JPMorgan Research Report Analysis: Tesla Deliveries Beat Expectations by 21%, Rating Maintained Neutral
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
JPMorgan Research Report Analysis: Tesla Deliveries Beat Expectations by 21%, Rating Maintained Neutral
Timeline delays or an economic model proven to fall short of expectations could shift risks to the neutral rating into downward pressure.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsWritten by: Rita
TechFlow Guide
Tesla delivered 4.801 million vehicles in Q2, exceeding Bloomberg consensus by 21%. Under multiple catalysts such as accelerated deliveries, expansion of FSD approved countries, and启动 of Optimus Gen 3 production, JPMorgan believes the positive feedback loop formed by automotive and energy storage businesses should push up the stock price. However, the Neutral rating remains unchanged. The truth behind this is: investors' current buy price has already priced in profit expectations for 2035 and beyond. JPMorgan raised 2026 and 2027 EPS to $2.15 and $2.20, but the 2030 target EPS of $7.50 implies a compound growth rate of over 50%. Short-term beats cannot change this time mismatch.
Delivery Volume Leads Europe's Rush, US Drags
Tesla delivered 4.518 million vehicles in June alone, totaling 4.801 million in Q2. This is 14% higher than JPMorgan's expectation of 4.2 million vehicles, and 21% higher than Bloomberg consensus of 3.975 million vehicles. This is a lead in volume magnitude, not marginal improvement.
But delivery data itself is not the whole story. JPMorgan specifically highlighted geographical differences. Europe increased 105% YoY in June, France +56%, Sweden +43%, Norway +39%; China increased 24% YoY; Australia +89%. The US market dragged down, with a 27% YoY decline in June.
Tesla's growth momentum shifts globally. Regions with lower EV penetration (Europe, Australia) are rushing to install, while mature markets (US) face saturation pressure. JPMorgan pointed out that Berlin capacity release decreased 20% YoY, indicating supply chain bottlenecks persist; strong sales in June reflect the release of accumulated demand, not a breakthrough in production capacity.
FSD and Optimus Stories Advancing, None Yet Realized
The second layer of focus in the research report is autonomous driving and robots. FSD was approved in Belgium, Denmark, Lithuania, Estonia, and the Netherlands, attracting European user adoption. Optimus Gen 3 robots start production in July and begin contributing output in August.
JPMorgan believes accelerated autonomous driving, accelerated car sales, and accelerated energy storage deployment form a positive feedback loop. The logic chain seems complete: FSD safety data accumulation, expansion of approval scope, rise in user adoption rate, connected fleet data feeding back into AI models, and further improvement in safety. The same applies to Optimus: in-factory validation, benchmarking AWS/KIVA-level industrial AGI potential, and future cost structure optimization.
But the implicit assumption is that all catalysts are realized simultaneously without setbacks. In reality, FSD requires 2-3 years from testing to scale adoption, with high regulatory uncertainty. Optimus similarly faces a long chain of production ramp-up, cost control, and application validation.
JPMorgan's risk section clearly states that if Optimus deployment falls short of expectations or FSD regulatory approval is slow, the company faces a dual shock of EPS downward revision and capital expenditure expansion. The positive feedback loop is a story of "if", not the reality of "already".
Energy Storage Continuously Beats Expectations, But Forecast Errors Remain
JPMorgan's June energy storage expectation was 11.0 GWh, Tesla's actual was 13.5 GWh. The company's self-compiled consensus was 13.8 GWh, so JPMorgan's beat was instead marked as -2%.
What do these seemingly contradictory numbers indicate. It is likely that JPMorgan based this on past conservative assumptions, while actual market demand and Tesla's execution exceeded historical patterns. But 13.5 GWh is still slightly low in the company consensus, indicating that although the energy storage business is high-growth, maturity is still in the building stage, and the forecast error space is large.
Behind the $475 Target Price, It's 2035 Profits Providing Support
JPMorgan adopts a hybrid valuation method. Applying a 75x P/E multiple based on 2030 forward earnings (considering 50% margin and high growth), plus Sum-of-the-Parts valuation for Robotaxi and Optimus separately, finally arriving at a December 2027 target price of $475.
Assumptions priced into $475: 2030 EPS $7.50, Robotaxi business contributes significant profits after 2029, Optimus scale deployment becomes main driver after 2028.
Risks to the realization of these expectations exist. JPMorgan lists six downside risks, among which Musk's strategic leadership and execution ability are particularly sensitive. If Optimus or Robotaxi progress stalls, or the policy environment reverses, the upside space of current pricing disappears.
Idiosyncratic factors account for 40% of stock price performance drivers, which is already high in the industry. Tesla's stock price relies to a considerable extent on the realization of individual stock stories, rather than being driven by systemic factors. Narrative phase deviation, stock price faces rapid correction.
TechFlow Perspective
Q2 delivery data exceeded expectations, but the victory has a special background: the rush in Europe and Australia is a phased release of supply chain adjustments, not a new normal. The substantive logic of JPMorgan maintaining a Neutral rating is adherence to the valuation equilibrium point. Neutral is not doubting delivery growth rate, it is that pricing has already run ahead of fundamentals. Investors have already paid for 2035 EPS expectations; no matter how many Q2 beats, it cannot change the time mismatch between buy price and realization price.
What truly deserves attention is when the two long-term catalysts, Optimus and Robotaxi, will commercialize. Timeline compression (Optimus achieves considerable profit contribution in 2027 instead of 2028), current $475 pricing has room for upward breakthrough. Timeline extension or economic model proven less than expected, Neutral rating risk turns to downward pressure.
Disclaimer
This article is a compilation and interpretation of third-party brokerage research reports by TechFlow Research. Ratings, target prices, earnings forecasts, and related judgments cited in the text are the views of the brokerage analyst, represent only the position of their affiliated institution, do not represent the views of TechFlow Research, and do not constitute any investment advice.
Market involves risks, decisions must be independent. This article should not be used as a basis for buying or selling any securities.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
@chaoxiangooo
