TSLA vs. RIVN: Which EV Stock Is a Better Buy for Long-Term Gains?
Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence.
TSLA stock surged over 65% in the past 12 months, fueled by strong investor confidence. However, it has dropped about 20% year-to-date due to missed revenue estimates and concerns around CEO Elon Musk 's political affiliations. Meanwhile, Rivian shares have fallen more than 15% over the same 12-month period, reflecting ongoing hurdles for the young EV maker.
Tesla Stays on Top in EV Popularity, but Financial Woes Persist
Tesla remains the most popular EV brand, thanks to its strong global presence, innovative technology, and loyal customer base. While long-term investor confidence remains strong, the company is struggling to maintain both market leadership and consistent financial performance.
Notably, Tesla missed its second-quarter revenue and profit targets, with automotive sales falling 16% and fewer vehicles sold. Musk warned that the next few quarters could be tough due to higher tariffs and the upcoming end of the U.S. EV tax credit. Investors are staying cautious as the company deals with changing demand and new regulations.
Besides making EVs, Tesla is focused on ride-hailing, self-driving, and robotics. However, investors are finding it harder to understand the company's overall direction.
Rivian's Growth Stalls
Rivian's rapid rise in the EV market has hit a speed bump, as shifting U.S. policies take a toll. Like many EV-only manufacturers, Rivian is feeling the effects of the Trump administration's rollback of pro-EV incentives under its 'big, beautiful bill.' The company is now facing slowing growth, weaker-than-expected earnings, and growing investor concerns as it adjusts its strategy amid shifting market conditions.
Earlier this week, the company reported Q2 results and warned of tougher times ahead. Rivian also slashed its full-year EBITDA forecast to a loss of $2.0–$2.25 billion, deeper than its earlier estimate of $1.7–$1.9 billion and worse than Wall Street's $1.88 billion loss projection.
Additionally, analysts warn that the loss of federal EV tax credits could dampen demand for its upcoming R2 SUV, potentially forcing price cuts and further deepening its already negative profit margins. Overall, analysts generally remain optimistic about Rivian's long-term prospects. Notably, Wedbush's 4.5-star-rated Dan Ives called Rivian a 'work in progress,' as the company maintained its 2025 delivery forecast but tweaked its EBITDA target to navigate ongoing economic headwinds.
Using TipRanks' Stock Comparison Tool, we compared TSLA and RIVN to see which EV stock analysts favor. Both stocks carry a Hold rating. Rivian's price target of $14.36 suggests a potential 20% upside, while Tesla's target of $305.40 implies a 7.6% downside from current levels.
Conclusion
Both Rivian and Tesla offer strong long-term potential but appeal to different investors. Tesla's proven dominance and diversified operations make it a stable, innovation-led choice. Rivian, though riskier, is gaining traction and may offer greater upside for growth-focused investors.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
26 minutes ago
- USA Today
Tested: Is the 2025 Volvo EX30 the Tesla alternative we were promised?
Tesla's influence shows up everywhere in the 2025 Volvo EX30. You see it in the speedometer relegated to a corner of the infotainment touchscreen. You see it in the gear selector stalk that doubles as the cruise control switchgear. And you see it in the credit-card-style key that's meant to be a backup to using your phone for unlocking and starting the vehicle. All of this is cost-saving minimalism cleverly passed off as modernism, an art that Tesla — and now Volvo — has nearly perfected in its pursuit of making attainable (and profitable) EVs. Of all the parallels between the EX30 and a Tesla, the strongest similarity is one that no automaker should imitate: the mile-wide gap between what the automaker originally promised and the car it eventually delivered. Just two years ago, Volvo introduced the EX30 as the cheap and cheerful cure for too-expensive EVs with a $36,245 starting price and 275 miles of range. Yet the only EX30 you can buy in the U.S. right now and for the foreseeable future costs nearly $10,000 more than that and landed well short of 200 miles in MotorTrend's Road-Trip Range test. Volvo set out to build the $35K EV that Tesla has long teased and appears to have come to the same conclusion: It can't be done. (Chevy has proven otherwise.) Revisiting vintage automakers: What if AMC Motors had survived? How it could've changed the auto industry Trading value for performance It's a shame that the launch turned into a bait and switch because the $46,195 Volvo EX30 Twin Motor Performance is awesome in its own right. Imagine an electric Volkswagen GTI with 422 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque, and you'll have a pretty good idea of what it's like to drive. Presented