Nvidia -7% today, -23% since July 10. But afterhours, it rose when Microsoft outlined what it’s spending on AI infrastructure.
By Wolf Richter for WOLF STREET.
Microsoft reported earnings today afterhours for its fiscal Q4, and as you’d expect, overall revenues beat expectations by a hair; they rose 15% in the quarter, to $64.7 billion. And its net income beat by a hair, rising by 10% to $22 billion, or $2.95 a share.
But there were some details that didn’t go over well. Intelligent Cloud revenues rose by 19% to $28.5 billion, missing expectations by a hair. Within it, revenues from its intently-watched Azure (AI and machine learning) soared by 30% on a constant-currency basis, but that was down from 31% in fiscal Q3, and it missed expectations of 31% growth. And it said during the earnings call that it sees Azure revenue growth slowing to 28% to 29% on a constant-dollar basis.
Revenues from “Productivity and Business Processes” rose 11%; revenues from Windows rose 7%; and revenues from “Consumer Products and Cloud Services” rose 3%. Device revenues fell.
Meanwhile, over at the AI-cash-burn machine, capital expenditures jumped by 55% to $13.9 billion, reflecting the money being thrown at data centers and hardware. During the earnings call, the company said that spending would increase further, that it would “scale” its infrastructure investments “to meet the growing demand signal for our AI and cloud products.”
Over the past 12 months, Microsoft added 7,000 employees, most of them in R&D, bringing the total to 228,000 employees, according to its annual report for the fiscal year, also released today afterhours.
Upon the news, Microsoft shares [MSFT] initially tanked 7% afterhours, then recovered some, and are now down 4%, after having fallen 0.9% during regular hours. Including afterhours, the stock has dropped 12.5% from the peak on July 10:
Another crummy day for the Mag 7: -$2.09 trillion from peak.
By the close of regular-hours trading, shares of the Magnificent 7 – Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Tesla – dropped another 1.8%, or by $274 billion in market capitalization.
Since the peak on July 10, they have dropped by 12.3%, or by $2.09 trillion in dollar terms. The combined market cap has now fallen to $14.9 trillion, about where it had been on June 4, down from $17.0 trillion on July 10.
A 12.3% drop would normally be no big deal if the dollar amounts weren’t so huge. But apparently, the huge dollar amounts weren’t a big deal either on the way up, it was just the normal thing to happen, for seven stocks to gain trillions of dollars in value in a matter of months. Easy come, easy go:
Nvidia was the primary driver today, falling 7.0% in regular trading hours, giving up $198 billion in market cap for the day. The stock was down by 23.1% from the peak on July 10, having given up $771 billion in market cap.
But afterhours, it jumped 4.6%, perhaps on Microsoft’s disclosure about the billions it’s spending on AI infrastructure, and that this spending would accelerate further.
Microsoft and Tesla were also responsible for the decline during regular hours. Microsoft fell 0.9% (-$33 billion in market cap), and Tesla fell 4.1% (-$32 billion in market cap). Tesla is down 46% from its all-time high in November 2021. The other four of the Mag 7 were relatively little changed for the day.
The stocks in the Mag 7, from the July 10 peak, in order of the percentage decline:
- Nvidia [NVDA]: -23.2% (-$512 billion)
- Tesla [TSLA]: -15.5% (-$130 billion)
- Meta [META]: -13.3% (-$180 billion)
- Microsoft [MSFT]: -9.4% (-$327 billion), not counting the drop afterhours
- Alphabet [GOOG]: -11.1% (-$265 billion)
- Amazon [AMZN]: -9.0% (-$188 billion)
- Apple [AAPL]: -6.3% (-$225 billion)
On a side note: Fed day.
Wednesday is Fed day. The market expects a September rate cut with 100% certainty. There is no longer any room for doubt. And the Fed might confirm that that’s realistic, and that’s what is already priced in. The market doesn’t need that confirmation anymore; it’s already set for a rate cut in September.
But as the Fed has done earlier this year when the market went way overboard with its rate cut mania, it might try to walk back those expectations. The statement might not say anything that would confirm a rate cut in September. And Powell might mention how his “confidence” about inflation heading to 2% was rising but needs a few more good data points to rise enough to make a decision to cut, etc., etc., thereby throwing doubts on a September rate cut. And that could be interesting.
Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the beer and iced-tea mug to find out how:
Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.
