Bitcoin signage in Times Square in New York, Dec. 9, 2025.
Michael Nagle | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana slumped on Saturday as retail traders digested a busy market week that saw wild swings in commodities and a long-awaited announcement by President Donald Trump on his choice for the next Federal Reserve chairman.
In afternoon trading, Bitcoin, the world’s largest cryptocurrency by market value, sank below $78,000, down 7.6%. Ethereum slid about 11% to $2,382.57, while Solana lost 13% at $101.91.
The slide in crypto comes in the wake of Trump’s selection of Kevin Warsh to lead the Fed, which bolstered the U.S. dollar as it eased concerns about the central bank’s independence. Dollar strength may reduce bitcoin’s appeal among investors as an alternative currency.
If confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Warsh would replace sitting Chairman Jerome Powell. Powell’s current term as chair ends in May. Trump has criticized Powell — particularly about his unwillingness to reduce interest rates — almost since the Fed chair took the job in 2018.
The slide in crypto is the latest blow to retail investors, who were buffeted by a sharp selloff in spot silver on Friday, the worst day for the market since March 1980.
Spot silver was down 28% at $83.45 an ounce, trading near its lows of the day. Silver futures plummeted 31.4% to settle at $78.53.
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Waymo is close to finalising a $16bn funding round that will more than double the value of Google’s self-driving car business to $110bn, bringing in several new investors as it prepares to expand globally and fend off competition from Elon Musk.
Google’s parent company Alphabet, which incubated the start-up in its X labs, will contribute more than three-quarters of the amount raised, according to four people familiar with the process.
New participants include Silicon Valley venture capital firm Dragoneer and Sequoia Capital, as well as Yuri Milner’s DST Global, the people said. Existing investor Andreessen Horowitz will put in more money and another existing investor, Abu Dhabi’s sovereign fund Mubadala, will contribute hundreds of millions more.
Waymo’s annual recurring revenue — a measure of expected revenue from subscriptions commonly used by start-ups — has grown to more than $350mn and the funding round was three times oversubscribed, the people added.
“While we don’t comment on private financial matters, our trajectory is clear: with over 20mn trips completed, we are focused on the safety-led operational excellence and technological leadership required to meet the vast demand for autonomous mobility,” Waymo said.
Andreessen, Dragoneer, DST, Mubadala and Sequoia declined to comment.
Waymo has established itself as the leader in the robotaxi market, having recorded more than 125mn fully autonomous miles on US roads with few related safety incidents. Waymo says it expects to host 1mn rides per week this year in cities including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix and Miami.
While the main way to hail a ride is through its own app, it has also partnered with Uber in secondary markets such as Austin and Atlanta.
Alphabet is raising more cash to help fund its rollout across the US, including New York, and last year started testing in foreign cities such as London and Tokyo amid growing competition from Musk’s Tesla and China’s Baidu.
Waymo’s vehicles — which use a combination of cameras, laser-based Lidar sensors and detailed street maps — are classed as level four autonomous and require no driver or active supervision. It is preparing to expand from Jaguar I-Pace SUVs to Hyundai Ioniq 5 models and a larger van made by China’s Zeekr to cut costs.
Its main rival is Tesla, which last year started offering a “robotaxi” service in Austin, Texas, with the eventual aim of allowing the millions of vehicles it has sold to be rented out to the service when not in use. It is also developing a dedicated two-seat Cybercab without a steering wheel that it says will enter production this year.
However, Tesla vehicles rely only on cameras without Lidar, which has led to persistent questions about safety. The company lost a lawsuit in Florida and was ordered to pay $243mn in damages after a fatal accident involving its autopilot software.
Tesla’s “full self-driving” technology is only classed as level two autonomy — which requires the driver to pay attention at all times — and its robotaxi service in Austin still requires a safety observer in the car or a trailing vehicle.
The autonomous driving company started as a “moonshot” experiment in Google’s X lab in 2009, and was spun out in 2016.
Waymo last raised $5.6bn in a funding round in October 2024 that valued it at more than $45bn. Andreessen Horowitz, Silver Lake, Tiger Global and T Rowe Price were among the largest investors.
