Investor's Corner
Tesla stock (TSLA) one week after the Q1 2016 Report
Post Q1 Report Action
The technical response of the stock market to last week’s Tesla Q1 2016 report has been mostly negative. The stock lost quite a bit since last week, standing at around $208 when I write this, but overall 12-month Analyst Price Targets have actually increased with the average raising from $253 to $277, indicating that the Top Analysts did not see the report as negatively as this past week’s market action.
This is a small sample of the reactions from Top Analysts, noting that none of them changed their position to BUY, SELL or HOLD.
Adam Jonas of Morgan Stanley, reiterated a BUY with $333 price target, commenting that “we forecast ~70k units in 2016 (vs. the reiterated guidance of 80-90k shipments), which is composed of ~16k Model X and ~54k Model S units. In 2Q, we forecast ~17k deliveries–inline with the outlook.”
Charlie Anderson of Dougherty resumed coverage of TSLA with a BUY and price target of $500, noting that “the focus coming out of the Q1 report is on managements decision to pull-forward its production goal of 500K vehicles from 2020 to 2018. While this aggressive schedule certainly increases the risk of nearer-term stumbles, it also significantly pulls forward the earnings power. Tesla has set a goal to produce 1MM vehicles by 2020, roughly 2x what most observers previously believed. Our view is that demand is not the question; it is solving the manufacturing challenges deftly as they come.”
Brian Johnson of Barclays reiterated a SELL with $165 price target.
Ryan Brinkman of J.P. Morgan reiterated a SELL with $185 price target, as he “Doubts Tesla Motors Can Meet Accelerated Production Target.”
Colin Rusch or Oppenheimer reiterated a BUY with $385 price target, indicating that “we believe the critical characteristic of TSLAs business model over the next 24 months will be operating leverage. We believe the company can achieve 15%+ incremental operating margins as it ramps the Model 3. We modeling TSLA reaching 500k vehicles in 2019 vs. the target of 2018, noting the company has a history of setting nearly unachievable goals. Effectively we are accelerating ramp by a year from our previous expectations, but calculate that if the company reaches its 500k vehicle target in 2018 and 1M in 2020, our EPS estimates will prove ~30% too low.”
See the table below from TipRanks (tipranks.com) for a complete summary of the current top analyst ratings.
Swing Trading TSLA using the MACD
This is the first post where I will start outlining techniques that traders may want to use when trading TSLA stock.
I am mostly a “swing trader”. Swing Trading is a short term trading method that can be used when trading stocks and options. Whereas Day Trading positions last less than one day, Swing Trading positions typically last two to six days, but may last as long as two weeks (for TSLA sometime six-seven weeks). Swing traders use technical analysis to look for stocks with short-term price momentum. These traders aren’t interested in the fundamental or intrinsic value of stocks, but rather in their price trends and patterns.
There are a number of technical indicators that swing traders use. Today I will cover the MACD. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) is a trend-following momentum indicator that shows the relationship between two moving averages of prices. The MACD is calculated by subtracting the 26-day exponential moving average (EMA) from the 12-day EMA. The Exponential Moving Average (EMA) is a type of moving average that is similar to a simple moving average, except that more weight is given to the latest data.
The good thing is that you really do not have to calculate any of these indicators yourself, as pretty much all trading platforms that I know of provide you with such indicators as an option when displaying the stock chart of a given security.
The following stock chart from Wall Street I/O shows the TSLA market data as “candlestick” (showing open, close, high and low of the day) for the past year, plus it also shows the MACD for the same period.
One technique that swing traders use is to enter a “long” trade when the MACD “crosses to the bulls”, and exit the trade when the MACD “crosses to the bears”. I have indicated these points in the chart for the huge run up between the February low and April high.
Micah Lamar is the CEO of Wall Street I/O (wallst.io), where together with his team of experts he helps people learn stock and option trading. Disclosure: I have been a subscriber to wallst.io for a few years.
This past weekend, Micah run a “MACD Validation” experiment on TSLA 1-year behavior up to last Friday close. The results are as follows.
Micah found that “if one had bought TSLA stock exactly a year ago, and held it for the full year, one would have incurred a $30 loss per share.
If one had bought and held TSLA stock while the MACD was bullish, one would be up $22 for the year.
If one had sold (short) TSLA stock while the MACD was bearish, one would be up $51 for the year.”
Someone trading both sides (long and short the stock) would be up a whopping $73, or a $30% gain.
Of course, trading the same entry and exit points based on the MACD with put or call options instead of stock would have resulted in returns 10 to 100 times or better than if just trading TSLA stock.
Micah indicates that “TSLA is a great stock for swing traders: the reason is that it has so much “beta.” A high beta indicates that a security is much more “volatile” than the rest of the market. Most high-tech stocks like TSLA have a beta of greater than 1, offering the possibility of a higher rate of return, but also posing more risk.
