Nvidia share price plunge has one major explanation

Published

1 year ago

June 25, 2024

admin

Just one week ago, Nvidia became the world’s most valuable company.

The chipmaker – whose shares had risen nine-fold since the end of 2022 – overtook Microsoft as its stock market valuation reached $3.34trn (£2.63bn).

Since then, the shares have fallen by 13%, declining in each of the last three trading sessions.

That has been enough to clip more than $500bn (£394bn) from Nvidia’s stock market valuation reached when, last Thursday, the shares hit an all-time intra-day high of $140.76 (£110.94) each (taking into account the 10-for-one share split completed earlier this month).

Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry – watch live

To put that into context, Exxon Mobil – the 14th biggest company in the S&P 500 index and itself one of only a dozen companies ever to achieve the status of the world’s most valuable company – has a stock market valuation of $511bn.

So what is going on?

There are a number of factors at play.

The first is profit-taking. Nvidia shares, prior to last Thursday, had enjoyed a fantastic run and had attracted a lot of hot money from so-called “momentum buyers” who see a stock moving higher and jump on board to profit from the ride.

It was natural for such buyers to lock in profits by selling.

Added to that is that speculative money has moved on. A report published over the weekend in the Wall Street Journal that Meta Platforms, the parent of Facebook, has held talks with Apple about integrating Meta’s generative AI model into the recently unveiled Apple Intelligence system sent shares in both higher as profits from Nvidia’s recent strong run were recycled.

That money has not left the market – it has simply been redeployed from Nvidia to other stocks, not least Meta and Apple, but also elsewhere.

That can be shown by the fact that the sell-off in Nvidia, while also dragging down peers such as Broadcom, Taiwan Semiconductor, and Super Micro Computer (a server maker which is a heavy buyer of Nvidia’s chips), did not lead to a wider sell-off.

The Dow Jones, admittedly not as good a barometer of the US stock market as the S&P 500, hit its highest level for a month on Monday even as the S&P 500 and Nasdaq, both of which have a heavier weighting in Nvidia, were falling.

Also contributing to the sell-off was the revelation – via a filing to the main US financial regulator, the Securities & Exchange Commission – that Jensen Huang, Nvidia’s founder and chief executive, has taken advantage of the recent rise in the share price to reduce his holding.

Mr Huang, who founded Nvidia in 1993, sold just under $95m (£74.9m) worth of shares between Thursday 13 June and Friday 21 June. Nor is Mr Huang – who still owns more than 866 million shares in Nvidia worth $102.3bn (£80.3bn) at Monday evening’s closing price – the only director to have been selling recently.

Mark Stevens, a veteran venture capitalist who has been on the Nvidia board since 2008, has offloaded $28m (£22m) worth of shares this month while Tench Coxe, another VC who was one of Mr Huang’s earliest backers and who has been on the board since the start, has sold $119.5m (£94.1m) worth.

Selling by directors is not always a reliable guide to a company’s prospects. Sometimes it reflects personal factors, such as a divorce or estate planning, rather than indicating what a director thinks of a company’s prospects. Rightly or wrongly, though, it is usually taken as a negative signal.

Perhaps the most significant factor in the sell-off, though, is that some investors have been looking at Nvidia through traditional investment yardsticks.

The main one of these is the price/earnings (P/E) ratio. The higher the P/E ratio is, the more expensively a stock is valued.

Last week, after its latest gains, shares of Nvidia were changing hands at 45 times expected earnings.

To put that in context, the forward P/E of the S&P 500 is 22 times and the Nasdaq only slightly more. Put another way, investors were ascribing more than twice the value to Nvidia’s future earnings as they were to those of its peers.

Moreover, as the influential investment magazine Barron’s pointed out at the weekend, Nvidia was being valued at some 20 times its expected sales for the year to the end of January 2026 – a racy valuation, to say the least.

Stocks with those kinds of valuation have to justify it with spectacular earnings growth.

