Skip to main content
Preview

Research from Friday’s close · next update overnight after Monday’s close

Radar
TSLA

TSLA Research brief

Tesla, Inc.

Adjusted close as of 2026-10-30
$399.81(−0.87%)

Sagehood’s view on TSLA

Tesla, Inc. · Research 2026-10-30 · Accepted

Research score

53Neutral50 is balancedScore change −2 since 2026-10-29, from 55 to 53; view unchanged at Neutral. Compare the two recordsConfidence 55 · It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.Confidence across the 100 names in this research run: 45 to 70, median 55.
How to read this score

Dated research brief

WhyThe neutral view is driven by a stalling growth engine, since the latest quarter's revenue fell 0.2% and the 3.3% operating margin trails the 8.7% sector median. The unresolved risk is that price holds 3.8% above 200-day average and the 90-day channel keeps rising.
What argues against this viewThe strongest case against the neutral stance is the still-intact uptrend: price sits 3.8% above 200-day average and 8.2% above 50-day average. A 90-day channel of 7.9% per year with 14-week RSI 55.9 could extend toward the 404.11 resistance.
Break conditionFrom the financial specialist: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median with accelerating quarterly growth would break the deceleration claim.Tests that specialist’s reading, not this page’s whole Neutral view.

Sagehood does not check this condition automatically. See research limitations below.

Valuation range

No model fair value · the discounted cash flow model declined

The valuation model declined to give a fair value for this stock: the close ($399.81) was 19.7 times the model’s cash-flow estimate ($20.30).

Close $399.81 (recorded) on 2026-10-30; estimates use fundamentals to 2026-09-30.

The peer-multiple estimate is not shown: the close is 10.9 times the estimate.

Rejected model output (not a valuation)
Bear
$15.40
Base
$20.30
Bull
$38.90

The model’s own grid cells, kept for reference. The model’s own check rejected them: they are not a valuation and not a price target.

Against peers

Consumer Discretionary
MultipleTSLAGroup medianPercentile
P/E (TTM)439.35×18.50×100th
P/S13.66×1.25×100th
P/B15.84×4.01×88th
FCF yield0.23%3.64%22nd
Score details & research limitations9 unavailable fields
Conditions Sagehood can check on its ownNot available in this run. A written break condition is not an automated check; this run does not provide a source-linked rule Sagehood can verify on its own.

Where the break condition comes from: Sagehood research took this condition from the financial specialist. It tests that specialist’s own reading, so it does not say everything that would change this page’s Neutral view.

How to read this research

The score expresses the published research view. 50 is balanced.

Bullish, Neutral or Bearish beside the score is the direction of that view, set by the research from the score: 65 and above is Bullish, 45 to 64 Neutral, 44 and below Bearish.

Confidence is how well the evidence supports this view, not which way it points: Sagehood research is asked to keep it no higher than its most confident specialist, and lower when the specialists disagree or much of the evidence is weak. It is not a calibrated probability of investment success.

Source verification checks the identity and origin of evidence. It does not prove that a claim is correct or that an investment will succeed.

Valuation estimates depend on their inputs and assumptions. They are not guaranteed future prices.

Retrospective research looks back at an earlier period. It is not a verified record of a decision made then using only information available then.

Unavailable is not zero. Read the adjacent reason: information may be missing, unverified or deliberately withheld.

How Sagehood works

The session this view is fixed to

Close$399.81 on 2026-10-30, as the research recorded it
Change on the day−0.87%
First eligible market session2026-11-02

Recorded score context

Specialist source coverage7 of 10 specialists have a verified source on this run. 3 do not.
Score reconciliationThe 7 specialist contributions shown add up to the weighted starting point this score was built from.
Change since the last accepted run55 on 2026-10-29 → 53 on 2026-10-30 (−2 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.
The run this is compared withResearch of 2026-10-29

Not in this run: Run-specific score definition, Confidence band, Horizon, Why the score changed, Today's unexplained move and Blockers.

