Cryptocurrencies rallied on Sunday after President Donald Trump announced the creation of a strategic crypto reserve for the United States that will include bitcoin and ether, as well as XRP,  Solana’s SOL token and Cardano’s ADA. “A U.S. Crypto Reserve will elevate this critical industry after years of corrupt attacks by the Biden Administration, which is why my Executive Order on Digital Assets directed the Presidential Working Group to move forward on a Crypto Strategic Reserve that includes XRP, SOL, and ADA,” he said in a post on Truth Social. “I will make sure the U.S. is the Crypto Capital of the World.” “And, obviously, BTC and ETH, as other valuable Cryptocurrencies, will be at the heart of the Reserve,” he said in a follow-up post. “I also love Bitcoin and Ethereum!” XRP surged 33% after the announcement while the token tied to Solana jumped 25%. Cardano’s coin soared more than 60%. Bitcoin rose 10% to $94,343.82, after dipping to a three-month low under $80,000 on Friday. Ether, which has suffered some of the biggest losses in crypto year-to-date, gained 13%. Trump is hosting the first White House Crypto Summit on Friday, and investors will be watching closely for more clues about the direction of the reserve plans. This is the first time Trump has specified his support for a crypto “reserve” versus a “stockpile.” While the former assumes actively buying crypto in regular installments, a stockpile would simply not sell any of the crypto currently held by the U.S. government.

China’s factory activity expanded at its fastest pace in three months to 50.8 in February, a private-sector survey showed on Monday, as millions of migrant workers returned to work after an extended Lunar New Year holiday. The seasonally adjusted Caixin/S&P Global manufacturing purchasing managers’ index beat Reuters poll forecast of 50.3, also accelerating from 50.1 in January and 50.5 last December. The private-sector manufacturing PMI has stayed above the 50 threshold that separates expansion from contraction since last October. This private survey reading on Monday followed the official manufacturing PMI released on Saturday, which also showed that China’s February factory activity expanded at its fastest pace since November. The official PMI rose to 50.2 in February from 49.1 in January, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. The non-manufacturing PMI, which includes services and construction, also climbed to 50.4 from 50.2 in January. The figures came as economists flagged that fresh U.S. tariffs could pressure the country’s manufacturing activity — which accounted for a quarter of China’s GDP last year — and dent the role of exports as a key driver of growth this year. In February, new export orders grew at the fastest rate since last April, according to the Monday survey, as “demand strengthened from foreign clients.” The stronger external demand for Chinese manufactured goods could be due to U.S. importers continuing to front-run tariffs in anticipation of even higher levies, Zichun, Huang, China economist at Capital Economics, said in a note. U.S. President Donald Trump last week announced to impose additional 10% tariffs on Chinese goods — on top of the 10% he levied on China on Feb. 4. Trump had threated 60% tariffs on China on his campaign trail. The additional tariffs are scheduled to take effect on March 4, coinciding with a high-profile annual gathering in Beijing where Chinese authorities are expected to unveil economic targets for 2025 and fresh policy support. While attention is now on potential countermeasures from Beijing, investors also await more government details on a broad stimulus plan to prop up the slowing economy, including ramped-up fiscal spending to boost domestic demand and fend off persistent disinflationary pressures.

Patchy recovery

At the upcoming parliamentary meetings, China’s leadership is expected to acknowledge a significant softening in domestic demand while revealing highly anticipated details on fiscal stimulus aimed at shoring up growth in the face of heightened U.S. trade tensions. While a combination of fiscal support and “tariff front-running” helped China’s economy regain some momentum in February, the overall growth in this quarter is likely to slow, Capital Economics’ Huang said. “Unless the leadership unveil greater-than-expected stimulus at the National People’s Congress, it is hard to see how a slowdown can be avoided this year,” Huang said. Plagued by lackluster domestic consumption, output prices at factories have remained under pressure, particularly consumer and investment goods that experienced sharper price declines, according to the Monday survey. Squeezing that profit margin further, costs for copper and certain chemical products have edged higher, the survey showed. Employment in the manufacturing sector also slumped to a near five-year low, as manufacturers continued to prioritize cost reductions, particularly among consumer goods producers.

