NEW Magnificent 7 Price Targets — Only ONE Is a Buy Now

The Magnificent 7 are back in the headlines, but look at what's happened to the individual stocks just this month. Meta surged. Apple's recovered. Nvidia is attracting buyers again. Yet, Amazon's moved the other way. And Alphabet, well, it's barely participated. And that's the problem when we do talk about these seven as though they're one investment. They may all be among the biggest companies in the market, but their share prices, as we can see, in fact just the last week, they're responding to very different expectations. Some of them, while they've had a huge run, others are still meaningfully below their 52- week highs. And the tempting response, honestly, is to buy whichever's fallen furthest. But a stock being down doesn't really tell us whether it's cheap. and their 3-month correlation is fallen to a 12-ear low. We still call them the Magnificent 7, but investors are making increasingly different judgments about growth, AI spending, and future profits. So, which one is actually worth buying today? And you can see why the groups regained attention. Meta's rally is help pull the broader trade higher. The conversation quickly shifted from is big tech in trouble to am I missing the next run? But also the rebound can hide what's happening underneath. Money flowing back into the ETF doesn't make every constituent equally attractive. I want to know which company offers the best return from this starting price today. And the starting price, well, it matters even more with the 10-year US Treasury yield finishing Friday around 5.2%. high yields. Remember, they give investors another place to put money and they make expensive stocks work harder to justify their valuations. Now, it doesn't mean the biggest tech companies suddenly stop growing. In fact, one argument is that their financial strength becomes an even greater advantage when money is more expensive. And Tom Lee, he has an interesting argument for why the biggest technology companies could still attract money despite higher yields. Listen to what he says about their ability to fund the AI buildout compared with smaller competitors trying to decipher why yields are higher. I mean I think there's multiple reasons but I think what's kind of lost in the conversation is two things. Number one is uh where will rates be in 6 months because where will inflation be? And second, I think rising yields make competition better for stronger companies. Meaning there are going to be some companies that actually become more attractive as yields rise. And I think as you're pointing out, Scott, that's probably why the mag 7 are rising. You know, as as yields rise, their ability to fund still becomes is easy, but for competitors, it's tougher. I think that distinction is important. These companies can afford to invest through a difficult rate environment, but their financial strength doesn't tell us what return we're going to earn if we buy the shares. Now, a brilliant business can still be an expensive stock. And obviously, it's especially relevant to AI. The largest companies can spend extraordinary amounts on data centers and chips. The questions for shareholders is how much of that investment eventually comes back as free cash flow. Now, some of that spending may create enormous value. Some projects may take longer to pay off than investors expect. That difference is going to matter when we get to Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft. And another investor on CNBC made almost the opposite decision. He still sees AI spending continuing, but he isn't putting fresh money into the market at these yields. Let's listen to his reasoning. So I think the market should not be ignoring rates because I do believe that right now the 10-year is competition except for the greed factor. So you continue to see and what's not going to be disintermediated here is AI spending. We hear that time and time again. Now we'll hear it again when Micron reports in about a week. And so I think that the market it's sort of okay, but you know, and I bought some some stocks that would gotten really trash, but I'm not putting new money into this market here, not with where rates are going. Those two views can both contain some truth. High yields may strengthen the competitive position of cashrich companies and make their shares less attractive if the valuation is too demanding. That's why I want to judge the seven individually instead of making one call on big tech overall. And there is a reason these stocks command attention. The group has been growing earnings faster than the rest of the S&P 500. I'm not questioning whether they're important businesses. I'm questioning what should we pay for every single one. Where history shows us also how dramatically the winners can change. A familiar name or a strong return last year is not enough to settle today's ranking. We need to compare what each company can deliver from here. And that creates a particularly interesting question around the stocks that haven't kept up. If Microsoft or Alphabet catches another wave of buying, it could change their near-term share