Investor's Corner
Tesla stock (TSLA) one week after Q2 2016 Report
Post Q2 Report Action
As we previously reported, the Q2 quarterly results were “mixed”:
- Revenue matched expectation, a positive for Wall Street;
- Earning losses were higher than anticipated, a negative, but for a company like Tesla, where the stock price is based on future expectations, the earning numbers are really not what counts;
- Slightly increasing gross margins, a positive;
- Practically zero ZEV credits for the quarter, a negative;
- Production and demand on track to support 50,000 deliveries in 2H 2016, a positive;
- Lower production numbers than previously anticipated, a negative.
When you have such a mix of positives and negatives, it is fairly normal for traders to have a “subdued” response, unlike the usually wild responses to results that are big misses or big beats on expectations.
Accordingly, this time around the technical response of the stock market to last week’s Tesla Q2 2016 report has been “muted.” The stock has been in “compression” (a horizontal back and forth) since the report, staying in the $225-$230 range, but overall 12-month Analyst Price Targets have actually decreased with the average dropping from $277 to $244.
Looking at more details of the reactions to the report, this is a small sample from Top Analysts, noting that none of them changed their position.
Alexander Potter of Piper Jaffray says “Teslas untouchable brand helps investors look past million-dollar losses.”
“It’s hard to recommend a cash-burning company with such an uncertain outlook,” said Potter, who reiterated a neutral rating and $223 price target on the stock. But consumers and investors still seem captivated by Tesla’s products, said Potter. And as long as the company “retains this aura,” its stock multiple will “probably stay buoyant,” he said.
Brad Erickson of Pacific Crest says “The risks still outweigh the rewards.”
“Brad rattled off a number of challenges Tesla still needs to tackle in a note to clients. But he reiterated a sector weight rating on the stock, said Tesla’s cash burn wasn’t as bad as expected during the quarter, and maintained the belief that the company’s longer-term vision is “second to none.”
Ben Kallo of Robert W. Baird says “Focus [is] on Tesla (TSLA) Production Ramp and Long Term Goals, Not Q2 Miss.”
Kallo commented, “Q2 revenue was in line with our estimate, but TSLA missed on EPS with higher-than-expected OPEX. Additionally, gross margin missed consensus estimates and was pressured during the quarter with the Model S refresh and X ramp, but automotive gross margin improved sequentially, which was better than we expected. Importantly, TSLA reaffirmed its 2H:16 delivery target of ~50k vehicles, expects margins to ramp in 2H:16 given higher manufacturing efficiency, and the Model 3 remains on track for 2H:17 production.”
Kallo also covers SolarCity (SCTY) and he commented that “Although SCTY has a 45-day go-shop period which could provide additional upside, we believe it is highly likely the TSLA and SCTY merger will go through, and we are moving to the sidelines.”
Colin Rusch of Oppenheimer “noted that Tesla appears to be taking on increasing responsibility when it comes to technology development.”
“Rusch wasn’t surprised by Tesla’s quarter, and the firm remains on the sidelines until Tesla can show some progress toward profitability. It also appears to have taken a hard line with suppliers on timelines, pricing and allocation of resources,” he explained. “While we see potential benefits, we note increasing risk on supplier pushback.”
Ryan Brinkman of J.P. Morgan noted that “JPMorgan cuts Tesla estimates on higher operating expenses.”
“To reflect lower revenue and higher operating expenses following the company’s Q2 results, Brinkman cut his 2016 earnings per share estimate for Tesla to (32c) from $1.60. The analyst notes his 2016 earnings estimate was $4.62 a year ago and $2.74 at the start of this year. This reflects the “degree of consistent ratcheting down of near-term earnings,” Brinkman tells investors in a post-earnings research note. The analyst keeps an Underweight rating on Tesla with a $180 price target.”
Shelby Seyrafi of FBN Securities “reiterated a Buy rating on Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA), with a price target of $275.”
Seyrafi is a 3-star analyst with an average return of 0.5% and a 51.5% success rate. Seyrafi covers the Technology sector, focusing on stocks such as Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Dot Hill Systems Corp., and Concur Technologies.
Colin Langan of UBS, says “Tesla, SolarCity synergies still cloudy.”