SpaceX filed a request with the FCC on Friday seeking approval to put a constellation of 1 million data center satellites into orbit. While the FCC is unlikely to approve a network that expansive, SpaceX’s strategy has been to request approval for unrealistically large numbers of satellites as a starting point for negotiations.
The filing proposes establishing a network of solar-powered data centers in low Earth orbit that communicate with one another via lasers. The filling speaks of the constellation in ambitious sci-fi terms, calling it a “first step towards becoming a Kardashev II-level civilization — one that can harness the Sun’s full power.”
Even if just a small fraction of those 1 million satellites wind up in orbit, it would mark a significant increase in the number of man-made objects in space. The European Space Agency estimates there are around 15,000 satellites orbiting the Earth at the moment, and the majority are Starlink. (Over 9,600 of them, according to Johnathan’s Space Report.)
When experts are already concerned about the abundance of space junk and potential for orbital collisions, such an explosion of objects in orbit would seem ill-advised. But SpaceX argues that the orbital data centers would be a cheaper and more environmentally friendly alternative to land-based centers that form the backbone of the growing AI industry. Instead of syphoning water from communities, polluting groundwater, and driving up electricity bills, orbital data centers would be able to radiate heat into the vacuum of space and rely almost exclusively on real-time solar power and limited batteries.
The backlash against data centers has been growing, and communities are increasingly winning their battles to block their construction. So it’s no surprise that the biggest names in AI are turning their attention to one of the few places where there isn’t a community to upset.
Correction January 31st: An earlier version of this article stated that there were over 11,000 Starlink satellites in orbit. That number was the total launched, including satellites that had been decommissioned. This has been corrected to reflect how many Starlink satellites are currently active in orbit.
On Thursday, Nvidia Corp (NASDAQ:NVDA) CEO Jensen Huang said during a visit to Taiwan that surging AI demand is rapidly increasing the need for advanced memory.
Huang said the future of artificial intelligence will be shaped as much by memory as by computing power, reported UDN, one of the leading media platforms in Taiwan.
He noted that modern AI models need to think, respond and reason at extremely high speeds, driving a sharp rise in memory capacity requirements across the industry.
Don’t Miss:
The Nvidia CEO also highlighted that the company collaborates with every major high-bandwidth memory supplier, including SK Hynix, Samsung Electronics (OTC:SSNLF) and Micron Technology Inc (NASDAQ:MU).
He said Nvidia relies heavily on these partners to meet soaring demand this year.
Huang rejected concerns that the U.S. has shifted about 40% of Taiwan’s semiconductor manufacturing capacity stateside.
Instead, he said global chip production should be viewed as expanding, with new capacity being added in the U.S., Europe and Japan while Taiwan remains a key manufacturing hub.
Trending: Blue-chip art has historically outpaced the S&P 500 since 1995, and fractional investing is now opening this institutional asset class to everyday investors.
Huang praised Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (NYSE:TSM) as the world’s best foundry partner, citing its technology leadership, execution and flexibility.
He said TSMC will need to significantly scale capacity over the next decade, with most production staying in Taiwan alongside overseas expansion.
Huang dismissed rumors circulating in mainland China that Nvidia’s H200 AI chips have received regulatory approval, saying no orders have been placed and final clearance is still pending.
If approval comes, he said, Nvidia is prepared to move quickly with partners to deliver products.
Previously, it was reported that the clearance was granted during Huang’s visit to China, where he’s kicking off the company’s annual events ahead of the Lunar New Year in mid-February.
See Also: Private-Market Real Estate Without the Crowdfunding Risk—Direct Access to Institutional-Grade Deals Managed by a $12B+ Real Estate Firm
Nvidia’s H200 AI chip has become a flashpoint in U.S.-China tech tensions. While Washington has approved shipments, Beijing has yet to fully clear imports.
Make better investment decisions with Simply Wall St’s easy, visual tools that give you a competitive edge.
Reports suggest Nvidia and Apple are exploring using Intel’s foundry and advanced packaging capacity for future chips from around 2028.
