Why CrowdStrike (CRWD) Stock Is Falling Today
Shares of cybersecurity company CrowdStrike (NASDAQ:CRWD) fell 5.5% in the afternoon session after the company reported mixed first quarter 2025 (Q1 FY-26) results: its revenue guidance for next quarter slightly missed and its full-year revenue guidance was just in line with Wall Street's estimates.
On the other hand, CrowdStrike beat convincingly on operating profit. Looking ahead, guidance was solid. The company's EPS guidance for next quarter topped analysts' expectations, and its full-year EPS guidance slightly exceeded Wall Street's estimates as well.
Overall, this was a mixed quarter and not enough for the high expectations around the stock (as evidenced by the 52-week high right before reporting and a 40+% stock price appreciation year-to-date before the print).
The stock market overreacts to news, and big price drops can present good opportunities to buy high-quality stocks. Is now the time to buy CrowdStrike? Access our full analysis report here, it's free.
CrowdStrike's shares are very volatile and have had 20 moves greater than 5% over the last year. In that context, today's move indicates the market considers this news meaningful but not something that would fundamentally change its perception of the business.
The biggest move we wrote about over the last year was 11 months ago when the stock dropped 14.7% following a global technology outage. The outage was caused by a faulty update deployed by CrowdStrike to computers running the Microsoft Windows operating system.
CrowdStrike clarified that the issue wasn't caused by "a security incident or cyberattack."
CEO George Kurtz noted on the social media platform X (formerly called Twitter) that "the issue has been identified, isolated, and a fix has been deployed."
However, the issue had far-reaching consequences, affecting systems in industries delivering critical services, including hospitals, banks, and airports.
CRWD stock's decline suggested markets might be struggling to understand the long-term implications of the issue, especially as it relates to CrowdStrike maintaining its dominance in the highly competitive cybersecurity space, which often permits little to no room for mistakes.
Wedbush analyst Dan Ives provided insights on how this might play out, adding, "It could create opportunity for some competitive displacements, but this will take time to determine the path of CIOs and companies looking ahead and related legal actions related to this outage."
CrowdStrike is up 33% since the beginning of the year, and at $461.84 per share, it is trading close to its 52-week high of $488.76 from June 2025. Investors who bought $1,000 worth of CrowdStrike's shares 5 years ago would now be looking at an investment worth $4,812.
Here at StockStory, we certainly understand the potential of thematic investing. Diverse winners from Microsoft (MSFT) to Alphabet (GOOG), Coca-Cola (KO) to Monster Beverage (MNST) could all have been identified as promising growth stories with a megatrend driving the growth. So, in that spirit, we've identified a relatively under-the-radar profitable growth stock benefiting from the rise of AI, available to you FREE via this link.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
AI Search Engine Perplexity Gains Traction vs. Google
Perplexity keeps breaking records, clocking 780 million searches in Maya 20% jump from Aprilas CEO Aravind Srinivas told Bloomberg Tech Summit attendees that people are tired of legacy browsers like Chrome. If Perplexity can keep this momentum, Srinivas believes it could hit 1 billion weekly queries soon, thanks to everything happening in its search bar, new-tab page and sidecar interface that drives extra engagement. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 3 Warning Sign with PYPL. The startup, backed by Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) and Jeff Bezos, is also gearing up to launch Comet within three to five weeks. Comet is Perplexitys new agentic search service that does things for youlike record your virtual meetings, transcribe them and let you search what was said. Srinivas admitted building those features has been harder than anticipated, but he says reliability and speed have improved, and everyones working super hard to get the browser out in your hands. Perplexity just added a way to buy products directly in chat via PayPal (NASDAQ:PYPL) or Venmo, hinting at future revenue beyond ads. That matters because Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) still owns about 90% of search trafficand even though Bing sits in second with around 4%, Perplexitys off-the-charts growth and $14 billion valuation (up from $9 billion in December) show investors are betting that a browser-native, AI-first experience could steal user time and queries. Investors should keep an eye on whether Perplexity can sustain these gains once Comet goes live; this summers traffic pick-up and early feedback on Comet will be key gauges. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If Elon Musk's Wealth Was Evenly Distributed Across America, How Much Money Would Every Person Get?