prices. But is lagging the rally itself a reason to buy? And on CNBC, one panelist singled out Microsoft and Alphabet as two names that haven't kept pace with the wider move is a tempting argument for buying the lagards. Let's listen to the case he makes today. >> Thought that comes to mind is what about Microsoft? What about Alphabet? Those are two names that frankly have not performed well recently. I know Microsoft's had a bid since the spring. That's great. But recently, the last few weeks, it's flatlined and Google really has done nothing. So, what would happen if those get in gear? And I think they will, by the way, both based on the fundamentals and their valuation. Um, I think this is setting up for a nice crescendo into year end. Now, I can see why those two stand out, but it hasn't rallied yet. Is a starting point for research, not a conclusion. We need to compare their valuations, expected growth, and cash generation with the companies that have already moved. So, some of them well in September, some not as well. Today, we're going to rank all seven from the stock I find least attractive at today's price to the one I would actually buy. I'm going to explain what is driving each business, what his valuation assumes, and what would change my mind. Let's start at number seven. And before I do, I want to let you know that I release one weekly article covering severely undervalued stocks as well as what's gone in the market over the last few days. You can click below, sign up, read all of these straight away. Now, we move into number seven and it is Tesla. Now, it will probably annoy people who see it primarily as an AI and robotics company because the potential there is real, but around $370 a share, I think investors already paying heavily for the future. I mean when we look year to date it's down 17% over the last year down 12% over the last five is up but not great around 41% where today it's trading towards the low end of the 52- week range with just one very weak buy rating from Wall Street. Now let's give the operating business its due first. Tesla's latest quarter was not a collapse. Revenue reached 28.2 2 billion up 26% from a year earlier and deliveries reached a second quarter record of 480,000 vehicles. And you can also see here in fact energy and services becoming more meaningful as well. Energy storage deployment grew while services revenue rose strongly. If you only hear that Tesla is an old car company in decline, you miss genuine areas of progress. Now look at what happened below revenue. Tesla reported 398 million of operating income on the 28.2 2 billion of sales. Its operating margin, well, it also fell to 1.4%. Sales, yes, grew, but that growth converted into very little operating profit. And the margin is the tension at the center of the stock. Shelders are valuing Tesla for future software, autonomy, and robotics profits. While the present business, it's earning a relatively thin margin. We can see on a trailing 12-month basis, gross profit sitting at 19%, EBIT DAR sitting at 10%, net income sitting just below 4%. And the valuation grade, well, it reflects that gap, it's difficult to argue Tesla's cheap against the earnings and cash flow that are available today. To justify the share price, you need to believe the economics change substantially. I mean, forward P today sits at 211. We're talking more than 1,000% larger than the sector. if you want to compare it to their own 5year average is sitting 74% richer and that's pretty much the same conclusion no matter which valuation metric you look at today and there are possible ways they could change Tesla's investing in robotics its cybercap program and manufacturing capacity its ambitions extend well beyond selling more vehicles at today's margins now this chart is a projection not revenue already arriving in shareholders accounts timing adoption and eventual profit margins all matter a massive market opportunity cannot tell us by itself what a Tesla share is worth today. And the robo tax economics, they're compelling if Tesla can deliver them at scale. The crucial words are if and at scale. Cost estimates are useful for testing the opportunity. They're not evidence that the full opportunities been captured. Now Tesla has to fund this transition. In the latest quarter, their operating cash flow was under 5 billion, but capital expenditure reached just shy of 6 billion. Free cash flow was also negative 1.1 billion. And my own cash flow model gives me a value of $264. Against the share price today, we're talking around 29% downside. No margin of safety. In fact, a 41% premium. Now, obviously estimates can be wrong, but the size of the gap that demands in fact an explanation. Even the model we're using gives Tesla substantial future cash flow growth is on a valuation that assumes the company stops innovating. The problem is that shareholders need an even more successful outcome than my already very optimistic path. You can see in fact we've used a growth rate of 30% baked into the price today sits around 35%. And analyst targets well it tells a slightly different story and bulls can reasonably point to Tesla's