What this was built from

Filing cited in the evidenceNot recorded on this card. The newest filing on record is under Key financials, and recent filings are listed under SEC filings.
Peer set9 names in Consumer Discretionary: AMZN, CCL, CMG, CVNA, F, NCLH, NKE, SBUX, TSCO. How they were chosen is under “Valuation & peers”. The valuation range says why the peer-multiple estimate is not shown.

Not in this run: Company profile date and Standing disclosure.

Not available in this run

9 fields are unavailable. Each is identified with its reason above; missing information is not zero or a negative research signal.

Price context

· adjusted close $399.81

+6.6% from 2026-06-25

Recent price-basis check: 2026-10-02 to 2026-10-30 (20 sessions). Economic comparability outside this window remains unchecked.

TSLA adjusted close
Adjusted price · USD · viewing 2026-06-25 to 2026-10-30

Selected 2026-10-30. TSLA adjusted close. Continuous series. $399.81 US dollars.

90 daily adjusted-price observations through 2026-10-30, ending at the 2026-10-30 research date. The final point is a dated final close. Shown for context, not point-in-time research evidence: the research used the prices recorded with it.

Use the arrow keys on the chart to step through observations.

Published score history

2026-07-23 to 2026-10-30 · 37 publications

Each point is a verified published score. The line breaks where the research method changed (4 methods, numbered in the order they were first used), so scores are not joined across methods. Hollow points were published after their decision window (retrospective).

Every published score and confidence
Research dateScoreViewConfidenceMethod
2026-10-3053Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2955Neutral55Method 4
2026-10-2854Neutral49Method 4
2026-10-2754Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2652Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2350Neutral50Method 4
2026-10-2245Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-2152Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-1645Neutral40Method 4
2026-10-0944Bearish50Method 4
2026-10-0750Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-0248Neutral45Method 4
2026-10-0144Bearish55Method 4
2026-09-3050Neutral49Method 4
2026-09-2950Neutral49Method 4
2026-09-2850Neutral49Method 4
2026-09-2548Neutral52Method 4
2026-09-24 · retrospective49Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-2349Neutral55Method 4
2026-09-1842Bearish60Method 4
2026-09-16 · retrospective40Bearish55Method 4
2026-09-09 · retrospective45Neutral56Method 4
2026-09-0440Bearish50Method 4
2026-09-01 · retrospective40Bearish55Method 4
2026-08-31 · retrospective41Bearish63Method 3
2026-08-2841Bearish63Method 3
2026-08-26 · retrospective41Bearish63Method 3
2026-08-24 · retrospective40Bearish63Method 3
2026-08-20 · retrospective40Bearish63Method 3
2026-08-19 · retrospective42Bearish63Method 3
2026-08-1438Bearish63Method 2
2026-08-1336Bearish63Method 1
2026-08-0737Bearish63Method 1
2026-08-0637Bearish63Method 1
2026-08-0438Bearish63Method 1
2026-07-3137Bearish75Method 1
2026-07-2334Bearish52Method 1

Specialists

7 of 10 published specialist analyses are available.

Each specialist’s view is shown as the published research recorded it; supporting detail appears only when it was recorded with that same view.

3 unavailable

TSLA research

Financial specialist

Showing Financial specialist result.

Financial specialist

Evaluated for this session

Bearish

Tesla's growth engine is stalling: trailing-twelve-month revenue of $103,570 million grew 8.3%, but the latest quarter's revenue growth was −0.2% and trailing-twelve-month operating margin of 3.3% sits far below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Full analyst note

What the specialist sees

Evidence: trailing-twelve-month revenue was $103,570 million with 8.3% growth, but the last four quarterly revenue growth rates were −3.1%, 15.8%, 25.5% and −0.2%, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 3.3% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Why it matters now

Decelerating revenue growth and a 3.3% trailing-twelve-month operating margin below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median imply the core business is losing pricing and cost leverage, so earnings quality depends on volume recovery that the latest quarter does not show.