The discussions center on Intel’s 18A and 14A process nodes as part of its push to grow external foundry services.
Any formal agreements could influence the balance of global chip manufacturing capacity and U.S. supply chain planning.
Intel (NasdaqGS:INTC) is best known for its PC and data center processors. Management has been repositioning the company as a contract manufacturer for other chip designers. Interest from Nvidia and Apple would place Intel more directly in competition with established foundries that handle much of the world’s advanced chip output. For investors, this development relates to whether Intel’s manufacturing roadmap is attracting large, technically demanding customers.
The potential partnerships are still at the discussion stage and any production would be years away. As a result, this is more about future capacity and customer mix than near-term earnings. If even part of this foundry work materializes, it could broaden Intel’s revenue sources and give the company stronger ties across the U.S. chip supply chain. The key question for you is how much weight to put on these early signals when assessing Intel’s longer-term role in global manufacturing.
Stay updated on the most important news stories for Intel by adding it to your watchlist or portfolio. Alternatively, explore our Community to discover new perspectives on Intel.
NasdaqGS:INTC Earnings & Revenue Growth as at Jan 2026
How Intel stacks up against its biggest competitors
For Intel, having Nvidia and Apple explore using its foundry and advanced packaging capacity from around 2028 points to early customer interest in its push to manufacture chips for others, an area where Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing and Samsung are key competitors. Given Intel’s recent Q4 2025 net loss of US$591 million and guidance for a Q1 2026 loss per share, investors may see these talks as relevant to whether the foundry segment can eventually become a meaningful contributor alongside the existing PC and data center businesses.
The reports fit closely with the existing Intel narrative that focuses on an AI centric product roadmap and building trust in its foundry services with large, technically demanding customers. Interest from Nvidia and Apple lines up with the idea that Intel’s manufacturing roadmap and advanced packaging could support external clients, which is one of the ways analysts have framed a possible improvement in revenue mix and use of Intel’s manufacturing assets over time.
Potential validation of Intel’s 18A and 14A manufacturing processes if talks eventually convert into concrete foundry or packaging contracts.
Possible progress toward the turnaround story that links AI workloads, foundry customers and better use of existing fabs, especially after recent cost cuts and job reductions.
The discussions are early and any production is years away, while Intel is currently loss making and guiding to another quarterly loss, so the financial impact is uncertain.
Execution risk remains high as Intel still faces internal supply constraints and tough competition from TSMC, AMD and Nvidia in key product categories.
From here, the key things to track are whether Intel, Nvidia or Apple confirm any binding agreements, how Intel’s foundry segment losses evolve, and whether upcoming guidance gives more clarity on capacity, yields and capital spending. If you want to see how this potential foundry work fits with different long term viewpoints on Intel, check community narratives and fair value debates through the community narratives for Intel on Simply Wall St.
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
Companies discussed in this article include INTC.
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com
The stock markets have been on an amazing run in recent years, with the S&P 500 more than doubling since the beginning of the decade and the Dow rising by nearly 75%.
What does the future hold for the stock markets? We asked leading AI chatbots ChatGPT, Grok and Gemini that question. Here’s what they had to say — along with what it could mean for your wallet.
ChatGPT and Grok are on the same page regarding how the stock market will perform over the next couple of years, with both forecasting moderate growth that will likely not match the stellar gains of 2025.
Here’s what ChatGPT expects during the next one to three years:
The U.S. stock market should continue rising through 2026, though gains “may be more moderate” than the strong run of recent years. Expect high-single-digit to low-double-digit returns, supported by corporate earnings and economic resilience.
Here’s Grok’s near-term call:
“Solid but more moderate performance” compared to the “exceptional” gains of the early 2020s, driven primarily by AI-related productivity and earnings growth, while facing headwinds from elevated valuations and potential economic uncertainties.
Gemini takes a slightly more bullish view, projecting an average S&P 500 return of 9% to 12% in 2026, with upside as high as 15%. That’s roughly in line with Goldman Sachs’ forecast of a 12% gain for the S&P 500 in 2026.