with a gap in traffic or an empty roundabout, the EX30 rockets through with an exuberance that matches its Moss Yellow paint. It is not, however, a rowdy little hooligan of a hatchback as the specs suggest. Exercising characteristic restraint, Volvo delivers all that oomph as a shove rather than a gut punch. The EX30 launches with the faintest scrape of spinning tires, and power builds linearly over the first 20 or so mph. Hitting 60 mph in 3.2 seconds has never felt so civilized. When the EX30 zips past the quarter-mile mark in 11.8 seconds, it does so up against the 112-mph speed limiter that Volvo rolled out across its lineup five years ago in the name of safety. Similarly, the EX30 steers and turns and tackles bumps capably without ever feeling overtly aggressive. Its 110-foot stop from 60 mph and 0.87 g of cornering grip are decent for a 4,190-pound vehicle on all-season tires but hardly the makings of a four-door sports car. For a Volvo, that's perfect. The EX30 Twin Motor Performance is fun to hustle and pleasant to commute in, making it a great daily driver. How to make a cheap car feel expensive The danger of buying the expensive version of a cheap car is that so much of a car is designed and engineered for the lowest-priced model. That's the story of the Ford Maverick. At $33,000, it feels like a value. In a $43,000 model, you can't ignore the flashing and exposed edges on many of the injection-molded plastic parts. Like the Maverick, the EX30 uses texture and color to turn cheap interior materials into eye candy. Unlike Ford, Volvo has engineered the fit and finish so that those materials also look and — where it matters — feel expensive. The sense of quality is furthered by the cabin's thoughtful and innovative design. The glove box drops from the center of the dash to give the front passenger more kneeroom. Instead of a conventional center console, a bin slides out from below the fixed center armrest with a clever, independently sliding top plate that allows you to allocate the space for cupholders or catchall storage. As noted at the beginning of this story, it's not hard to find where Volvo has cut cost from the bill of materials. Look at how simple the climate vents are. The front doors have been stripped of nearly all electronics, with the driver and passenger sharing two window switches in the center console to control all four windows. The front speakers all live in a soundbar running across the top of the dash, which unfortunately takes a toll on the audio system's sound quality. Lamborghini unveils the Temerario GT3: Introducing the successor to Lambo's most decorated race car What would have been easily justified trade-offs in a $36,245 EX30 are tougher to swallow at our test car's $48,395 sticker price, but the cabin is ultimately an industrial design masterpiece. Funky and original, the EX30 feels like the spiritual successor of the quirky 2008–2013 Volvo C30. The EX30's petite size reinforces the connection with that decade-old Volvo. The four-door EX30 measures about an inch shorter than the two-door C30 (and 5 inches shorter than the Toyota Corolla hatchback). As a result, the rear seats are only functional if your kids have the anatomy of a Squishmallow, and emptying a full Costco cart into the EX30's 12.4-cubic-foot cargo hold will test your Tetris skills. Volvo EX30 real-world range and charging The most consequential cost-cutting measure naturally shows up in what's the most expensive part of any EV, the battery. The EX30's lithium-ion pack stores 64.0 kWh of electricity, less than the late (but soon-to-be-resurrected) Chevrolet Bolt EV. Officially, the Volvo EX30 Twin Motor Performance is rated for a reasonable 253 miles on a full charge. At a steady 70 mph in the real world, though, we achieved an impractical 180 miles. That 29 percent gap between the window sticker and our measurement (which admittedly only looks at 95 percent of a full charge) makes the EX30 one of the worst performers in the MotorTrend Road-Trip Range test. Its fast-charging performance is similarly underwhelming. Power peaks at 153 kW and quickly tapers off, delivering enough juice in 15 minutes to cover just 87 miles at 70 mph. Given the EX30's size, limited range and mediocre charging, there are far better options at this price point — pretty much any EV at this price point — for anyone planning on road-tripping their electric vehicle. Getting techy Tesla's influence is palpable in the nearly button-free dashboard. The EX30 runs nearly all its major controls through a scaled-down version of the Android Automotive–based infotainment system found in the larger EX90. Thankfully the EX30 hasn't been plagued by the litany of software quality complaints owners have logged against Volvo's new flagship EV, and our reviewers took to the user interface quickly. We like that you can download apps such as Spotify and Waze directly to the 12.3-inch touchscreen and that it offers the familiar comfort of Apple CarPlay and Android