optionality. But a target based on future robotics value is highly sensitive to when those profits arrive pushing them out several years. Will it changes massively what they're worth today? Here's my test for moving Tesla higher in the ranking. Show me a sustained recovery and operating margin, growing free cash flow, and commercial evidence that autonomy can make a material contribution. Progress on all three that would change this discussion. Until then, I'm separating excitement about the technology from conviction about the investment. At this price, there's too much future success embedded in the shares for Tesla to rank anywhere but seventh. We then move to number six, Apple. And this is a very different business from Tesla, established, highly profitable, and supported by an enormous installed base. My concern much simpler. I struggle to see enough return from buying it today around $340. Having said that, look up 25% year to date. over the last year at 33. Over the last five, more than a double, $135, sitting pretty much around all-time highs at $345. Yet, we only get one buy rating again, but very weak again from Wall Street today. And the latest results were excellent. Fiscal third quarter revenue reached 109 billion, up 16% year-over-year with June quarter records for iPhone, Mac, and services. Obviously, this is not a weak company waiting for a turnaround, and Apple's profitability remains one of its strongest arguments. The business converts its reach and ecosystem into cash, and customers continue to pay a premium for its devices and its services. We're talking gross margin 49%. Not too dissimilar from the sector. Some nice efficiencies to their 5year average. Bottom line, 28% much higher than the sector. Also again efficiencies from their own 5year average with very very impressive cash from operations 147 billion also a massive improvement from an already large number on their 5year at 116 and the new iPhone 18 Pro gives the upgrade cycle another reason to matter Apple's also pushing a more capable Siri and ondevice AI now those developments could support stronger engagement across the installed base and also one thing to point out here services as we can see here compounded annual growth over the last 6 years around 15%. They're important. They add recurring revenue around the hardware. Yet, that strength is already widely recognized. Buying Apple today requires asking how much additional growth the markets not priced in. And this chart is the warning I take seriously. Over a long period, Apple's market value has grown far faster than the profits used to support it. That, yes, can persist for a while, but it makes the entry price increasingly important. And we can see their forward P sits around 37 against a 5-year near 29 yield.32 below the 5-year.5. Neither comparison here tells me I'm getting an unusually attractive price. In fact, they both point to a potential severe overvaluation. The forward P I believe at least in the last 5 years is the highest it's ever been. And using the blue tunnel from simply safe dividends which points out fair value intrinsic price. You can sign up free trial by click on the pin comment. This is telling us potential overvaluation, massive disconnect from stock price upper end of the blue tunnel over the last 5, 10 years, even 20 years. Pretty obvious for more of this period is showing us an investor been more than happy to pay a premium. Very, very rare to see it in a severely or even a slight undervaluation signal. And the growth story, yes, it's good, but a premium multiple demands more than good. I need confidence that the next wave of iPhone upgrades, services, and AI features can translate into enough incremental earnings. And there is a plausible bull case. A large install base can lift services, newer devices, can encourage upgrades, and Apple has the scale to distribute AI features quickly. I'm never going to dismiss those advantages. And my DCF gives me $266 per share. We can see 22% above the current price, a premium today of 28%. I'm being asked to pay well above the cash flow value that I can defend at this point. Now, obviously, DCF is an estimate, not a verdict. The point is to expose the assumptions if the current price needs much stronger future cash generation. I want to know where that extra cash comes from. We've used a 10% growth rate that's above the 5-year 10ear KGA and the negative most recent year. I mean, reversed ETF is pointing to 13.5% growth just to justify today's value at $340. And Wall Street's targets do not settle either. Analysts may become more positive after a product launch and the stock can rise on enthusiasm. Neither changes the amount I'm paying for the business today. Now, I'd reconsider Apple if earnings grew into the valuation or if the shares offered a substantially better entry price. I like the company. I do not need to force a purchase when the expected return looks thin. So, Apple lands at six. Tesla has the larger gap between narrative and current profits. Apple has the much stronger proven business, but the current valuation still keeps it outside my buy list. Number five is Meta and