Array Technologies (ARRY) Fell Last Week. Here is Why.
The share price of Array Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:ARRY) fell by 8.74% between May 20 and May 27, 2025, putting it among the Energy Stocks that Lost the Most This Week. Let's shed some light on the development.
An aerial view of a solar panel farm, its panel incremented tracking the sun's path.
Array Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:ARRY) is a leading global provider of solar tracking technology to utility-scale and distributed generation customers, who construct, develop, and operate solar PV sites.
The share price of Array Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:ARRY) fell last week after investors reacted negatively to the House of Representatives advancing President Trump's 'one big beautiful bill', which may end numerous green-energy subsidies that have supported the renewable energy sector. While the industry was already expecting the gradual phase-out of wind and solar tax credits, the latest version of the bill accelerates this timeline, dealing a serious blow to the solar energy industry, which relies heavily on such credits.
That said, Array Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:ARRY) posted strong results for its Q1 2025 earlier this month, beating expectations in both revenue and earnings. The company reported a strong revenue growth of 97.1% YoY and achieved the second-largest quarter of volume shipped since 2023, indicating solid market share recovery.
While we acknowledge the potential of ARRY to grow, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an AI stock that is more promising than ARRY and that has 100x upside potential, check out our report about this cheapest AI stock.
READ NEXT: 10 Cheap Energy Stocks to Buy Now and 10 Most Undervalued Energy Stocks to Buy According to Hedge Funds
Disclosure: None.
Erreur lors de la récupération des données
Connectez-vous pour accéder à votre portefeuille
Erreur lors de la récupération des données
Erreur lors de la récupération des données
Erreur lors de la récupération des données
Erreur lors de la récupération des données
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Audit of Louisiana Department of Education finds issues with payroll policy compliance
BATON ROUGE, La. (Louisiana First) — An audit of the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) found failures in compliance with payroll policies and procedures and state property regulations. According to the report, 14% of 13,937 timesheets processed between July 1, 2023, and June 30, 2024, were approved by supervisors between one and 470 days after the payroll posting date. Auditors said failures in following payroll procedures increase the risk of errors or fraud. A recommendation from auditors encouraged management to provide supervisory oversight to make sure employees comply with policies and procedures. In a response, LDOE agreed with the findings and said its human resources director and payroll manager would implement an action plan that includes sending reminders to employees. Auditors recommended supervisory oversight after identifying a failure in state property regulation compliance. The report said this could result in inaccurate financial reporting and increase the risk that assets could be misreported, lost, or stolen. LDOE's policy and the Louisiana Administrative Code require all movable property with an acquired cost of $1,000 or more to be tagged and inventory information sent to the Louisiana Property Assistance Agency within 60 calendar days. LDOE agreed with the auditors' findings, explaining that the processing of assets was 'challenging' after a surge in inventory, resulting in a backlog and causing submission delays. The department said it would add staffing, implement a streamlined procedure, offer training, conduct audits, and communicate with the Louisiana Legislative Auditor's office. Audit of Livingston Parish School Board found misappropriated funds Smoke from Canadian wildfires to affect air quality, visibility in parts of US: What to know Kenner Police make third arrest in connection to drugging death of news reporter Supreme Court allows Trump to revoke Biden's parole program; Sotomayor, Jackson issue scathing dissent BREC Commission appoints interim superintendent Think your return to the office was rough? Elon Musk faces big challenges Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
America's Reputation Might Not Matter as Much as People Think
America's reputation is shot. At least, that seems to be the prevailing view at the moment. 'Trump is Trashing America's Reputation,' exclaimed a recent opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. 'Trump's erratic policy is harming the reputation of American assets,' read the headline in The Economist. And writing for The Conversation, Steve Dunne of the University of Warwick observed, 'Across the opening 100 days of his second term, Trump … has devastated—perhaps irreparably—economic confidence in the US.' The core idea in such statements is that U.S. President Donald Trump's behavior since the start of his second term has undermined the United States' role as a source of global stability and has caused the country to give up the mantel of global leadership. To determine whether this is really the case, it's is worth stepping back to reflect on how and whether reputation plays a role in international affairs. Reputation has been asserted as an important factor in understanding whether governments will honor obligations to repay sovereign debt, uphold commitments to allies, not back down in a crisis, or just generally behave cooperatively. Overall, cooperation is commonly framed as a positive for a country's reputation: One typically doesn't say that a pariah state, like North Korea, has ruined its reputation by starting to cooperate. But when international relations analysts speak of reputation, whose reputation are they speaking of? There is much debate among international relations scholars as to whether reputation tends to be associated with individual leaders, with countries, or with both. To get more in-depth news and expert analysis on global affairs from WPR, sign up for our free Daily Review newsletter. If one believes that reputation is primarily attached to leaders, then a country's reputation in world affairs is quite fluid, as it depends on who is holding the levers of power at a given time. According to this view, while Donald Trump's predictably unpredictable nature could result in a wild four years while he is in office, expectations will again reset following the 2028 election. Following his election in 2021, Joe Biden spoke of how 'America is Back' following four years of Trump as president and he sought to reset the United States' global reputation. In some respects, he did that. But the extent to which he continued with some of Trump's key foreign policies was also notable, whether those policies were economic restrictions towards China, or continuing to use the Abraham Accords to underpin a coalition against Iran. The other view is that international reputation is associated with countries as a whole and that there is something about the character of a country that leads to expectations about its behavior. In this view, the United States, independent of Donald Trump himself, has an international reputation. Still, even under this view, the leader a country chooses for itself can affect its reputation. Many observers abroad