Wall St jumps on Microsoft's blockbuster earnings
Microsoft became the second publicly-traded company after Nvidia to surpass $US4 trillion ($A6.2 trillion) in market valuation, following a blockbuster earnings report.
Meta Platforms also climbed 12.1 per cent to an all-time high in early trading, after the social media giant forecast third-quarter revenue well above estimates, thanks to AI boosting its core advertising business.
Nvidia gained more than one per cent.
The S&P technology index and the communication services index both hit record highs, up 1.2 per cent and over three per cent, respectively.
In early trading on Thursday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 88.73 points, or 0.20 per cent, to 44,550.01, the S&P 500 gained 45.18 points, or 0.71 per cent, to 6,408.08 and the Nasdaq Composite gained 245.09 points, or 1.16 per cent, to 21,374.76.
A Commerce Department report showed US inflation increased in June as tariffs on imports started raising the cost of some goods, supporting economists' expectations that price pressures would pick up in the second half of the year.
"Thursday's PCE was stronger than expected and throws cold water on the idea of (an autumn) rate-cut, as it's clear that lower interest rates are not justified at this time," said Clark Bellin, president and chief investment officer, Bellwether Wealth.
"Inflation remains sticky and justifies the Fed's decision to keep interest rates unchanged at Wednesday's meeting."
Separately, weekly jobless claims increased marginally last week, suggesting the labour market remained stable.
Attention now turns to Friday's non-farm payrolls report and a looming tariff deadline, with President Donald Trump refusing to extend trade talks for lagging partners.
Easing global trade war fears, signs of US economic resilience, and renewed AI optimism have set Wall Street on course for monthly gains.
The S&P 500 and blue-chip Dow are set for a third straight monthly gain - their longest winning streak in nearly a year - while the Nasdaq was on track for its best monthly run since March 2024.
On Wednesday, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell diluted investor expectations for an interest rate cut in September after the central bank kept rates unchanged.
Traders now see a 58.8 per cent chance the Fed will stay pat in September as well, according to CME's FedWatch tool.
Powell said it was too early to predict a September rate cut, and that current policy was not restricting the economy. The statement came after stronger-than-expected GDP data for the second quarter.
The "hold" verdict prompted another jibe on Powell by Trump, while Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he expected an announcement on Powell's successor by year-end.
EU officials said European liquor could face 15 per cent tariffs from August 1 until a different agreement is reached, with talks set to continue in the autumn.
Trump's deal with South Korea on Wednesday cut the country's import tariff to 15 per cent from the previously threatened 25 per cent.
Among other stocks, Applied Digital soared 32.7 per cent after the data centre operator surpassed estimates for quarterly revenue.
Declining issues outnumbered advancers by a 1.17-to-1 ratio on the NYSE, and by a 1.16-to-1 ratio on the Nasdaq.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The treasurer is telling us to stay calm, but this could be the time to panic
'AI may be the most transformative technology in human history,' wrote the treasurer this week. It's the rarest kind of statement: at once emphatically grand and altogether too modest. Grand, because it has AI outstripping, say, the wheel, electricity, or the internet. Modest, because it puts AI on the same continuum as all this, as though its difference is merely one of scale and speed, rather than something more fundamental. In this way, Jim Chalmers echoes the spirit of the Productivity Commission's latest interim report, also released this week, examining how AI will change our economy. It would be fair to say the report is optimistic, seduced by AI's promise of significantly increased productivity. To that end, it warns the government against overregulating AI, on the basis that this would slow down its productive march. Chalmers' version of the same idea has government regulating 'as much as necessary to protect Australians, but as little as possible to encourage innovation'. All of which presumes some kind of clear-eyed assessment of AI's risks. And it's hereabouts that all this optimism should give us pause. Not because either the government or the commission deny there are serious risks. But because they characterise these risks – much as they characterise AI – as mere extensions of previous experience. Indeed, the commission's report could hardly be clearer on this point. After running through a series of potential problems – including some serious ones such as AI making mistakes in high-risk situations like healthcare or law enforcement – it concludes there is ultimately nothing new to see here: 'AI can exacerbate existing risk of harm but does not create wholly new risks where none existed before'. Loading Meanwhile, Chalmers acknowledges the possibility of significant unemployment, but believes it will not be widespread or structural. To this end, he makes the observation that while technological developments always eliminate jobs, they create more than they destroy. 'We've seen this play out before,' he affirms. But this is more an assumption than an argument. It assumes that all technological advancement is some single, undifferentiated phenomenon, such that its history broadly repeats. But this is something the Albanese government must know not to be true. It is, after all, implementing a ban on social media platforms for children under 16, a belated response to a damaging technology we spent years assuming would be as benign as, say, television. Now we seem to be assuming similarly AI will neatly fit into a benign pattern. That assumption only holds to the extent AI is analogous with most of what has come before. And in the circumstances, we'd be wise to examine it far more rigorously before settling on it because there are good reasons to suppose it is a different species altogether, for which history is a poor guide.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