this is where the ranking gets more difficult because the business is growing quickly and the stock does show upside in my model. The question is how much confidence the upside deserves. Now they have rebounded up 14% year to date and this is one we talked a lot when it was trading much lower in the $500 region. Over the last year though it is flat over the last five more than a double up at 112% and it's trading not far off 52- week highs. Still we get a strong buy from Wall Street respectable buy from Seek Alpha and Met has enjoyed a powerful September rally. Momentum's returned as investors focus on its AI product and the potential for another revenue stream beyond advertising. That move changes the starting price for new buyers. And the Muse download chart explains some of the excitement. is suggesting strong early consumer interest. I take that seriously while remembering that downloads, paying users, and durable profits are three different milestones. And Meta's latest connect announcements also puts Muse into its AI glasses plans. It gives Meta a potentially distinctive way to reach users. It's an interesting product that the financial return remains to be demonstrated. Look, the existing advertising business is easier to value. Med has repeatedly found ways to improve monetization across its apps. It gives a real engine to fund experiments that many competitors could not afford. And then you've also got revenue per employee is showing the scale of the engine as the business has grown. It's generated enormous revenue with each employee. This is a genuinely high quality operating platform. And you've also got the latest quarter reinforcing the demand story. Revenue reached 61 billion up 28% from a year earlier. So, if you judge Meta solely by sales growth, it would rank much, much higher. They're also projecting 23% growth moving forwards and EPS around 20% over the next 3 to 5 years. Both of these figures, in fact, as we can see, are higher than their own 5-year average. The issue is that their expenses are growing faster than revenue, at least in the latest quarter. Operating income declined even as sales surge. Now we have legal charges that contributed while the broad investment program continues to increase the cost basis. I mean this is very very important. The capex in relation to sales makes up 39%. If we look at their 5year average well much lower sitting around 24. The biggest issue here is cash after investment. Meta produced 32 billion of operating cash flow in the quarter but their capital expenditure and finance these payments they absorbed almost all of it. That left just 784 million of quarterly free cash flow. Management expects 130 to 145 billion of capex for the full year. The figures make the future cash flow path especially important. And you can see my intrinsic value from the DCF comes to $832 or around 11% today's price. There is upside but an 11% gap is not a large cushion when the investment program is this substantial. I mean look at the shape of analyst forecast. 2 billion of free cash flow in 26, 20 in 27, 50 billion in 2028 and much more in the later years. The recovery is possible, but it also carries a great deal of the valuation. And the forward P is not outrageous beside Meta's recent history, but an earnings multiple loan will not capture what shareholders receive after data center investment. That's why I put the cash flow forecast beside it. My route to moving meta high is clear. keep the advertising growth, show that Muse can retain and monetize users, and show free cash flow recovering as the AI infrastructure starts earnings its keep. At number five, I'm not calling Meta a bad investment or dismissing the new products. I'm saying the share price rally has left a fairly narrow model cushion for a spending program whose return still needs proving. And number four, we've got Alphabet. Its latest business performance is remarkable. The reason it doesn't rank higher is that the stock is almost exactly at my estimated fair value in the data we're using today. Year to date, they're up 10% over the last year up 40. Over the last five, up 143, trading around the midpoint of the 52- week range. Weak buy rating from Seek Alpha, strong buy from Wall Street. And if we start with the existing business, Alpha delivered 41 billion of quarterly operating income up 30% year-over-year. That is an enormous profit base to fund the AI and their cloud ambitions and the profitability. While that here reinforces the point Google search, YouTube and the broader platform still generate substantial earnings. Investors worried about AI disruption should also recognize the resources that Alphabet has to respond. Gross margin 61% net income margin 55%. These are very strong numbers, including the cash they generate, an incredible 186 billion in the trailing 12 months. And in their most recent quarter, cloud revenue rose 82% and cloud operating income more than tripled is a strong answer to the idea that alphabet has been left behind in AI infrastructure. Search revenue was up 17%. Yes, AI may alter how people find information, but their latest numbers showed a core