As far as where TSLA is today, it is still in “bearish” territory (as far as the MACD and other indicators are concerned), which for me it means that it is untouchable on long trades as “too risky”, and since I do not like to play on the downside for stocks of companies that are in my “buy what you know” list, I will not trade it again until the MACD crosses back to the bulls.
Investor's Corner
Tesla’s flying Roadster just revealed something bigger than the car
Analysts say the Roadster demo puts a Tesla and SpaceX merger back on the table.
The Roadster unveiling near Waco ended Thursday night, and by Friday morning much of the investor reaction had less to do with the car than with who owns the rocket technology inside it.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said the event “puts the Tesla/SpaceX relationship on the table in a tangible way,” pointing to the propulsion, pressure vessel and control hardware sitting on a Tesla product. Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management called the demo “a ridiculous display of engineering” with “no commercial value” beyond embarrassing traditional automakers, though he said it showed Musk wants the two companies together.
The more specific forecast came a day earlier from Barclays. Analyst Dan Levy told clients a deal could be announced before Tesla’s annual meeting, which must happen by December 6, and that an announcement in late October or early November could make shareholder approval harder. Barclays expects SpaceX to be the buyer in an all stock deal, with Tesla holders receiving SpaceX shares at a premium, based on market values of roughly $2.1 trillion for SpaceX and $1.5 trillion for Tesla. If nothing lands around the meeting, the bank still sees an announcement within 6 to 12 months.
The Roadster demo just added more weight to merger speculations. Tesla’s demo used cold gas thrusters and pressure tanks of the kind SpaceX uses on Falcon 9, and Musk described the car as a collaboration between Tesla and SpaceX engineers, as we mentioned in our breakdown of the three Roadster configurations.
Musk has not publicly addressed a deal since the event, as far as we have seen. His most direct answer remains the one he gave at the All In Summit, when he said that with so much collaboration, “who can imagine what action one might take” without ruling anything out. Ives has held to a 2027 timeline since his March note, and Musk pushed back on the China piece of the speculation when ARK floated a year end announcement in August.
The next test is Tesla’s third quarter earnings call on October 21. However, we recall in July that Musk told analysts, “we can’t talk about combining companies and that kind of thing on an earnings call,” so a clear answer wouldn’t be expected.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk breaks his silence on the Starlink impact to Ukraine drones
Musk says the US military and president set Starshield limits, not SpaceX, amid Ukraine complaints.
Elon Musk says the speed limit cutting out Ukraine’s military Starlink terminals is not SpaceX’s decision. In a post on X Wednesday, Musk wrote that “Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.” He added that Starlink is a commercial service limited to civilian or defensive activities and “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”
He was replying to Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s former defense minister, who had thanked Musk for restoring connectivity at speeds up to 160 km/h and said removing the Starshield limit entirely is “now critical for Ukraine’s defense.”
Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS.
Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX. Usage of Starlink is limited to civilian or defensive activities and cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 14, 2026
The complaint started Tuesday night, when Ukrainian officials said military terminals began losing service above roughly 100 mph. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said the defense forces got no warning and several missions were disrupted, as Teslarati reported earlier Wednesday. The 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at speeds well below the limit, which made drones harder to control. Poland’s foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, asked Musk on X whether he is “playing politics with your products again.”
That is why the Starlink and Starshield distinction matters. SpaceX introduced Starshield in 2022 as the government version of Starlink, with an initial focus on Earth observation, communications and hosted payloads. It won a Space Force contract in 2023 with a $70 million ceiling. In December 2024, the Pentagon moved Ukraine’s terminals onto Starshield, covering about 3,000 units across two contracts. Ukraine’s military connections therefore run through a service that Musk now says sits under Washington’s control.
While Musk’s post describes who holds authority, it does not infer that anyone ordered the limit, and neither SpaceX nor the US government has confirmed who set it. Ukrainian officials have pointed to the timing, which follows President Trump’s push for an energy ceasefire and Musk’s Saturday post that “Zelensky has gone too far.” The BBC noted Trump denied threatening to restrict intelligence sharing with Kyiv, and no evidence has been presented that Washington requested the cap.
The episode also revives a promise from 2025. After Poland accused him of threatening Ukraine’s access, Musk said Starlink “will never turn off its terminals” and would not be used as a bargaining chip. Poland has since supplied more than 29,000 terminals to Ukraine. Teslarati also covered Kyiv’s search for Starlink alternatives in 2025, and the latest dispute gives that search new urgency.
Investor's Corner
Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet
Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.
Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.
The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.
Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.
Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.
There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.
The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.
The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.
![TSLA analyst coverage [Source: TipRanks] TSLA analyst coverage [Source: TipRanks]](http://www.teslarati.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/TipRanks-1.png)