Auto for those who aren't ready for such newfangled ideas. The EX30 comes in two versions, the standard Plus trim and the $1,700 Ultra upgrade that adds a 360-degree camera system, automated parking, ambient cabin lighting, a cabin air filter, LED headlights and Pilot Assist, Volvo's conservative take on Tesla's Full Self-Driving. It can center the EX30 in its lane, slow or accelerate with traffic, and even guide the vehicle through a lane change, but all of this requires the driver to keep their hands on the wheel and eyes on the road. We appreciate a cautious, safety-first approach, but the value of Pilot Assist seems marginal compared to Ford's BlueCruise or GM's Super Cruise. Given its limited capabilities, we'd be inclined to pass on the Ultra trim to try to keep the price in check. A lesson learned? The Volvo EX30 Twin Motor Performance's straight-line speed, polished driving dynamics, and fetching design tug at our emotions, but it's hard not to feel jilted once you climb out of the driver's seat and look at the vehicle in the larger context. Volvo originally pitched the EX30 as a value play that would get more Americans into EVs. Instead, we got a tiny hot rod of a luxury car for a niche buyer. For now, the work of pushing EVs into the mainstream will have to be carried out by larger, cheaper, longer-range alternatives such as the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5, Kia EV6, Ford Mustang Mach-E and Chevy Equinox EV. Should Volvo someday figure out how to bring the entry, single-motor EX30 to America (specs for which are included on the U.S. media site), we hope it's learned an important lesson: Wait until you're shipping the cars to the U.S. to announce the price. Photos by Jim Fets
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Wall Street's Wild Rally: Why No One Cares About Tariffs Anymore
Investors are in full-on risk modeand they're not waiting around to see how the Trump tariffs play out. From small caps to crypto, riskier corners of the market are lighting up as bets on a Federal Reserve rate cut heat up. The S&P 500 (SPY) is up nearly 30% from its April lows, with Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) and other megacap techs carrying most of the load. According to Deutsche Bank, just a handful of tech giants were responsible for 90% of the index's Q2 earnings growth. The Russell 2000 is climbing for the fourth straight month, emerging-market stocks are catching bids, and even speculative European bank bonds are finding buyers. The fear? Gone. Volatility measures like the VIX and MOVE indexes are plumbing their lowest levels in months. Traders are now pricing in a nearly 90% chance the Fed cuts rates in September, with some even betting on a 50-basis-point move. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent added fuel to that fire, saying rates should probably be 150 to 175 basis points lower. The market has latched onto that narrative. Even currency volatility has dropped to its lowest in a year. All the while, the economic backdrop remains soft: labor market data isn't running hot, inflation came in as expected, and for now, that's enough. The mood is surprisingly bullishit's almost like what tariffs, who cares?' said Neil Birrell, CIO at Premier Miton. That detachment from reality? It's workingat least for now. But not everyone's ready to join the parade. It's very expensive right now to be bearish, said UBS O'Connor's Bernard Ahkong, who still sees plenty of risks lurking in the background. Bloomberg's Mark Cudmore warned that rising long-end yields or another Trump curveball could snap the rally. Still, Wall Street strategistssome of whom had slashed targets back in Aprilare now raising their outlooks. Citigroup's Scott Chronert even bumped up his year-end S&P 500 target, betting that potential tax cuts could outweigh tariff impacts. For now, the market's not trading fearit's trading FOMO. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio
Gizmodo
an hour ago
- Gizmodo
DOGE Has Continued to Waste Billions While Saving Almost Nothing: Reports
The Trump Administration's Department of Government Efficiency has been a project largely defined by ever-diminishing expectations. At the outset of DOGE's journey, its chief operator, Elon Musk, famously claimed, in a bout of wild optimism, that he hoped to cut 'at least' $2 trillion out of the federal budget. Not long after the election, Musk reduced his ambitions to $1 trillion. Throughout the first few months of Trump's second term, DOGE claimed to be saving Americans billions, but analyses repeatedly showed the organization was wildly inflating its savings and often making rudimentary math mistakes. In May, the billionaire claimed that DOGE had saved Americans $160 billion, but admitted that his org was 'not as effective' as he'd hoped. At the time, the New York Times reported that DOGE had only publicly accounted for $58 billion of the savings Musk alleged and that even those purported savings had