Yet, as Barron’s columnist Eric Savitz pointed out, Nvidia’s quarter-on-quarter earnings growth has, over the last four quarters, slowed from 88% to 34% to 22% to 18%. Now, quarter-on-quarter earnings growth of 18% is still pretty spectacular. But it does not quite justify a price/earnings multiple that has gone from 25 to 45 over the last year.

Pointing out that from 1976 to 2020, stocks trading at P/E rations of over 15 tended to underperform, Mr Savitz added: “I know what you’re thinking. It’s different this time. This is AI! And sure, maybe AI really is the most important thing to happen in technology since cloud computing, or the internet, or mobile phones, or even the personal computer. But the numbers worry me.

“Nvidia’s market value is now nearly five times the industry estimate for next year’s global chip sales-yes, the total from every company worldwide. Microsoft has seven times the number of employees Nvidia does, and twice the sales. Apple has five times the staff, and triple the sales volume. Nonetheless, this past week, Nvidia’s market cap vaulted past them both.”

Mr Savitz was not the only investment columnist suggesting that, perhaps, Nvidia’s shares might be over-valued.

Some of Monday’s sell-off was also fuelled by the highly influential ‘Heard on the Street’ column in the Wall Street Journal which, at the weekend, invited readers to cast their minds back to the dot-com bubble at the beginning of the century and, in particular, to the gyrations seen at that time in shares of Cisco Systems.

Cisco, the Journal reminded its readers, was favoured along with stocks such as IBM, Lucent and Intel – companies whose hardware were at the forefront of connecting households and businesses to the internet. By the end of 1999, it had become the world’s most valuable company.

The comparison with Cisco has undoubtedly dented sentiment towards Nvidia in some quarters.

Pointing out that today Cisco is now valued at 40% less than it was back then, the Journal highlighted that, at its peak in March 2000, Cisco shares were valued at 131 times forward earnings despite a less impressive financial performance than that recently shown by Nvidia.

Stressing that Nvidia was not is frothily valued as Cisco had been, the column added: “That doesn’t necessarily make Nvidia’s shares safe at their current level, though.

“The stock has seen a big influx of individual investors since the company’s latest financial results last month. Daily retail inflow has averaged nearly $141m since the earnings compared with a daily average of about $39m during the month prior, according to Vanda Research.

“Sell-side analysts are also getting rather exuberant. Several have pushed up their price targets since the stock’s 10 June split. And at least four of those targets are now at $160 and higher, which would put Nvidia’s market capitalization near $4trn at its current share count.

“Nvidia may be the top gun of AI, but investors should be careful not to write checks the stock can’t cash.”

Quite so.

AI is still a nascent technology and it is impossible to know, from here, who may be the greatest winners from it over time.

Just as investors back in 1999, trying to predict who would be the world’s biggest winners from widespread adoption of the internet, could not have known.

US

Donald Trump praises Liberian president’s English – the country’s official language

Published

2 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Donald Trump praises Liberian president's English - the country's official language

Donald Trump has praised the Liberian president’s command of English – the West African country’s official language.

The US president reacted with visible surprise to Joseph Boakai’s English-speaking skills during a White House meeting with leaders from the region on Wednesday.

After the Liberian president finished his brief remarks, Mr Trump told him he speaks “such good English” and asked: “Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?”

Mr Trump seemed surprised when Mr Boakai laughed and responded he learned in Liberia.

The US president said: “It’s beautiful English.

“I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.”

Mr Boakai did not tell Mr Trump that English is the official language of Liberia.

The country was founded in 1822 with the aim of relocating freed African slaves and freeborn black citizens from the US.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

Mr Trump promised the leaders of Liberia, Senegal, Gabon, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau a pivot from aid to trade at the surprise meeting.

He described the countries as “all very vibrant places with very valuable land, great minerals, and great oil deposits, and wonderful people”.

Later asked by a reporter if he’ll visit the continent, Mr Trump said, “At some point, I would like to go to Africa.”