The treasurer is telling us to stay calm, but this could be the time to panic
'AI may be the most transformative technology in human history,' wrote the treasurer this week. It's the rarest kind of statement: at once emphatically grand and altogether too modest. Grand, because it has AI outstripping, say, the wheel, electricity, or the internet. Modest, because it puts AI on the same continuum as all this, as though its difference is merely one of scale and speed, rather than something more fundamental. In this way, Jim Chalmers echoes the spirit of the Productivity Commission's latest interim report, also released this week, examining how AI will change our economy. It would be fair to say the report is optimistic, seduced by AI's promise of significantly increased productivity. To that end, it warns the government against overregulating AI, on the basis that this would slow down its productive march. Chalmers' version of the same idea has government regulating 'as much as necessary to protect Australians, but as little as possible to encourage innovation'. All of which presumes some kind of clear-eyed assessment of AI's risks. And it's hereabouts that all this optimism should give us pause. Not because either the government or the commission deny there are serious risks. But because they characterise these risks – much as they characterise AI – as mere extensions of previous experience. Indeed, the commission's report could hardly be clearer on this point. After running through a series of potential problems – including some serious ones such as AI making mistakes in high-risk situations like healthcare or law enforcement – it concludes there is ultimately nothing new to see here: 'AI can exacerbate existing risk of harm but does not create wholly new risks where none existed before'. Loading Meanwhile, Chalmers acknowledges the possibility of significant unemployment, but believes it will not be widespread or structural. To this end, he makes the observation that while technological developments always eliminate jobs, they create more than they destroy. 'We've seen this play out before,' he affirms. But this is more an assumption than an argument. It assumes that all technological advancement is some single, undifferentiated phenomenon, such that its history broadly repeats. But this is something the Albanese government must know not to be true. It is, after all, implementing a ban on social media platforms for children under 16, a belated response to a damaging technology we spent years assuming would be as benign as, say, television. Now we seem to be assuming similarly AI will neatly fit into a benign pattern. That assumption only holds to the extent AI is analogous with most of what has come before. And in the circumstances, we'd be wise to examine it far more rigorously before settling on it because there are good reasons to suppose it is a different species altogether, for which history is a poor guide.
Sydney Morning Herald
4 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
AI copyright exemption idea has set the robot among the pigeons
The proposal by the Productivity Commission to give internationally owned AI companies exemptions from the Australian Copyright Act so they can mine locally copyrighted work to train artificial intelligence large language models, such as ChatGPT, is an idea whose time has not come. AI is already enjoying a free for all and transforming the way Australians work, learn and play. But the commission's harnessing data and digital technology interim report recommended weakening copyright protections, adding that AI-specific regulation should be a last resort while stressing that data underpinned growth and value in the digital economy and 'a mature data-sharing regime' could add up to $10 billion to Australia's annual economic output. A mounting backlash is growing to halt the runaway technology. Australia's media bosses are directly lobbying Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on the threat posed by AI, uniting with authors, musicians and artists to oppose the proposal. Of course, the Herald, published by Nine Entertainment, has a vested interest in this issue: Nine chief executive Matt Stanton took the media's fears directly to Albanese last month, as Labor attempts to rein in digital behemoths against the spectre of retaliation from the Trump administration for countries that regulate US tech giants. Additionally, a letter from Australia's top media firms and creative bodies to Attorney-General Michelle Rowland vowed to fight the erosion of copyright protections. As the arrival of computers and mobile phones illustrated, new technology is a boon for boosters and naysayers. AI has been spruiked as bringing an intellectual revolution as profound as the Enlightenment, but the glow has dimmed: there are reports of its use as a propaganda tool to interfere with US elections and the International Labour Organisation estimated 70 per cent of the tasks done by humans could be done or improved by AI, including 32 per cent of jobs in Australia. Meanwhile, despite Australian media companies taking explicit steps to protect themselves, some of the world's richest men openly continue to ignore moves to control their avarice. ChatGPT owner OpenAI, Perplexity and other artificial intelligence giants are crawling and scraping major Australian news websites tens of millions of times a month and pocketing untold swags of dollars. New figures from Nine Entertainment reveal the sheer number of times OpenAI and its rivals are scraping news outlets to inform their AI products – in the month of June, Nine websites were crawled almost 10 times every second by all AI firms, fuelling OpenAI's rapid rise to a $770 billion valuation. The commission's copyright proposal has enraged others. Midnight Oil frontman and former Labor minister Peter Garrett slammed the commission's recommendation to throw copyright to the wind and allow text and data mining of songs without compensating songwriters. 'The rampant opportunism of big tech aiming to pillage other people's work for their own profit is galling and shameful,' Garrett told News Limited.
