Palantir vs. Alphabet Stock: Wall Street Says Buy One and Sell the Other
Both Palantir and Alphabet stock have shown strong price appreciation since the 2022 bear market.
Both companies benefit from growing spending on AI as its use cases expand.
Palantir and Alphabet's valuations have moved in opposite directions.
10 stocks we like better than Palantir Technologies ›
Artificial intelligence (AI) has been the driving force behind the stock market's gains since the bottom of the recent bear market in October 2022. Breakthroughs in generative AI's capabilities created a lot of excitement about the potential of new uses for AI within businesses.
Palantir Technologies (NASDAQ: PLTR) found immense value in using AI within its data mining software and has rapidly grown the number of customers using it. That resulted in strong operating results and a soaring stock price. Meanwhile, Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG) (NASDAQ: GOOGL) benefited from increased investment in AI development through its Google Cloud platform while strategically integrating generative AI into its core search product. Investors rewarded the stock, nearly doubling its value since the start of 2023.
But past performance isn't an indicator of future results, as the saying goes. And Wall Street analysts only expect one of these stocks to keep climbing higher over the next 12 months.
Palantir has a median price target of $100, based on the views of 28 analysts who follow the company. That suggests a 20% downside over the next 12 months. Just six of those analysts have given the stock an overweight or buy rating.
Alphabet has a median price target of $200, based on the views of 71 analysts following it. That suggests 16% upside over the next 12 months. Of those analysts, 60 rate the stock as overweight or buy.
Here's what investors need to know.
Palantir's introduction of its Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP) helped supercharge its growth, especially among U.S. corporations. AIP makes Palantir's software more accessible to non-technical users, expanding its use cases within an enterprise. As a result, Palantir's U.S. commercial revenue rose by 54% in 2024. It topped 70% year-over-year growth in 2025's first quarter.
As a software company, Palantir exhibits extremely strong operating leverage. With its rapid revenue growth, fueled by U.S. corporations, its adjusted operating margin expanded to 44% in Q1 2025. That was up from 24% in the first quarter of 2023.
Its growth isn't expected to slow down anytime soon. Management increased its guidance for 2025 alongside its first-quarter earnings release. It now expects revenue growth of 36%, and to maintain that 44% operating margin for the full year.
But here's the problem for Palantir stock: Its valuation of more than 75 times management's expected sales is extremely high. On an enterprise-value-to-EBITDA basis, the stock trades at more than 160 times forward estimates. No other enterprise software company has a valuation that's even close to that multiple. Taking a long-term outlook for the business suggests the stock could produce lower-than-average returns for investors even if it continues to produce extremely strong financial results. Wall Street seems to be thinking the stock will face a reset at some point in the near future. Such a dip could provide a buying opportunity for investors. But right now, Palantir stock is too expensive to recommend buying.
Alphabet stock has come under pressure over the last few months as the company faces regulatory challenges and a court ruling that it has been acting as an illegal monopoly in the search engine technology space. As a result, it may be required to divest itself of certain assets, including its Chrome browser.
Compounding that pressure is a report from Apple's Eddy Cue in early May that searches in its Safari browser are down due to increased use of AI chatbots like ChatGPT. Alphabet pays Apple roughly $20 billion a year for the right to be the default search engine in Safari (a practice the Department of Justice and the judge in the antitrust case took issue with), and it has derived a lot of value from its position in the Apple ecosystem.
But Alphabet's financial results show another story. Google Search revenue increased 10% year over year in the first quarter. That growth was fueled by Google's integration of new AI features into its core search product. Most notably, AI Overviews, which offer AI-generated answers to search queries alongside links to their sources. Management said the feature increases engagement and user satisfaction, and it's now monetizing search results with AI Overviews at the same rate as those without it. That has led to higher overall revenue. Other AI features include Google Lens and Circle to Search, which help produce more high-value product searches.
But Alphabet is more than just a search engine. It also owns YouTube, which grew its revenue by 10% in the first quarter. Its Waymo business is seeing strong momentum as it expands its autonomous vehicle ride-hailing service to new cities. It now completes over 250,000 rides per week.