Here are some other near-term forecasts from Gemini:
While tech has led the way in recent years, 2027 and 2028 are expected to see healthcare, Industrials and small-caps “catch up” as interest rates stabilize.
Read More: Self-Made Millionaires Suggest 5 Stocks You Should Never Sell
Find Out: 9 Low-Effort Ways To Make Passive Income (You Can Start This Week)
Forecasts beyond the next three to five years are more uncertain, as unforeseen events can significantly impact markets. According to ChatGPT, many forecast models “suggest lower average annual returns” of 4% to 7% compared with recent decades, due to higher valuations and structural shifts. Grok cites a similar range based on average long-term forecasts.
These are some other long-term market forecasts from AI:
Grok: Optimistic scenarios see “much higher returns” if AI truly transforms the economy, but baseline views assume more gradual adoption and potential volatility if earnings disappoint.
Gemini: Major institutions like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan generally expect the S&P 500 to grow at a slower, more “normalized” pace as high valuations and aging demographics act as a drag, partially offset by an “AI productivity boom.”
Make better investment decisions with Simply Wall St’s easy, visual tools that give you a competitive edge.
If you are wondering whether Campbell’s current share price makes sense, you are in the right place to look at what the numbers are really implying.
The stock last closed at US$27.98, with a 4.4% return over the past 7 days, 0.4% over 30 days, 1.0% year to date, but a 24.2% decline over 1 year and a 38.3% decline over 3 years.
These mixed returns have come alongside ongoing interest in Campbell’s position in the packaged food sector and how investors view its long term prospects. Recent attention has focused on how the business fits into consumer staples portfolios and whether the share price now reflects a more cautious stance on the stock.
On our checks, Campbell’s has a valuation score of 5/6. This sets up a closer look at how different valuation methods stack up, and it also hints at an even richer way to think about value that we will come back to at the end of this article.
Find out why Campbell’s’s -24.2% return over the last year is lagging behind its peers.
A Discounted Cash Flow, or DCF, model looks at the cash Campbell’s is expected to generate in the future and discounts those cash flows back to today to estimate what the business could be worth now.
Campbell’s last twelve month free cash flow is reported at about $658.3 million. Analysts have provided explicit forecasts out to 2028, with free cash flow for that year projected at $763.5 million. Beyond that, Simply Wall St extrapolates additional annual free cash flow figures out to 2035 using a 2 Stage Free Cash Flow to Equity model, with projections such as $848.2 million in 2026 and $896.2 million in 2035 before discounting.
Pulling all of those projected cash flows together, the DCF model arrives at an estimated intrinsic value of about $59.68 per share. Compared with the recent share price of US$27.98, this implies the stock is 53.1% undervalued based on these inputs and assumptions.
Result: UNDERVALUED
Our Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) analysis suggests Campbell’s is undervalued by 53.1%. Track this in your watchlist or portfolio, or discover 868 more undervalued stocks based on cash flows.
CPB Discounted Cash Flow as at Jan 2026
Head to the Valuation section of our Company Report for more details on how we arrive at this Fair Value for Campbell’s.
For a profitable company like Campbell’s, the P/E ratio is a straightforward way to relate what you pay per share to the earnings that support that price. It is a quick check on how the market is weighing current profitability against what it expects in the future.
A higher or lower P/E often reflects what investors think about future growth and risk. Strong growth expectations or lower perceived risk can support a higher P/E, while slower growth or higher risk tends to justify a lower one.
Campbell’s currently trades on a P/E of 14.4x. That sits below the Food industry average of about 21.2x and also below the peer group average of 15.8x. Simply Wall St goes a step further with its proprietary “Fair Ratio” of 19.1x for Campbell’s, which estimates the P/E you might expect given factors such as earnings growth, industry, profit margins, market cap and key risks.
This Fair Ratio is more tailored than a simple peer or industry comparison because it weighs company specific characteristics rather than treating all food companies as alike. Since Campbell’s current P/E of 14.4x is meaningfully below the Fair Ratio of 19.1x, the shares appear inexpensive on this measure.