What could change the view

Countercase: If the sequential revenue decline from $28,236 million to $28,046 million proves a one-quarter air pocket rather than a trend, the decelerating read is wrong; the missing interest-coverage figure leaves the balance-sheet cushion unquantified. Falsifier: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median with accelerating quarterly growth would break the deceleration claim.

Specialist score details
Specialist score
44
Evidence confidence
70
Base weight for this role
0.13
Base weight × confidence
9.10
Weight in the score (the chip's weight)
0.20
Weighted contribution
8.82
Business driver
Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $103,570 million with 8.3% growth, but the last four quarterly revenue growth rates were −3.1%, 15.8%, 25.5% and −0.2%, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 3.3% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.
Mechanism
Decelerating revenue growth and a 3.3% trailing-twelve-month operating margin below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median imply the core business is losing pricing and cost leverage, so earnings quality depends on volume recovery that the latest quarter does not show.
Countercase
If the sequential revenue decline from $28,236 million to $28,046 million proves a one-quarter air pocket rather than a trend, the decelerating read is wrong; the missing interest-coverage figure leaves the balance-sheet cushion unquantified.
Contributions & coverage details

Specialist contributions

Each specialist’s recorded numbers, in the usual specialist order, as recorded: nothing is re-ranked or recalculated. Weights and contributions show two decimals; hover for the exact value.

Financial specialist

Bearish

Score
44
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.20
Weighted contribution
8.82

Risk specialist

Bearish

Score
44
Evidence confidence
70
Weight in the score
0.12
Weighted contribution
5.43

Sector specialist

Neutral

Score
64
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.14
Weighted contribution
8.74

SEC filings specialist

Neutral

Score
50
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.04
Weighted contribution
2.05

News specialist

Neutral

Score
58
Evidence confidence
62
Weight in the score
0.15
Weighted contribution
8.72

Price-trend specialist

Neutral

Score
58
Evidence confidence
55
Weight in the score
0.24
Weighted contribution
14.06

Economy specialist

Neutral

Score
52
Evidence confidence
60
Weight in the score
0.11
Weighted contribution
5.50

Published specialist analyses unavailable: Valuation specialist, Geopolitics specialist, Social-media specialist. No specialist result is inferred.

  • Valuation specialist: The valuation specialist did not vote on this run because the valuation model declined to give a fair value: the close ($399.81) was 19.7 times the model’s cash-flow estimate ($20.30).
  • Geopolitics specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.
  • Social-media specialist: This specialist had no checked public source on this run, so no source-backed analysis is shown.

How this insight was formed

Each specialist view shown here is checked against the published research files. Sagehood research combined those views into the one Research Score above.

Evidence & method

Inspect the reasoning, source records and valuation behind this dated view.

Sagehood research reasoningSpecialist reasoning, selected statements and filing context
Accepted publication2026-10-30 researchNext eligible session 2026-11-02point-in-time

TSLA: Sagehood research reasoning

Accepted research score

53

Neutral50 is balanced
Lead specialist in the research decision:

Financial specialist

Bearish

Specialist score 44Evidence confidence 70
What the specialist sees

Trailing-twelve-month revenue was $103,570 million with 8.3% growth, but the last four quarterly revenue growth rates were −3.1%, 15.8%, 25.5% and −0.2%, and trailing-twelve-month operating margin was 3.3% against the 8.7% sector operating-margin median.

Why it matters

Decelerating revenue growth and a 3.3% trailing-twelve-month operating margin below the 8.7% sector operating-margin median imply the core business is losing pricing and cost leverage, so earnings quality depends on volume recovery that the latest quarter does not show.

What argues against it

If the sequential revenue decline from $28,236 million to $28,046 million proves a one-quarter air pocket rather than a trend, the decelerating read is wrong; the missing interest-coverage figure leaves the balance-sheet cushion unquantified.

This specialist’s break condition: A later reading showing trailing-twelve-month revenue growth at or above the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median with accelerating quarterly growth would break the deceleration claim.

