Author: admin

By Brett Arends

Lone Nvidia bear Jay Goldberg shares why he’s still not a buyer of the AI superstock

Nvidia founder and CEO Jensen Huang, the man of the moment.

How does it feel to be the only analyst on Wall Street who is bearish about AI superstock Nvidia Corp. (NVDA)?

“It feels fantastic,” Jay Goldberg tells me with a laugh. “Everybody asks me this question.”

Goldberg, a research analyst at Seaport Research Partners, is the only analyst with a “sell” or “underperform” recommendation on Nvidia’s stock. Of the other 65 (yes, really), 60 give stock a “buy” or “outperform” rating and five give it a neutral “hold,” according to FactSet.

“I have never told my clients to ‘short’ Nvidia,” he adds, referring to the technique for trying to make money if a stock falls. “But I’ve always positioned my thesis as, ‘Nvidia is going to underperform the sector.’ And that has actually played out. If you look at the AI sector, Nvidia has underperformed since April 1 when I launched coverage.”

Goldberg is a former research analyst at Deutsche Bank. He also worked in the tech sector. He spent a decade in China and remains in touch with former colleagues there, while staying on top of developments. One of the (many) reasons he’s skeptical about Nvidia’s stock at current levels is that Taiwan Semiconductor, the company that actually produces the physical chips, is already running at full capacity. “They’re sold out,” he says. “And once they’ve sold out, where does the upside come from?”

But Goldberg’s analysis isn’t just about Nvidia stock. His thesis is important for everyone who invests in the stock market, even if they just have their 401(k) invested in broad-based index funds that track the S&P 500 SPX. When the last two bubbles burst, in 2000 and 2008, it wasn’t just the investments at the center of the mania – technology stocks and housing, respectively – that tanked. The entire market went down about 50%.

A market is supposed to match buyers and sellers. If you run out of sellers, that’s when you get in trouble. One of the oldest saws on the street of shame is that a bubble doesn’t peak “until the last bear turns bullish.” (Based on the events of 1999-2000 and 2006-07, it’s probably more accurate to say it doesn’t peak until the last bear capitulates or gets fired.)

Goldberg is standing his ground.

“It’s complicated,” he says.” I’m getting increasingly bearish about the AI cycle, the AI bubble. I fully subscribe to this as a bubble. Semiconductors are cyclical. Eventually, gravity will reassert itself. This could end in six weeks. It could end in three years.”

We’re already at the stage where big companies, particularly Nvidia, ChatGPT-owner OpenAI and others, are providing the capital to their own customers. This so-called “vendor financing” was a notorious feature of the dot-com and tech bubble of the late 1990s, and dragged everything down when the bubble burst.

Goldberg says things could get “even crazier” as companies issue massive amounts of debt to fuel their expansion. And that is starting to happen.

Meanwhile, the investment euphoria for the emerging technology of artificial intelligence has outstripped the proven demand from end customers.

“I’m especially nervous about the demand side of the AI trade,” he says. “I don’t think we fully understand the use case of AI. Enterprise adoption is tepid,” referring to usage by businesses.

A recent study by MIT found that 95% of the companies that have invested in AI have so far earned “zero return.” Meanwhile, up the road from MIT at Harvard Business School, the latest business review asks – with a straight face – “AI Companies Don’t Have a Profitable Business Model. Does That Matter?”

As MarketWatch has recently written, hedge-fund manager Harris “Kuppy” Kupperman, among others, has already run a slide rule over the math of the AI mania and found it comes up short.

Goldberg argues that many investors underestimate how expensive it is to run AI cloud-computing server farms, which need an enormous amount of electricity. He also says AI chips will be rendered obsolete far quicker than many in the industry say.

“The more important question is not the physical life of the server, it’s the economic life of the server,” Goldberg says. “In 2022, if you had a GPU, you could pay for it in six months. Now the payback is still somewhere between 11/2 and two years.” That’s “still pretty good,” he says. But the direction is down. “What matters is the obsolescence factor.”

This is an argument already made by Michael Burry, the hedge-fund manager made famous by Michael Lewis’s “The Big Short,” which successfully predicted the global financial crisis in 2008. Burry recently started betting against AI superstocks such as Nvidia. “He’s onto something,” Goldberg says.

In a surprising and mysterious development, Burry just deregistered his hedge fund, Scion Asset Management, from the Securities and Exchange Commission. “On to much better things Nov. 25th,” he wrote. It’s not clear yet what Burry means. But if he’s a bear who’s capitulating, that’s another ominous sign.

-Brett Arends

This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.

  (END) Dow Jones Newswires

  11-15-25 1238ET
Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Belém, Brazil, November 2025 — The United Nations-convened Forum for Insurance Transition (FIT) today unveiled a landmark global guide that links underwriting and investment portfolios of insurance and reinsurance companies through a pioneering set of “Total Balance Sheet Principles” for transition planning.

“A Total Balance Sheet Transition: A holistic transition plan guide linking the underwriting and investment portfolios of insurers and reinsurers” provides insurers, reinsurers and brokers with a practical, principles-based framework to develop and disclose credible, enterprise-wide transition plans. The guide defines the essential components of a total balance sheet approach—grounded in cognitive consonance—and sets out clear criteria, principles and practical examples that help insurers better identify and manage risks, opportunities and impacts, , strengthen financial resilience, and support real-economy transition outcomes.

The new guide is the third deliverable of the FIT Transition Plan Project:

• The first deliverable of the FIT Transition Plan Project, Closing the Gap (November 2024), introduced the foundations of transition planning for the insurance industry and mapped national policy and regulatory frameworks relevant to transition plans, climate and sustainability risk management, and disclosure across developed and developing countries.
• The second deliverable, Underwriting the Transition (July 2025), provided deep-dive transition plan guidance tailored to insurance and reinsurance underwriting portfolios, outlining the respective roles of insurers, reinsurers and brokers.
• This third deliverable—developed in two phases—operationalizes the convergence of underwriting and investment transition plans, ensuring that earlier FIT guidance can be implemented as part of one coherent Total Balance Sheet framework.

Together, these deliverables form the most comprehensive, insurance-specific transition plan guidance available to date.

We recently published 11 Stocks Jim Cramer Talked About. Cisco Systems Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO) is one of the stocks Jim Cramer recently discussed.

Networking hardware equipment manufacturer Cisco Systems Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO) reported its fiscal first-quarter earnings report on Wednesday. The results saw the firm report $14.88 billion in revenue and $1 in EPS which beat analyst estimates of $14.77 billion and $0.98. Citing orders from hyperscalers, Cisco Systems Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO) outlined that its networking business saw revenue grow by 15% to $7.77 billion during the quarter. After yesterday’s close and the latest earnings, Cisco Systems Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO)’s current forward P/E ratio sits at 19, according to Yahoo Finance. Cramer discussed the firm ahead of the earnings report and assured viewers that the Cisco Systems Inc. (NASDAQ:CSCO) of 2025 wasn’t equivalent to the one in 1999:

“[On upcoming earnings] Yeah and we own it for the charitable trust. It’s not expensive by the way. Now the last time it was at these levels, it was very expensive. Now you’re talking about 1999, but that’s a company that sells at 16 times earnings. It’s not the one that’s historically blowing up to anybody. Doesn’t blow people off.

While we acknowledge the potential of CSCO as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.

READ NEXT: 30 Stocks That Should Double in 3 Years and 11 Hidden AI Stocks to Buy Right Now.

Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.