But he added that he’d “have to see what the schedule looks like”.

Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, promised to go to Africa in 2023, but only fulfilled the commitment by visiting Angola in December 2024, just weeks before he left office.

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says Israeli government

Published

2 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Gaza permanent ceasefire 'questionable', says Israeli government

The Israeli government believes the chances of achieving a permanent ceasefire in Gaza are “questionable”.

The pessimistic assessment, in a top-level Israeli government briefing given to Sky News, comes as the Israeli Prime Minister prepares to leave Washington DC after a four-day visit which had begun with the expectation of a ceasefire announcement.

Benjamin Netanyahu will leave the US later today with the prospect of even a temporary 60-day ceasefire looking extremely unlikely this week.

Within “a week, two weeks – not a day” is how it was framed in the background briefing late on Wednesday.

Crucially, though, on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the framing from the briefing was even less optimistic: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement. But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Sky News has spoken to several Israeli officials at the top level of the government. None will be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

But I have been given a very clear understanding of Mr Netanyahu’s thinking.

The Israeli position is that a permanent ceasefire (beyond the initial 60 days, which itself is yet to be agreed) is only possible if Hamas lays down its arms. “If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war],” said a source.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

This was rejected by Hamas and by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who reportedly told the Israelis that the redeployment map “looks like a Smotrich plan”, a reference to the extreme-right Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.

My briefing of Mr Netanyahu’s position is that he has not shifted in terms of Israel’s central stated war aims. The return of the hostages and eliminating Hamas are the key objectives.

But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, it was clear from my briefing that no permanent ceasefire is possible in the Israeli government’s view without the complete removal of Hamas as a political and military entity.

Hamas is not likely to negotiate its way to oblivion.

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, a senior Israeli official told Sky News: “We would want IDF in every square metre of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone.”

It was clear to me that Mr Netanyahu wants his stated position to be that his government has no territorial ambition for Gaza.

One quote to come from my briefing, which I am only able to attribute to a senior Israeli official, says: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas.”

Another clear indication of Mr Netanyahu’s position – a quote from the briefing, attributable only to a senior Israeli official: “You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, it’s clear from my briefings that Mr Netanyahu continues to rule out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

The Israeli government assessment is that the Palestinians are not going to have a state “as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state”.

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the briefing revealed that Mr Netanyahu’s view is that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave” but that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated.

“It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction,” a senior Israeli official said.

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary”, is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.

Reacting to Israeli Defence Minister Katz’s recent statement revealing a plan to move Palestinians into a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza, and not let them out of that area, the official wouldn’t be drawn, except to say: “As a permanent arrangement? Of course not.”

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says senior Israeli official

Published

5 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

A senior Israeli official has issued a less-than-optimistic assessment of the permanency of any ceasefire in Gaza.

Speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, the senior official said that a 60-day ceasefire “might” be possible within “a week, two weeks – not a day”.

But on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the official said: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement.

“But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to conclude a four-day visit to Washington later today.

There had been hope that a ceasefire could be announced during the trip. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that it’s close.

Speaking at a briefing for a number of reporters, the Israeli official would not be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

The official repeated Israel’s central stated war aims of getting the hostages back and eliminating Hamas. But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, the official was clear that no permanent ceasefire would be possible without the complete removal of Hamas.

“We will offer them a permanent ceasefire,” he told Sky News. “If they agree. Fine. It’s over.

“They lay down their arms, and we proceed [with the ceasefire]. If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war].”

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, the official said: “We would want IDF in every square meter of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone…”

He added: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas…”

The official said the Israeli government had “no territorial designs for Gaza”.

“But [we] don’t want Hamas there,” he continued. “You have to finish the job… victory over Hamas. You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, the official ruled out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

“They are not going to have a state in the foreseeable future as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state. It doesn’t make a difference if they are the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, it’s just a difference of tactics.”

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the official predicted that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave”.

But he claimed that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated, adding: “It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction.”

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary,” is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.