consensus estimate, according to Yahoo Finance. Adjusted EBIT came in at $2.5 billion, up $400 million from a year earlier, at a 5.2% margin.Related: Down 99%, popular EV stock is ripe bankruptcy candidateThen came the part Houchois was counting on. Ford raised its full-year adjusted EBIT guidance to $10 billion to $11 billion, up from $8.5 billion to $10.5 billion, and lifted its adjusted free cash flow target to $6 billion to $7 billion from $5 billion to $6 billion.Revenue told the softer side of the story, falling 4% year over year to $48.3 billion as the Novelis disruption and older model wind-downs weighed on volume.The tailwinds Jefferies was counting onThe bull case was not built on hope alone. Several pieces were already in motion.Ford’s first quarter beat expectations by a wide margin, with adjusted earnings of $0.66 per share against a $0.19 estimate and revenue of $43.3 billion, CNBC reported.The company raised its full-year guidance on that report, helped by a $1.3 billion tariff refund benefit.Other tailwinds include:Warranty costs are easing, which lifts margins without a single extra vehicle sold.Material costs are coming down, offsetting some of the drag from the EV unit.Free cash flow should grow as inventories rebuild and supplier compensation payments decline.Ford Pro, the commercial and software arm, has been the quiet workhorse. Its paid subscriber base reached 879,000 in the first quarter, up 30% from a year earlier, according to Ford’s earnings materials.The number that could break the Ford bull caseEvery clean thesis has a weak spot. For Ford, it is the electric vehicle division.Model e lost $777 million in the first quarter, and management guided the unit to lose $4 billion to $4.5 billion for the full year, Investing.com showed.Jefferies is betting that lower warranty and material costs will outweigh Ford’s EV losses, but that only works if the EV losses don’t grow faster than the savings. That math only holds if the EV losses don’t grow faster than the savings.Ford already discontinued the electric F-150 Lightning and is pushing costs toward a cheaper Universal EV Platform, with a $30,000 midsize truck due in 2027.That reset could pay off, and Ford’s new software deal with Apple strengthens the pitch. The risk is the payoff sits years out, while the losses are here now.How Ford stacks up against GM and the broader marketThe stock is up about 15% year to date and has climbed roughly 31% over the past year, outrunning the S&P 500’s more modest gain over the same stretch. Shares closed at $15.28 on July 29 and gained about 8% over the prior five days as the earnings beat lifted sentiment.Ford versus General Motors, at a glanceAnalyst mood: Wall Street still leans cautious on Ford, with 10 of 15 analysts at hold, while GM draws far more buy ratings.Recent results: Both automakers beat and raised guidance, with GM lifting its full-year outlook the prior week and Ford following on July 28.Income appeal: Ford’s roughly 4% dividend yield stays well above the market average, a draw GM cannot match.For income investors, that yield is the real appeal. Ford’s free cash flow easily covers the dividend.Ford also assembles most of its vehicles domestically, which gives it a structural edge over GM when tariffs hit import-heavy rivals.What Ford investors should watch now that earnings have landedFord reported on July 28, and the print confirmed the core of the Jefferies thesis. A few lines still bear watching from here.Your post-earnings checklistThe guidance raise landed, so watch whether Ford holds the new $10 billion to $11 billion EBIT range through the second half.Check F-Series and truck production commentary for confirmation that Novelis volume keeps recovering.Read the Model e loss line closely, since a wider loss threatens the whole margin argument. The third-quarter loss narrowed, and investors will want that trend to continue.Track free cash flow, which Jefferies expects to keep improving as supplier payments fade.A word of caution is in order, though. One firm’s upgrade is a data point, not a green light, and the majority of analysts covering Ford still sit at hold for a reason.If you already own Ford, the setup rewards patience more than reaction. If you are considering a new position, the print gave you the proof the thesis needed, though the stock has already moved higher on it.Jefferies set its target at $17.50 before the numbers. Ford has started backing it up, and the guidance line was the first place that showed.Related: Rivian stock spikes following latest update