We've seen the headlines that reveal how rich the world's top billionaires are — but it's hard to comprehend just how rich they are. Consider this: Let's say you had $1 billion in your bank account and had to spend $100,000 every day, for an entire year. After 365 days, you would still have $963,500,000 (nine hundred sixty-three million five hundred thousand). Discover More: Find Out: Over the last two decades, billionaires have ballooned their wealth to unparalleled levels. In 2005, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates ranked as the world's richest person, with a net worth of $46.5 billion, as reported by CNN. Today, that title belongs to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, whose net worth stands at $368 billion as of June 5, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Even when adjusted for inflation, Gates' former net worth would be equivalent to roughly $76 billion in today's dollars. It is worth noting that other billionaires have also increased their wealth during the same time. For instance, tech billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos are worth $229 billion and $227 billion, ranking second and third globally. For many Americans, this trend is not sitting well. The sky-high cost of living has catalyzed support for redistributive tax policies, especially among younger voters and the progressive base of the Democratic Party. While higher taxation may or may not happen in the years to come, here's hypothetically how much you'd get if the world's richest man gives a check to every American. The United States Census Bureau estimates the current population to be around 341 million people, ranking only behind India and China. If Musk's enormous $368 billion were equally divided in the U.S., each person would receive $1,079 (rounded to the nearest dollar). A couple would receive $2,158, while a family of four would get $4,316. Despite the enormous wealth of billionaires, much of their fortune is tied up in stocks, real estate, and other holdings. Only a small percentage of their assets is held in cash. Based on data from Forbes, Musk has a 12% ownership stake in Tesla and to date, he remains the largest shareholder in the $1.15 trillion electric vehicle company. This is in addition to a 42% slice in SpaceX and a 54% interest in xAI, among many other businesses. Interestingly, Bloomberg reported that Musk's financial holdings appreciated by 77% after joining the campaign trail with President Donald Trump late last year, as reported by Bloomberg. Investors became bullish on Tesla and Musk became the first person to ever reach a net worth exceeding $400 billion. Since then, Tesla's market value has fluctuated as a result of volatile market conditions, macroeconomic factors and the threat of a global trade war. Editor's note: Data is accurate as of June 5 and is subject to change. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Says Trump's Executive Order To Lower Medication Costs Has a 'Real Shot' -- Here's Why This article originally appeared on If Elon Musk's Wealth Was Evenly Distributed Across America, How Much Money Would Every Person Get? Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Gizmodo
37 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
OpenAI Appeals ‘Sweeping, Unprecedented Order' Requiring It Maintain All ChatGPT Logs
Last month, a federal judge ordered OpenAI to indefinitely maintain all of ChatGPT's data as part of an ongoing copyright lawsuit. In response, OpenAI has filed an appeal to overturn the decision stating that the 'sweeping, unprecedented order' violates its users' privacy. The New York Times sued both OpenAI and Microsoft in 2023 claiming that the companies violated copyrights by using its articles to train their language models. However, OpenAI said the Times' case is 'without merit' and argued that the training falls under 'fair use'. Previously, OpenAI only kept chat logs for users of ChatGPT Free, Plus, and Pro who didn't opt out. However, in May, the Times and other news organizations claimed that OpenAI was engaging in a 'substantial, ongoing' destruction of chat logs that could contain evidence of copyright violations. Judge Ona Wang responded by ordering ChatGPT to maintain and segregate all ChatGPT logs that would otherwise be deleted. In a court appeal, OpenAI argued that Wang's order 'prevent[s] OpenAI from respecting its users' privacy decisions.' According to Ars Technica, the company also claimed that the Times' accusations were 'unfounded', writing, 'OpenAI did not 'destroy' any data, and certainly did not delete any data in response to litigation events. The order appears to have incorrectly assumed the contrary.' 'The [Times] and other plaintiffs have made a sweeping and unnecessary demand in their baseless lawsuit against us,' COO Brad Lightcap said in a statement. He added that the demand for OpenAI to retain all data 'abandons long-standing privacy norms and weakens privacy protections.' On X, CEO Sam Altman wrote that the 'inappropriate request…sets a bad precedent.' He also added that the case highlights the need for 'AI privilege' where 'talking to an AI should be like talking to a lawyer or a doctor.' we have been thinking recently about the need for something like "AI privilege"; this really accelerates the need to have the conversation. imo talking to an AI should be like talking to a lawyer or a doctor. i hope society will figure this out soon. — Sam Altman (@sama) June 6, 2025 The court order triggered an initial wave of panic. Per Ars Technica, OpenAI's court filing cited social media posts from LinkedIn and X where users expressed concerns about their privacy. On LinkedIn, one person warned their clients to be 'extra careful' about what information they shared with ChatGPT. In another example, someone tweeted, 'Wang apparently thinks the NY Times' boomer copyright concerns trump the privacy of EVERY @OPENAI USER – insane!!!' On one hand, I couldn't imagine having a ChatGPT log sensitive enough data that I'd care if someone else read it. However, people do use ChatGPT as a therapist, for life advice, and even treat it as a romantic partner. Regardless of whether I'd personally do the same, they deserve the right to keep that content private. At the same time, the Times' case isn't as baseless as OpenAI claims. It is absolutely worth discussing how artificial intelligence is trained. Remember when Clearview AI scraped 30 billion images from Facebook to train its facial recognition? Or reports that the federal government uses images of vulnerable people to test facial recognition software? Yes, those examples exist outside of journalism and copyright law. However, it highlights the need for conversations about whether companies like OpenAI should need explicit consent to utilize content rather than scraping whatever they want from the internet.
