Latest news with #ChatGPT-inspired
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Better AI Stock: Alphabet vs. Nvidia
Nvidia trades at much higher valuation multiples than Alphabet, making it an expensive bet on future AI growth. Alphabet's stable business and lower valuation make it appealing for value-focused investors. Alphabet looks like a better buy today, but Nvidia still has upside potential for a certain type of high-growth investors. 10 stocks we like better than Alphabet › Artificial intelligence (AI) has been a hot topic for more than two years now. A small group of tech giants has emerged as leaders in this space, providing either the computing hardware or the user-friendly services that power this technology revolution. You know them as the "Magnificent Seven" stocks. This phrase suggests greatness, though it was always meant as a warning signal. Several of the seven heroes died in the 1960 movie by the same name. The seven original AI leaders could stumble and fall, too. As I'm writing this on May 28, the Magnificent Seven stocks have separated into two distinct groups. High-performance microchip designer Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) stole the show so far with a total gain of 701% in the ChatGPT-inspired generative AI boom. Software and services giant Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG) (NASDAQ: GOOGL) has a more modest stock return of 72% over the same period. There are so many questions in the air. Can Nvidia hold on to its dominant grip on the AI hardware opportunity? Will Alphabet's Google division thrive in the new age of AI-driven online services? Are the stocks trading at reasonable valuations these days? And most of all -- which one of these mighty AI stocks is the better buy today? Let's take a look. At first glance, Nvidia's stock looks too hot to handle. The stock price has multiplied by 8 in about 30 months. Nvidia's business may be booming, but those shares are changing hands at the lofty valuation of 25 times sales and 54 times free cash flows. Many investors will look no further, walking away from these deal-breaking valuation multiples. At the same time, lots of investors absolutely love Nvidia's stock at these prices. It comes with one of the lowest short-seller interests on the market. An overwhelming majority of analysts tracking this stock call it a "buy" and the average one-year price target is about 24% above the current value. And the Nvidia bulls have their reasons. The company's sales more than doubled in 2023, doubled again in 2024, and are poised to continue soaring as the generative AI market evolves. Furthermore, Nvidia can charge very high prices for its AI accelerator chips and be more limited by manufacturing capacity than by customer demand. As such, Nvidia's profits have skyrocketed much faster than the plain top-line sales. So if you expect Nvidia to stay on its AI hardware throne throughout the mega-growth portion of this generative AI revolution, the stock could definitely be a good buy today. It's not every investor's favorite cup of wealth-building tea, but Nvidia's stock appeals to a certain type of growth-oriented stock buyer. Here's a fun fact. Alphabet makes more money than Nvidia, even after the chip guru's massive growth spurt. The Google parent's annual revenues are about three times the size of Nvidia's. The difference grows smaller when you look at different types of profit, but Alphabet is still consistently larger: Now, Alphabet's huge financial figures are paired with significantly slower growth rates. Hence, the stock doesn't come with growth-inspired price premiums. Trading at 5.9 times sales and 28 times free cash flows, Alphabet's ratios are in the same ballpark as the average S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) component. That makes Alphabet a value-oriented bet on the generative AI boom. It's also a solid long-term holding, with or without the AI-focused opportunity. This company was built to thrive in pretty much any economy. The Google-based Alphabet you see today could look very different 10 or 20 years from now, but it should still be an innovative winner. I don't want to throw Nvidia under Wall Street's heaviest bus. The company just might be able to stave off AI chip rivals for years to come, until the ballooning valuation finally makes sense. I'm certainly not closing out my own Nvidia position today, hoping to catch a bit more of its AI-driven gains. But I'm not buying more Nvidia stock today, either. Alphabet is a much more tempting idea, pairing the company's ultimate longevity with a very reasonable share price. It's one of my favorite investments of all time, and a particularly strong buy at today's modest valuation. Before you buy stock in Alphabet, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Alphabet 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 $638,985!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $853,108!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 978% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 171% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of May 19, 2025 Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Anders Bylund has positions in Alphabet and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Better AI Stock: Alphabet vs. Nvidia was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - It's Kamala Harris's nomination to lose in 2028 — and she's already losing it
