Here’s our Club Mailbag email investingclubmailbag@cnbc.com — so you send your questions directly to Jim Cramer and his team of analysts. We can’t offer personal investing advice. We will only consider more general questions about the investment process or stocks in the portfolio or related industries. Question 1: The stocks in the Trust have astonishingly different P/Es. With this in mind, how can a price target be established for each of them? Thank you. I find the Club to be fascinating. —Marc M. Price targets are part art and part science. While the art portion can be more subjective at times, the most important thing to keep in mind when thinking about the correct multiple to put on a stock is the “comp,” meaning the thing we are comparing that stock to. The two primary comps are going to be the peer group (those companies most similar to the one in question) and the multiple investors paid in the past. What we don’t want to do is think about what the appropriate multiple should be by examining companies that don’t represent an apples-to-apples comparison. A stock’s multiple (and we like looking at the forward multiple) is calculated by dividing the current shares price by earnings estimates for the next 12 months. For example, we wouldn’t look at the multiple investors are willing to pay for Club stocks Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) or Coterra Energy (CTRA) in an attempt to determine the correct multiple for Microsoft (MSFT). We would have to consider the multiples of Pioneer and Coterra in regard to one another (and other U.S.-based exploration and production companies) because both are U.S.-based exploration and production (E & P) companies. We would then consider whether one should or should not demand a higher or lower multiple versus the other. Based on our price targets of $259 for PXD and $30 for CTRA, the forward P/E multiple that we think represents fair value is roughly 12 times for PXD and roughly 11 times for CTRA. That’s below what investors have paid for PXD over the last five years and about in line with what they’ve paid for Coterra in that time frame. Based on our price target of $400 for MSFT, the forward P/E we think represents fair value is about 33 times. That’s several turns above the historic average, but we think it’s justified given the opportunity generative AI represents for Microsoft to charge customers more for their software to help them reduce costs, thanks to the efficiency gains these AI offerings can bring about. Like most investors, we are willing to pay more for the high-growth potential that we see in tech, whereas an oil name investment thesis is more income-oriented via dividends and stock buybacks. Once we have an idea of what these multiples are, we can begin to make adjustments based on the merits of the company in question versus what peers have going for them or what the company looked like in the past. It’s also worth watching the overall market’s multiple to see how much of a premium or how much of a bargain the stock in question may be. As of this writing, the forward P/E on the S & P 500 was just over 19 times. For further reading on how to determine an appropriate price target based on multiples, check out our commentary dedicated to the process. Question 2: If I am just starting with the Investment Club and have some money to invest, how do I achieve a balanced portfolio that mirrors the Investment Club’s? Do I just purchase stocks with a 1 rating, but then I am not balanced through all sectors? Thanks, Brian The last part of the question is exactly why our general rule of thumb, for those just getting started, is that the first $10,000 should go into a diversified index fund, such as an S & P 500 index fund. This will ensure diversification from the very start of your investing journey. From there, you are correct: start looking for 1-rated Club holdings to augment your portfolio. (That information can be found on our portfolio page .) Our “1 rating” is our way of communicating to members that in the current market landscape, a stock is a buy at current levels. Keep in mind that on any given day, there could be big price swings, so our daily commentary should take priority over our ratings as it will always be more real-time in nature. (We provided additional thoughts on how to go about the research and how to start adding names.) That said, as you add names, you will of course be altering the makeup of your portfolio in terms of sector exposure. So, be sure to remain mindful of the sector breakdown of any ETFs or index funds you already own. (Here’s a breakdown of the S & P 500’s sector weighting .) Another thing we would add: We generally advise individual investors to own no more than five to 10 stocks. That’s because it takes about one hour of homework per day, per stock to keep on top of your positions. We have Jim Cramer and two analysts and a team of reporters and editors covering the 30 some stocks in the Club portfolio. Unless you are looking for a second job, five to 10 hours per week of homework feels about right for most investors. A follow-up question that sometimes comes up is: “I own five stocks but don’t feel comfortable with any single stock being in excess of 10% of my portfolio. How do I reconcile this if I don’t want to be 50% in cash?” It’s a valid concern and to reconcile these views — wanting to be more invested but not own more