BOSTON (AP) — Demonstrators gathered outside Tesla stores across the U.S. Saturday to protest the automaker’s billionaire CEO, Elon Musk, and his push to slash government spending on behalf of President Donald Trump. The demonstrations are part of a growing backlash in North America and Europe to Musk’s disruptive role in Washington. Critics of Trump and Musk hope to discourage and stigmatize purchases of Tesla, the electric car company that is the world’s most valuable automaker. Liberal groups for weeks have organized anti-Tesla protests in hopes of galvanizing opposition to Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency and energizing Democrats still demoralized by Trump’s November victory. “We can get back at Elon,” said Nathan Phillips, a 58-year-old ecologist from Newton, Massachusetts, who was protesting in Boston on Saturday. “We can impose direct economic damage on Tesla by showing up at showrooms everywhere and boycotting Tesla and telling everyone else to get out, sell your stocks, sell your Teslas.” Musk is taking direction from Trump to slash federal spending and sharply reduce the workforce, arguing that Trump’s victory gave the president and him a mandate to restructure the U.S. government. DOGE officials have swiftly gained access to sensitive databases, directed thousands of federal job cuts, canceled contracts and shut down sections of the government, including the U.S. Agency for International Development. Musk’s critics say his actions defy Congress’s power to control the U.S. budget and present a host of ways for him to enrich himself. Musk leads several other companies, notably SpaceX, which conducts launches for NASA and the intelligence community, and the social media platform X. “Protests will not deter President Trump and Elon Musk from delivering on the promise to establish DOGE and make our federal government more efficient and more accountable to the hardworking American taxpayers across the country,” said White House spokesperson Harrison Fields. Tesla did not respond to an emailed request for comment. More than 50 demonstrations were listed Saturday on the website Tesla Takedown, with more planned later in March from coast to coast in the United States along with England, Spain and Portugal. News reports showed demonstrations in recent days in U.S. cities including Tucson, Arizona; St. Louis; New York City; Dayton, Ohio; Charlotte; and Palo Alto, California. Some Tesla owners have also reported their vehicles vandalized with spray painted swastikas amid what Jewish groups and observers fear is a rise in antisemitism. Federal prosecutors charged a woman in connection with a string of vandalism against a Colorado Tesla dealership, which included Molotov cocktails being thrown at vehicles and the words “Nazi cars” spray painted on the building. Saturday’s demonstration in Boston had a festive atmosphere, with a brass band playing music as protesters carried signs and chanted. Several of the signs mocked Musk and DOGE, with one reading: “Stop Elon and his despicable Muskrats.” “This government led by Trump and Musk, it’s gone completely off the rails and we are here to stop that,” said Carina Campovasso, a retired federal worker. “And I hope they listen.” About 300 demonstrators protested at a Tesla dealership in New York City on Saturday. Police said nine people were taken into custody but did not elaborate on the charges they faced. Tesla’s share price has fallen by nearly a third since Trump took office, though it’s still higher than it was a year ago. Musk’s current net worth is an estimated $359 billion, according to Forbes, which calculated his 2024 net worth as $195 billion.

Investors no longer have to speculate about how Nvidia (NVDA 3.97%) performed in the fourth quarter of 2024. Now we know. And the news was once again positive. Nvidia reported its Q4 results after the market closed on Wednesday. It should come as no shock that the GPU maker handily beat Wall Street estimates. But should you buy Nvidia stock after its blowout Q4 results?

How good was Nvidia’s Q4 performance?

Nvidia reported Q4 revenue of $39.33 billion, up 78% year over year and 12% higher than revenue generated in the previous quarter. This result topped the company’s previous guidance of $37.5 billion. It also exceeded the average estimate of $38.05 billion among analysts surveyed by LSEG. The company posted Q4 adjusted earnings of $0.89 per share, a year-over-year increase of 71% and a 10% jump from the third quarter of 2024. The consensus analysts’ estimate was for adjusted earnings of $0.84 per share. Nvidia’s big story was its data center business. Data center revenue soared 93% year over year and 16% sequentially to a record $35.6 billion. This made up nearly 91% of the company’s total revenue. There were a couple of clouds in Nvidia’s silver linings, though. One negative with the Q4 results is that the company’s growth is slowing somewhat. Nvidia’s revenue skyrocketed 94% year over year in Q3 and 122% in Q2. The company’s gross margins also slipped 3% year over year in Q4 to 73%.

Looking ahead

With all of this good news, why did Nvidia’s share price slide a little after its Q4 update? Investors focus more on the future than on the past. Nvidia’s outlook, while positive, wasn’t overly impressive. The company’s guidance was for revenue in the first quarter of its fiscal 2026 of $43 billion, plus or minus 2%. This figure is below the average estimate of $43.37 billion among the analysts surveyed by LSEG. It also reflects further deterioration in Nvidia’s growth rate. Nvidia projects an adjusted gross margin in Q1 of 71%, plus or minus 50 basis points. This continues the downward trend of the company’s gross margin in recent quarters. Investors would normally be ecstatic about a company delivering 65% revenue growth and gross margins of over 70%. However, when a stock trades at almost 31 times forward earnings as Nvidia does, expectations are understandably higher than for many other companies.  

Wall Street ended higher on Friday after a choppy trading session, with Dell Technologies dipping and other tech stocks climbing after a meeting between the U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskiy ended in disaster. Zelenskiy and Trump traded verbal blows at the White House before the world’s media. This created fresh uncertainty over Ukraine’s war with Russia for investors already worried about sticky U.S. inflation and a tepid economy. The S&P 500 moved lower immediately after the clash before recovering and ending the day with a gain. Zelenskiy left the White House without signing a much-vaunted deal between Ukraine and the U.S. over the joint development of natural resources. “The news, if you watched it live, it was pretty worrisome. It got heated, and Zelenskiy is considered an ally of the U.S.,” said Adam Sarhan, chief executive at 50 Park Investments. “That’s why the market sold off, but then cooler heads prevailed. Zelenskiy either is going to make a deal or he’s not.” Dell (DELL.N), opens new tab dropped 4.7% after the PC maker forecast a decline in its adjusted gross margin rate for fiscal 2026. Peer HP Inc (HPQ.N), opens new tab fell 6.8% after its quarterly profit forecasts missed expectations. Nvidia <NVDA.O> and Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab rose almost 4% each and lifted the S&P 500. The S&P 500 climbed 1.59% to end the session at 5,954.50 points. The Nasdaq gained 1.63% to 18,847.28 points, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1.39% to 43,840.91 points. Volume on U.S. exchanges was heavy, with 17.5 billion shares traded, compared to an average of 15.4 billion shares over the previous 20 sessions. All 11 S&P 500 sector indexes rose, led by financials (.SPSY), opens new tab, up 2.1%, followed by a 1.8% gain in consumer discretionary (.SPLRCD), opens new tab. For the week, the S&P 500 fell about 1%, the Nasdaq lost 3.5% and the Dow climbed almost 1%. The Nasdaq lost about 4% for all of February, its deepest monthly loss since April 2024. The S&P 500 fell 1.45% for the month and the Dow lost 1.6%. Earlier, a Commerce Department report showed inflation rose in January in line with expectations. However, consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of the economy, dropped 0.2% after an upwardly revised 0.8% increase in December. This could complicate the Federal Reserve’s deliberations on monetary policy. “Spending came in lower than we were looking for… most of it I would attribute to a cooling economy, which presents a dilemma for the Fed in the sense that you still have inflation and you have an economy that is moving lower. If you add them together, that equals stagflation,” said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at Spartan Capital Securities. Friday’s report is important for investors trying to gauge the next move for the central bank after policymakers reiterated a hawkish stance. Investors worry Trump’s policies, especially trade restrictions, could exacerbate U.S. inflation. “Tariff talk certainly is having a negative effect on the stock market, and it probably will keep a lid on stock market advances until there’s more clarity around that,” said Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at CFRA Research. Traders see the Fed lowering borrowing costs twice by December, little changed from before the report, according to data compiled by LSEG. Investors will assess comments from Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee later in the day. The CBOE Volatility Index (.VIX), opens new tab, also known as Wall Street’s fear gauge, touched a one-month high and was last up at 21.26 points. Advancing issues outnumbered falling ones within the S&P 500 (.AD.SPX), opens new tab by a 7.1-to-one ratio. The S&P 500 posted 39 new highs and 14 new lows; the Nasdaq recorded 43 new highs and 332 new lows.

NEW YORK (AP) — An “economic blackout” promoted on social media was underway Friday but with no clear indication of how many people took part or whether national retailers and restaurant chains noticed any effect from the grassroots protest. A fledgling activist group encouraged U.S. residents to refrain from spending for 24 hours as an act of resistance against what the group’s founder described as the malign influence of billionaires, big corporations and both major political parties on the lives of working Americans. The planned blackout started at 12 a.m. EST and was set to run through 11:59 p.m. EST. As of midday, any retrenchment on the part of consumers wasn’t visible, according to Marshal Cohen, chief retail advisor at market research firm Circana. The assessment was based on phone calls with retail executives and reports from his network of analysts monitoring malls and stores, Cohen said. “It doesn’t look like anybody’s really pulling back,” he said. “If you get 5% or 10% of the people that don’t shop, that could happen on any given day because of the rain.” Other groups and individuals are organizing longer boycotts to protest companies that have reduced their diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and to oppose President Donald Trump’s moves to abolish all federal DEI programs and policies.

Who’s behind the ‘24-hour Economic Blackout?’

The People’s Union USA, which takes credit for initiating the no-spend day, was founded only recently by John Schwarz, a meditation teacher who lives in the Chicago area, according to his social media accounts. The Associated Press did not receive a reply to requests for comment sent this week to the email address on the organization’s website. The website includes a link to a crowdfunding site where Schwarz requested help funding The People’s Union USA. As of late Friday afternoon, it showed well over $95,000 in donations, the vast majority in amounts $50 and under. The New York Times reported Friday afternoon that a biography in the “Meet the Founder” section of the website omitted information about Schwarz that many potential donors would have found off-putting: in 2007, a Connecticut judge sentenced him to 90 days in jail and five years’ probation for disseminating voyeuristic material. The AP could not immediately reach the Middlesex County criminal court clerk’s office to verify the court records the newspaper cited. The Times said Schwarz did not admit guilt with the plea he entered at the time but agreed the state had enough evidence to convict him and did not contest the charge. “This whole thing was a big scam,” he told the newspaper Friday. “It’s going to be expunged. … I did not do anything inappropriate to anybody.” The term “Blackout” previously was applied to a 2020 protest initiated by two Black women who wanted the music industry to take a day to talk about racism and how the industry profited off Black artists. They created a campaign under the hashtag #TheShowMustBePaused. Social media users joined in by posting black squares and pausing their feeds to show support for the Black Lives Matter movement. The People’s Union USA plans another broad-based economic blackout on March 28. It is also promoting weeklong consumer boycotts of specific retailers — Walmart and Amazon — as well as global food giants Nestle and General Mills.

Are people participating?

For his economic blackout, Schwarz advised participants to refrain from making any purchases either in stores or online, to shun fast food and to avoid filling their car gas tanks. Shoppers with emergencies or in need of essentials should support a local small business, he said. Many research firms weren’t tracking the event’s immediate impact on sales. Companies may comment eventually if the various boycotts have material business consequences. Some people posted videos on social media saying they weren’t making any store purchases Friday. Some users said they brewed their morning coffee at home, packed a lunch to take to work or bought items they needed ahead of time. Rachelle Biennestin, a first-grade teacher and TikTok content creator who lives near the Boston area, accepted the invitation not to shop Friday. She already was participating in “No Buy 2025,” a social media-driven trend that encourages participants to reduce personal over-consumption. Biennestin said she wanted to spend less money because major companies, such as Walmart, Amazon and Target, have backed away from their DEI commitments. She redirected her business to Costco, which has stood behind its diversity, equity and inclusion programs. “I’m not going to forget that they rolled back on DEI,” Biennestin said. “I’m going to remember that, and so will my wallet.” The no-spend day also received plenty of criticism online and inspired snarky suggestions for counter-protest shopping sprees. However, small businesses may have benefited from shoppers who decided to visit independent shops. Mischa Roy, who owns a tea and home goods shop in Northampton, Massachusetts called Spill the Tea Sis, had reduced staffing in case the blackout made Friday slow. Instead, sales were brisk, Roy said. “We are definitely seeing brand loyalty and small business loyalty,” she said.

What other boycotts are in the works?

A number of boycotts are in the works. An Atlanta-area pastor, the Rev. Jamal Bryant, organized a website called targetfast.org to recruit Christians for a a 40-day Target boycott starting March 5, which marks Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent. Other faith leaders have endorsed the protest. Target announced in January that it was ending its hiring, supplier recruitment and promotion goals for women, members of racial minority groups, LGBTQ+ people, veterans and people with disabilities. The discount retailer headquartered in Minneapolis previously had a reputation as an inclusion ally. The Rev. Al Sharpton, founder and president of the National Action Network, announced in late January that the civil rights organization would identify two companies in the next 90 days that will be boycotted for abandoning their DEI pledges.

Will the events have any impact?

Some retailers may feel a slight pinch from Friday’s broad “blackout.” Renewed inflation worries and Trump’s threat of tariffs on imported goods already have had an effect on consumer sentiment and spending. Anna Tuchman, a marketing professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, thinks the economic blackout will likely make a dent in daily retail sales but won’t be sustainable. “I think this is an opportunity for consumers to show that they have a voice on a single day,” she said. ”I think it’s unlikely that we would see long-run sustained decreases in economic activity supported by this boycott.” Other boycotts have produced different results. Tuchman studied the impact of a boycott against Goya Foods during the summer of 2020 after the company’s CEO praised Trump. Her research, based on data from research firm Numerator, found the brand saw a sales increase driven by first-time Goya buyers who were disproportionately from heavily Republican areas. However, the bump proved temporary; Goya had no detectable sales increase after three weeks, Tuchman said. It was a different story for Bud Light, which spent decades as America’s bestselling beer. Sales plummeted in 2023 after the brand sent a commemorative can to a transgender influencer. Bud Light’s sales still haven’t fully recovered, according to alcohol consulting company Bump Williams.

In early February, John Schwarz, a self-described “mindfulness and meditation facilitator,” proposed a 24-hour nationwide “economic blackout” of major chains on the last day of the month. Schwarz urged people to forgo spending at Amazon, Walmart, and all other major retailers and fast-food companies for a day. He called on them to spend money only at small businesses and on essential needs. “The system has been designed to exploit us,” said Schwarz, who goes by “TheOneCalledJai” on social media, in a video to his roughly 250,000 followers on Instagram and TikTok. “On February 28, we are going to remind them who really holds the power. For one day, we turn it off.” Schwarz, 57, has no background in social or political organizing. Until early this year, he almost exclusively posted videos of himself offering inspirational messages and motivational tips sitting in his home, backyard and shopping mall parking lots. He had low expectations for his boycott message gaining traction. “I thought maybe a handful of my followers would do it,” he told CNN in a phone interview this week. Instead, Schwarz’s call rapidly spread online. His video has been shared more than 700,000 times on Instagram and viewed 8.5 million times. Celebrities such as Stephen King, Bette Midler and Mark Ruffalo have encouraged people to participate. Reporters wrote and aired TV pieces about the boycott, propelling it further. The “economic blackout” effort is relatively uncoordinated and nebulous. Experts on consumer boycotts and corporate strategy are dubious that it will make a dent in the bottom lines of the massive companies it targets, let alone the vast US economy. Effective boycotts are typically well organized, make clear and specific demands and are focused on one company or issue. But this boycott has gained strength online because it has captured visceral public anger with the American economy, corporations and politics. “There’s the sense that a lot of people want to do something. Doing something in the American context has often meant using pocketbook politics,” said Lawrence Glickman, a historian at Cornell University and author of “Buying Power: A History of Consumer Activism in America.” “This a way of engaging in a form of collective action outside of the electoral arena that makes people feel some connection and sense of potential power.”

SINGAPORE, Feb 28 (Reuters) – Investors unnerved by the prospect of U.S. President Donald Trump’s impending tariffs drove a wave of selling on Friday in risk-sensitive currencies such as the Aussie, sent bitcoin tumbling and gave safe-haven support to the dollar. On Thursday Trump said his proposed tariffs of 25% on Mexican and Canadian goods would take effect on March 4 along with an extra 10% duty on Chinese imports, defying expectations of those who hoped for a further delay in the levies. The risk-off moves gathered steam during the trading session, with cryptocurrencies among the biggest losers for the day as bitcoin slid more than 5% to bottom at $79,125.53, its weakest level since November 11. Ether similarly tumbled more than 5% to an over 13-month low of $2,099.37. The two tokens were on track for their steepest monthly falls since June 2022, following a towering rally late last year on optimism that the Trump administration would be a boon for the asset class. “Bitcoin’s fall below $80,000 shows that positive sentiments from a crypto-friendly administration and high-profile endorsements have run their course,” said Joshua Chu, co-chair of the Hong Kong Web3 Association. “It’s clear bitcoin is a risk asset, not the inflation hedge or digital gold it’s often touted to be.” In the broader market, the Aussie slid 0.4% to its lowest in more than three weeks at $0.62105, extending a decline of 1% from the previous session. It was on track for a weekly loss of nearly 2%. The New Zealand dollar similarly fell more than 0.5% to $0.5599 and was set to shed 1.9% for the week. The euro struggled at a two-week low of $1.0380 and was also headed for a weekly fall of 0.6%, which would put its monthly gain at just 0.35%. “Markets were shaken out of tariff complacency,” said Sim Moh Siong, currency strategist at Bank of Singapore. “We continue to see scope for some U.S. dollar strength if tariff risks materialise by April even as our conviction that the U.S. dollar can strengthen meaningfully is now reduced given cracks in the U.S. exceptionalism story.” The Canadian dollar slipped to a more than three-week low of C$1.4452, as it heads for a weekly decline of 1.5%. The greenback’s moves against the Chinese yuan were more muted as it was little changed at 7.2846, after rising to a two-week top of 7.2914 earlier in the session. “Ahead of China’s most important political event next week, investors are likely staying clear of the yuan as (the People’s Bank of China) would likely intervene to ensure the yuan’s stability,” said Alex Loo, FX and macro strategist at TD Securities. Against a basket of currencies, the greenback struck a two-week top of 107.42 , extending its 0.8% jump on Thursday. Still, the index was on track for a monthly loss of more than 1%, its worst since August, as the dollar faces downward pressure amid worries over the health of the world’s largest economy. A raft of weaker-than-expected economic data has led traders to ramp up bets for more Federal Reserve rate cuts this year, in turn sending U.S. Treasury yields lower and proving a drag on the dollar. “For now, it’s the growth story that is dominating, pushing yields lower, while at the same time, we’re starting to see a little bit of an increase in volatility in markets in general and that risk aversion as well,” said Rodrigo Catril, senior currency strategist at National Australia Bank. Elsewhere, sterling fell 0.17% to $1.2580, but was set to end the month with a gain of more than 1.6% for its best performance in five months. The pound has partly been supported by expectations for relatively fewer rate cuts from the Bank of England than some other central banks, namely the European Central Bank. The yen fell 0.1% to 149.91 per dollar . Still, the Japanese currency was set to rise 3.5% for the month, its best since last July, on heightened bets of more rate hikes this year by the Bank of Japan (BOJ). Core consumer prices in Tokyo slowed in February, but kept well above the BOJ’s 2% target, data showed on Friday.

Nvidia (NVDA) reported its fourth quarter earnings after the bell on Wednesday, beating analysts’ expectations on the top and bottom lines and issuing solid Q1 guidance. Nvidia’s stock was up as much as 2% on the news; near 6:00 p.m. ET, the stock was up closer to 0.7%. Nvidia’s earnings come as the company girds itself for potential 25% tariffs on chips imported into the US and the threat of increased export controls on its shipments to China. The AI giant is also contending with the fallout from claims that Chinese startup DeepSeek developed its AI models using less powerful Nvidia chips than its US rivals, putting into question whether Big Tech companies are over-investing in AI. For the quarter, Nvidia reported earnings per share (EPS) of $0.89 on revenue of $39.3 billion. Wall Street was expecting EPS of $0.84 on revenue of $38.2 billion. The company said it expects Q1 revenue of $43 billion plus or minus 2%, better than the $42.3 billion expected. Data center revenue clocked in at $35.6 billion versus expectations of $34 billion in the quarter. “We’ve successfully ramped up the massive-scale production of Blackwell AI supercomputers, achieving billions of dollars in sales in its first quarter,” CEO Jensen Huang said in a statement. “AI is advancing at light speed as agentic AI and physical AI set the stage for the next wave of AI to revolutionize the largest industries.” According to Nvidia CFO Colette Kress, cloud service providers made up 50% of Nvidia’s data center revenue in the quarter. The company reported similar results in Q3. The company’s Blackwell line of chips contributed billions in sales for the quarter, Kress said. “We delivered $11.0 billion of Blackwell architecture revenue in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025, the fastest product ramp in our company’s history.” Nvidia’s gaming revenue, however, fell 11% year over year in Q4 due to supply constraints around its latest gaming chips. Nvidia is the reigning champion of AI chips, and it’s not losing that crown anytime soon. Its chips are the envy of Silicon Valley and beyond, and its competitors are still far from overtaking its performance advantage. Big Tech companies Amazon (AMZN), Google (GOOG, GOOGL), Meta (META), and Microsoft (MSFT) are spending billions of dollars building out their AI data centers, and a chunk of that is going straight to Nvidia. But shares of those same companies are also struggling in the early months of 2025. Google parent Alphabet is off more than 8% year to date, Amazon is down 2.5%, Microsoft has fallen 5.3%, and Apple (AAPL) has dropped more than 4%. Meta is the sole outlier in the group, with shares up over 14%. Huang also alluded to fears that DeepSeek’s AI models, which were developed using lower-powered Nvidia chips while still matching the performance of top US-made AI models, would hurt Nvidia’s sales. “Demand for Blackwell is amazing as reasoning AI adds another scaling law — increasing compute for training makes models smarter and increasing compute for long thinking makes the answer smarter,” he said. Nvidia is staring down President Trump’s threat of 25% tariffs on chips imported into the US, which could force it to either raise prices or eat some of the cost of the tariffs, cutting into margins. Nvidia works with TSMC to build its processors, which produces many of those chips in Taiwan. Trump has also threatened to put further export restrictions on Nvidia chips destined for China, which would cut into the company’s revenue from the region. Wall Street has also raised concerns about the impact of Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta using their own custom AI chips versus those developed by Nvidia. If those companies’ chips can match Nvidia’s in performance, the thinking goes, they’ll be less dependent on Nvidia’s offerings. But Morgan Stanley Research analyst Joseph Moore cautioned overreacting to the potential of these ASICS, or application-specific integrated circuits. “Spending time with 20-25 Nvidia alternatives over the years, most of which failed to get traction, we saw initial enthusiasm based on price and potential performance, which [brought] an initial deployment,” Moore wrote. “Then there is almost always a pull back to Nvidia, which has the most mature ecosystem, and the alternatives are put on hold, sometimes never to return.” Google’s and Amazon’s chips have proven to be the exception to that rule so far, but Moore says Nvidia is still gaining share in the AI space.

Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos on Wednesday announced a “significant shift” to the publisher’s opinion page that led David Shipley, the paper’s editorial page editor, to leave the paper. The changes upended precedent and rattled a media company that has already been shaken by years of turmoil and leadership turnover. As part of the overhaul, the Post will publish daily opinion stories on two editorial “pillars”: personal liberties and free markets, Bezos teased in an X post on Wednesday morning after announcing the change in a company-wide email. The Post’s opinion section will cover other subjects, too, Bezos wrote, but “viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.” “I’m confident that free markets and personal liberties are right for America,” Bezos wrote. “I also believe these viewpoints are underserved in the current market of ideas and news opinion. I’m excited for us together to fill that void.” In announcing the shift, the billionaire media mogul championed the changes as based in American principles anchored in “freedom.” This freedom, Bezos emphasized, “is ethical — it minimizes coercion — and practical — it drives creativity, invention, and prosperity.” As a basis for the change, Bezos noted that legacy opinion sections have become outdated and have been replaced by the internet. “There was a time when a newspaper, especially one that was a local monopoly, might have seen it as a service to bring to the reader’s doorstep every morning a broad-based opinion section that sought to cover all views,” Bezos said via X. “Today, the internet does that job.”

David Shipley leaves the Post

Bezos also shared that David Shipley, the Post’s editorial page editor, would part ways with the company. Shipley had been offered a role in leading Bezos’ planned changes but decided to step away instead. “I offered David Shipley, whom I greatly admire, the opportunity to lead this new chapter,” Bezos wrote on X. “I suggested to him that if the answer wasn’t ‘hell yes,’ then it had to be ‘no.’ After careful consideration, David decided to step away. This is a significant shift, it won’t be easy, and it will require 100% commitment — I respect his decision.” Bezos said the Post will search for a new opinion editor to “own” the paper’s new editorial direction. In an email to the Post’s editorial team obtained by CNN, Shipley noted his decision to leave the publisher was reached “after reflection on how I can best move forward in the profession I love.” “I will always be thankful for the opportunity I was given to work alongside a team of opinion journalists whose commitment to strong, innovative, reported commentary inspired me every day — and was affirmed by two Pulitzer Prizes and two Loeb Awards in two short years,” Shipley wrote in the email. Shipley’s departure comes after spending four months navigating increasing criticism of the Post from subscribers and its own journalists. During that time, he defended the Post’s decision to not run a cartoon from Ann Telnaes that featured Jeff Bezos – and led to her resignation. “Not every editorial judgment is a reflection of a malign force,” Shipley said in January. “My decision was guided by the fact that we had just published a column on the same topic as the cartoon and had already scheduled another column — this one a satire — for publication. The only bias was against repetition.”