Perhaps the biggest growth driver for Alphabet is its Google Cloud business. It has been a big beneficiary of the growing spending on developing AI, and Alphabet has been working to expand its data center capacity as quickly as possible. Its 28% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter belies the true increase in demand for its compute services. That's evident from its operating margin expansion of 8.4 percentage points to 17.8%. Based on how Alphabet's larger competitors in the cloud infrastructure space are faring, Google Cloud could enjoy a lot more operating leverage as it scales up further.
All of the uncertainty surrounding Alphabet's future, though, has pushed its valuation down to just 18.2 times forward earnings estimates. That's a great price for a company with a massive cash-flow-generating business like Google Search, a fast-growing cloud computing business, and a massive lead in the burgeoning autonomous vehicle space. It's no wonder Wall Street analysts expect the stock to climb, despite the regulatory challenges the company is facing.
Before you buy stock in Palantir Technologies, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Palantir Technologies wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $651,049!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $828,224!*
Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 979% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 171% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join .
See the 10 stocks »
*Stock Advisor returns as of May 19, 2025
Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Adam Levy has positions in Alphabet and Apple. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Apple, and Palantir Technologies. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Palantir vs. Alphabet Stock: Wall Street Says Buy One and Sell the Other was originally published by The Motley Fool
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
16 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Direct pay to college athletes starts July 1. Some key dates tied to implementation of settlement
It took five years for the $2.8 billion antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA and five major conferences to reach a settlement. Now comes the process for implementing it. Following are significant dates: Settlement approved; settlement-related NCAA rules are effective, as adopted by the NCAA Division I Board on April 21, 2025. NIL Go portal launches. Opt-in deadline for non-defendant schools to fully commit to revenue sharing. First date for direct institutional revenue-sharing payments to student-athletes. Opt-in schools must 'designate' student-athletes permitted by the settlement to remain above roster limits. With the exception of the 'designated' student-athletes, fall sports must be at or below roster limits by their first day of competition. With the exception of 'designated' student-athletes, winter and spring sports must be at or below roster limits by their first day of competition or Dec. 1, whichever is earlier. ___ AP college sports:
Forbes
18 minutes ago
- Forbes
Musk Follows Harvard In Biting The Hand That Feeds
Elon Musk and Harvard Both Bite the Governmental Hand that Feeds Them From an early age, children are taught essential lessons: do not play with fire, do not pet strange dogs, and if one cannot swim, stay out of the deep end. Another timeless rule—often forgotten by those in positions of immense wealth and influence—is this: do not bite the hand that feeds you. This lesson, while simple, has profound implications in the real world. It applies just as readily to billionaires and institutions as it does to children on a playground. Yet recent actions by both Elon Musk and prominent academic institutions—most notably Harvard, but also Columbia, MIT, and others—suggest that even the most successful individuals and organizations are capable of ignoring foundational wisdom. Harvard set the tone. Amid growing political scrutiny and a shifting cultural landscape, the university has drawn intense criticism over its handling of campus protests, particularly those involving slogans such as 'from the river to the sea.' The administration's decision to defend even the most controversial speech—widely viewed by many as antisemitic—has triggered investigations and jeopardized billions in tax-exempt status and government research funding. This raises a critical question: is this truly the hill worth dying on? Is preserving the right to controversial protest slogans worth risking Harvard's institutional future? It is doubtful that most students and faculty would knowingly trade funding, grants, and prestige for this fight. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has now followed suit—this time turning his attention toward President Donald Trump, with whom he has launched a high-profile and personal feud. What makes this move especially striking is that President Trump is not a distant figure or a fading influence. He is once again sitting in the White House, wielding executive authority over regulatory agencies, defense contracting, and infrastructure initiatives—all areas that directly affect Musk's companies. Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI have flourished in part because of government partnership. SpaceX alone holds multibillion-dollar contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense. Tesla has benefitted from years of energy subsidies and EV tax incentives. Picking a fight with the sitting president—regardless of personal conviction—puts this entire ecosystem at risk. And again the question must be asked: is this battle worth the damage? Whatever principle Musk may be defending, the consequences extend far beyond himself. Shareholders, employees, and retail investors—many of whom placed their trust and savings in his leadership—are the ones left exposed. The parallel between Harvard and Musk is striking: both have been immensely successful, aided in large part by government funding, favorable regulation, and public goodwill. And both have, for different reasons, chosen to confront the very institutions and leaders that have helped sustain their growth. There is precedent for how this ends. Jack Ma, once the most powerful entrepreneur in China, famously criticized the Chinese government. The backlash was immediate and absolute. His companies were dismantled. His IPO was cancelled. His wealth and influence evaporated almost overnight. Even in less authoritarian systems, the lesson holds: those who antagonize the systems that support them may not survive the consequences. While Musk's personal net worth has dropped from nearly $450 billion to approximately $300 billion, the impact is more symbolic than practical for him. But for millions of investors, employees, and stakeholders, these battles matter. Market volatility, regulatory backlash, and reputational risk all come with tangible financial costs—costs borne not just by Musk himself, but by those who have trusted and invested in his vision. The same applies to Harvard and peer institutions. Their leadership may believe they are standing on principle, but the price of alienating government agencies and key financial backers could reshape the long-term trajectory of these universities. The erosion of public trust, the loss of bipartisan support, and the potential withdrawal of federal funding pose existential threats. Leadership—whether in business or academia—requires more than conviction. It requires judgment, timing, and the discipline to separate personal ideology from institutional responsibility. Founder-led companies often outperform when leaders are focused, visionary, and measured. But when ego replaces strategy, the consequences can be swift and severe. No one is demanding absolute political alignment or silence in the face of controversy. No one is asking Elon Musk to wear a MAGA hat. But his recent actions have been so volatile, so self-destructive, that investors may soon be tempted to hand him something else entirely—a MEGA hat: Make Elon Great Again. In today's polarized environment, the margin for error has narrowed. And for those who owe much of their success to public support—whether in Silicon Valley or the Ivy League—biting the hand that feeds is not just unwise. It is unsustainable. ---------------------------------- Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please refer to the following link for additional disclosures: Additional Disclosure Note: The author has an affiliation with ERShares and the XOVR ETF. The intent of this article is to provide objective information; however, readers should be aware that the author may have a financial interest in the subject matter discussed. As with all equity investments, investors should carefully evaluate all options with a qualified investment professional before making any investment decision. Private equity investments, such as those held in XOVR, may carry additional risks—including limited liquidity—compared to traditional publicly traded securities. It is important to consider these factors and consult a trained professional when assessing suitability and risk tolerance.
Forbes
19 minutes ago
- Forbes
An AI Film Festival And The Multiverse Engine
In the glassy confines of Alice Tully Hall on Thursday, the third annual Runway AI Film Festival celebrated an entirely new art form. The winning film, Total Pixel Space, was not made in the traditional sense. It was conjured by Jacob Adler, a composer and educator from Arizona State University, stitched together from image generators, synthetic voices, and video animation tools — most notably Runway's Gen-3, the company's text-to-video model (Runway Gen-4 was released in March). Video generation technology emerged in public in 2022 with Meta's crude video of a flying Corgi wearing a red cape and sunglasses. Since then, it has fundamentally transformed filmmaking, dramatically lowering barriers to entry and enabling new forms of creative expression. Independent creators and established filmmakers alike now have access to powerful AI tools such as Runway that can generate realistic video scenes, animate storyboards, and even produce entire short films from simple text prompts or reference images. As a result, production costs and timelines are shrinking, making it possible for filmmakers with limited resources to achieve professional-quality results and bring ambitious visions to life. The democratization of content creation is expanding far beyond traditional studio constraints, empowering anyone with patience and a rich imagination. Adler's inspiration came from Jorge Luis Borges' celebrated short story The Library of Babel, which imagines a universe where every conceivable book exists in an endless repository. Adler found a parallel in the capabilities of modern generative machine learning models, which can produce an unfathomable variety of images from noise (random variations in pixel values much like the 'snow' on an old television set) and text prompts. 