names due to the time commitment and not wanting to be so heavy in cash — we would point you right back to that S & P 500 index holding. We say $10,000 as a starting point to ensure diversification from the start. That said, you can always allocate more funds to that position as a means of putting more money to work in a more passive way without feeling the need to increase individual stock exposure beyond a comfortable level. For example, you may opt to hold five individual stocks at 10% each and an S & P 500 index fund at 40%. Then your equity portfolio would be 90% invested and the rest could be cash. To be clear, this is not a recommendation on portfolio allocation, only an example of how one may use an index fund to get more money to work in a more passive way while maintaining a more actively invested portion of your portfolio. Question 3: When trimming shares to take some profits, is it typically more profitable over time, to trim the shares with a low-cost basis or a high-cost basis? Sincerely, Donna M. The concern with which lots one should sell isn’t so much about profits as it is about tax implications. The Club is a Charitable Trust and is, therefore, required to distribute all portfolio income and realized capital gains to qualified publicly supported charitable organizations. As a result, we stick to the default sales method first-in, first-out, or FIFO. This means that the oldest shares are going to be the first ones sold. That said, for most investors not trading in a tax-advantaged account, a sale is going to have some kind of tax implication based on the profits realized or the loss taken with the sales. While we can’t get into too much detail (as we cannot offer individual investing advice), remember that long-term capital gains rates on stocks owned for more than 1 year differ from short-term capital gains rates on stocks owned for less than 1 year, which are taxed as income. So, remember that if your goal is to raise cash, your concern shouldn’t be so much about which lots you can sell in order to realize more profits, it should be about which lot you can sell while paying the least in taxes. If you’ve got a position that you are up on overall but within which there are lots that are losers and your goal is to trim that position, you may even consider selling the losers in order to tax loss harvest. That’s all we can really offer up on the matter as anything beyond this would best be discussed with your accountant as they will know what is best given your own unique circumstances. (See here for a full list of the stocks in Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust’s portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.
Here’s our Club Mailbag email investingclubmailbag@cnbc.com — so you send your questions directly to Jim Cramer and his team of analysts. We can’t offer personal investing advice. We will only consider more general questions about the investment process or stocks in the portfolio or related industries.
Question 1: The stocks in the Trust have astonishingly different P/Es. With this in mind, how can a price target be established for each of them? Thank you. I find the Club to be fascinating. —Marc M.
Tesla’s Supercharger network — already the most reliable fast-charging network in the world — just became a little easier to use. Google Maps now displays live availability data for Tesla Superchargers, showing how many stalls are currently available at each location.
The new integration means users can now see real-time charger status directly inside Google Maps, similar to what Tesla owners have long seen inside their vehicles or in the Tesla app.
When searching for a Supercharger, Maps now lists the total number of stalls and how many are available at that moment. It’s the same information Tesla provides through its own navigation system, but now visible to anyone using Google Maps — Tesla owner or not.
Latest step in opening up Tesla’s Supercharger network
This might look like a small change, but it’s another sign that Tesla is steadily opening up parts of its once-exclusive charging ecosystem.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
The company has already begun integrating non-Tesla EVs into its Supercharger network across North America – first through the short-lived Magic Dock and then through the NACS rollout.
While this update is not particularly useful for Tesla owners, who already have this data in the in-vehicle navigation or the app, making real-time charger data available on Google Maps makes perfect sense for non-Tesla EV owners.
Electrek’s Take
Tesla has always led when it comes to charging reliability at Supercharger stations – hence why opening up the network to non-Tesla EV owners in North America over the last 2 years has been such a big deal.
But next to having non-functioning chargers, there’s nothing worse than showing up at a charging station and it is fully used.
Now, if EV owners are planning their trips through Google Maps, they will be able to avoid that more easily.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
US President Donald Trump (L), backdropped by Turbines at the European Offshore Wind Deployment Centre, also known as the Aberdeen Bay Wind Farm, walks on the first fairway after playing off the first tee to officially open the Trump International Golf Links course in Balmedie, Aberdeenshire, north east Scotland on July 29, 2025.
