Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) took a steep dive on the heels of the company’s Q4 and FY 2023 earnings call, dropping over 9% as of writing. With the company stating that volume growth would be tempered this year due to its focus on the next-generation platform and executives being quite vague about its guidance for 2024, analysts, including some TSLA bulls, are not happy.
Tesla actually had a record 2023, with vehicle sales growing nearly 40% year-over-year in 2023 to over 1.8 million units worldwide. Wall Street currently expects Tesla to post about 2.1 to 2.2 million vehicle sales for 2024, which would translate to a growth of about 20%. This number seems conservative and attainable enough, but Tesla simply maintained that its volume growth would be substantially lower than 2023’s ~40%.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives shared his sentiments about Tesla’s earnings call, in a post on X. Ives described the call, which provided some high-level long-term views on the company, as another “train wreck” conference call. Following the earnings call, Ives adjusted his price target for Tesla from $350 to $315 per share, though he also noted that Wedbush remains bullish on the company.
Great to join @bsurveillance discussing another train wreck conf call in our view from Tesla and Musk lacking margin outlook and firm guidance for 24. Remain bullish for long term EV/AI vision but near term headwinds @lisaabramowicz1 @FerroTV @annmarie @BloombergTV https://t.co/E40CMG2Mg0— Dan Ives (@DivesTech) January 25, 2024
“We were dead wrong expecting Musk and team to step up like adults in the room on the call and give a strategic and financial overview of the ongoing price cuts, margin structure, and fluctuating demand. Instead, we got a high-level Tesla long-term view with another train wreck conference call,” Ives noted.
RBC analyst Tom Narayan also maintained his “Buy” rating on Tesla, though he lowered his price target from $300 to $297 per share. “We leave our delivery estimates unchanged after the vague guide, but lower our car gross margin expectations on less robust cost down opportunity,” he noted in a report. Narayan also pointed out that Tesla’s next-generation vehicle platform is still “many quarters away” from impacting the company’s numbers.
New $TSLA report from Adam Jonas: 5 thoughts post earnings call
“We reiterate our OW $TSLA rating ($345 price target) which offers over 80% upside from current levels which we believe is compelling in proportion to the investment level within our US auto coverage.” pic.twitter.com/TdZ2cLavdc— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) January 25, 2024
Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas, for his part, pointed out that Tesla almost did not provide any guidance during the call. He also observed that there were no “AI rabbits” pulled out of Tesla’s hat during the call, which was highlighted by Musk’s conservative comments about Dojo. Despite this, Morgan Stanley opted to maintain its “Overweight” rating and $345 price target on Tesla, with a bear case PT of $100 and a bull case PT of $500 per share.
While the sentiments surrounding Tesla’s Q4 and FY 2023 earnings call seem generally negative, some analysts opted to take a more optimistic stance on the company. Canaccord lowered its price target for Tesla from $267 to $234 per share, though the firm also noted that it is time for investors to be patient about the company. The firm noted that it remains bullish about Tesla’s long-term prospects.
NEWS: Canaccord Genuity has lowered its $TSLA price target to $234 (from $267), maintains a BUY rating.
They put out a good note:
“It’s time to be patient. The next-generation vehicle, FSD upgrades, margin improvement, and Optimus will likely bring an acceleration in revenue…— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) January 25, 2024
“It’s time to be patient. The next-generation vehicle, FSD upgrades, margin improvement, and Optimus will likely bring an acceleration in revenue growth. But not this year — 2024 will be subdued; probably a trough, but still relatively slow (we model ~18% y\y revenue growth). Growth curves are seldom smooth, and Tesla is no different.
“We are still quite bullish on Tesla’s long-term growth prospects. We think EVs will replace ICE vehicles despite recent countervailing narratives. We see vehicle autonomy as one of the highest value-creating technologies to be deployed. Ever. And Tesla, with its razor/ razorblade approach, is a leader in this real-world AI. We think Tesla is Apple on steroids as it focuses on manufacturing and a higher level of vertical integration. Tesla is THE sustainability behemoth, in our opinion,” the firm noted.
The critical metric, auto gross margins ex credits, came in at 17%, compared to the Street at 17.3%. I was expecting 16.7%.
While this missed the Street, it marks the end of four consecutive quarters of margin decline, up from 16.3% in the Sep-23.
Over this is a positive.— Gene Munster (@munster_gene) January 24, 2024
Longtime Tesla bull Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management also pointed out that Tesla’s auto gross margins for the past quarter ended a streak of dropping margins. “The critical metric, auto gross margins ex credits, came in at 17%, compared to the Street at 17.3%. I was expecting 16.7%. While this missed the Street, it marks the end of four consecutive quarters of margin decline, up from 16.3% in the Sep-23. Over, this is a positive,” Munster wrote on X.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Investor's Corner
Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming
Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.
Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”
Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.
The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.
Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.
The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.
Cybercab engineering deep dive — Robotaxi (@robotaxi) October 26, 2026
The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.
Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”
SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.
Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.
This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:
🚀 Elon says Raptor 4 will make 300 tons of thrust at sea level at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3.
How far Raptor has come:
Raptor 1: 185 tf, 2,080 kg
Raptor 2: 230 tf, 1,630 kg
Raptor 3: 250 tf, 1,525 kg
Raptor 4: 300 tf33 on Super Heavy = ~9,900 tf, nearly 3x Saturn V https://t.co/HQDswZhyvL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.
This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.
Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.
Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.
The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.
Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.
For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.
Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.
Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.
Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.
The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.
🚨 Latvia has just received approval for Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised)
This is the 10th country in the EU to gain approval:
1. Netherlands — 10 April 2026 (original RDW approval)
2. Lithuania — 20 May 2026
3. Estonia — 29 May 2026
4. Denmark — 9 June 2026
5. Belgium — 10 June 2026
6. Slovenia — 7 September 2026
7. Czechia — 21 September 2026
8. Croatia — 29 September 2026
9. Slovakia — 16 October 2026— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.
In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.
The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.
The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.
These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.
However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.
Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming
How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady
