TSLA · Forward model · Bear case
The Bear case, 20 quarters out
Each segment is projected from its own operating driver, rolled up into consolidated cash flow, and discounted back to a fair value per share. The assumptions below are editable — change them and every number on this page moves with them.
Tesla reports THREE segments — Automotive, Energy generation and storage, and Services and other — and this model carries eight, because the three mix businesses with completely different economics. The three PARENTS are reported and exact for every quarter shown (2026 Q2: $20,516M / $3,139M / $4,581M, $28,236M total, per the 8-K Exhibit 99.1). What is estimated is the split INSIDE them: FSD, Semi, Robotaxi and Optimus are carved out of Automotive, and storage and solar out of Energy, because Tesla discloses none of those separately. Services and other is carried as reported. Basis is 2026 Q2, the latest print.
Vehicle demand stalls against a cheaper Chinese field, FSD approvals slip country by country, Robotaxi stays confined to a handful of metros, and Optimus does not sell externally inside the horizon. Storage keeps working.
Latest: $25.51B (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $22.50B |
| 2025Q3 | $28.09B |
| 2025Q4 | $24.90B |
| 2026Q1 | $22.39B |
| 2026Q2 | $28.24B |
| 2026Q3E | $28.13B |
| 2026Q4E | $28.02B |
| 2027Q1E | $27.90B |
| 2027Q2E | $27.77B |
| 2027Q3E | $27.66B |
| 2027Q4E | $27.54B |
| 2028Q1E | $27.43B |
| 2028Q2E | $27.35B |
| 2028Q3E | $27.29B |
| 2028Q4E | $27.26B |
| 2029Q1E | $27.28B |
| 2029Q2E | $27.36B |
| 2029Q3E | $27.20B |
| 2029Q4E | $26.95B |
| 2030Q1E | $26.69B |
| 2030Q2E | $26.45B |
| 2030Q3E | $26.21B |
| 2030Q4E | $25.97B |
| 2031Q1E | $25.74B |
| 2031Q2E | $25.51B |
What drives each segment
Automotive
Units × priceModel 3/Y, Cybertruck and the next-gen platform, excluding FSD, which is carried separately. The cash engine that funds AI, robotics and energy — volume gated by pack capacity rather than demand, at mid-teens margins.
Latest: $13.97B (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $16.27B |
| 2025Q3 | $20.75B |
| 2025Q4 | $17.18B |
| 2026Q1 | $15.65B |
| 2026Q2 | $19.81B |
| 2026Q3E | $19.47B |
| 2026Q4E | $19.13B |
| 2027Q1E | $18.80B |
| 2027Q2E | $18.48B |
| 2027Q3E | $18.16B |
| 2027Q4E | $17.84B |
| 2028Q1E | $17.53B |
| 2028Q2E | $17.23B |
| 2028Q3E | $16.93B |
| 2028Q4E | $16.64B |
| 2029Q1E | $16.35B |
| 2029Q2E | $16.07B |
| 2029Q3E | $15.79B |
| 2029Q4E | $15.52B |
| 2030Q1E | $15.25B |
| 2030Q2E | $14.98B |
| 2030Q3E | $14.73B |
| 2030Q4E | $14.47B |
| 2031Q1E | $14.22B |
| 2031Q2E | $13.97B |
Assumptions & reasoning
- Modelled on units x price because Tesla's own constraint is physical: pack capacity caps units, and the next-gen platform lowers price deliberately. A single revenue growth rate would hide the fact that these two move in opposite directions.
- FSD revenue is NOT in this line. It is carved out into its own vertical, so this is vehicles at hardware margin only. Leaving it in would flatter automotive margin and hide the software story the whole thesis rests on.
- Margin glides 16% to 20% on scale and mix, which is deliberately unheroic. This line is modelled as a mature manufacturer that funds the rest of the company, not as a growth story.
- It is still roughly two thirds of revenue at the basis quarter, so the valuation is far more sensitive to this line than to any of the optional ones — a point worth holding on to while reading the Optimus assumptions.
FSD / Autonomy
Subscribers × ARPUThe software layer sold on top of the fleet: one-time purchases and subscriptions. High margin, attach-rate driven, and the enabler without which Robotaxi does not exist.
Latest: $1.15B (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $380M |
| 2025Q3 | $450M |
| 2025Q4 | $500M |
| 2026Q1 | $551M |
| 2026Q2 | $600M |
| 2026Q3E | $720M |
| 2026Q4E | $821M |
| 2027Q1E | $904M |
| 2027Q2E | $973M |
| 2027Q3E | $1.03B |
| 2027Q4E | $1.07B |
| 2028Q1E | $1.11B |
| 2028Q2E | $1.14B |
| 2028Q3E | $1.16B |
| 2028Q4E | $1.17B |
| 2029Q1E | $1.18B |
| 2029Q2E | $1.19B |
| 2029Q3E | $1.19B |
| 2029Q4E | $1.19B |
| 2030Q1E | $1.19B |
| 2030Q2E | $1.18B |
| 2030Q3E | $1.18B |
| 2030Q4E | $1.17B |
| 2031Q1E | $1.16B |
| 2031Q2E | $1.15B |
Assumptions & reasoning
- Subscribers penetrate a GROWING fleet toward a 90% attach ceiling, so growth slows for two reasons in sequence: first as attach saturates the cars already sold, then because further growth can only come from new deliveries. Once penetration flattens near 90% this line tracks vehicle sales, which is what the automotive vertical above is already modelling.
- TAM is the HW4-capable fleet, 6M at the basis quarter growing 4.9% a quarter, not the whole installed base: older cars lack the compute and retrofitting has never been offered at scale. Raise the growth rate if you think hardware upgrades become a product.
- Margin is 88% because this is software delivered over an existing connection to hardware the customer already bought. Capex is nominal — the training compute is carried at the corporate level, not here.
- The load-bearing assumption is regulatory, and it is not in any slider on this page: the ramp encodes approvals arriving steadily. A single jurisdiction blocking unsupervised indefinitely would break the ceiling, not the ramp.
Tesla Semi
Units × priceClass 8 electric trucking out of the Nevada line. Higher ASP than cars and a real order book, but still a secondary volume story inside the horizon.
Latest: $1.15B (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $6M |
| 2025Q3 | $9M |
| 2025Q4 | $13M |
| 2026Q1 | $18M |
| 2026Q2 | $90M |
| 2026Q3E | $113M |
| 2026Q4E | $142M |
| 2027Q1E | $179M |
| 2027Q2E | $225M |
| 2027Q3E | $283M |
| 2027Q4E | $356M |
| 2028Q1E | $447M |
| 2028Q2E | $562M |
| 2028Q3E | $707M |
| 2028Q4E | $889M |
| 2029Q1E | $1.12B |
| 2029Q2E | $1.41B |
| 2029Q3E | $1.46B |
| 2029Q4E | $1.41B |
| 2030Q1E | $1.36B |
| 2030Q2E | $1.32B |
| 2030Q3E | $1.28B |
| 2030Q4E | $1.23B |
| 2031Q1E | $1.19B |
| 2031Q2E | $1.15B |
Assumptions & reasoning
- Semi revenue is NOT disclosed by Tesla — this line is apportioned like every other, and the unit count is derived from it at a $180k average. Deliveries before 2026 were a pilot fleet in the tens per quarter (PepsiCo and similar), so 2025 here is deliberately near zero; the Nevada high-volume line is what starts the ramp.
- Margin starts negative. A ramping line carries fixed cost against low volume, and Tesla has never claimed Semi is profitable at current output.
- Volume compounds at 18% until it reaches the Nevada line's stated ~50k a year and then holds there. Left unbounded the same rate reached three times the line's design capacity over five years, which is not a view about demand — it is a modelling error. Raise the ceiling if you think a second line gets built.
- Autonomy is not modelled here. Driver-out trucking would change the economics of this line more than any volume assumption, and it is not in the numbers.
Robotaxi / Cybercab
Capacity × utilisation × pricePurpose-built autonomous vehicles on a Tesla-operated network. Revenue is fleet x utilisation x revenue per vehicle, so it is gated by how many cars are deployed and approved, not by demand.
Latest: $212M (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $0.00 |
| 2025Q3 | $0.00 |
| 2025Q4 | $4M |
| 2026Q1 | $13M |
| 2026Q2 | $14M |
| 2026Q3E | $12M |
| 2026Q4E | $18M |
| 2027Q1E | $25M |
| 2027Q2E | $32M |
| 2027Q3E | $40M |
| 2027Q4E | $47M |
| 2028Q1E | $55M |
| 2028Q2E | $64M |
| 2028Q3E | $73M |
| 2028Q4E | $82M |
| 2029Q1E | $92M |
| 2029Q2E | $102M |
| 2029Q3E | $113M |
| 2029Q4E | $125M |
| 2030Q1E | $137M |
| 2030Q2E | $150M |
| 2030Q3E | $164M |
| 2030Q4E | $179M |
| 2031Q1E | $195M |
| 2031Q2E | $212M |
Assumptions & reasoning
- Modelled on the same shape as a compute business — deployed units x utilisation x price — because the constraint is identical: revenue tracks what is switched on and approved, not what riders would pay for. The fleet is held flat at 1,000 vehicles through 2026 Q3 and only starts growing in Q4, when Cybercab deployment begins.
- Capex starts at 120% of segment revenue. Every vehicle is bought before it earns anything, so this line consumes cash for years before it returns any, and its present value inside the horizon is deeply negative.
- Utilisation matters more than fleet size. Doubling the fleet at 45% utilisation is worth less than holding the fleet and reaching 72%, which is why the target is the slider to argue about.
- This line assumes approvals keep widening city by city. It carries no explicit regulatory reversal: a metro withdrawing permission would show up as a utilisation collapse, not as a smaller fleet.
Optimus
Units × priceHumanoid robots, initially for internal use and training, later sold externally. The largest optionality in the model and the least evidenced — Fremont's first line is installing now.
Latest: $54M (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $0.00 |
| 2025Q3 | $0.00 |
| 2025Q4 | $0.00 |
| 2026Q1 | $0.00 |
| 2026Q2 | $0.00 |
| 2026Q3E | $0.00 |
| 2026Q4E | $0.00 |
| 2027Q1E | $0.00 |
| 2027Q2E | $0.00 |
| 2027Q3E | $8M |
| 2027Q4E | $10M |
| 2028Q1E | $11M |
| 2028Q2E | $12M |
| 2028Q3E | $14M |
| 2028Q4E | $16M |
| 2029Q1E | $18M |
| 2029Q2E | $20M |
| 2029Q3E | $23M |
| 2029Q4E | $26M |
| 2030Q1E | $29M |
| 2030Q2E | $33M |
| 2030Q3E | $37M |
| 2030Q4E | $42M |
| 2031Q1E | $48M |
| 2031Q2E | $54M |
Assumptions & reasoning
- Zero revenue for five quarters is a modelled fact, not a placeholder. The Fremont line is still being installed, and its first output goes to Tesla's own factories for training rather than to customers — so the first external dollar lands in 2027 Q3, not at first production.
- Musk has called this the biggest product ever, possibly ten times the next biggest. This model does not encode that: at 35% a quarter from 500 units it stays a small share of revenue across the whole horizon. If you believe the claim, the growth rate here is where it goes, and it is the single largest lever on the page.
- Margin starts at -40%. Everything about this line is new — no shared platform, no existing supply chain — which is exactly why Musk warned it scales unlike a car.
- Treat the present value of this line as option value, not forecast. It is the assumption most likely to be wrong in either direction by an order of magnitude.
Energy Storage
Units × priceMegapack and Powerwall. The other cash-generative business, sold by the gigawatt-hour, with a new Texas Megafactory adding 50 GWh a year of Megapack 3 capacity.
Latest: $4.03B (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $2.49B |
| 2025Q3 | $3.11B |
| 2025Q4 | $3.53B |
| 2026Q1 | $2.09B |
| 2026Q2 | $2.82B |
| 2026Q3E | $2.87B |
| 2026Q4E | $2.92B |
| 2027Q1E | $2.98B |
| 2027Q2E | $3.03B |
| 2027Q3E | $3.08B |
| 2027Q4E | $3.14B |
| 2028Q1E | $3.20B |
| 2028Q2E | $3.25B |
| 2028Q3E | $3.31B |
| 2028Q4E | $3.37B |
| 2029Q1E | $3.43B |
| 2029Q2E | $3.49B |
| 2029Q3E | $3.56B |
| 2029Q4E | $3.62B |
| 2030Q1E | $3.69B |
| 2030Q2E | $3.75B |
| 2030Q3E | $3.82B |
| 2030Q4E | $3.89B |
| 2031Q1E | $3.96B |
| 2031Q2E | $4.03B |
Assumptions & reasoning
- Modelled per gigawatt-hour deployed rather than as a growth rate, because that is the unit Tesla reports and the unit the factories are sized in.
- Deployments are capacity-constrained, not demand-constrained — the order book has run ahead of what the factories can ship for several years, which is why the growth rate is tied to capacity coming online.
- Margin at 24% gliding to 30% assumes cell cost falls faster than ASP does. That gap is the entire margin story, and it has held so far but is not guaranteed.
- This is the second-largest line and by far the least contested. If the model is wrong about Tesla, it is unlikely to be wrong here.
Solar
Growth pathSolar cells and roofs, much smaller than storage today. The $10B vertically integrated Texas cell plant targets commercial production in 2029 Q1, near the end of this horizon.
Latest: $409M (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $300M |
| 2025Q3 | $305M |
| 2025Q4 | $310M |
| 2026Q1 | $315M |
| 2026Q2 | $319M |
| 2026Q3E | $320M |
| 2026Q4E | $322M |
| 2027Q1E | $324M |
| 2027Q2E | $327M |
| 2027Q3E | $330M |
| 2027Q4E | $334M |
| 2028Q1E | $337M |
| 2028Q2E | $341M |
| 2028Q3E | $346M |
| 2028Q4E | $350M |
| 2029Q1E | $355M |
| 2029Q2E | $360M |
| 2029Q3E | $365M |
| 2029Q4E | $371M |
| 2030Q1E | $377M |
| 2030Q2E | $383M |
| 2030Q3E | $389M |
| 2030Q4E | $395M |
| 2031Q1E | $402M |
| 2031Q2E | $409M |
Assumptions & reasoning
- This is the one vertical carried on a plain growth path, because there is no disclosed operating driver worth modelling: Tesla stopped reporting solar deployments in a useful unit years ago.
- The Texas cell plant is the story here and it lands at the very end of the horizon — construction runs 2026 to 2028 with production targeted 2029 Q1. Its revenue contribution is barely inside the window, but its capex is not, which is why capex intensity starts at 45%.
- Terminal growth is set ABOVE current growth rather than below it, the opposite of every other line. That encodes the plant coming online and is a deliberate claim, not an oversight.
- At roughly 1.5% of revenue this line cannot move the valuation. It is carried for completeness and because the capex is real.
Services & Other
Growth pathSupercharging, used vehicles, insurance, parts and merchandise. Not one of the strategic verticals, but real revenue that the other seven do not account for.
Latest: $4.54B (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025Q2 | $3.05B |
| 2025Q3 | $3.48B |
| 2025Q4 | $3.37B |
| 2026Q1 | $3.75B |
| 2026Q2 | $4.58B |
| 2026Q3E | $4.62B |
| 2026Q4E | $4.66B |
| 2027Q1E | $4.69B |
| 2027Q2E | $4.71B |
| 2027Q3E | $4.73B |
| 2027Q4E | $4.74B |
| 2028Q1E | $4.74B |
| 2028Q2E | $4.75B |
| 2028Q3E | $4.75B |
| 2028Q4E | $4.74B |
| 2029Q1E | $4.73B |
| 2029Q2E | $4.72B |
| 2029Q3E | $4.70B |
| 2029Q4E | $4.69B |
| 2030Q1E | $4.67B |
| 2030Q2E | $4.64B |
| 2030Q3E | $4.62B |
| 2030Q4E | $4.59B |
| 2031Q1E | $4.56B |
| 2031Q2E | $4.54B |
Assumptions & reasoning
- This vertical is not in the strategic list — it is here because without it the other seven do not sum to Tesla's reported revenue, and a model whose segments do not reconcile to the consolidated total is not checkable.
- It scales with the installed fleet rather than with sales, so it is the most predictable line in the model and the least interesting.
- Margin is thin by design: charging and service are run near cost to support the vehicle business, and used-vehicle margin moves with residual values.
Where each case comes from
Elon case — primary sources
The primary sources this case is built from — filings, calls and posts. Where they are claims by an interested party rather than disclosures, every number in the Elon column is what happens if they are taken at face value.
Autonomy is a regulatory problem, not a capability one
- Jul 28, 2026 Supervised FSD unequivocally saves lives, which means delays in country approvals costs lives!
- Jul 22, 2026 Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
- Jun 29, 2026 FSD v14 Lite rollout confirmation — capability shipping ahead of approval.
- Aug 12, 2026 Tesla FSD FTW — the recurring claim that cars running FSD are already superior to human drivers.
Robotaxi as a purpose-built network
Optimus as the biggest product ever
Semi and the electric freight line
From cash flow to fair value
| Present value of free cash flow, 20 quarters | -$15.77B |
| Terminal-year revenue | $103.43B |
| Terminal-year EBITDA | $14.51B |
| Exit multiple, on revenue | 4.0x |
| Terminal value | $413.71B |
| Discounted at 13.5% a year, terminal value becomes | $219.64B |
| Enterprise value | $203.87B |
| Net cash | $30.00B |
| Equity value | $233.87B |
| Diluted shares | 3.53B |
| Fair value per share | $66.29 |
| Against the current price of $345.13 | -81% |
8x is a premium and is meant to be one. A sum of the parts, weighting each vertical by its terminal mix at sector multiples (autos 1.5x, storage 3x, FSD 15x, Robotaxi 8x), gives about 4x, because two thirds of terminal revenue is still hardware. 8x is held at double that because the terminal year is not a hardware business winding down — it is still compounding 11-13% a year at a 22% EBITDA margin, which is what separates it from a mature manufacturer and what the parts-based blend cannot see. The cost of that view is explicit: 8x revenue on a 22% margin is about 37x terminal EBITDA, the richest multiple of any model on this site, and it is a bet on the mix continuing to shift toward software and autonomy. For reference the current share price implies about 12x and Tesla trades near 14x trailing revenue today, so the premium here is still well short of what the market is paying. The multiple is a per-case input: Bear holds 4x, the parts-based number, and Bull 14x. Move the slider: at 4x the fair value is about $142 and at 12x about $402, so this one input swings the answer more than every operating assumption on this page combined.
Read the other way round: at $345.13 the market is paying 21.9x terminal-year revenue, holding every other assumption on this page fixed. That is the number to argue about.
Capex outside the verticals
Each vertical's capex is a share of its own revenue, which is the right shape for capacity that scales with sales. These are not that: fixed-size programmes with their own schedule that spend whether or not any segment grows. They are added on top, and they are why free cash flow dips in the years below.
Terafab pilot fab (Giga Texas)
2026 Q3 → 2027 Q4Tesla's own research and pilot line, roughly $3B, running ahead of the joint facility. Small next to Tesla's ~$25B a year core capex, but it is additive to it.
Terafab phase 1 (Tesla share)
2028 Q1 → 2030 Q4The joint Tesla/SpaceX advanced fab, $16.8B announced for phase 1. The funding split has not been disclosed; 40% is assumed here for Tesla, which leads the research side while SpaceX leads volume manufacturing. Heavy spend lands 2028 through the early 2030s.
The projected path
| Quarter | Automotive | FSD / Autonomy | Tesla Semi | Robotaxi / Cybercab | Optimus | Energy Storage | Solar | Services & Other | Revenue | YoY | EBITDA | Capex | FCF | R40 | PV of FCF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Q3E | $19.47B | $720M | $113M | $12M | $0 | $2.87B | $320M | $4.62B | $28.13B | +0% | $2.51B | $5.60B | -$3.09B | -11 | -$2.99B |
| 2026 Q4E | $19.13B | $821M | $142M | $18M | $0 | $2.92B | $322M | $4.66B | $28.02B | +13% | $2.68B | $5.34B | -$2.66B | +3 | -$2.50B |