business still growing. long-term question is how the behavior and monetization evolve. It's why Alphabet ranks above Meta for me despite Meta's greater model upside. Alphabet's current operating profit and breadth gives me more evidence of its earnings power while both companies invest heavily. Then comes the cost. Management lifted its 2026 capital expenditure outlook to between 195 billion and 205 billion and they expect spending to rise significantly again in 2027. Investors need that capacity to earn a return and the pressure is visible in cash flow. Alpha had negative6 billion of free cash flow in the latest quarter. Although their trading 12 month remain positive at 53 billion and their forward P while it sits around 26 compared with a 5-year 22. Alphabet deserves a quality premium but this is no longer a case where the multiple itself obviously does the work for you. And if we look at the blue tunnel, well, we can see slight overvaluation. It is sitting above the upper end over the last 5 years. I mean, it wasn't that long ago. We're talking 2025 where it was severely undervalued. And there is a bull case worth taking seriously. Search continues to fund the buildout. Cloud scales with a large backlog and Alphabet monetizes its own AI infrastructure. That combination could make today's spending look sensible in hindsight. My DCF comes to $343. essentially identical to the stock price today. It means I'm not being offered much protection if cloud margins disappoint or AI spending remains elevated longer than expected. And the model, well, it assumes free cash flow recovers strongly in the late years. A share price equal to that optimistic path that's different from a share price that leaves room for things to go wrong. And analyst targets show why some investors remain enthusiastic. I understand the case, but a target above the market is not by itself a margin of safety. I want to test the cash flow needed to get to that point. So, Alph moves high if the price comes back while the fundamentals hold or if cloud profit and cash flow improve enough to lift my fair value. Today, I would hold it and keep watching. So, number four is a close call. I prefer Alphabet's current breadth and proven earnings to Meta's narrow modeled upside. Microsoft is next because its cash generation is holding up better through the spending cycle. Now, Microsoft is number three. If you rank these stocks by my DCF upside alone, it would be lower. I'm placing it here because the underlying business is converting it AI demand into cash more clearly today. Year to date, they're up 7% over the last year, pretty much flat. Over the last five, up 75, trading towards the upper end of the 52- week range. Strong buy from Wall Street, weak buy from Seek Alpha. And Azour revenue grew 43% in the latest quarter. That is strong growth at Microsoft scale and sits alongside office security and a broad set of enterprise relationships. The profitability figures show why I give that growth weight. Microsoft's not relying on one hopeful future product to create its economics. It already has a highly profitable enterprise business. Nice margin, 68% growth. We can see bottom line massive 40% nice efficiencies to their 5year as well generating 183 billion of cash from their operations. And the recent co-pilot change matters here. Microsoft is trying to make its AI offering more useful across the actual tools and information companies use every single day. That is a clearer route to paid adoption and the market it like the announcement. So I wouldn't rank the stock on a single day's reaction, but the product direction is relevant. Microsoft needs co-pilot to become something businesses use routinely, not simply a feature they trial. And there's evidence of traction. Microsoft said Microsoft 365 C-pilot passed 30 million paid seats. That is meaningful distribution even though we still need to watch how adoption turns into sustained profit after infrastructure costs. And the wider cloud business is growing strongly too. Cloud revenue is up 27% and commercial remaining performance obligations reached just shy of 700 billion. The backlog it provides visibility though delivery and margins they still matter. Here is the financial distinction I care about. Despite a 41 billion capital expenditure quarter, Microsoft still generated 20 billion free cash flow, the spending is huge, but the business is producing cash through it. And the forward P is around 26 below the 5year 30. The historical comparison is encouraging. Although the business now has a different level of cab intensity and we can also see a slight undervaluation signal, although this one was severely undervalued for most of 2026. Well, look, I don't want to turn the relative multiple here into a claim that the shares are cheap. The DCF gives me a much more restrained answer. Quality can justify a place in the ranking without automatically making the stock a buy. My fair value is $490 versus a share price of 516. That's pretty much 5% downside, a 5% premium, too. The gap is small enough that reasonable assumptions could change it, but there's no clear bargain here. And the forecast