The S&P 500 has spent much of the year under scrutiny as elevated valuations and signs of overextension fueled expectations of a market correction. After the index broke through 7,000 for the first time and kept climbing to new records, those fears intensified across financial media.The S&P 500 Shiller cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio has climbed above 40 for only the second time in history, following the late-1990s tech boom, according to Robert Shiller’s dataset tracked at Multpl.Bank of America’s July 2026 Global Fund Manager Survey found that 43% of global fund managers believe artificial intelligence (AI) stocks are in bubble territory, though a slightly larger share, 48%, said they are not, Seeking Alpha reported. A new midyear equity analysis from Putnam Investments reframes the conversation around what extended rallies and periodic selloffs mean for your long-term returns. S&P 500 earnings did the heavy lifting, not expanding valuationsOne of the most persistent misconceptions about the current rally is that investors have simply been paying more for the same earnings.The Putnam report challenges that view with a set of data points that are difficult to dismiss or explain away. Roughly a year ago, consensus estimates for S&P 500 earnings stood at about $265 a share.Related: UBS doubles down on S&P 500 targetThose estimates have since risen to nearly $340, representing a jump of close to 30% in just over twelve months of revised forecasts. During that same stretch, the index climbed from about 6,000 to more than 7,400 while the forward price-to-earnings multiple contracted.Earnings growth, not speculative enthusiasm, has been the primary engine propelling this rally forward over the past year, the report concluded. Historical S&P 500 drawdowns are the norm, not the exceptionThe fear that a sharp selloff will erase gains is understandable, but the historical record tells a very different story.Over the past 75 years, the S&P 500’s average peak-to-trough intra-year pullback has been 13.7%, LPL Research found using Bloomberg data. More Wall Street:HSBC doubles down on stock market message for 2026Citi quietly resets S&P 500 price target for the rest of 2026Jim Cramer has a stark message on the stock market for 2026Despite those regular declines, the index delivered an average annual price gain of 9.6% and posted positive returns in 74% of those years, according to LPL Research.Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist at LPL Financial, wrote that selloffs of this size are a routine feature of equity markets. The index has spent nearly 70% of trading days in a drawdown of up to 5% on a calendar-year basis, the firm’s research showed.The 1990s expansion offers a parallel for current AI-driven rallyMany investors reflexively compare the current AI-fueled market to the dot-com bubble, but most focus only on the eventual crash. The Putnam report points instead to the years of powerful, sustained gains that preceded the late-1990s unraveling and puts them in context.The S&P 500 generated a 430% total return during the decade, including five straight years of gains above 20%, Putnam noted. The Cboe Volatility Index averaged in the low-to-mid-20s throughout the 1990s, well above the mid-teens average that has characterized the current decade, the Putnam analysis noted.

The AI rally may resemble the 1990s boom more than its crash, with history highlighting years of sustained market gains first.Bloomberg / Getty Images

Stepping aside to avoid short-term pain often costs more than the dipThe cost of moving to cash during volatile stretches has been quantified in analyses from firms including JPMorgan Asset Management. JPMorgan Asset Management found that $10,000 invested in the S&P 500 at the start of 1995 would have grown to about $402,000 by 2023. An investor who missed just the ten best trading days during that period would have finished with only $265,000, a 34% reduction.Jack Manley, global market strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management, told CNBC in April 2026 that the firm’s data shows six of the market’s 10 best days over the past two decades occurred within two weeks of its 10 worst days.”Now is still a good time to be taking risk, but realize it is going to be a choppy, bumpy ride over the course of this year,” Manley said.The shortfall exists because the market’s strongest single-day gains tend to cluster tightly around its most volatile and unsettling stretches. Putnam’s case for staying invested through 2026 swingsNone of this guarantees a correction will not occur, and current valuations carry meaningful risk at these elevated levels. The Putnam report acknowledges that the artificial intelligence investment cycle is making companies harder to value and that the road ahead will be uneven. But the firm’s core argument holds: periodic volatility is not a credible reason to abandon a position in equities entirely, Shep Perkins, chief investment officer of Putnam Investments,  wrote in the analysis.Putnam’s report acknowledges that headlines and short-term swings will remain part of the road ahead in 2026. The data from Putnam and LPL suggests that retreating to cash in response has historically done more damage than any individual drawdown.Related: Morgan Stanley sees a troubling S&P 500 repeat