This 1 Thing Is Really Bugging Me About Amazon Web Services
Any investor keeping tabs on e-commerce giant Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) probably already knows how important its cloud computing arm is to the company's bottom line. For those who don't, the bulk of its revenue still comes from selling merchandise to online shoppers, 58% of last year's operating profits came from Amazon Web Services, even though this business only made up 17% of Amazon's total sales. That allows Amazon's sizable cloud-based cash flow to help fund a lot of different growth initiatives. And it is!
This proverbial gravy train might not be quite as impressive in the foreseeable future as it's been in the recent past, though. While Amazon Web Services still seems to enjoy a decent degree of pricing power, if AWS' market share trend is any indication, that could be changing soon. This sets the stage for narrower profit margins, and ultimately less net profits.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More »
AWS is losing market share
Technology market research outfit Synergy Research Group keeps track of the numbers, reporting how much the world spends on cloud computing services each and every quarter. As has been the case for some time now, Amazon Web Services remained the single-biggest name in the business through Q1 of this year, maintaining its lead on Microsoft 's and Alphabet 's Google cloud businesses.
That lead is narrowing, though. Indeed, as the chart of Synergy's recent historical data illustrates, Amazon Web Services' share of the world's cloud computing sales fell to a multi-year low (maybe a record low?) 29% during the first quarter of 2025. That lull not only extends a downtrend that's been underway since early 2023, but accelerates it.
That's not to suggest Google and Microsoft are solely responsible for this market-share setback. While both clearly gained share through 2022 and into 2023, both of these big names have also struggled to win cloud business of late. Much of Amazon's recent loss of market share is to mostly unknown "other" providers. This makes sense -- as the industry matures, cloud computing clients are looking for the more specialized options and features that only the smaller cloud computing companies may offer.
Regardless, Amazon Web Services is clearly losing market share. And it certainly doesn't want to.
Still profitable enough ... for now
It hasn't mattered much yet. Indeed, AWS' revenue is still technically growing faster than the arm's operating costs are, allowing for still-widening profit margins through the first quarter of 2025.
Think bigger picture, though, and longer term. The cloud computing business is clearly competitive, and even its smaller players are now in a position to push back against the so-called "Big Three." While there's been enough industrywide growth for all these service providers to go around, we may be at a turning point on this front. If its growth rate slows -- as is usually the case once a business matures -- look for cloud's commoditization to kick off a price war.
Price wars, of course, punch profit margins.
Just keep your finger on the pulse of this business
Don't panic if you currently hold a stake in Amazon; this isn't exactly a reason in and of itself to avoid a position in Amazon, either. There's still good money to be made in the business, and Amazon is well-positioned to earn its fair share of it.
Don't be naïve, either, however. Amazon stock has been and remains priced as if AWS will remain the powerhouse profit producer it's been up until this point. Now this once-reliable presumption is in question. Even the smallest red flag on this front could take an oversized toll on Amazon stock, sparked by unexpected disappointment.
In other words, just keep your finger on the pulse of this business to make sure you're not completely blindsided by one of its upcoming quarterly reports. One of the two charts above is going to have to change directions sooner or later, and likely sooner than later.
Should you invest $1,000 in Amazon right now?
Before you buy stock in Amazon, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Amazon 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 is979% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to171%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
See the 10 stocks »
*Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025
Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. James Brumley has positions in Alphabet. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, and Microsoft. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
30-year-old man dies in industrial incident at Vancouver Island paper mill
The Catalyst Pulp and Paper Mill in Crofton, B.C., is seen in this file photo. (CTV News)
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Carney faces pressure to retaliate against Trump's steel, aluminum tariffs
Prime Minister Mark Carney is facing increasing pressure from premiers, industry, labour and business organizations to retaliate against U.S. President Donald Trump's doubling of steel and aluminum tariffs. But even as he called the tariffs 'unlawful, unjustified and illogical,' Mr. Carney said Canada will take its time responding, citing broader talks with the U.S. that he said are progressing. Mr. Trump initially imposed tariffs of 25 per cent on the metals in March but doubled them to 50 per cent as of Wednesday. The tariffs apply to all foreign suppliers, but they will disproportionately hit Canada, which is the largest supplier of steel and aluminum to the U.S. Ottawa imposed retaliatory tariffs in March, but Mr. Carney lifted many of those in April over concerns that they would drive up prices for Canadian consumers. Mr. Carney, who won the spring election on a campaign to fight against U.S. tariffs, including through retaliation, said Canada wouldn't hit back against the increased tariffs just yet. 'We are in intensive negotiations with the Americans and in parallel, preparing reprisals if those negotiations do not succeed,' Mr. Carney said during Question Period on Wednesday. Ontario Premier Doug Ford urged immediate retaliation. He told reporters he had spoken with Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc, who is leading the U.S.-Canada file, to make the case. The Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities joined together to demand government action. The three groups rarely share a stage, but did so Wednesday to make a point, said Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress. 