will they already include a period of heavy investment followed by sharp cash flow recovery. I want to see Azour and co-pilot monetization keep pace with the depreciation and the running costs of new capacity. That is the test over the next few quarters. Cloud demand is strong across the industry. Investors should pay attention to the cash return each company gets from building to meet it. I'm comfortable putting Microsoft narrowly ahead of Alphabet because its current cash generation is stronger and its enterprise distribution is unusually valuable. Alphabet's faster cloud growth keeps the two close. But number three, as a hold, not a buy call, a modest pullback or stronger evidence that AI revenue is outrunning AI Costco change that today's price. I prefer to wait. Amazon, well, that comes in at number two and it's the hardest placement in the entire episode. My model shows more upside here than for Nvidia. So why is Amazon second and why isn't it my one clear buy? Firstly, look at the performance is up 8% year to date, up 14 over the last year, 47 over the last five. Trading around midpoint of the 52 week range. Double strong buy. I believe the first one we've seen so far from Wall Street and Quant. Weak buy again from Seeking Alpha. And we also have to appreciate the operating momentum here is real. Amazon's latest quarterly sales reached 200 billion, up 20%. This is a vast company still finding ways to grow across retail, advertising, and cloud. And AWS, that's the headline. Sales grew 37% to 42 billion in the quarter, the fastest growth in 18 quarters. That's powerful evidence that demand for cloud and AI capacity is reaching Amazon. And AWS produced 17 billion of quarterly operating income, up from 10 billion a year earlier. is while not treat heavy capital expenditure as proof the underlying business is deteriorating and look advertising grew as well for the company that adds another profitable source of revenue alongside retail and cloud the case for Amazon rest on several businesses improving together with AWS doing much of the heavy lifting but you do also need to look carefully at the reported net income their latest quarter did also include nonoperating pre-tax income primarily from investments in anthropic is not ordinary repeatable retail or AWS profit. The anthropobic investment can be valuable, but I don't want an investment gain to make Amazon's ongoing earnings multiple look artificially cheap. For this ranking, I care more about operating profit and future free cash flow. And the cash flow is where the market's hesitation makes sense. Trading operating cash flow rose to 161 billion. Yet, trading free cash flow that fell to negative 7.6 billion. The gap comes largely from investment in property and equipment, especially AI infrastructure. If AWS demand persists and the capacity earns strong returns, today's weak cash flow could be temporary. My DCF gives Amazon a value of around $348 against a share price of 249, roughly 40% upside at 29% margin of safety. Among the seven stocks, this is the largest gap in the central case. And even when we look at the lower growth scenario here, in fact, it gives a value of 296 or roughly 19% upside above the starting price. On its face, it makes Amazon look like an obvious number one candidate. But now inspect the forecast which is producing these results. It moves from 5 billion in 2026 to 20 billion, then 1628, 120 by 29, and then 175 in 2030. This is an immense recovery. Now, it may happen AWS latest growth strengthens the argument, but the size and speed of the cash flow increase mean that a delay in returns on new data centers would materially affect the valuation. It also explains why the stock can lag despite impressive headlines. Investors are looking at the same strong AWS demand and asking when the billion spent to serve it will appear as free cash flow. And look, a reversed ECF that can also help here, but only if we look at the whole cash flow path. A simple implied growth figure can sound reassuring. While the model already assumes a very large recovery in the early forecast years as we highlighted and the street optimism, it is understandable. Amazon has scale, customer demand, and several ways to earn on its investment. The uncertainty is how much capital it must keep spending to capture the demand. Here is what would make Amazon an outright buy for me. AWS stays strong while free cash flow begins a convincing recovery. It would make the upside less dependent on a distant forecast. Amazon deserves the number two spot because the operating evidence and model upside are too strong to place beneath Microsoft or Alphabet. Nvidia stays ahead because more of its cash generation is already visible today. That brings us to number one. Nvidia is the only stock here where I see a compelling combination of current operating proof growth and a meaningful gap to my estimated value. year to date is up 21% over the last year up 27 over the last five. I mean that's probably the best we've seen today and of many companies in the market up 939% is trading around 52- week highs. This company valued at 5.4 trillion with a double strong