Result: UNDERVALUED
NasdaqGS:CPB P/E Ratio as at Jan 2026
P/E ratios tell one story, but what if the real opportunity lies elsewhere? Discover 1417 companies where insiders are betting big on explosive growth.
Earlier we mentioned that there is an even better way to think about valuation, so let us introduce you to Narratives, which are simply your own story about Campbell’s linked directly to numbers such as fair value, future revenue, earnings and margins.
On Simply Wall St’s Community page, used by millions of investors, you can create or follow Narratives that connect what you believe about Campbell’s business to a concrete forecast and then to a fair value. You can then quickly compare that fair value with the current share price to help decide whether the stock looks attractive or not for you.
Because Narratives on the platform update automatically when new information such as news or earnings is added, your story and valuation stay current without you having to rebuild your view from scratch each time.
For example, one Campbell’s Narrative on the Community page might assume a higher fair value based on stronger revenue and margin assumptions, while another assumes a lower fair value based on more conservative expectations. You can see both side by side to judge which better matches your outlook.
Do you think there’s more to the story for Campbell’s? Head over to our Community to see what others are saying!
NasdaqGS:CPB 1-Year Stock Price Chart
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
Companies discussed in this article include CPB.
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com
French Connection is back on the trail of global expansion with the aid of its cheeky initials-based slogan that made it so popular in the late 1990s.
The label once known for clothes bearing FCUK is seeking to reinvent itself again under the ownership of a group of British entrepreneurs based in the north of England who rescued it in 2021.
This week, the former high street darling signed a licensing agreement to develop and distribute men’s and women’s apparel and accessories across North America, which is understood to include plans to revive the FCUK branding.
It is the latest chapter in a rollercoaster story of success and setback. French Connection was founded in 1972 by Stephen Marks, who named it after the film starring Gene Hackman released the previous year.
The entrepreneur hired the French designer Nicole Farhi to head his design studio in the 1970s and she later launched her own label under the company’s umbrella. Together they made French Connection a hit, with a London stock market float in 1983 helping make Marks the UK’s 15th richest man for a time.
The pair also became partners romantically and had a daughter together before separating at about the end of the decade. By that point the brand had fallen out of favour, prompting Marks to retake directorial control in 1991.
It recaptured the public’s imagination thanks to the swear-adjacent slogan coined by the ad man Trevor Beattie in 1997 after he noticed the initials used in French Connection internal memos. It was emblazoned on T-shirts in phrases such as “FCUK Fashion” and “Hot as FCUK”.
For several years over this period Marks’s wife, Alisa, had a key design role, but they split in late 2003 after a decade of marriage and their expensive divorce forced Marks to sell shares in the business, relinquishing majority control.
Stephen Marks, who founded French Connection in 1972 and was once one of the richest men in the UK, in 2001. He sold up in 2021. Photograph: David Sillitoe/The Guardian
By the mid-noughties, shoppers had tired of the FCUK joke and it was dropped in 2005. The company, which still owns the Great Plains brand and once owned the YMC and Toast labels as well as Nicole Farhi, struggled to find a new identity and was also hit by bad debts partly related to the collapse of House of Fraser, where it had concessions.
A return to the bawdy branding in 2016 failed to revive the company in the face of heavy competition from cheaper rivals such as Asos, Zara and H&M.
Marks ran the business until he sold up in 2021, eventually relinquishing control after years of losses and mounting pressure from investors as the value of the firm dived from half a billion pounds in its heyday to less than £50m.
Its new owners no longer use FCUK in the chain’s handful of British stores, although the brand has been sold for short periods in the UK via retailers such as Urban Outfitters as a retro label that appeals to 1990s nostalgia.
It has, however, become a hit in India, where local licensee Myntra describes the clothing as having “distinct laid-back attitude for when you don’t want to look like you are trying hard to look good” accompanied by “powerful, provocative slogans”.
Apinder Singh Ghura, a Newcastle-based businessman, oversaw the £29m rescue takeover in 2021 of the brand that took it off the London Stock Exchange. The current owners also include his Manchester-based business partner, Amarjit Singh Grewal, and KJR Brothers, which is led by Rafiq Patel, a textile businessman.