How the score was formed

The specialists’ weighted starting point was 53.32. Sagehood research’s adjustment was −0.32. 55 on 2026-10-29 → 53 on 2026-10-30 (−2 points). This is simple arithmetic between the two published scores, not an explanation of the change.

Evidence Sagehood research weighed

These selected claims are evidence Sagehood research weighed, not a reconstruction of the numeric adjustment.

Claims as this research published them. Sagehood confirms each claim and its support were published together with this research. That is not an independent check, and it does not prove the claim is accurate or predict future performance.

  1. Financial specialist

    Same statement as under “What the specialist sees” above.

  2. Price-trend specialist

    Close 399.81 sits 3.8% above 200-day average and 8.2% above 50-day average, with the 90-day channel slope at 7.9% per year and trend-channel position 1.04 standard deviations; the 1-year channel slope is −20.8% per year with trend-channel position 1.75 standard deviations.

  3. Risk specialist

    TSLA shows twenty-day annualized volatility 36.0% against sixty-day annualized volatility 40.0% with a stable volatility trend, drawdown from the one-year high −18.4% versus maximum one-year drawdown −39.1%, one-year large daily-move count 33, downside beta 2.29 against SPY beta 2.2, and days to earnings 89.

Sagehood research decision

The investment case, main risk and break condition are the ones shown under Sagehood’s view at the top of this page.

Recorded break condition
Break condition as kept in the decision trail

A later reading showing TTM revenue growth at or above the 5.0% sector revenue-growth median with accelerating quarterly growth would break the deceleration claim.

Evidence & sourcesClaim-support availability, filing-context links and research method

TSLA: This run has no checked links from its claims to their evidence. The specialists’ writing is shown as recorded, and no missing evidence is filled in.

Accepted research

Research dated 2026-10-30.

How this research was made

This research is AI-generated and is not investment advice.

Research date
2026-10-30
Valuation & peersInput limits notedFair-value cells, peer multiples and the inputs behind the range

Valuation: the model declined to give a fair value

Against the 2026-10-30 close of $399.81 (recorded)

Fundamentals reference date: 2026-09-30.

The valuation model declined to give a fair value for this stock: the close ($399.81) was 19.7 times the model’s cash-flow estimate ($20.30).

Rejected model output (not a valuation)

The discounted cash flow grid cells this run nominated, kept for reference. The model’s own check rejected them: they are not a valuation and not a price target.

Bear
$15.40−96% vs close
Base
$20.30−95% vs close
Bull
$38.90−90% vs close

The bear, base, and bull cases sit more than 5× from the close: extreme scenarios, shown as the model computed them.

The peer-multiple estimate is not shown: the close is 10.9 times the estimate.

Peers: the 9 Liquid 100 names in Consumer Discretionary that this run priced. Companies outside the Liquid 100 are not in the set.

The names: AMZN, CCL, CMG, CVNA, F, NCLH, NKE, SBUX, TSCO.

Multiples against the peer group

Consumer Discretionary · 9 companies in the group

  • Price to earnings (trailing twelve months)439.35×

    Peer median 18.50× · middle half 15.19× to 24.62× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Price to sales13.66×

    Peer median 1.25× · middle half 0.97× to 3.09× · 100th percentile of the group

  • Price to book15.84×

    Peer median 4.01× · middle half 2.77× to 6.30× · 88th percentile of the group

  • Free cash flow yield0.23%

    Peer median 3.64% · middle half 1.71% to 4.17% · 22nd percentile of the group

This run declares Enterprise value to EBITDA and computes no value for it, for this company or for its peer group.

Evidence limits: 9 valuation inputs required conservative handling: another valuation input required conservative handling; depreciation and amortization were available but not used because this version does not compute an EV/EBITDA multiple.

Includes the currently displayed specialist or comparison, not every specialist. Dates and limitations remain attached.

Sagehood research is for general information. It is not individualized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security.

Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) research | Sagehood