The Line Between Results and Share Prices Snapped on Tuesday

Marktomarket
08-19 17:29
Reward Tiger-CoinsReward 500 Tiger-coins

Hello. Three companies reported on Tuesday. Put the three side by side and no order makes sense.

$Fabrinet(FN)$ beat on revenue by about 3.1 per cent and on earnings per share by about 7.5 per cent, both records — and closed down 19.38 per cent at US$482.59.

$Home Depot(HD)$ beat on both lines, posted net sales of about US$47.9 billion and its best comparable sales since 2022, and reaffirmed full-year guidance — and closed down 0.12 per cent.

$BIDU-SW(09888)$ missed on both revenue and profit, with earnings per share about 22.7 per cent short — and closed down 12.73 per cent.

Full marks fell 19 per cent, a pass fell 0.12 per cent, a fail fell 12.7 per cent. The line between results and share price snapped that day.

What snapped was not the numerator. It was the denominator.

The 30-year Treasury yield sat at 5.28 per cent, having touched 5.31 per cent intraday on Monday, its highest since 2007. A long-dated yield is the ruler you use to mark down money that only arrives later — move the ruler and the further away the money is, the deeper the mark-down. And once a risk-free yield is above 5 per cent, bonds start competing with equities for the same money.

US stocks fell for a third straight session: $Invesco QQQ(QQQ)$ down 1.69 per cent, $NASDAQ(.IXIC)$ Composite 1.33 per cent, $SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust(SPY)$ 0.68 per cent and $Dow Jones(.DJI)$ 0.22 per cent.

Fabrinet came off worst not because the results were bad but because the quality of them got questioned. Coverage put the fall down to three things: gross margin, free cash flow and guidance. Its gross margin is 12.06 per cent — contract manufacturing is thin work however much volume goes through it. Lift the denominator and the first question becomes what that growth is worth in margin. Coherent beat on both lines a few days earlier and closed down 7.99 per cent the next day. Same question.

Baidu gives the same answer from the other end. Its AI cloud infrastructure business grew 50 per cent year on year, but the drag from advertising ran deeper, and one write-up simply called the results the price of going all in on AI. The part that was growing sits in the future, the part that was shrinking sits in the present, and the market only counted the second.

Memory turned over completely. $SanDisk Corp.(SNDK)$ closed down 9.01 per cent at US$1,625.78, handing back the whole of Monday's 8.88 per cent; $Tradr 2X Long SNDK Daily ETF(SNXX)$ fell 17.84 per cent while $Tradr 2X Short SNDK Daily ETF(SNDQ)$ rose 18.00 per cent. $SK hynix(SKHY)$ closed down 9.20 per cent and $Micron Technology(MU)$ 7.02 per cent.

The fuse was lit in Asia, where Kioxia fell about 7.5 per cent in Japan. What widened the fall was a single sentence: one house set out a comparison the same day of what is over-owned and what nobody has bought, and concluded that Nvidia remains under-owned while SanDisk is a crowded trade. Arriving after a month of gains in memory, that handed leveraged money its reason to cut.

$Direxion Daily Semiconductors Bull 3x Shares(SOXL)$ fell 14.80 per cent and $Direxion Daily Semiconductors Bear 3x Shares(SOXS)$ rose 15.20 per cent, almost mirror images. This was not an accident at one company but a whole board being marked down together: $Marvell Technology(MRVL)$ fell 7.82 per cent, Intel 6.58 per cent and $Advanced Micro Devices(AMD)$ 4.27 per cent.

One concession is due here. If everything came down to the discount rate, Micron would not make sense: the same day Bank of America raised its target to US$1,550 and another house upgraded it on the grounds that "inventories don't lie", and the shares still fell 7.02 per cent.

The two sides are working different problems. The sell side works the numerator — inventories, contract prices, the tightness in HBM. The market works the denominator. Micron's earnings peak is pinned somewhere around 2027, and its next results are not due until 22 September, with nothing in between to verify the numerator. At times like that the denominator is louder.