buy from Wall Street and Quant with a respectable buy from seeing Alpha probably the best in terms of the ratings that we've covered today and the scale of their growth still deserves a pause. Nvidia reported 96.2 2 billion in the latest quarter, up 106% year-over-year. This is not a small company growing from an easy base. Their data center revenue reached 89 billion, up 17%. Demand across the air buildout is translating into Nvidia's reported sales now rather than sitting entirely in a forecast 5 years away. And their gross margin was 75% in the quarter. It matters because enormous revenue growth is far less attractive if the business must give away the economics to achieve it. So far, Nvidia's margins remain exceptional. And I know the share price been volatile. Strong results do not guarantee a rising stock every week, particularly when investors debate how long today's AI spending cycle can last. And the commitment chart points to both opportunity and risk. Nvidia's preparing for extraordinary demand. If customers keep building, it benefits. If they slow spending a business scale for that demand, it could feel it quickly. Now, competition is another reason not to treat today's margins as permanent. Customers are developing their own chips and rivals want a larger share of AI spending. Nvidia must keep earning its position. Yet, the valuation has changed substantially as earnings have grown. The forward P here sits around 1819, far below its 5year average around 35. Doesn't remove sickle risk, but it alters the price that I'm paying for the growth. And the tiny dividend is beside the point for this investment. The relevant return depends on earnings power, cash generation, and whether customers continue paying for Nvidia's full platform. And we can see on the blue tunnel a massive, massive, severely undervalued signal. Look at the last 5 years. In fact, from around 2024, this one even before that had traded at an undervalued level. Now we're seeing just such a massive disconnect. I mean, I'd not buy merely because a multiple's fallen. Sometimes the market lowers a multiple because it expects growth to slow. The reason Nvidia leads is that the reported business is still expanding rapidly and management are guiding around 108 billion of revenue for the next quarter. Guide is always not a guarantee, but extends the evidence of near-term demand beyond the quarter that's already been reported. And my DCF gives a value of $33 against today's price. That's a 35% upside or a 26% margin of safety. That's a substantial model gap for a company which is already producing enormous profit. Now I still want to challenge my own model. It projects free cash flow rising from around 97 billion to 180 billion. That is base of analyst forecast and we've already had a few quarters in the year. But yes, it is a demanding jump even after Nvidia's extraordinary results. In the lower growth scenario of 8%, we can see in fact the price goes to 254. That's still above the starting price though the cushion much smaller. It tells me the conclusion depends on continued execution. The clearest downside case is a slowdown in hyperscaler spending or weaker returns on their AI projects. Export restrictions, customer concentration and custom chips could add pressure. These are risks I would monitor, not ignore. For the number one position to hold, I want continued demand, durable gross margins and growth that turns into free cash flow. If those begin to break, a low forward multiple will it offer less comfort. But compared with the other six, Nvidia gives me the strongest mix today. Amazon offers slightly greater model upside while asking me to wait for a much larger recovery in their cash after their spending. Nvidia's profits and growth are visible now and the valuation still leaves room in my central case. It makes it my number one and the one magnificent seven stock that I would buy at these prices today. So here is the final order. Seventh Tesla remarkable ambitions but too much future success in the price relative to today's margins and today's cash flow. In number six, Apple, an excellent profitable business that I cannot justify buying at this valuation. In fifth, Meta, genuine growth and exciting new products, but a narrowed model cushion while AI spending absorbs cash. In fourth, Alphabet strong search and extraordinary cloud growth with the shares already close to my fair value. In third, Microsoft, my highest ranked hold, Azour co-pilot and his enterprise reach are compelling, but I would like a better entry price. Second, Amazon the greatest upside in my central model held back from the top spot by how much future free cash flow recovery the model requires. And first, Nvidia still a demanding forecast, but the strongest evidence today that AI demand is becoming revenue, profit, and cash is the only one I would buy at these prices. But let me know your own thoughts, whether you agree, whether you disagree. In fact, let me know your own ranking in the comments below. Don't forget as well to sign up to the weekly newsletter, fresh copy coming Monday. But as always and more importantly, have a great day.