I don’t like that word “interesting”.
I think it’s a terrific word, when used sparingly as the brighter scientists do, and as Wolf did here.
The stock and bond markets are acting like a dog casually snapping at grass in the back yard: eventually, some unsightly retching and vomiting ensues.
It’s especially “interesting” to watch if it’s your neighbor’s dog.
I expect the FED to cut rates by 0.25%. This has been predicted well in advance by Mr. Market. He has been shouting this from the roof tops that a rate cut would come since very late 2022 / very early 2023. And now finally the FED will move to cut rates.
Your Mr. Market has been shouting since December about six rate cuts in 2024. And we haven’t gotten a single one yet, because your Mr. Market is mostly drunk. Someday, your Mr. Market will be right, but so far, he has been wrong every step along the way.
The drunken sailors have moved on from Bourbon Street to Wall Street for their Bloody Marys!
I fully agree. But Mr.Market has been VERY consistently expressing the same message in advance what the FED was going to do. For either hikes or cuts. It can take a while for the FED to bow to Mr. Market.
Between september 2021 and november/december 2022 Mr. Market also predicted well in advance that the FED would raise rates and would continue to hike rates. It took a number of months before the FED started to raise rates but in the 1st half of 2022 indeed the FED stated to raise rates and continued to do so until well into the 4th quarter of 2022.
There is no relationship with (Price) inflation as I expect that food prices could easily DOUBLE in the next say months.
The FED hiked rates through the July 2023 meeting. Your 2 comments don’t make sense because you don’t seem to know the actual rate hike history. “Mr. Market” was way off if it was shouting from the “roof tops that a rate cut would come since very late 2022 / very early 2023” as your first comment says. In your second comment you state “but in the 1st half of 2022 indeed the FED started to raise rates and continued to do so until well into the 4th quarter of 2022.” The Fed actually raised 4 more times in 2023.
If this is what Mr. Market has been telling you, you might be better served ignoring it. The Fed didn’t bow to Mr. Market if the Fed continued raising for 6 months after Mr. Market was shouting for cuts. Mr. Market was simply clueless.
I believe the original metaphor of Mr. Market was from Benjamin Graham, who in effect said Mr. Market is bipolar, becoming manic and buying stocks from the (smart) investor just as they were running up toward a blowoff, and becoming morose and selling those stocks to that investor just as they were hitting bottom. I.e., the Mr. Market character buys high and sells low. That’s how investors like the patient Graham and his protege Buffet made money.
Phleep, interesting thank you.
Yes. Not to mention his first cousin Mr. Media. The financial media seems to LATCH on to any Fed comment that even mildly insinuates a rate cut and repeat it ad nauseum. The fact that they too have been repeatedly wrong does not deter their “reporting” in the slightest.
Mr. Media makes his money from Mr. Market.
Interesting to know that research (studies from behavioral economists) has shown that broadcasters are highly inclined to “mimic” their peers, whether intentional or not.
You see that all the time on news broadcasts: same stuff on every venue. And the popularity of sensationalism and the showcasing of provocative news reporters, e.g. Fox.
…not in small part due to the end of the ‘fairness doctrine’ for broadcast coupled with the ravenous public appetite for instant entertainment in all things-gotta finance that presentation of news ‘product’-the more ‘+/- confirmation-biased entertaining’ it is, the better it’s ad support to remain in the market…
may we all find a better day.
“He has been shouting this from the roof tops that a rate cut would come since very late 2022 / very early 2023.”
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. You’ll eventually be right about this mythical rate cut that happens many, many years from now. But you’ll be off on the timing which is what really counts.
I want what this guy’s having! XD
I fail to understand why people are so excited to increase productivity because it REDUCES DEMAND in the long term.
The story below assumes that the workers don’t take on more debt.
Let’s assume a company produces 10.000 units per month an they do that with 100 workers each earning $ 1000 per month. Then the cost of labour cost for that company is $ 100.000 per month and then DEMAND from those workers is also $ 100.000.
Then this company increases its productivity by producing the same 10.000 units per month with 90 workers each still earning $ 1000 per month. Then labour costs for that company has dropped to $ 90.000. But at the same time income / DEMAND (from those 100 (!!!) workers) has dropped to $ 90.000 as well.
So, by increasing productivity this company will be forced to cut producdtion as well ( by a 1.000 units).