A new French Connection design. Photograph: French Connection
The group’s new North American licensing deal with G-III Apparel Group, which controls brands including Calvin Klein, Karl Lagerfeld and DKNY, forms part of the road to reinvention. G-III will take over French Connection’s existing team in the US and oversees distribution via more than 700 boutiques and department stores.
Ghura, who spent years in the clothing industry before shifting to other investments including property and care homes and the Bench streetwear brand, which he has now sold, said French Connection was targeting the 25-plus market with good-quality garments at an affordable price.
“I see French Connection as a great brand with great equity and recognition, everything a blue-chip brand should have we have got,” he said.
Ghura said the UK government “hadn’t done the business community any favours” with its decisions on tax and pay, but the label could compete against cut-price competitors such as Shein as “every brand has its place and we appeal to our customers because of the DNA we possess”.
A summer sale sign at French Connection on Oxford street in central London in 2007. Photograph: Kevin Foy/Alamy
The brand, which at one time had more than 140 stores in the UK and hundreds of franchise outlets elsewhere, now has just 10 French Connection stores in the UK and 15 discount outlets but sells through 60 concessions, including every John Lewis.
It is also distributed on the websites of Marks & Spencer, Asos and Next in the UK and Otto in Germany and Austria, and is planning a small number of new high-street outlets.
In 2024, the brand’s sales fell 10% to £108m, but pre-tax profits shot up to £1.6m from just £0.3m a year before according to the latest accounts filed at Companies House.
The FCUK logo once felt ubiquitous, but is no longer used in the chain’s British stores. Picture taken in 2010. Photograph: Universal Images Group North America LLC/Alamy
Sales at established stores are now rising by more than 10% after the group improved quality, ditched poor-performing branches and brought in a new head of design – Helen Gallagher – from fashion brand Mint Velvet.
The performance stands out among the UK’s mid-market fashion brands, which have been hit by lacklustre spending as younger shoppers have less spare cash amid rising energy and phone bills and other costs such as Netflix subscriptions, gym memberships and music festivals.
The revival comes as fellow 90s stalwart Topshop attempts to win its way back into wardrobes via a new online stores and outlets in John Lewis, while River Island battles for survival with a rescue restructure.
A model sports new designs from French Connection. Illustration: French Connection
Ghura said French Connection would be focusing on “capital light” expansion via licensees, with hopes to find partners in south-east Asia and China and to widen its footwear and accessories ranges, rather than opening dozens of expensive UK outlets.
Simon Donoghue, the managing director of French Connection’s retail and online business, said the company had “zero tolerance of loss-making stores” and was now in its third season of strong underlying growth as it got the “value for money equation really sorted”.
“Prices are now similar to four years ago, but it is better quality and that resonates,” he said. “It comes back to design and product. Getting that right gives confidence to invest more in inventory.”
Kraft Heinz announced plans to split into two separately traded companies, reversing its 2015 megamerger, which was orchestrated by billionaire investor Warren Buffett.
As both consumers and regulators push back against ultra-processed foods, the companies that make them have been splitting up or divesting iconic brands. Last year, Unilever spun off its ice cream business into The Magnum Ice Cream Company. Kraft Heinz is preparing to break up later this year, undoing much of the merger forged more than a decade ago by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway and private equity firm 3G Capital. And Keurig Dr Pepper is planning a similar split after it finishes its acquisition of JDE Peet’s.
In 2024, nearly half of mergers and acquisitions activity in the consumer products industry came from divestitures, according to consulting firm Bain. Over the next three years, 42% of M&A executives in the consumer products industry are preparing an asset for sale, a Bain survey found.
Of course, the trend isn’t confined to just the consumer packaged goods industry. Industrial companies like GE and Honeywell have pursued their own breakups in recent years. It’s happening too in legacy media; Comcast spun off many of its cable assets into CNBC owner Versant, while Warner Bros. Discovery is planning to spin off its cable networks later this year as Netflix acquires its streaming and studios division.
“In many of the spaces that we’re seeing this type of activity, there are many very fierce competitive pressures that are making it harder to operate,” said Emilie Feldman, a professor at The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.