The only real gain of the day was Apple, up 1.45 per cent at US$310.03. It handed in no results that day. What it handed in was an agreement: the EU core technology commission cut to 5 per cent, the fee on alternative payment channels reset to 20 per cent, the rules on third-party app stores loosened, and a long-running antitrust dispute with Brussels settled.

A fee you can put a number on, in exchange for a fine you cannot. When the denominator is rising, what the market least wants to pay for is a figure nobody can put down.

$Meta Platforms, Inc.(META)$ is the mirror of that sentence. It closed down 4.45 per cent, the worst of the Magnificent Seven. Twenty-nine states are suing over the way Facebook and Instagram are designed and the harm done to young users; the trial opened on Tuesday and company executives were on the stand from day one. Coverage has put potential damages as high as US$1.4 trillion — the scale the plaintiffs are asking for, not a verdict, but enough for the market to reprice legal costs.

The same day the investor Steve Eisman questioned its AI spending, pointing at expenses up about 55 per cent year on year. Legal costs and capital expenditure rising together, against a valuation resting on advertising profit from 2027 onwards.

The same arithmetic reached other places. $NEBIUS(NBIS)$ closed down 7.60 per cent even though its own news that day was all good: the city council in Vineland, New Jersey approved the second phase of its data centre and the project cleared its permits. The AI neoclouds are the most direct casualties of a long-dated yield — asset-heavy, expanding on debt and long contracts, with profit landing two or three years out.

$NVIDIA(NVDA)$ closed down 2.34 per cent, a week from results after the close on 26 August. The bond investor Jeffrey Gundlach compared its US$500 billion AI financing arrangement to "bonds collateralised by bananas", and its guarantee on that Ohio data centre for OpenAI was cut on Monday, from US$$250 billion to U$$120 billion.

And the buildout is still running on borrowed money. Alphabet is preparing a record A$5 billion Australian bond to fund its AI spending, timed to a moment when the long end is pinned at its highest since 2007.

The week is not done reporting: Target pre-market on Wednesday, Kuaishou after the Hong Kong close on Wednesday, Alibaba pre-market in the US on Thursday, Yangtze Optical on Friday.

The minutes of the July policy meeting come at 2am Singapore time on Thursday — that 29 July meeting was the fifth in a row with no move, leaving the range at 3.50 to 3.75 per cent, though three members argued for a 25 basis point rise. If the minutes set out the case for a rise more fully, the long end has further to go.

The best of the three report cards fell 19.38 per cent. While the denominator is still moving, a report card can only do so much.

The above is personal analysis, not investment advice.

💬 【Talking Point】

$Apple(AAPL)$ cut its EU core technology commission to 5 per cent and settled a long-running antitrust case — the only Magnificent Seven name up on the day. Do you read that as buying certainty cheaply, or as giving margin away under pressure?

💰 【Bounty】

Drop your view in the comments and there are coins in it for you! 🎁

🔔 Better shared than saved — tag a friend and split the coins!

Nvidia Drops 2.3% a Week Before Earnings — 50% Upside or Bubble?
Nvidia −2.34% Tuesday, a week out from August 26 earnings. BofA sees roughly 55% upside after pricing in AI risk, and notes institutions are still underweight — unusual, in a week when memory and second-tier compute are called crowded trades. The bear case is financing: Nvidia is backing about $105bn of lease guarantees for OpenAI's Ohio data center, which Gundlach likened to "bonds collateralized by bananas"; Huang denies it is circular. On competition, Cerebras claims the fastest accelerator and Groq raised $350m. Add before earnings, wait for the minutes, or rotate to Broadcom?
Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.
Reward expired
Due to insufficient number of valid participants, 500Tiger coins have been refunded to the initiator
Deadline to 08/20 17:29
Reward-post