'This is an all-hands-on-deck moment. We need to defend our jobs. We need to invest in our industries, and we need to protect our communities that built this country, labour, business, municipalities and government.' She urged reprisal, but said she also wants the government to take other steps, including reforms to employment insurance to assist affected workers and legislated commitments to use Canadian steel in national projects. Industry, billionaire tycoon Barry Zekelman urge government action on steel dumping Ms. Bruske said there are 23,000 steel industry jobs in the country that could be affected 'within the next couple of days,' plus 9,500 aluminum jobs, and then all the spin-off jobs created by both industries. The Prime Minister's hesitation on retaliation is a contrast with the approach of then-prime minister Justin Trudeau, who immediately imposed tariffs on the U.S., both earlier this year and in 2018, during Mr. Trump's previous trade war with Canada. In March, Mr. Ford also moved quickly to levy a 25-per-cent surcharge on electricity that Ontario sends to 1.5 million homes in three U.S. states. He cancelled the measure within a day after Mr. Trump threatened to double steel and aluminum tariffs in response. But Mr. Ford said his understanding is that a Canada-U.S. deal is close, and so for now he is not reinstating the surcharge. Mr. Carney is pushing for a deal between the two countries covering both trade and national security, including the border and defence. The CEO of Algoma Steel Group Inc., Michael Garcia, said Ottawa should immediately bring in tariffs on imports of foreign steel to address dumping in Canada from places such as Turkey, Vietnam and the Middle East. Mr. Garcia said that unless the price of steel skyrockets, the company's U.S. business isn't viable anymore. 'I am advocating for Section 53 tariffs not as a retaliatory measure against the U.S., but as a prudent move to protect a vital strategic industry,' he said in an interview. Under Canada's Customs Tariff law, Section 53 tariffs can be imposed by Ottawa in cases in which unfair trade practices are occurring that are harming domestic trade. An estimate by Oxford Economics, a consultancy firm, found that more than half of U.S. steel imported into Canada is currently exempt from tariffs. The Aluminium Association of Canada said the tariff increase would destroy demand across the continent, no matter whether the metal is made in Canada or the U.S., and disrupt key sectors, including defence, construction and automotive. Steel prices in the U.S. have already risen by 16 per cent since Mr. Trump took office in January, and his higher tariffs risk causing inflation for American consumers by making products built with steel more expensive. At a committee hearing on Wednesday, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said that the administration's goal is not to get other countries to simply lower trade barriers but to ensure that those countries stop exporting certain products to the U.S., a position that would appear to complicate Mr. Carney's efforts to land a deal that includes removing U.S. tariffs. Mr. Lutnick said under questioning from Senator John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, that he did not know the name of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the legislation under which the U.S. has imposed steel, aluminum and auto tariffs. He also said he was not familiar with a principle called the 'major questions doctrine,' which was central to a legal decision overturning a different series of Mr. Trump's tariffs. Mr. Lutnick is the member of the President's cabinet with top authority on trade policy. Mr. Kennedy's grilling of Mr. Lutnick could indicate a fracture in Republican support for Mr. Trump's agenda. While the party traditionally supported free trade, it has largely fallen in line behind the President's protectionism since he returned to office. Meanwhile, in Ottawa, the opposition Conservatives and the New Democrats all castigated Mr. Carney Wednesday for campaigning in the recent election on having a plan to push back against Mr. Trump, but still not having a deal to end the tariff dispute. Mining giants Alcoa, Rio Tinto and Aluminerie Alouette operate nine plants in Canada, eight of them in Quebec. This amps up the political pressure on the minority Liberal government from the Bloc Québécois. At a White House meeting last month, Mr. Trump said there was nothing Mr. Carney could say that would make him change his mind on tariffs, but the Prime Minister has remained insistent that such a deal would include the U.S. lifting its levies on Canada. With reports from Niall McGee and Nicolas Van Praet
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
B.C. cabinet minister reiterates provincial opposition to north coast pipeline
B.C. Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions Adrian Dix speaks in Delta on Jan. 24, 2025. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck) Locked in a trade war with the United States, many Canadian leaders see a potential new pipeline to British Columbia's north coast as a way to diversify the national economy – but the provincial government is not on board. B.C. Premier David Eby quickly voiced his opposition to the plan, and that position was reiterated by Energy and Climate Solutions Minister Adrian Dix on Wednesday. 'That idea doesn't make sense to us,' said Dix, at an unrelated news conference. The province has been down this road before and it proved very controversial. Starting in the early 2000s, Enbridge proposed the Northern Gateway pipeline to carry Alberta bitumen to an export terminal in Kitimat, just south of Prince Rupert. In 2016, then-prime minister Justin Trudeau and the newly-elected federal Liberals banned oil tankers on B.C.'s north coast, essentially sinking the project. With Canada's place in a shifting geopolitical landscape uncertain, Alta. Premier Danielle Smith thinks the idea deserves another look. 'We've got to work with where we think we'll have the most success,' she said at a First Ministers meeting in Saskatoon earlier this week. 'And where I think we'll have the most success right now is working on a corridor between Hudson Bay and the Port of Prince Rupert.' With a new prime minister at the helm promising to fast-track projects deemed in the national interest, conditional federal support appears to be on the table. 'The world is certainly more divided and dangerous and the imperative of making Canada an energy superpower in all respects has never been greater,' Mark Carney said in Saskatoon. Pointing to the cost overruns and delays of the recently completed Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion, Dix doesn't think there's an economic case for another new pipeline. 'This would be a colossally expensive and not economic proposal,' he said. 'It's a political proposal – and fair enough – but we have a different view. The premier has expressed very clearly his view of non-support for that." With other premiers, including Ontario's Doug Ford, already voicing their support, B.C.'s NDP government is an outlier this time. If a deep-pocketed company steps forward offering to take the pricey project on, there may be little the province can do to stop it.