were willing to view Trump's first election as a fluke—after all, he didn't even win the popular vote the first time around. But the fact that Trump remained the figurehead of the Republican Party after his first term and then won reelection by securing the popular vote suggested to many that Trump is indicative of the more general character of the United States. This resets expectations about U.S. behavior going forward. Setting aside questions about whether Trump's approach truly marks a new phase in the behavior of the United States or whether its even possible to render such a judgment after only a few months in office, there is evidence that the U.S. reputation prior to Trump remains intact. He was elected again, but under circumstances that were particularly advantageous to the non-incumbent party. The U.S. courts have also continued to block and slow his agenda, most recently his beloved tariff policy, and civil society actors are pushing back against his agenda in myriad successful ways. In the end, it might turn out that the U.S. under Trump perfectly illustrates the old saying attributed to Winston Churchill, that 'Americans can always be expected to do the right thing, after all other possibilities have been exhausted.' This suggests that the United States, regardless of who is in office, has long had a reputation of being inward looking and not particularly cooperative with the rest of the world, but ultimately doing so when it is needed most. Such debates are interesting, but there is a larger question at play. Is it even worth worrying about reputation? After all, states and leaders are generally shortsighted. As I've written before, because the international system is inherently complex, decisionmakers within states are typically just going from one fire to the next trying to avoid the worst possible outcomes. Memories are short because there is only so much that can be learned about future likely behavior from particular cases. The political scientist James Morrow made this point when he wrote that 'in international crises … factors always vary across cases.' For example, does the U.S. failure to defend country X mean that it will fail to defend country Y? Not necessarily, because countries X and Y are likely in very different situations. Consider Trump's views toward Ukraine and Taiwan. If he were to cease U.S. military aid to Ukraine—a possibility that seems increasingly unlikely—this should not be seen as an encouraging sign to Beijing, because the context is very different. Defending Taiwan, an island, is very different than defending Ukraine and its large land border with Russia. Trump views the war in Ukraine as the fault of his predecessors, but likely would view a Beijing attack against Taiwan as a personal affront to him. Moreover, U.S. economic and security interests are arguably clearer with Taiwan than they were for Ukraine. In the same way that behavior in one situation may not translate to behavior in another situation, it is questionable whether reputation in one issue area, such as trade, will matter in another, such as defense cooperation. The contexts are again significantly different, and a country's reputation for behaving a certain way in trade relations may not say much about how it behaves as a partner in other contexts. In sum, it may well be desirable for a leader and a country to exhibit predictable cooperative behavior. But such predictability regarding the past doesn't supersede context-specific considerations of power and interests. Donald Trump may well understand this feature of international politics. Stated simply, reputation's importance in international politics may be largely because people think it matters, not because it actually matters in reality. Paul Poast is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a nonresident fellow at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. The post America's Reputation Might Not Matter as Much as People Think appeared first on World Politics Review.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump taps former right-wing podcast host Paul Ingrassia for key watchdog post
President Trump announced Thursday night that he was tapping Paul Ingrassia, a former far-right podcast host, to lead the Office of Special Counsel -- an independent watchdog agency empowered to investigate federal employees and oversee complaints from whistleblowers. The Trump administration has previously taken aim at the Office of Special Counsel, firing the head of the agency, Hampton Dellinger (a Biden appointee) in February. Dellinger expressed opposition to the Trump administration's firing of federal employees under DOGE-led cuts, noting that many had been fired or laid off without notice or justification. Dellinger challenged his firing in court and was briefly reinstated to the post until a federal appeals court allowed for his dismissal. Dellinger decided to drop the challenge. MORE: After clashes with AG's top aide, a White House liaison pushing 'loyalty' to Trump at DOJ is reassigned: Sources ABC News exclusively reported in February about how Ingrassia, in his role as White House liaison to the Department of Justice, was pushing to hire candidates at the DOJ who exhibited what he called "exceptional loyalty" to Trump. His efforts at DOJ sparked clashes with Attorney General Pam Bondi's top aide, Chad Mizelle, leading Ingrassia to complain directly to President Trump, sources told ABC News. Ingrassia was pushed out of DOJ and reassigned as the White House liaison to the Department of Homeland Security, where he was serving prior to Trump announcing his new role, according to a White House official familiar with the matter. In a post on X, Ingrassia wrote in response to his nomination: "It's the highest honor to have been nominated to lead the Office of Special Counsel under President Trump! As Special Counsel, my team and I will make every effort to restore competence and integrity to the Executive Branch — with priority on eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal workforce and revitalize the Rule of Law and Fairness in Hatch Act enforcement." For the Senate-confirmed five-year term, Ingrassia will likely face tough questions over his lengthy history of media appearances and posts on social media promoting Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election as well as his ties to far-right media figures. He was previously spotted at a 2024 rally hosted by white nationalist Nick Fuentes and has publicly praised figures like Andrew Tate -- who has faced criminal charges for alleged sexual assault (Tate denies all wrongdoing). MORE: In addition to Musk, multiple top DOGE officials leaving Trump administration: Sources Ingrassia, in a comment to NPR, maintained he did not intend to go to the Fuentes rally and instead was there for another event. "I had no knowledge of who organized the event, observed for 5-10 minutes, then left," he wrote to NPR. He added that the notion that he is an extremist is "lacking in all credibility." Before joining the Trump administration, Ingrassia led communications efforts for a nonprofit legal organization that promotes itself as "the answer to the useless and radically leftist American Civil Liberties Union," and he was a writer for the right-wing website Gateway Pundit. Trump has also been known to post some of Ingrassia's pro-Trump stories on social media. Trump taps former right-wing podcast host Paul Ingrassia for key watchdog post originally appeared on