Nobody cares about “increasing productivity” when they’re bidding on the AI bubble.
They care that it takes hundreds, thousands and tens-of-thousands of microchips to make a holographic operating system (whether it works or not).
Zuck sold the MetaWurst, nobody but Wall St. bought, NVDA and ChatCopyPaste sold the AI, Cisco sold the internet…. (Sizzle)
Same argument for steam engines.
Hmm. I wasn’t around, but I guess it would have been pretty obvious to anybody that the steam engine actually worked, and it would be useful.
Was there a speculative bubble built around the steam engine? (Maybe so?)
There WAS around the internet. A definitely useful and productive tool that saw profit a decade AFTER the bubble.
The telephone was initially called “interesting” and the ask was: but what would you use it for?
Another useful and profitable tool: no bubble (until the WWW in Y2k).
I’m not saying AI won’t be useful. I’m hearing that CEOs (of alphabet and other small businesses) saying “I don’t know how we’ll profit from this.”
Struggler – don’t know about early, speculative ‘bubbles’ with steam, but there were many, often-fatal, physical ones resulting in boiler explosions (poor analogy with lithium-battery fires, perhaps). Nonetheless steam got ‘safer’ in the micro-, and went on to drive much of our Industrial Revolution, for its foreseen goods, and unforeseen macro-ills, through today-via coal, petroleum, and nukes…best.
may we all find a better day.
Finally someone who gets it!
The 2 elements of a bubble are (1) a legitimate innovation/opportunity; and (2) leverage.
The leverage allows speculators to gross up their bets and bid stock prices WAY above any reasonable valuation, even assuming rosy projections.
The point about the options market is that it allows leverage in a form that has never been used to this extent in financial markets ever.
The mainstream consensus appears to be that because interest rates are high(er) that most of the leverage is out of the system.
Not true– if you can easily run 100 to 1 leverage in the options market, 5.5% interest rates don’t matter.
The central question is that since tons of regular investors (along with institutions) are playing in this space, and economists and regulators are ignoring it, whether that leverage could unwind spectacularly, and if so when.
Long Term Capital Management was an epic case study– it was founded by the developers of the Black Scholes option pricing model (among others) and exploded due to too much leverage (which was primarily because of the derivatives exposure).
But it worked great for a few years.
Since most of the derivatives market operates in the shadows I am trying to figure out how to model this to not end up on the wrong side of it.
I think there was a railroad bubble, not so much a steam engine bubble
Seriously, Plunge Protection Team, special Mag 7 units, get back to doing your job instead of spending too much time at happy hr during regular business time..
Otherwise you might force BTFD retailers to take over, is that what you want?
But the company’s revenues is still the same, meaning it has a higher profit. And the higher profit is going to the shareholders who make up the difference in demand.
Yikes… this is a mess of an analysis.
Are a companies only customers their employees? What do the now unemployed workers do….perhaps work somewhere else? Perhaps producing something else?
Doubtful but wondering if politics will play in. A rate cut plays to the narrative that inflation is coming under control and current administrations policies are working. Pushing those decisions until November is the other side of the coin. I doubt the Fed would factor this in but interesting to think about.
1. Election year says there will be at least one rate cut, of course before Nov. 5.
2. Now the reason for this… I saw a few hours ago a very obscure FED inflation rate (after a few algos massaged the data) of 2.06%, exactly what the FED ordered.
I checked my browser history. That 2.06 comes from Prof. Krugman’s piece in the NYT today regarding pending recessions (“Keep Sahm and Carry On”).
It is called the “Multivariate Core Trend of PCE Inflation”.
As stated in the article “On Monday the New York Fed released its latest estimate of underlying inflation, based on an algorithm that’s supposed to separate the signal from the noise. The Fed’s target is 2 percent; the current New York Fed number is 2.06”.
The market has gone nuts, but somebody is making some serious cabbage along the way. For example, nearly 80 million shares of CRWD were dumped on June 21 at a price between $370 – $380. This stock normally trades with a volume between 3 – 5 million shares daily. That means somebody dumped an extra $28 billion worth of shares in one day right before the global internet outage and subsequent stock plunge to $233 currently. Strange times indeed.
I wonder what was exposed while that bug was munching away.
It was probably a Senator lightening up his holdings to invest in something like a ranch in Idaho, you know, to diversify. Just coincidental, timewise.