| 2027 Q1E | $18.80B | $904M | $179M | $25M | $0 | $2.98B | $324M | $4.69B | $27.90B | +25% | $2.83B | $5.12B | -$2.28B | +16 | -$2.08B |
| 2027 Q2E | $18.48B | $973M | $225M | $32M | $0 | $3.03B | $327M | $4.71B | $27.77B | -2% | $2.96B | $4.91B | -$1.95B | -9 | -$1.72B |
| 2027 Q3E | $18.16B | $1.03B | $283M | $40M | $8M | $3.08B | $330M | $4.73B | $27.66B | -2% | $3.07B | $4.74B | -$1.67B | -8 | -$1.43B |
| 2027 Q4E | $17.84B | $1.07B | $356M | $47M | $10M | $3.14B | $334M | $4.74B | $27.54B | -2% | $3.16B | $4.57B | -$1.42B | -7 | -$1.17B |
| 2028 Q1E | $17.53B | $1.11B | $447M | $55M | $11M | $3.20B | $337M | $4.74B | $27.43B | -2% | $3.24B | $4.49B | -$1.25B | -6 | -$1.01B |
| 2028 Q2E | $17.23B | $1.14B | $562M | $64M | $12M | $3.25B | $341M | $4.75B | $27.35B | -2% | $3.30B | $4.37B | -$1.06B | -5 | -$825M |
| 2028 Q3E | $16.93B | $1.16B | $707M | $73M | $14M | $3.31B | $346M | $4.75B | $27.29B | -1% | $3.36B | $4.26B | -$897M | -5 | -$675M |
| 2028 Q4E | $16.64B | $1.17B | $889M | $82M | $16M | $3.37B | $350M | $4.74B | $27.26B | -1% | $3.41B | $4.17B | -$756M | -4 | -$551M |
| 2029 Q1E | $16.35B | $1.18B | $1.12B | $92M | $18M | $3.43B | $355M | $4.73B | $27.28B | -1% | $3.46B | $4.10B | -$637M | -3 | -$450M |
| 2029 Q2E | $16.07B | $1.19B | $1.41B | $102M | $20M | $3.49B | $360M | $4.72B | $27.36B | +0% | $3.50B | $4.04B | -$539M | -2 | -$368M |
| 2029 Q3E | $15.79B | $1.19B | $1.46B | $113M | $23M | $3.56B | $365M | $4.70B | $27.20B | +0% | $3.54B | $3.95B | -$418M | -2 | -$277M |
| 2029 Q4E | $15.52B | $1.19B | $1.41B | $125M | $26M | $3.62B | $371M | $4.69B | $26.95B | -1% | $3.56B | $3.86B | -$298M | -2 | -$192M |
| 2030 Q1E | $15.25B | $1.19B | $1.36B | $137M | $29M | $3.69B | $377M | $4.67B | $26.69B | -2% | $3.59B | $3.78B | -$193M | -3 | -$120M |
| 2030 Q2E | $14.98B | $1.18B | $1.32B | $150M | $33M | $3.75B | $383M | $4.64B | $26.45B | -3% | $3.60B | $3.70B | -$100M | -4 | -$61M |
| 2030 Q3E | $14.73B | $1.18B | $1.28B | $164M | $37M | $3.82B | $389M | $4.62B | $26.21B | -4% | $3.62B | $3.63B | -$19M | -4 | -$11M |
| 2030 Q4E | $14.47B | $1.17B | $1.23B | $179M | $42M | $3.89B | $395M | $4.59B | $25.97B | -4% | $3.62B | $3.57B | $43M | -3 | $25M |
| 2031 Q1E | $14.22B | $1.16B | $1.19B | $195M | $48M | $3.96B | $402M | $4.56B | $25.74B | -4% | $3.63B | $2.95B | $555M | -1 | $304M |
| 2031 Q2E | $13.97B | $1.15B | $1.15B | $212M | $54M | $4.03B | $409M | $4.54B | $25.51B | -4% | $3.64B | $2.90B | $601M | -1 | $319M |
Every row is projected. A year-over-year change is shown only where the quarter it compares against exists — an em dash means there is no comparable quarter, not a flat year.
Model revisions
Assumptions are marked to reality as each quarter prints. Every change is appended here, with the fair value the model produced at the time, so the model's own history stays visible.
| Date | Changed | Fair value then | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-16 | actuals, basis, drivers, capex | $272.39 | Rebased on the reported 2026 Q2 print: $28,236M revenue, $20,516M automotive, $3,139M energy, $4,581M services, 480,126 deliveries, 13.5 GWh deployed, capex $5,789M and free cash flow -$1,092M. Segment parents are now reported rather than apportioned; automotive ASP corrected from $34.0k to $41.3k and storage from $293 to $209 per kWh. |
| 2026-08-16 | all | $240.25 | Initial model, built off the 2026 Q1 print of $22.387B. Eight verticals apportioned from the three reported segments; Robotaxi holds its 1,000-car fleet flat until Cybercab deployment in 2026 Q4, Semi ramps from the Nevada line in 2026 after a pilot-scale 2025, and Optimus opens in 2027 Q3. |