The squeeze on packaged food and beverage companies comes from lower demand, which has led to shrinking volume for many of their products. To turn around their businesses and win back investors, they are counting on dumping underperforming brands.
February will bring both quarterly earnings reports and presentations at the annual CAGNY Conference, offering investors more opportunities to hear about food executives’ plans for their portfolios. Companies to watch include Kraft Heinz, which could share more details on its upcoming split, and Nestle, which is considering selling off multiple brands in its portfolio.
Cases of Dr. Pepper are displayed at a Costco Wholesale store on April 27, 2025 in San Diego, California.
Kevin Carter | Getty Images
Shrinking sales
For more than a decade, consumers have been buying fewer groceries from the inner aisles of the grocery store, instead focusing on the outer aisles with fresh produce and protein. The pandemic served as the exception, as many consumers returned to the brands that they knew. However, price hikes and “shrinkflation” as life eased back to normal largely erased that shift in behavior.
More recently, regulators, emboldened by the “Make America Healthy Again” agenda espoused by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have put both more pressure and a bigger spotlight on processed foods. And the rise of GLP-1 drugs to combat diabetes and obesity have meant some of food companies’ key consumers have lost their appetite for the sweet and salty snacks that they used to eat.
As a percentage of overall spending, the consumer packaged goods industry has held onto its market share. But the biggest companies are losing customers to upstart brands or private-label products, according to Bain partner Peter Horsley.
On average, about 35% of large consumer products companies’ portfolios are in categories with more than 7% growth, Horsley said. For comparison, over half of private-label brands are in high-growth categories, like yogurt and functional beverages, and for insurgent brands, it’s even higher.
For Big Food, the result has been slowing — or even declining — sales, followed by stock declines. In some cases, activist investors push for companies to focus more on their core offerings and to offload so-called distractions.
“You’re seeing a lot of pressure from a valuation standpoint, especially for these publicly traded companies,” said Raj Konanahalli, partner and managing director of AlixPartners. “One way to reset expectations is to really kind of focus more on the core offerings and dispose or divest the slower, capital-intensive or non-core businesses.”
While getting bigger helped food companies develop scale, enter new markets and grow their sales, it also made their businesses much more complex, according to Konanahalli. Become too big, and it becomes too difficult to make decisions quickly or to decide how and where to invest back into the business.
To be sure, some of these divestitures and breakups follow deals that seem to have been ill-advised from the start. Look no further than the merger of Keurig Green Mountain and Dr Pepper Snapple Group in 2018, to form Keurig Dr Pepper.
“Frankly the surprise to us was the decision back in 2018 when Keurig Green Mountain acquired the Dr Pepper Snapple Group in an $18.7 billion deal to create Keurig Dr Pepper in the first place,” Barclays analysts Patrick Folan and Lauren Lieberman wrote in a note to clients in August when the breakup was announced. “At the time, it was seen as both odd and a very left field deal with the questionable logic of combining coffee and [carbonated soft drinks].”
(When the merger was announced in 2018, Lieberman said on a conference call with executives from both companies that she was still “scratching my head” about the logic of the deal for both players).
Shares of Keurig Dr Pepper have risen 37% since the merger. The S&P 500 has climbed 150% over the same period.
To sell or not to sell
Like many industries, the packaged food industry has gone through cycles of expansion and contraction, according to Feldman. For example, Kraft spun off a snacking business that includes Oreos into Mondelez in 2012, just three years before it merged with Heinz.
However, in recent years, expanding through acquisitions has required more sophisticated thinking and execution.
“If you go back to those glory years of pre-2015, the rules of the game in consumer products felt fairly simple, at least if you’re a global company,” Bain’s Horsley said. “You bought another company that was relatively similar to you. You integrated it together, you pulled out the cost synergies … and then that gave you good top-line and bottom-line growth. But the rules of the game have changed.”
Around 2015, upstarts like Chobani or BodyArmor began stealing market share from legacy brands. As a result, food giants needed to become more thoughtful about what they were acquiring and how they were managing their portfolios, according to Horsley.