Comments

  • 人生何处不红山
    08-20 14:48
    人生何处不红山
    我觉得苹果这次上涨,不完全是“欧盟和解值多少钱”的问题,更像是市场在高利率环境下重新给确定性现金流定价。
    同一天FN、NBIS、半导体这些公司承压,有一个共同特征:市场今天付的钱,很大程度上要靠2027、2028甚至更远的增长来证明。30年美债到了5%以上,未来一美元的价值自然要打更大的折扣。
    苹果恰好相反。
    它有庞大的当期自由现金流、成熟的服务业务和持续回购能力,现在又把一个难以量化的欧洲监管风险,换成了可以直接放进模型里的费率让步。
    所以我认为它真正做的是:
    牺牲一小部分利润率,换取更低的风险溢价。
    但这里也有一个不能忽略的风险——如果欧盟的5%和20%最终成为美国、日本、韩国等市场监管机构效仿的模板,那么今天看起来是一次性让利,未来就可能变成App Store全球盈利能力的结构性下降。
    因此我目前偏向“廉价购买确定性”,但要加一个条件:
    只要欧洲是特例,这笔交易就很划算;如果欧洲变成全球定价模板,苹果今天消灭的是监管风险,明天可能损失的是长期利润率。
    高利率市场最喜欢的不是利润最高的公司,而是最容易算清楚未来能赚多少钱的公司。
  • 人生何处不红山
    08-20 14:39
    人生何处不红山
    我更倾向于把苹果这次处理理解成花钱买确定性,而不是被迫放弃利润。

    原因在于,市场给大型平台公司的折价,很多时候并不是来自已经发生的罚款,而是来自“到底会罚多少、规则会不会继续收紧、商业模式会不会被迫重构”这种无法建模的尾部风险。

    把核心技术委员会费率降到5%、替代支付渠道费用降到20%,确实会牺牲一部分单笔交易的抽成,但至少这个损失现在变成了一个可以放进模型里的数字。

    而反垄断诉讼如果长期悬着,市场面对的是三个更难定价的问题:

    未来罚款是多少?
    App Store规则还会不会继续被拆?
    其他司法辖区会不会照着欧盟复制?

    在30年美债收益率超过5%的环境里,我反而觉得这种区别尤其重要。

    高利率最惩罚的,不只是低利润,而是远期、模糊、不可验证的利润。

    所以苹果愿意牺牲一部分抽成,把监管风险从“无限可能”压缩成“确定成本”,本质上是在降低自己的风险溢价。

    当然,真正需要观察的是第二阶段:如果欧盟让步只是个案,那这笔交易很划算;如果它成为全球监管模板,导致App Store抽成率持续下移,那今天买到的就不是确定性,而是盈利模式永久让利。

    因此我的判断是:

    现在更像廉价购买确定性,但这笔交易到底便不便宜,要看5%和20%最终是欧洲价格,还是全球价格。

  • 北极篂
    08-20 08:48
    北极篂
    真正需要观察的是:这种让利会不会从欧盟开始,逐渐成为其他市场要求苹果降低抽成的先例。


    如果只是欧洲特例,我认为影响有限;如果全球监管开始复制,这才是苹果投资者真正需要担心的利润率风险。


    我的判断:短期是让利,长期是买确定性;真正的风险不是5%,而是5%会不会变成下一个起点。
  • 北极篂
    08-20 08:48
    北极篂
    所以这更像一次主动调整,而不是被监管打到失去防守能力。


    我反而认为,用部分利润换取规则清晰和长期确定性,对苹果的估值是好事。
  • 北极篂
    08-20 08:48
    北极篂
    我更倾向前者:这是苹果用一小部分利润,换取更大的监管确定性。


    表面看,5%的新模式确实意味着苹果在欧盟的抽成空间被压缩,但我认为真正重要的不是这5%,而是把持续多年的反垄断纠纷尽量“定价”下来。对于苹果这种拥有庞大生态和超高服务利润率的公司,最怕的不是让出一点利润,而是规则长期不确定,甚至不断面临罚款、限制和商业模式被迫重构。
  • CareyDunlop
    08-19 18:23
    CareyDunlop
    Ngl the denominator story is too broad here. FN was carrying a way richer multiple, so 5.3% long bonds were always going to hit it harder than HD or BIDU.
Leave a comment
7
3