I think you highlight an important corruption that enjoys the wrongheaded belief that financial crime is somehow more acceptable than the poor sod who robbed a convenience store with a squirt gun and ended up with 20 years.
They steal because they can.
dang – ’twas ever thus…
(paraphrasing a perhaps no-longer relevant R.A. Heinlein aphorism: “…have you ever noticed that the person who goes broke in a big way never seems to miss a meal? It’s the one who’s short a slug who has to tighten his belt…”).
may we all find a better day.
The Crowdstrike outage occurred on July 19, some four weeks after your June 21 sale event.
Ninny.
One does not do an insider event too close to the event – it may raise undue suspicion. But if you look it was the biggest trading day YoY. I may be missing something but I saw no discernable reason for it. Anyone have some facts?
Exactly. It’s not every Tom, Dick, and Harry that can trade volume like that in one day and nearly pick the peak price simultaneously before a catastrophic event tanks the stock.
The markets are strange. I don’t know how pointing that out makes me a Ninny, but you make a compelling argument.
“The market expects a September rate cut with 100% certainty. There is no longer any room for doubt.”
The 10 year Treasury has gone from 4.70% on April 25 to 4.14% today (2/3 % drop!) . Those falling long bond yields have already loosened financial conditions significantly. It seems like the Fed would be shooting themselves in the foot with even a single rate cut, since (1) long yields appear to be working things out on their own, while (2) GDP, consumer spending, money market balances, unemployment, etc. all point to a strong economy. Meanwhile, (3) many inflation indicators are well above target, especially in core services which (eventually) bleed through to wages. Finally (4) there are six job openings for every five unemployed persons which is a super tight labor market, by any standard.
“… seems like the Fed would be shooting themselves in the foot with even a single rate cut,”
Totally agree, and the Fed is likely aware of it. So they’re just talking, while they wait and see — that has been what they have been doing for seven months.
I agree, The notion that a Fed rate cut would be the correct move is almost an own goal level, unforced error.
They’re going to try something new.
A cut of .25 but also a raise of .50.
🤯
Jk
“Meanwhile, over at the AI-cash-burn machine,” we all forgot to remember:
Dr. Copper is NOT reflecting the infrastructural upgrades that the good ole US of A will require for power supply and water supply JUST for AI chips.
EVs have been predicted to require an infrastructural upgrade… no comment.
Gas lines are probably still leaking and threatening to explode and they have only begun the bridge inspections (US 50, one of 3
Major routes across Colorado was closed for months and is still on reduced service).
The inflation creation act was too small to tackle even the smallest issues. Chip building knowledge is not even onshore, if we build the factory, can we even operate it?
AI is an expensive business.
AI is a profitable business for those who understand it…
its certainly profitable for those who sell chips and data centers for it. is it profitable for those who are paying for the services? that remains to be seen.
Here is where my doubt comes in with profits for AI, specifically LLMs that need giant data centers: it’s primary profitability is replacing the labor of highly-skilled professionals and white-collar workers. Because most folks don’t have good insight into what those folks are doing, they are very good at creating stories where there role is central to any success. Meaning that the very people AI can replace are the very people human nature is least likely to replace. Is a manager who has some prestige because he manages 50 people going to fire those 50 people and use AI to do the work himself? Not a chance. People create empires, they don’t destroy their own.
Nvidia is the best at GPU computer cards. Always has been, AMD is almost a joke compared to Nvidia quality.
Nvidia is best of breed hands down.
yes, for gpu computer cards to play games.
the 3 trillion value based on ai is a new thing.
The Fed has never changed course during an election cycle. If raising before the conventions, they continued to raise. If they were lowering before the conventions, they continued to lower. And, once they paused, they never deviated.
If they cut rates July or September, this will be the first.
I say no cuts until November.
Guess we’ll know if Powell walks out to the podium while Gone till November plays
2.09 trillion is a lot of money that could have been spent on share buybacks for how the stock market is supposed to work.
Silly people.
It’s just classic speculation. The herd got scared.
Buy all the Nvidia and MSFT you can. Elevator to $1000? Yes please.
The magnificent 7 are already yesterday’s news.
Surveillance capitalism is a losing proposition.