Maybe the Democratic insiders in Washington were right about Kamala Harris. Despite a wealth of advantages, Harris and her team don't seem to know what to do next. Her reappearance in the public has been rather unremarkable, rehashing Democratic tropes about Donald Trump along with the expected policy bromides. That's just not going to cut it. From the outside, it is astonishing how quickly the political cognoscenti have dismissed the former vice president. There should be no question about her being the leader of the Democratic Party, and she's an obvious front-runner for the 2028 nomination. Harris got more than 75 million votes in 2024 with 95 percent of Democrats voting for her, according to the exit polls. In a party still mired in identity politics, Harris checks more boxes than any other putative Democratic candidate. She remains popular as well, with the most recent YouGov poll showing Harris at 87 percent favorable against 9 percent unfavorable with Democrats. The McLaughlin poll has Harris at 88 percent favorable against 10 percent unfavorable. But the cracks start to show with her ballot tests versus other Democratic hopefuls. The most recent polling by McLaughlin has Harris with just 30 percent of Democratic primary voters, while Echelon Insights has her at 32 percent. She remains far ahead of any rivals, leading second-place Pete Buttigieg by 22 points in the Echelon poll and Gavin Newsom by 22 points in McLaughlin. As long as Harris is in the mix, she is likely to lead all Democrats just based on name recognition. If she does run in the next election, she will lead in all national polls until the first Democratic primary contest. But can she actually win the nomination once she has to get votes on her own? Her first run in 2020 ended rather ignominiously and the 2024 nominating contest involved not much more than a spate of phone calls and allowing the weight of being the incumbent vice president to crush any potential opposition. The last few months are showing why the D.C. establishment was extraordinarily unimpressed during her veep tryout. The return of Harris has been, at best, desultory. Her first major address was a ChatGPT-inspired cataloguing of Democratic complaints about President Trump and perfunctory praise for her grandstanding potential rivals. Her follow-up was a private address to Australian real estate agents. Who is scheduling this nonsense? This tentative, scattershot rollout shows the fundamental problem with Harris and her team: They lack any strategic vision, and Harris herself seems petrified of angering or even slightly annoying anyone in her fractious party. She lacks confidence, and what charisma she has is definitely low wattage. Her polling numbers, identity qualifications (as a non-white woman) and former vice presidential status should be intimidating to other Democrats, but nobody is afraid of Kamala. Her flirtation with running for California governor in 2026 is not helping, since that would end her presidential ambitions. She cannot run for governor in 2026 and president in 2028. Between the bad timing, the unfortunate Nixon comparisons and the immediately violation of the pledge not to run for president that she would have to make on the gubernatorial campaign trail, it's just not feasible. That puts Harris in the mix for 2032 at the earliest. If a Democrat wins in 2028, Harris will be staring at 2036 — 72 years old and likely needing to knock out an incumbent vice president and whoever else jumps in. To make matters more difficult, California is a mess policy-wise, fiscally and politically. It is hard to believe that Harris can make a dent in the state's myriad problems. Plus, the politics of the state are far to the left of the rest of the country, meaning her own politics will necessarily be drawn in that direction in order to get anything done. Harris should re-emerge aggressively — not just attacking Trump, but presenting at least a skeleton of ideas for the future. She should have a real theme. The term 'opportunity economy' that she used in 2024 wasn't great, but it is serviceable. She could be riding that. And she should absolutely ignore all other potential rivals, with the idea that they are politically beneath her. Harris is the leader — Buttigieg, Cory Booker, J.B. Pritzker and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can be helpful to her. But the most important task for Harris is to escape culpability for Trump 2.0 by pinning the blame on Team Biden for losing. That doesn't mean attacking Joe — after all, he is a sick, confused old man, taken advantage of by his dissolute son and scheming inner circle. Given the revelations in the recent books 'Fight' and 'Original Sin,' this task should be easy. It is a challenging weave, but not too difficult for a decently competent politician. Given the reporting, the best line she can deliver is that Biden's inner circle only did two things well: hide former President Joe Biden's mental infirmity and get Trump elected. In a Democratic Party where the grassroots are as hostile to the establishment as the Republican grassroots, that line is a sure crowd-pleaser. Harris has to establish herself independently. She has to take some risks bashing the Democratic insider. They never were on her side when she was vice president, so she doesn't really have much to lose. The bottom line for Harris is that the 2028 nomination is not going to be handed to her. She is going to have to work for it and show she has the political chops to run for president on her own. That cannot be done trying to be all things to all people. Harris has all the advantages, but she is showing she doesn't know what to do with them. Keith Naughton is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm, and a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
It's Kamala Harris's nomination to lose in 2028 — and she's already losing it
