This Is How Much AMZN, GOOGL, MSFT, and META Will Spend on AI This Year
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.
Microsoft led the group with $88.7 billion in capital expenditures for Fiscal 2025, which exceeded its earlier projections. Separately, Meta raised the lower end of its spending outlook for a new range of $66-$72 billion. This was due to aggressive AI data center investments and talent recruitment. In addition, Alphabet boosted its estimate from $75 billion to $85 billion, thanks to strong demand for its Google Cloud services. As a result, analysts responded positively, with Wedbush raising Meta's price target to $920, RBC lifting Microsoft's to $640, and Needham increasing Alphabet's to $220.
However, Amazon was the outlier, with its shares falling despite forecasting $118.5 billion in spending. The drop was due to worries about weaker operating income guidance at Amazon Web Services, even as its AI business grows at triple-digit annual rates. Interestingly, though, while AI investments are making many investors optimistic, some market observers, including Apollo's Torsten Sløk and short-seller Jim Chanos, warn that an AI bubble could form that surpasses the dot-com era.
Which Big Tech Stock Is the Better Buy?
Turning to Wall Street, out of the four stocks mentioned above, analysts think that AMZN stock has the most room to run. In fact, AMZN's average price target of $259.87 per share implies more than 20% upside potential. On the other hand, analysts expect the least from META stock, as its average price target of $850.98 equates to a gain of 13.4%.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Verge
20 minutes ago
- The Verge
Meta illegally collected Flo users' menstrual data, jury rules
A California jury has found that Meta illegally collected user health data from the Flo period-tracking app, violating the state's wiretap law. The verdict concludes a lawsuit filed against Flo, Google, Meta, and app analytics company Flurry in 2021, in which Flo app users accused the companies of collecting their private menstrual health data without consent for targeted advertising. While Flo promised to keep users' sensitive reproductive health information private, the lawsuit alleged that Flo allowed Google and Meta to eavesdrop on in-app communications between November 2016 and February 2019, violating California's Invasion of Privacy Act. The cases against Flo, Google, and Flurry were resolved through undisclosed settlements before the trial, leaving Meta as the only remaining defendant. The jury reached a verdict on Monday that there was a 'preponderance' of evidence showing Meta had 'intentionally eavesdropped on and/or recorded conversations using an electronic device,' unbeknownst to Flo app users. While financial damages have yet to be decided, each violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act can result in a penalty of $5,000, with the lawsuit filed on behalf of 'millions' of Flo users. 'This verdict sends a clear message about the protection of digital health data and the responsibilities of Big Tech,' lead trial attorneys Michael P. Canty and Carol C. Villegas said in a statement. 'Companies like Meta that covertly profit from users' most intimate information must be held accountable.' Meta has objected to the verdict and will likely appeal the decision. 'We vigorously disagree with this outcome and are exploring all legal options,' Meta said in a statement reported by TechCrunch. 'The plaintiffs' claims against Meta are simply false. User privacy is important to Meta, which is why we do not want health or other sensitive information, and why our terms prohibit developers from sending any.' Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All by Jess Weatherbed Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Health Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Law Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Meta Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All News Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Policy Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Science Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed. See All Tech
Washington Post
20 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Companies keep building dangerous apps. Users keep paying the price.