For a cautionary tale, look no further than Kraft Heinz, formed by a mega-merger in 2015. Investors initially cheered the deal, but their enthusiasm waned as the combined company’s U.S. sales began lagging. Then came write-downs of many of its iconic brands, like Kraft, Oscar Mayer, Maxwell House and Velveeta, in addition to a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission related to its accounting policies and internal controls.
With the benefit of hindsight, analysts and investors have blamed much of Kraft Heinz’s downward spiral on the brutal cost-cutting strategy imposed after the merger. The company’s leadership was too focused on slashing costs and not enough on investing back into its brands, particularly at a time when consumer tastes were changing.
Since Kraft Heinz began trading as one company, shares have tumbled 73%.
But not everyone is sold that getting rid of underperforming brands will benefit shareholders.
“If you don’t fix the underlying capability, it doesn’t matter how many brands you sell or don’t sell,” RBC Capital Markets analyst Nik Modi said. “They’re not addressing the root problem. It’s just something to make investors happy because it seems like they’re making a change.”
One breakup that Modi agrees with is that of Kellogg, which split into the snacks-focused Kellanova and cereal-centric WK Kellogg in 2023. Last year, chocolatier Ferrero snapped up WK Kellogg for $3.1 billion, while Mars closed its $36 billion acquisition of Kellanova.
From Modi’s perspective, the breakup created more value for shareholders than the combined business did. Kellogg’s high-growth snack business was much more viable as an acquisition target without the sluggish cereal division attached. Plus, the two strategic buyers are both privately held companies that don’t have to worry about sharing quarterly earnings with the public.
Some investors are hoping for the same outcome with Kraft Heinz.
“The view that many have had is the best way to create value is split the companies and hope that you can create a Kellanova 2.0 where both entities get acquired at some point down the line, and that’s where value creation happens,” said Peter Galbo, analyst at Bank of America Securities.
Kraft Heinz hired Steve Cahillane, the former CEO of Kellogg and then Kellanova, as its chief executive. Once the company separates, Cahillane will serve as chief executive of Global Taste Elevation, the placeholder name for the spinoff with high-growth brands like Heinz and Philadelphia.
Steve Cahillane, President and CEO, Kellogg Company accepts Salute To Greatness Corporate Award during 2020 Salute to Greatness Awards Gala at Hyatt Regency Atlanta on January 18, 2020 in Atlanta, Georgia.
Paras Griffin | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images
But acquiring either company resulting from the Kraft Heinz split would be a pretty big acquisition, making it less likely that either is snapped up, according to Galbo. And the resulting uncertainty about the value creation from the breakup is maybe why Berkshire Hathaway, the company’s largest shareholder, is preparing to exit its 27.5% stake in Kraft Heinz.
Food divestitures pick up
A month into the new year, it’s unlikely that the divestiture trend will slow down.
On Tuesday, General Mills announced that it is selling its Muir Glen brand of organic tomatoes to focus on its core brands. And last week, Bloomberg reported that Nestle is preparing the sale of its water unit; the Swiss giant is also reportedly considering offloading upscale coffee brand Blue Bottle and its underperforming vitamin brands.
And if Big Food is making any acquisitions, the deals are more likely to involve “insurgent brands,” according to Bain. Over the last five years, acquisitions with a value of less than $2 billion represented 38% of total consumer products deals, up from 16% in the period from 2014 to 2019, the firm said. For example, last year, PepsiCo bought prebiotic soda brand Poppi for $1.95 billion and Hershey snapped up LesserEvil popcorn for $750 million.
Bigger deals are harder to come by because of the current regulatory environment, Konanahalli said. Buyers might not be strategic players, but instead private equity firms with plenty of cash on hand. For example, in January, L Catterton bought a majority stake in cottage cheese upstart Good Culture.
But a flashy divestiture or acquisition might not be the solution to a food conglomerate’s woes — or a surefire way to lift the stock price. Sometimes, good old-fashioned elbow grease can work even better.
“Just because it seems like the wind is blowing your way, it doesn’t mean that you can’t put in some hard work and turn things around,” AlixPartners’ Konanahalli said.