“Colin noted Tesla announced details of its agreement to acquire SolarCity (SCTY) and provided synergy targets with the deal. UBS said they remain cautious on the deal given the lack of compelling synergies and the fact the deal is an unneeded distraction for Tesla management, which already faces challenges with its Model 3 launch and production targets. UBS maintained its Sell rating and $160 price target on Tesla shares.”
The overall consensus of analysts covering Tesl Motors, reported at tipranks.com, is neutral (hold).
Source: TipRanks
Trade Analysis
Quarterly Reports are usually the catalyst that start or stop actions for swing traders. The Q2 report was no different. I called for a bullish swing trade when the MACD crossed to the bulls on July 1st. The trade closed on August 4th when the MACD crossed to the bears, the day after the Q2 report was released. This was a good trade that gained over $14 in about a month period to traders that went long on the stock (see the shaded band in the chart below). For option traders this was a “fabulous” trade.
A week after the report the market is undecided on what to do with TSLA in the short term. All indicators are “neutral”: the stock has gone sideways for a week; the MACD averages are flat and overlapping; the MACD itself is at zero; both the 50-day moving average (the red line in the chart below) and the 200-day moving average (the yellow line in the chart below) are flat. All of these indicators are showing the absence of a trend. Trading in these conditions is not advisable and fairly risky. I’m personally out of trading TSLA until a trend appears.
Source: Wall Street I/O
Elon Musk
Tesla FSD in Europe vs. US: It’s not what you think
Tesla FSD is approved in the Netherlands, but the European version differs from what US drivers use.
On April 10, 2026, the Dutch vehicle authority RDW granted Tesla the first European type approval for Full Self-Driving Supervised, making the Netherlands the first country on the continent to authorize Tesla’s semi-autonomous system for customer use on public roads.
As Teslarati reported, the RDW approval followed 18 months of testing, more than 1.6 million kilometers driven on EU roads, 13,000 customer ride-alongs, and documentation covering over 400 compliance requirements. Tesla Europe had been running public demo drives through cities like Amsterdam and Eindhoven since early 2026, giving passengers their first experience of the system on European streets.
The European version of FSD is not the same software US drivers use. The RDW’s own statement is direct, noting that the software versions and functionalities in the US and Europe “are therefore not comparable one-to-one.” We’ve compile a table below that captures the most significant differences between US-based Tesla FSD vs. European Tesla FSD that’s based on what regulators and Tesla have publicly confirmed.
| Feature | FSD US | FSD Europe (Netherlands) |
| Regulatory framework | Self-certification, post-market oversight | Pre-market type approval required (UN R-171 + Article 39) |
| Hands requirement | Hands-off permitted on highway | Hands must be available to take over immediately |
| Auto turning from stop lights | Available — navigates intersections, turns, and traffic signals autonomously | Available in EU build — confirmed in Amsterdam demo footage handling unprotected turns and signalized intersections |
| Driving modes | Multiple profiles including a more aggressive “Mad Max” mode | EU build is more conservative by default and errs on the side of restraint when it cannot confirm the limit |
| Summon | Available — Smart Summon navigates parking lots to driver | Status unclear — not confirmed as part of the RDW-approved feature set; urban FSD approval targeted separately for 2027 |
| Driver monitoring | Camera-based eye tracking | Stricter continuous monitoring with more frequent intervention alerts |
| Software version | FSD v14.3 | EU-specific builds that must be separately validated by RDW |
| Geographic restriction | US, Canada, China, Mexico, Australia, NZ, South Korea | Netherlands only; EU-wide vote pending summer 2026 |
| Subscription price | $99/month | €99/month |
| Full urban FSD scope | Available | Partial — separate urban application planned for 2027 |
The approval comes as Tesla is under real pressure to grow FSD subscriptions globally. Musk’s 2025 CEO compensation package, approved by shareholders, includes a milestone requiring 10 million active FSD subscriptions as one condition for his stock awards to vest. Tesla hit one million subscriptions during its Q4 2025 earnings call, which is a meaningful start, but still a long way from the target. Opening Europe as a market for subscriptions, rather than just hardware sales, directly accelerates that number.