A recent cyberattack exposed the sensitive personal data of thousands of women who used the Tea Dating Advice app to discuss and review men they date. A few days later, a California jury found that Meta wrongfully collected data from women using the period-tracking app Flo. The steady drum of high-profile app hacks and leaks has become background noise for many consumers — in 2024 alone, 1.7 billion people had their personal data compromised, according to data from the Identity Theft Resource Center. Among the recent targets are genetic data company 23andMe, Microsoft's workplace software and Tea, which explicitly billed itself as a safety app for women. Sometimes, the companies that fail to safeguard user data find themselves facing legal challenges from users or the government, as was the case with Flo. More often though, it's business as usual. Tea and Flo are both still operating and available in major app stores. Some Tea users, meanwhile, are left scrambling to remove their faces from online forums. It's a good reminder how often we turn over sensitive information to our apps and what little recourse we have when things go wrong. Online safety advocates have been warning for years that our apps — from big-name mainstays to relative newcomers like Tea — collect too much data and store it unsafely. But despite a stream of unnerving hacks, not much has changed, they say. The United States still doesn't have a comprehensive data privacy law. Tech companies, increasingly aided by AI programs that write code, rush products to market without proper safety measures. And consumers are left to fend for themselves, according to tech and security experts. 'It's not uncommon among software developers — especially small, scrappy start-up kind of stuff — to not even know how to store this information securely,' said Chester Wisniewski, a global director at cybersecurity company Sophos. You couldn't blame app users for wondering: When cybersecurity disaster strikes, who should be held responsible? Tea shot to the top of the Apple App Store in July as videos trended on social media discussing the app's controversial components, including letting women rate and review the men they date along with 'red flags,' 'green flags' and photos. Soon after, people on Reddit and 4chan called for the app to be targeted, and hackers found and shared the selfies, government IDs and direct messages of thousands of Tea users. Since the hack, Tea has continued to post lighthearted content promoting itself on its Instagram page. Last week, it posted a statement in response to the hack, saying it was taking its direct message system down out of an 'abundance of caution.' But the app's setup reflects a lack of safety precautions and security testing, putting users at risk from day one, says Dave Meister, a global head at cybersecurity research firm Check Point Software. Like many app start-ups, Tea appears to have released a product that looks good on the front end but lacks appropriate security infrastructure on the back end, he said. In this case, an exposed database let bad actors easily access troves of sensitive information, according to Meister. 'The fact that [the hackers] got in and just got free rein in the style which they did makes it very clear that the security there wasn't adequate and probably hadn't been considered as a part of the development of the application,' he said. Tea's founder and CEO, Sean Cook, has said that he got the idea for the app after watching his mother struggle with catfishing online. Cook previously worked as a product manager at Salesforce, Shutterfly and other tech companies, according to his LinkedIn. Cook, through the company's PR firm, declined to be interviewed for this story or comment on the breach. Tea spokesperson Taylor Osumi said Wednesday in an emailed statement that the company 'remains fully engaged in strengthening the Tea App's security, and we look forward to sharing more about those enhancements soon.' Tea will provide 'free identity protection services' to affected individuals, according to the statement. Apple, meanwhile, is still hosting the Tea app as well as the similar TeaOnHer app in its online store. Its guidelines require that apps 'implement appropriate security measures to ensure proper handling of user information' and 'prevent its unauthorized use, disclosure, or access by third parties.' When Apple finds that an app is out of compliance, it contacts the developer to explain the violation and gives them time to resolve it, Apple spokesperson Peter Ajemian said. He declined to comment on the Tea app specifically. With companies and app stores often passing the buck, it might fall to regulators to keep consumers safe, security experts say. Last week's Flo app ruling against Meta comes after the Federal Trade Commission accused Flo in 2021 of misleading users over how it treats their health data. A group of users also sued Flo over its privacy practices. Flo settled both lawsuits without admitting wrongdoing. But while regulators catch up, tech industry changes are putting consumers at increased risk of shoddy apps, Wisniewski said. For example 'vibe coding,' in which people use AI tools to write software programs, lets inexperienced developers spin up new apps with just a few typed commands. 'Everybody's talking about vibe-coding,' he said. 'You think these apps are bad now? Wait until AI starts writing them, they're going to be a hundred times worse.' Unsafe apps pose an outsize risk to women and other vulnerable groups, said Michael Pattullo, senior threat intelligence manager at Moonshot, a company that monitors online dangers. Moonshot has recorded an average of 3,484 violent threats against women per month in high-risk online spaces such as 4chan since it started monitoring in 2022. Data breaches fuel this ecosystem and put users at risk of physical harm when their names or addresses are leaked, Pattullo said. Social media platforms don't do enough to stop the spread of leaked information, he noted. Mainstream social media sites took down 28 percent of the violative posts Moonshot flagged in 2024, the company says. So far this year, that rate has decreased to six percent. Without tech companies, social platforms and app stores keeping users safe, the burden falls on regular people to withhold their data or try to guess which apps are trustworthy, Pattullo said. 'A user isn't joining any of these platforms expecting to have their privacy and physical security at risk, just by being in an online space, especially one that presents itself as secure,' he said. 'The one who has to take accountability and responsibility for this isn't the user, right?'
Wall Street Journal
20 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Anthropic's Quiet Edge in the AI Talent War
The war for top AI talent is hitting frenzied new heights among giants like Meta and OpenAI. But it's turning out that Anthropic, maker of the popular Claude models, is the place many engineers would rather work. New research from venture firm SignalFire shows that the startup is increasing its engineering organization faster than those competitors and more. The $170 billion AI company is hiring engineers 2.68 times faster than it's losing them. That number is 2.18 for OpenAI, 2.07 for Meta and 1.17 for Google.