Not too mention that are preposterly priced. As the CEO of Sun Micro Systems, in 1999, commented about the stock price
He pointed out that at a PE of 100, he would have too deliver every cent of earnings, with no capital expenditure too sustain the business. It’s not mathematically logical.
Sober valuation models are verboten because stocks are priced as if each one is an Olympic champion.
The rate structure curve is absurd, as interest rates sag in the face of record Treasury borrowing. The Fed’s girth makes it easier.
Wolf,
Do you have any information on how much of the stock in the Mag 7 is held by market makers to cover long duration call options?
If people are only putting up 4-5% of nominal values, short term treasury rates could be used to finance more calls, meaning higher rates cause certain stocks to go higher than they otherwise would.
The problem comes when the VIX goes up and you get a massive downside gamma squeeze and the whole house of cards collapses and you find out that everything was leveraged creating a bubble.
The issue with this type of bubble is that the leverage is in the options/vol space and not through margin (meaning that most of the calls are owned outright, although at this point some of these call options may be margined as well since they are deep in the money).
Do you know of a way to quantify the magnitude of this call options leverage? I know this is a big ask.
Call options are not attractive at these price levels. You seem to be a charlatan, pretending you know something useful, which obviously you don’t.
I’m not sure about NVDA call options, but the conversation naturally goes to the derivatives markets and managed money.
I think Tulipmania is referring to the way in which some of these securities are held and marketed.
Estimates vary (extremely widely) from a “value” of $12.5 trillion to a quadrillion.
If one is holding a long dated, highly profitable call option and uses the unrealized gain as collateral for another derivative, this creates an embedded but unstable leverage.
Options and futures markets have been opened to a huge number of investors in the last decade.
Put on top of this the managed money/ passive investing boom. This can hold a stock like AAPL in a growth, value, index (SP/ Nas), tech and everything fund. Assume the fund manager could use a derivative as a placeholder within a fund.
We “all know” that people won’t race to redeem their funds all at once… right? Until they all experience the same great margin call, inducing the Greater margin call at the institutional level.
The point is: Nobody likely understands the implications of our vast and rapidly growing economic market of markets.
SEE: SBF/ FTX and multiply by 1000
Very well said!
Have you seen any parallels to Long Term Capital Management which collapsed in 98 (and got a Fed bailout)?
I think when they blew up they were running about 200 to 1 leverage (60+% returns the prior few years before train wreck).
It seems to me that a lot of the leverage in the system has moved to the derivatives markets because of higher interest rates, which is fueling the ongoing rally.
My theory is that higher rates are not dragging down equity prices because the options market is serving as an alternate form of leverage, which raises the risk of a Long Term Capital Management style unwind which, as usual, no on on Wall St. will see coming.
Do you have any good resources for calculating where we are in this cycle?
Thanks again for your insights.
Tulipmania:
I have no idea where to begin with this type of research. Again the “experts” have narrowed it down to Trillions OR quadrillions.
The statement about AAPL above is from research I saw years ago, asking if the total number of shares outstanding is more or less than the number of shares “held” in the funds.
We have funds of funds (think 401k) and they’re a lot of black boxes (what’s held in my retirement “target date” 2030, 2040, 2050? Is there even a difference???).
I know there’s regulation and disclosure requirements but I question the enforcement and auditing.
Consider (as discussed in other comments) the fractional reserve banking system that is WAAY under water if marked to market and the FRB desperate to prevent the masses from exiting at once (ie: no more rate hikes/ money markets are already too attractive).
Also the prevalence of leveraged etfs/ etns that are only possible with derivatives; basically pushing the same worthless paper back and forth across the table, charging a fee for it and rinse/ repeating;
All brings up the idea that is used to justify commodities speculation:
“It’s not like these people will ACTUALLY take delivery of the barrels of oil.” Maybe… but they have a legitimate right to!
Shouldn’t the supply limit the demand?
No, because most options expire worthless and most futures are simply traded on speculation, who cares if there’s not enough shares to back it up?
dang,
Take a look at the TSLA Jan 25 200, 250 and 300 strike premiums in chart format plotted against the underlying and tell me with a straight face there wasn’t a massive gamma squeeze.
🤣 what a nutty theory.
You do remember what happened with Long Term Capital Management in 98, right?
It’s ok, the world needs ditch diggers and frosty makers too.