Tesla has said it anticipates EU-wide recognition of the Dutch approval during summer 2026, which would extend FSD access to Germany, France, and other major markets through a mutual recognition process without each country repeating the full 18-month review. That timeline is Tesla’s projection, not a confirmed regulatory outcome. As Musk acknowledged at Davos in January 2026, “We hope to get Supervised Full Self-Driving approval in Europe, hopefully next month.”
Elon Musk
Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations
Tesla’s new Supercharger for Business calculator reveals an eye-opening all-in cost and location-based ROI projections.
Tesla has launched an online calculator for its Supercharger for Business program, giving property owners their first transparent look at what it really costs to install Superchargers on site and what kind of return they can expect.
The program itself launched in September 2025, allowing businesses to purchase and operate Supercharger hardware on their own property while Tesla handles installation, maintenance, software, and 24/7 driver support. As Teslarati reported at launch, hosts also get their logo placed on the chargers and their location integrated into Tesla’s in-car navigation, meaning drivers are actively routed there. The stalls are open to all EVs, not just Teslas.
We launched Supercharger for Business in 2025 to help companies get charging right. We found simplicity and transparency to be a problem in this industry.
We’re now sharing pricing and a financial calculator to help make informed decisions. The goal is to accelerate investments,…
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) April 8, 2026
The new online calculator, announced by Tesla on Wednesday with the note that “simplicity and transparency” have been a problem in the industry, lets any business enter a U.S. address and get a real cost and revenue model. A standard 8-stall V4 Supercharger site runs approximately $500,000 in hardware and $55,000 per post for installation, bringing an all-in price just shy of $1 million. Tesla charges a flat $0.10 per kWh fee to cover software, billing, and network operations. Businesses set their own retail price and keep the margin above that fee.
Taking a look at Tesla’s Supercharger for Business online calculator, we can see that ROI is not uniform, and the gap between a strong location and a poor one can stretch the breakeven point by several years.
The biggest driver is foot traffic and how long people stay. A busy rest station, hotel, or outlet mall brings in repeat visitors who need to charge while they’re already stopped, pushing utilization numbers higher and shortening payback time.
Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator
Local electricity rates matter just as much on the cost side. Markets like California carry some of the highest commercial electricity rates in the country, which eats into the margin between what a host pays per kWh and what they charge drivers. At the same time, dense urban areas with high EV adoption tend to support higher retail charging prices, which can offset that cost if demand is strong enough. Weather also plays a role. Cold climates reduce battery efficiency and increase charging frequency, but they can also suppress utilization in winter months if drivers avoid stopping in exposed outdoor locations. Suburban and rural sites face a different problem: lower baseline EV traffic, which means a site with cheaper power and lower operating costs can still take longer to pay back simply because the stalls sit idle more often. Tesla’s calculator uses real fleet data to pre-fill utilization estimates by ZIP code, so businesses can run their specific address against these variables rather than relying on averages.
The program has seen real adoption. Wawa, already the largest host of Tesla Superchargers with over 2,100 stalls across 223 locations, opened its first fully owned and branded site in Alachua, Florida earlier this year. Francis Energy of Oklahoma and the city of Alpharetta, Georgia have also deployed branded stations through the program, as Teslarati covered in January.
Tesla now exceeds 80,000 Supercharger stalls worldwide, and the calculator makes the economic case for accelerating that number through private investment rather than company-owned sites alone.
Investor's Corner
Tesla stock gets hit with shock move from Wall Street analysts
Despite Tesla not being an automotive company exclusively, the Wall Street firms and analysts covering its shares are widely dialed in on its performance regarding quarterly deliveries. While it holds some importance, Tesla, from an internal perspective, is more focused on end-to-end AI, Robotaxi, self-driving, and its Optimus robot.
Tesla price targets (NASDAQ: TSLA) have received several cuts over the past few days as Wall Street firms are adjusting their forecast for the company’s stock following a miss in quarterly delivery figures for the first quarter.
Despite Tesla not being an automotive company exclusively, the Wall Street firms and analysts covering its shares are widely dialed in on its performance regarding quarterly deliveries. While it holds some importance, Tesla, from an internal perspective, is more focused on end-to-end AI, Robotaxi, self-driving, and its Optimus robot.