Brendan Smialowski | Afp | Getty Images
Two European pioneers of the modern wind power industry are sounding the alarm on the Trump administration’s clean energy cutbacks, warning Washington’s anti-climate agenda is part of a broader energy transition challenge.
Denmark’s Henrik Stiesdal and Britain’s Andrew Garrad, often referred to as the “Godfathers of wind” for their contributions in advancing the design, manufacture and deployment of wind turbines, said Trump’s war on wind appears to be a symptom of more widespread climate apathy.
Stiesdal is known for framing the early design principles for wind turbines and led the installation of the world’s first offshore wind farm in 1991, while Garrad developed computer models to optimize and certify turbine and farm designs.
“I think Trump’s approach is symptomatic of a general shift,” Garrad said, in comments echoed by Stiesdal, one that is opposed to the transition from fossil fuels to renewable technologies, such as wind and solar.
“We are facing right now, a change of mood. We had a very easy beginning, then quite a big struggle, then general acceptance, and now the worm is turning. And that’s something which we all have to address,” Garrad told CNBC.
Since returning to office at the start of the year, U.S. President Donald Trump has actively sought to disrupt the development of high-profile wind projects. His push to wipe out the offshore wind industry has included stop-work orders and the removal of green incentives under former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act.
“Trump is symptomatic. I mean an extreme symptom of that, but you can see it I think in all Western countries certainly, perhaps not elsewhere. And that’s a big issue,” Garrad said.
“This isn’t just a wind energy problem,” Garrad said. “To do this sort of change is a very dangerous thing. And I think it has shown that this is a political business … It’s a personal decision by a politician, who happens to be a rather powerful one — and it has sent shockwaves around the place.”
‘Pathetic’ and ‘expensive’
Trump’s onslaught against the wind industry has hit the business models of renewable energy giants particularly hard. Denmark’s Ortsed, the world’s biggest offshore wind farm group, is one notable example.
Last week, Orsted reported a net loss of 1.7 billion Danish kroner ($261.8 million) for the July-September period. The result, which was slightly better than analysts feared, was significantly down from profit of 5.17 billion Danish kroner in the same period last year.
Shares of the Copenhagen-listed company, which have fallen more than 80% from a 2021 peak, notched a fresh record low in August after the Trump administration ordered the company to halt work on a near complete windfarm.
A turbine blade is lifted onto a rack near tower sections at the Revolution Wind project assembly site at State Pier in New London, Connecticut, US, on Friday, Oct. 24, 2025.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Danish wind turbine firm Vestas has also been battling industry uncertainty, in part because of the Trump administration’s policies. When asked about some of these challenges, Vestas CEO Henrik Andersen said the company has a “well-established” supply chain in the U.S.
“For us, we see the U.S., both customers and the buildout in the U.S., as some of our core responsibility to help the U.S. with,” Andersen told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Nov. 5.
“Then sometimes maybe we have to get a bit of a slap that it is not everyone that likes the nature of a wind turbine. But I think, in general, … energy drives decision making and [the] cost of energy drives decision making,” he added.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) at the United Nations headquarters on September 23, 2025 in New York City.
Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images News | Getty Images
Trump has repeatedly criticized the deployment of offshore wind turbines, describing them as “pathetic” and “expensive” in a recent speech at the United Nations General Assembly.
“I’m telling you that if you don’t get away from the green energy scam, your country is going to fail,” Trump said on Sept. 23. The U.S. president also said climate change is the “greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world.”
Scientists have since condemned Trump’s characterization of climate change, pointing out that the overwhelming consensus is that climate change is already happening, with record-breaking heatwaves, flood events and hurricanes causing substantial economic damages across the globe.
Energy security
Stiesdal, who refused to comment specifically on Trump’s war on wind, said there appears to be “a fundamental misunderstanding” from those firmly opposed to the energy transition.
“A lot of people who would be inclined to vote for hard-right parties actually benefit both from the job offerings and the cost of their energy from renewables,” Stiesdal said.
“It’s not an easy thing to fight because a lot of it is kind of visceral or fundamental in the thinking about this tribal approach,” he continued. “Whenever I am confronted with that, or with discussions about that, I try to emphasize energy security, the job creation, the local beneficial effects of doing renewables and the assurances you get in society.”