Post staffers lash out

Bezos’ announcement was immediately met with hostility by some Post staffers who publicly took issue with the move. Jeff Stein, the publisher’s chief economics reporter, called the overhaul a “massive encroachment by Jeff Bezos” that makes it clear “dissenting views will not be published or tolerated there.” “I still have not felt encroachment on my journalism on the news side of coverage, but if Bezos tries interfering with the news side I will be quitting immediately and letting you know,” Stein said on X. Amanda Katz, who stepped down from her role on the Post’s opinion team at the end of 2024, called the change “an absolute abandonment of the principles of accountability of the powerful, justice, democracy, human rights, and accurate information that previously animated the section in favor of a white male billionaire’s self-interested agenda.” And columnist Philip Bump, who pens the Post’s weekly “How to Read This Chart” newsletter, pithily said “what the actual f**k” on Bluesky. Meanwhile, conservatives are celebrating Bezos’ changes. Charlie Kirk, the Turning Point USA founder, hailed the change as “the culture (…)changing rapidly for the better.” And Elon Musk, whose SpaceX is a direct rival of Bezos’ Blue Origins, succinctly applauded on X, saying “Bravo, @JeffBezos!” Following the transformation’s internal announcement, Will Lewis, the paper’s publisher and chief executive, noted in an internal email obtained by CNN that the “recalibrate(ion)” was “not about siding with any political party,” but, rather, about “being crystal clear about what we stand for as a newspaper.” “Doing this is a critical part of serving as a premier news publication across America and for all Americans,” Lewis wrote to Post staffers. As Shipley exits the Post on Friday, Lewis said he would put together an interim arrangement, adding that the editorial page editor’s replacement would be announced in “due course” — and be “someone who is wholehearted in their support for free markets and personal liberties.” In the early afternoon, Matt Murray, the Post’s executive editor, chimed in to respond to the “questions” he had received from concerned staffers. In an email obtained by CNN, Murray toed Bezos’ line, reminding staffers that opinion sections are “traditionally the provenance of the owner at news organizations.” “The independent and unbiased work of The Post’s newsroom remains unchanged, and we will continue to pursue engaging, impactful journalism without fear or favor,” Murray wrote. Though Murray and Lewis have supported Bezos’ transformation with staffers, New York magazine reports that Lewis’ tune is quite different behind the scenes, having warned Bezos that the changes would likely negatively impact the publication. Already, Lewis’ private predictions appear to be manifesting. Since the announcement, two former top Post editors have come out against the move. As reported by the Daily Beast, Marty Baron, the Post’s former executive editor, said he was “sad and disgusted” by Bezos’ demands, emphasizing that the Amazon and Blue Origin founder “has prioritized those commercial interests over The Post, and he is betraying The Post’s longstanding principles to do so.” Meanwhile, Cameron Barr, a former senior managing editor for the Post, said in a LinkedIn post that he would end his “professional association” with the newspaper, saying Bezos’ changes represent “an unacceptable erosion of its commitment to publishing a healthy diversity of opinion and argument.” And David Maraniss, a longtime Post editor and Pulitzer Prize winner, said on Bluesky that he would “never write for (the Post) again as long as (Bezos is) the owner.”

Bezos and the Post’s new direction

The divisive overhaul comes months after Bezos blocked the opinion page’s endorsement of former Vice President Kamala Harris at the eleventh hour, ending decades of precedent. Shipley was among the chorus of voices that sought to convince Bezos not to bar the endorsement, telling staffers in October that “I failed” to do just that. Since Bezos’ action to block the op-ed, a chain reaction has hounded the Post, with 250,000 Post readers canceling their subscriptions and several opinion staffers resigning in protest. The Post has also hemorrhaged reporters, who have signed with rival publications rather than remain at the ailing outlet. The massive changeup comes months after Bezos admitted in his defense of the op-ed block that his Amazon and Blue Origin business interests have served as a “complexifier for the Post.” In the run-up to November’s election, Silicon Valley media moguls were seen cozying up to then-candidate Donald Trump, hedging their bets in the event of a conservative presidential victory. Critics said Bezos was trying to change the Post’s editorial strategy to gain favorability with Trump, who has grown close to Elon Musk, whose SpaceX is a direct rival of Bezos’ own business. Bezos pushed back on those accusations in a rare October op-ed. “When it comes to the appearance of conflict, I am not an ideal owner of The Post,” Bezos wrote. “You can see my wealth and business interests as a bulwark against intimidation, or you can see them as a web of conflicting interests.” “Only my own principles can tip the balance from one to the other,” he wrote in October. Bezos’ “appearance of conflict” is issued from his numerous holdings, which include his Amazon and spacefaring company, Blue Origin. Bezos’ Amazon is also still facing a lawsuit from the FTC and 17 states, who accuse the company of abusing its economic dominance and harming fair competition. Bezos attended President Trump’s January inauguration. Although Bezos was not the only tech billionaire present, his attendance as the Post’s owner did little to dispel the appearance of conflict. Most recently, the Post opted to not publish an anti-Musk wrap ad for its print edition; while the Post did greenlight an internal anti-Musk ad, it has not yet clarified the grounds on which the wrap was denied and did not comment when asked whether Bezos was involved with the decision. Post staffers also have for some time also been discontented with Bezos over his appointment of Lewis as publisher and chief executive. After taking the top job in early 2024, reports quickly emerged of Lewis’ involvement in several controversies, including accusations that he used fraudulent and unethical methods to acquire reporting for articles while working at the Sunday Times. Lewis also came under fire for allegedly attempting to kill a story about his alleged involvement in the phone hacking scandal coverup. Lewis has denied the accusations. Dissatisfaction with Lewis reached a peak in June, when two Pulitzer Prize-winning Post journalists called for a leadership change amid the reports that questioned Lewis’ journalistic integrity, undermining the Post’s reputation and reporting alike. Though, as Murray notes, the opinion section is the “provenance” of the Post’s owner — meaning Bezos — the billionaire’s last change resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of subscribers, worsening the Post’s financial woes. As the overhaul exacerbates longstanding issues at the storied publication and current and former Post staffers publicly decry the changes, the Post appears to find itself in an emergency.