been 'significantly inflated, by including outright errors and guesses about the future.' Now, yet another fact-checking effort aimed at Musk's initiative has resulted in greatly reduced facts and figures. An analysis by Politico claims that, of some $52.8 billion that DOGE purports to have saved Americans by cancelling various government contracts, only a fraction appears to have been realized. The report states that, of the savings bragged about on DOGE's 'Wall of Receipts' website, only '$32.7 billion in actual claimed contract savings' could be verified. On top of that, the news outlet found that 'DOGE's savings over that period were closer to $1.4 billion.' Politico further notes that none of those savings will lower the federal deficit unless Congress steps in. Instead, the money went back to the respective agencies to which it had been allotted. In other words, DOGE basically did nothing. The apparent blunder was achieved through a poor grasp of timetables, the report claims: DOGE's savings calculations are based on faulty math. The group uses the maximum spending possible under each contract as its baseline — meaning all money an agency could spend in future fiscal years. That amount can far exceed what the government has actually committed to pay out. Counting this 'ceiling value' gives a false picture of savings for taxpayers. 'That's the equivalent of basically taking out a credit card with a $20,000 credit limit, canceling it and then saying, 'I've just saved $20,000,'' said Jessica Tillipman, associate dean for government procurement law studies at George Washington University Law School. 'Anything that's been said publicly about [DOGE's] savings is meaningless.' Also relevant is another recent report that claims DOGE spent substantially more money attempting to downsize government than it saved by destroying public programs. Authored by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, the analysis claims that DOGE blew through some $21.7 billion in taxpayer money as it attempted to downsize the federal workforce. Between January and July, DOGE spent some $14.8 billion through its Deferred Resignation Program, which paid public employees 'not to work for up to eight months.' DOGE allegedly spent another $6 billion on '100,000 employees who have been involuntarily separated from federal service or who remain on prolonged periods of administrative leave pending separation, many of whom were paid to not do their jobs for weeks or months.' The organization spent hundreds of millions more on various inefficient and wasteful policies. The Senate committee notes that the amount that DOGE spent in this fashion is more than double the amount that DOGE has definitively culled from the government ($9 billion, via cuts to NPR, PBS, and foreign aid) through the rescission package voted for by Republicans this summer. Meanwhile, as DOGE has continued on with its questionable antics, its own staff have continued to suck taxpayer money out of the government. In March, NPR reported that $40 million in public funds had been apportioned for DOGE's activities, but much about the cost of the initiative remains unclear. That same month, Wired noted that some DOGE staffers were making six-figure government salaries for their slash-and-burn work. The money often appeared to be coming from the very agencies that DOGE was butchering, the outlet noted. If both the recent studies are accurate, they reveal the very ironic contours of DOGE and its activities—an organization that claims to be rooting out governmental waste and fraud, but whose operations appear wasteful and whose public statements are frequently, according to many journalistic analyses, fraudulent. At this point, it's unclear what the heck DOGE is even doing. The organization isn't dead, but with the loss of its Supreme Leader (Musk), its mandate has become increasingly unclear, and its activities are now shrouded in mystery. Like a computer virus, the organization continues to worm its way through the bureaucracy's guts, servicing nebulous projects, like the creation of a national citizenship database that has alarmed privacy activists. Some of DOGE's former members continue to prove useful to the administration in other ways. Last week, the 19-year-old former DOGE-ling known as 'Big Balls' (real name Edward Coristine) managed to get punched in the face by a group of juveniles while out for a stroll in the nation's capital, according to Washington D.C. police. The spectacle of Coristine's bloodied visage was shared widely on Musk's X platform and other social media sites, and the incident has since served as a justification for Trump's authoritarian-style federalization of local police forces in D.C. The episode shows that, while DOGE has been an utter trainwreck from a governance and policy standpoint, it continues to serve certain functions deemed critical to the success of the current regime: namely, those of the public relations (i.e., propaganda) department.