King Charles III (centre) poses for a group photo after presenting the 2024 Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering to Andrew Garrad C.B.E. (left) and Henrik Stiesdal for their achievements in advancing the design, manufacture and deployment of modern wind power technology, during a reception for the 2025 Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering, at St James’ Palace November 5, 2025 in London, England.
Getty Images | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images
Stiesdal and Garrad were speaking to CNBC shortly before being presented with the 2024 Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering. The prize was presented by King Charles III during a reception at St. James’s Palace in London earlier this month.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) says renewables and AI are reshaping the world’s energy future, and that transformation is happening faster than anyone expected. In its new “World Energy Outlook 2025,” the IEA warns that energy security risks now stretch far beyond oil and gas. Critical minerals essential to clean tech, defense, and AI have become the new fault lines in global supply chains. The IEA also states that energy has become a central focus of geopolitical power struggles, making it one of the defining economic and security challenges of our time.
A more complex, electrified future
The IEA’s annual “World Energy Outlook” explores three possible scenarios for the future, emphasizing that none are predictions. Instead, they’re roadmaps that show what could happen depending on the choices governments and industries make on policy, technology, and investment.
Across every scenario, one theme stands out: electricity demand is surging faster than for any other form of energy. Electricity currently accounts for only about 20% of global energy use, yet it powers more than 40% of the global economy. Fatih Birol, the IEA’s executive director, said the trend is accelerating: “Last year, we said the world was moving quickly into the Age of Electricity – and it’s clear today that it has already arrived.”
Driving that growth are data centers, AI, and electrification across transportation, heating, and manufacturing. Global data center investment alone is expected to hit $580 billion in 2025 – even higher than the $540 billion the world will spend on oil supply.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Shifting global energy dynamics
Emerging economies, led by India and Southeast Asia, are now shaping energy markets that were once dominated by China. These regions are experiencing a rapid increase in demand for power, mobility, and industrial energy use. By 2035, 80% of global energy consumption growth is expected to come from countries with high solar potential.
At the same time, the IEA warns that grid expansion and storage aren’t keeping up with this growth. While investments in power generation have jumped nearly 70% since 2015, spending on transmission and distribution has risen at less than half that pace. The agency calls for urgent grid upgrades and stronger government coordination to prevent future electricity bottlenecks.
Renewables and nuclear on the rise
Solar leads the charge across all IEA scenarios, with renewables growing at a faster rate than any other energy source. Nuclear energy is also making a comeback: after two decades of stagnation, global nuclear capacity is projected to increase by at least a third by 2035, thanks to both large-scale projects and small modular reactor designs.
Dave Jones, chief analyst at global energy think tank Ember, said, “The world is moving in the right direction, and continued acceleration can drive a more rapid transformation of the energy system. Renewables and electrification will dominate the future – and fossil-importing nations will gain the most by embracing them.”
Energy access and climate urgency
The IEA highlights two critical areas where the world is falling short: universal access to energy and climate goals. Roughly 730 million people still live without electricity, and nearly 2 billion rely on polluting cooking methods. Even in the agency’s most ambitious pathways, global temperatures surpass 1.5C of warming before potentially returning below that level later in the century.
Meanwhile, the effects of climate change are already disrupting energy systems. In 2023 alone, over 200 million households worldwide were affected by energy infrastructure failures, with transmission lines accounting for about 85% of incidents. The IEA says governments must prioritize resilience not only against extreme weather but also against cyberattacks and supply chain shocks.
Birol summed it up: “When we look at the history of the energy world in recent decades, there is no other time when energy security tensions have applied to so many fuels and technologies at once. With energy security front and center for many governments, their responses need to consider the synergies and trade-offs that can arise with other policy goals – on affordability, access, competitiveness, and climate change.”
If you’re looking to replace your old HVAC equipment, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you’re finding a trusted, reliable HVAC installer near you that offers competitive pricing on heat pumps, check out EnergySage. EnergySage is a free service that makes it easy for you to get a heat pump. They have pre-vetted heat pump installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions. Plus, it’s free to use!
Your personalized heat pump quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – *ad
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.