'How many images can possibly exist,' the dreamy narrator begins as fantastical AI-generated video plays on the screen: a floating, exploding building; a human-sized housecat curled on a woman's lap. 'What lies in the space between order and chaos?' Adler's brilliant script is a fascinating thought experiment that attempts to calculate the total number of possible images, unfurling the endless possibilities of the AI-aided human imagination. 'Pixels are the building blocks of digital images, tiny tiles forming a mosaic,' continues the voice, which was generated using ElevenLabs. 'Each pixel is defined by numbers representing color and position. Therefore, any digital image can be represented as a sequence of numbers,' the narration continues, the voice itself a sequence of numbers that describe air pressure changes over time. 'Therefore, every photograph that could ever be taken exists as coordinates. Every frame of every possible film exists as coordinates.' Winners at the 3rd Annual International AIFF 2025 Runway was founded in 2018 by Cristóbal Valenzuela, Alejandro Matamala, and Anastasis Germanidis, after they met at New York University Tisch School of the Arts. Valenzuela, who serves as CEO, says he fell in love with neural networks in 2015, and couldn't stop thinking about how they might be used by people who create. Today, it's a multi-million-user platform, used by filmmakers, musicians, advertisers, and artists, and has been joined by other platforms, including OpenAI's Sora, and Google's Veo 3. What separates Runway from many of its competitors is that it builds from scratch. Its research team — which comprises most of the company — develops its own models, which can now generate up to about 20 seconds of video. The result, as seen in the works submitted to the AI Film Festival, is what Valenzuela calls 'a new kind of media.' The word film may soon no longer apply. Nor, perhaps, will filmmaker. 'The Tisches of tomorrow will teach something that doesn't yet have a name,' he said during opening remarks at the festival. Indeed, Adler is not a filmmaker by training, but a classically trained composer, a pipe organist, and a theorist of microtonality. 'The process of composing music and editing film,' he told me, 'are both about orchestrating change through time.' He used the image generation platform Midjourney to generate thousands of images, then used Runway to animate them. He used ElevenLabs to synthesize the narrator's voice. The script he wrote himself, drawing from the ideas of Borges, combinatorics, and the sheer mind-bending number of possible images that can exist at a given resolution. He edited it all together in DaVinci Resolve. The result? A ten-minute film that feels as philosophical as it is visual. It's tempting to frame all this as the next step in a long evolution; from the Lumière brothers to CGI, from Technicolor to TikTok. But what we're witnessing isn't a continuation. It's a rupture. 'Artists used to be gatekept by cameras, studios, budgets,' Valenzuela said. 'Now, a kid with a thought can press a button and generate a dream.' At the Runway Film Festival, the lights dimmed, and the films came in waves of animated hallucinations, synthetic voices, and impossible perspectives. Some were rough. Some were polished. All were unlike anything seen before. This isn't about replacing filmmakers. It's about unleashing them. 'When photography first came around — actually, when daguerreotypes were first invented — people just didn't have the word to describe it,' Valenzuela said during his opening remarks at the festival. 'They used this idea of a mirror with a memory because they'd never seen anything like that. … I think that's pretty close to where we are right now.' Valenzuela was invoking Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.'s phrase to convey how photography could capture and preserve images of reality, allowing those images to be revisited and remembered long after the moment had passed. Just as photography once astonished and unsettled, generative media now invites a similar rethinking of what creativity means. When you see it — when you watch Jacob Adler's film unfold — it's hard not to feel that the mirror is starting to show us something deeper. AI video generation is a kind of multiverse engine, enabling creators to explore and visualize an endless spectrum of alternate realities, all within the digital realm. 'Evolution itself becomes not a process of creation, but of discovery,' his film concludes. 'Each possible path of life's development … is but one thread in a colossal tapestry of possibility.'