In a notable shift underscoring mounting caution on Wall Street, three prominent investment banks slashed their price targets on Tesla Inc. shares over the past two weeks following the electric-vehicle giant’s disappointing first-quarter 2026 delivery numbers. The revisions highlight softening EV sales figures and, according to some, execution challenges.
Tesla delivered 358,023 vehicles in the January-to-March period, a 14 percent sequential decline and a miss versus consensus forecasts of roughly 365,000 to 370,000 units.
Production hit 408,000 vehicles, yet the delivery shortfall, paired with limited updates on autonomous-driving progress and new-model timelines, rattled investors. Shares fell about 8.7 percent since April 1.
Wall Street analysts are now adjusting their forecasts accordingly, as several firms have made adjustments to price targets.
Goldman Sachs
Goldman Sachs cut its target from $405 to $375 while maintaining a Hold rating. Analyst Mark Delaney pointed to soft EV sales trends and margin pressures.
Truist Financial followed on April 2, lowering its target from $438 to $400 (Hold unchanged), with analyst William Stein citing misses in both auto deliveries and energy-storage deployments, plus a lack of fresh details on AI initiatives and upcoming vehicles.
It is a strange drop if using AI initiatives and upcoming vehicles as a justification is the primary focus here. Tesla has one of the most optimistic outlooks in terms of AI, and CEO Elon Musk recently hinted that the company is developing something for the U.S. market that will be good for families.
Baird
Baird’s Ben Kallo made a very modest trim, reducing its target from $548 to $538, keeping and maintaining the ‘Outperform’ rating it holds on shares. Kallo said the price target adjustment was a prudent recalibration tied to near-term risks.
Truist
Truist analyst William Stein pointed to deliveries and energy storage missing expectations, and cut his price target to $400 from $438. He maintained the ‘Hold’ rating the firm held on the stock previously.
JPMorgan
Adding to the bearish tone on Monday, April 6, JPMorgan’s Ryan Brinkman reiterated an Underweight (Sell) rating and $145 price target, implying roughly 60 percent downside from recent levels.
Brinkman highlighted a “record surge in unsold vehicles” that adds to free-cash-flow woes, with inventory swelling to an estimated 164,000 units.
Tesla’s comfort level taking risks makes the stock a ‘must own,’ firm says
He lowered his Q1 2026 EPS estimate to $0.30 from $0.43 and full-year 2026 EPS to $1.80 from $2.00, both below consensus. Brinkman noted that expectations for Tesla’s performance have “collapsed” across financial and operating metrics through the end of the decade, yet the stock has risen 50 percent, and average price targets have increased 32 percent.
This disconnect, he argued, prices in an unrealistic sharp pivot to stronger results beyond the decade, while near-term realities remain materially weaker.
He advised investors to approach TSLA shares with a “high degree of caution,” citing elevated execution risk, competition, and valuation concerns in lower-price, higher-volume segments.
The revisions have pulled the overall consensus lower. Aggregators show the average 12-month price target now ranging from approximately $394 to $416 across roughly 32 analysts, with a prevailing Hold rating and a mixed split of Buy, Hold, and Sell recommendations.
Brinkman’s $145 target stands as a notable outlier on the bearish side.
Not Everyone Has Turned Bearish on Tesla Shares
Not all firms turned more pessimistic. Wedbush Securities held its bullish $600 target, stressing that AI and full self-driving technology represent the core value drivers, with current delivery softness viewed as temporary.
These moves reflect a broader Wall Street recalibration: near-term EV demand faces pressure from high interest rates, intensifying competition, especially from lower-cost Chinese rivals, and slower adoption.
At the same time, many analysts continue to see Tesla’s technology leadership in software-defined vehicles, autonomy, robotaxis, and energy storage as pathways to outsized long-term gains once macro conditions ease and new models launch.
With Tesla’s first-quarter earnings report due later this month, upcoming details on cost discipline, Cybertruck ramp-up, and AI roadmaps will likely shape whether these target adjustments prove prescient or overly cautious. Investors remain divided between immediate delivery realities and the company’s ambitious vision.
Tesla shares are trading at $348.82 at the time of publishing.
Tesla FSD in Europe vs. US: It’s not what you think
Tesla’s troublesome Auto Wipers get a major upgrade