Funny I watched a video on YouTube made by UBS, red flag there but for laughs wth… anyway it interviewed someone asking them signs of a bubble in a market. This guy basically name all the usual criteria behind a bubble, but then when ask does he think AI is in a bubble, he said it with a straight face, valutation is fair, this is just enthusiasm and not a bubble at all..
That’s some Amercian psycho stuff rright there… for a good laugh check out “Are we in a financial bubble UBS trending”
The only way known to man, so far, to measure the extent of a bubble is too measure the extent of it’s collapse. Historically, it has run negative 60 pct for the SandP and 75 pct for the Nas
The Fed cuts rates and prints money when the economy is truly weak. This is based on the faulty assumption that demand, which is increased by debt or savings (with a delay), fuels economic growth. Periods of real prosperity have been driven by saving, not borrowing. We’ll start saving again when the Fed policies take the economy off the rails for long enough. The centre of the economy will leave Wall Street and K Street, and return to Main Street. The Fed might be shut down.
prosperity driven by saving is because savings become investment.
who needs investment money from savings when the central banks will print it for you?
Exactly. The problem now is not with “liquidity”, but that all the “bad” money has chased out the “good”. Plenty of currency sloshing around the global financial plumbing, the problem is the lack of money-good collateral.
My argument is that prosperity will come back after the central banks fail. Homelessness is evidence that we’re in an inflationary great depression at the fringes…..
Investment in what? CRE where you can raise rents and drive out small, successful restaurants and retailers? Shiny new factories in Mexico and China? Investment, in the aggregate, is no guarantee of general prosperity. But may well be a guarantee of individual prosperity.
In my opinion, the soft landing narrative in the markets has been priced in awhile ago. I’m waiting for the next narrative to emerge and to reach consensus. Definitely there is no reason to bid up the prices of the Magnificent 7.
All are still overvalued. Need to drop another 60%, minimum. Higher for longer motherfuckers.
60%? That’s dramatic. Meta and Alphabet aren’t that overvalued. Several became VERY undervalued about two years ago. You gonna sit on the sidelines again and probably do nothing?
Who said anything about sitting on the sidelines? But I digress, I am glad I took my profits when I did, and will hedge any more buy in the tech sector that I do. Regardless, I still think it’s a “buy low sell high” game, but maybe I have that wrong.
Not long ago, a stock with a P/E ratio of 15 was considered expensive. Nowadays, a market value to revenue ratio of 15 is considered cheap.
IMHO, The Fed may talk about controlling inflation and unemployment, but they are really bankers (with a large staff of overpaid economists) and what really worries them the most is a potential collapse of the banking system. Inflation and unemployment are both in a range the Fed can live with. The reason they will cut rates is to save banks that are in trouble. When FOMC members start talking about cutting rates it’s because they are getting pressure from the pals who run the banks.
That tightrope that they are walking keeps getting thinner. The bankers and financiers might be able to “live with” the current situation, but the number of genuinely productive people/corporations that have to deal with real profit margins and actually produce something of real value, is shrinking. The Fed’s real power comes from their ability to create and lend into existence Federal Reserve Notes. Should a reasonable alternative to the FRN present itself, the Fed, and all those useless paper-pushing (I guess it digit-pushing now) fucks, will be irrelevant.
AMD up by 6% so far today, Nvidia down. Moving the deck chairs around perhaps?
NVIDIA up 10%. Not sure why you say otherwise.
💎🙌 LOL
7:30 AM 7/31/2024
Dow 40,847.22 103.89 0.25%
S&P 500 5,519.89 83.45 1.54%
Nasdaq 17,545.35 397.93 2.32%
VIX 16.39 -1.30 -7.35%
Gold 2,472.00 20.10 0.82%
Oil 77.15 2.42 3.24%
Since the 27th, the 10yr constant maturity’s yield has fallen from 4.27 to 4.17. Front running?
Feels like an end to the “rotation”.
Re: “ NVIDIA also announced a ten-for-one forward stock split of NVIDIA’s issued common stock to make stock ownership more accessible to employees and investors”
That’ll really help save suckers buying into this hallucination — making rat poison sweeter is always important in the long run
🤣 You need to AT LEAST check the date when you blindly google around to find something to post here that you don’t understand. The split was announced in May and became effective on June 10. What you see in the chart is the split-adjusted price of NVDA. There isn’t going to be another split for a while, LOL
13% gain today!
Woooooo