Maybe the Democratic insiders in Washington were right about Kamala Harris. Despite a wealth of advantages, Harris and her team don't seem to know what to do next. Her reappearance in the public has been rather unremarkable, rehashing Democratic tropes about Donald Trump along with the expected policy bromides. That's just not going to cut it. From the outside, it is astonishing how quickly the political cognoscenti have dismissed the former vice president. There should be no question about her being the leader of the Democratic Party, and she's an obvious front-runner for the 2028 nomination. Harris got over 75 million votes in 2024 with 95 percent of Democrats voting for her, according to the exit polls. In a party still mired in identity politics, Harris checks more boxes than any other putative Democratic candidate. She remains popular as well, with the most recent YouGov poll showing Harris at 87 percent favorable against 9 percent unfavorable with Democrats. The McLaughlin poll has Harris at 88 percent favorable against 10 percent unfavorable. But the cracks start to show with her ballot tests versus other Democratic hopefuls. The most recent polling by McLaughlin has Harris with just 30 percent of Democratic primary voters, while Echelon Insights has her at 32 percent. She remains far ahead of any rivals, leading second-place Pete Buttigieg by 22 points in the Echelon poll and Gavin Newsom by 22 points in McLaughlin. As long as Harris is in the mix, she is likely to lead all Democrats just based on name recognition. If she does run in the next election, she will lead in all national polls until the first Democratic primary contest. But can she actually win the nomination once she has to get votes on her own? Her first run in 2020 ended rather ignominiously and the 2024 nominating contest involved not much more than a spate of phone calls and allowing the weight of being the incumbent vice president to crush any potential opposition. The last few months are showing why the D.C. establishment was extraordinarily unimpressed during her VP tryout. The return of Harris has been, at best, desultory. Her first major address was a ChatGPT-inspired cataloguing of Democratic complaints about President Trump and perfunctory praise for her grand-standing potential rivals. Her follow-up was a private address to Australian real estate agents. Who is scheduling this nonsense? This tentative, scattershot rollout shows the fundamental trouble with Harris and her team. They lack any strategic vision, while Harris herself seems petrified of angering or even slightly annoying anyone in her fractious party. She lacks confidence, and what charisma she has is definitely low wattage. Her polling numbers, identity qualifications (i.e., a minority woman) and ex-VP status should be intimidating to other Democrats, but nobody is afraid of Kamala. Flirting with running for California governor is not helping. Seeking that office will end her presidential ambitions; she cannot run for governor in 2026 and president in 2028. Between the bad timing, unfortunate Nixon comparisons and immediately violating a pledge not to run for president (which she would have to make on the gubernatorial campaign trail), it's just not feasible. That puts Harris in the mix for 2032, at the earliest. If a Democrat wins in 2028, Harris will be staring at 2036, 72 years old and likely needing to knock out an incumbent VP and whoever else jumps in. Making matters more difficult, California is a mess policy-wise, fiscally and politically. It is hard to believe that Harris can make much more than a dent in the state's myriad problems. Plus, the politics of the state are far to the left of the rest of the country, meaning her own politics will necessarily be drawn in that direction in order to get anything done. Harris should re-emerge aggressively — not just attacking Trump, but presenting at least a skeleton of ideas for the future. She should have a real theme. The term 'opportunity economy' that she used in 2024 wasn't great, but it is serviceable. She could be riding that. And she should absolutely ignore all other potential rivals, with the idea that they are politically beneath her. Kamala Harris is the leader, while Buttigieg, Cory Booker, J.B. Pritzker and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can be helpful to her. But the most important task for Harris is to escape culpability for Trump 2.0 by pinning the blame on Team Biden for losing. That doesn't mean attacking Joe — after all, he is a sick, confused old man, taken advantage of by his dissolute son and scheming inner circle. Given the revelations in the recent books 'Fight' and 'Original Sin,' this task should be easy. It is a challenging weave, but not too difficult for a decently competent politician. Given the reporting, the best line she can deliver is that Biden's inner circle only did two things well: hide President Biden's mental infirmity and get Donald Trump elected. In a Democratic Party where the grassroots are as hostile to the establishment as the Republican grassroots, that line is a sure crowd-pleaser. Harris has to establish herself independently. She has to take some risks bashing the Democratic insider. They never were on her side when she was vice president, so she doesn't really have much to lose. The bottom line for Harris is that the 2028 nomination is not going to be handed to her. She is going to have to work for it and show she has the political chops to run for president on her own. That cannot be done trying to be all things to all people. Kamala Harris has all the advantages, but she is showing she doesn't know what to do with them. Keith Naughton is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm, and a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant.
