On Friday, Dec. 18, 2020, shares of electric-car maker Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) rose almost 6% to close at a record $695. More than 200 million shares changed hands that session (more than $131 billion of stock), making it one of the busiest trading days in the company’s history.

The buying wasn’t optional for everyone. S&P Dow Jones Indices had scheduled Tesla to join the S&P 500 (SNPINDEX:^GSPC) at its full weight before the market opened the following Monday. And the addition was based on that Friday’s closing prices. In other words, every fund tracking the index effectively paid $695.

Missed Nvidia in 2009? This Rare Signal Is Flashing Again. In 2009, a “Double Down” signal flashed for a little-known chipmaker called Nvidia. For the first time in years, that same “Total Conviction” signal is flashing for a company 1/100th the size of Nvidia. Continue »

Nearly six years later, that $10,000 would have become about $15,700. The same money in an S&P 500 index fund would have grown to about $20,500 before dividends.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

Nearly six years later

Tesla has split its stock once since then (three for one, in August 2022), which turns that $695 closing price into $231.67 per today’s share. A $10,000 purchase works out to about 43 of today’s shares.

As of this writing, the stock trades at about $364, up 57% from the split-adjusted purchase price. But stretched across almost six years, 57% comes to about 8% a year.

The ride was better at times. The stock traded as high as $498.83 within the past year, a level that would have put the stake above $21,000. It hasn’t held it.

The S&P 500, meanwhile, ended that Friday just above 3,700 and now sits close to 7,600 — up about 105%, or about 13% a year. And dividends would widen the index’s lead from there.

Tesla, for all the attention it gets, has trailed the very index it joined.

The reason isn’t that the company failed to grow.

Did Tesla deliver?

The purchase valued Tesla at more than $658 billion, the largest addition in the S&P 500’s history at the time.

In 2020, the company generated about $31.5 billion of revenue and $721 million of net income, its first profitable year. It produced and delivered about half a million vehicles. Against a price tag of more than $658 billion, the market was paying more than 900 times the year’s earnings.

Much of the growth that price demanded did show up. Tesla’s trailing-12-month revenue now tops $100 billion, more than triple 2020’s total. Notably, the company delivered more than 480,000 vehicles in this year’s second quarter alone, up 25% from a year earlier — nearly as many as it delivered in all of 2020. Its energy storage business, tiny back then, deployed 13.5 gigawatt-hours in the quarter, a 41% jump from a year earlier. And net income over the past four quarters was about $3.8 billion, more than five times what the company earned in 2020, though well below the $12.6 billion it earned in 2022.

However, the stock still lost to the index, because years of that growth were already priced in at $695. Over that stretch, Tesla’s price-to-earnings ratio compressed from more than 900 times earnings to more than 330 times earnings. I’d argue most of the company’s growth went toward justifying the price index funds had already paid.

Today’s price assumes another act

At more than 330 times earnings, today’s buyer is arguably making the same purchase the index funds made in 2020 — paying up front for growth that hasn’t arrived yet.

This time, the growth is supposed to come from autonomy. Tesla, which says it is in “its largest and most exciting period of investment,” now runs its Robotaxi ride-hailing service in seven major U.S. metros. And its steering-wheel-free Cybercab began carrying passengers in Austin this month, the same day federal regulators began an audit of the vehicle’s certification.

That investment isn’t free. The company’s second-quarter revenue was up 26% year over year, but net income fell 5%, and the company’s operating margin shrank to 1.4% from 4.1% a year earlier. Capital expenditures came in at $5.8 billion, more than double the year-ago figure, turning free cash flow negative.

Autonomy may yet deliver, of course, and if it does, today’s earnings could look small in hindsight. But I think the 2020 purchase is a useful reminder that even impressive growth can lose to an index fund when the starting price already reflects it. I wouldn’t buy shares at today’s price expecting them to beat the market.

Missed Nvidia in 2009? This Rare Signal Is Flashing Again

In 2009, a “Double Down” signal flashed for a little-known chipmaker called Nvidia. If you’d invested $5,000 then, you’d be sitting on $2,837,545 today.*

Now, for the first time in years, that same “Total Conviction” signal is flashing for a company 1/100th the size of Nvidia. It’s a key player in the $1.8 trillion space race, and with the stock recently sitting 20% off its highs, the window to get in early is closing fast.

Continue »

*Stock Advisor returns as of August 3, 2026

Daniel Sparks has clients with positions in Tesla. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

$10,000 in Tesla When It Joined the S&P 500 Would Be About $15,700 Today. An Index Fund Would Have Done Better. was originally published by The Motley Fool

Anthropic is reportedly in discussions with Nvidia about a potential $10 billion investment that could help shape what Reuters called a potential “mega IPO” for the AI company. According to Reuters, citing people familiar with the matter, the talks are still fluid and the figures being discussed could materially reshape the size—and potential valuation—of any public debut.

Reuters also reports that Anthropic is seeking to raise as much as $100 billion in the offering, which could value the company at around $2 trillion. The individuals described the negotiations as confidential and asked not to be identified, and Reuters said Anthropic declined to comment while Nvidia had not yet responded to a request for comment.

Key takeaways

• Reuters reports Anthropic is discussing a possible $10 billion Nvidia investment tied to a potentially massive IPO.
• The offering size under discussion could reach up to $100 billion, implying an around $2 trillion valuation target.
• Talks remain ongoing and could change, with neither Anthropic nor Nvidia providing comment.
• The rumored move fits a broader strategy in which chip makers seek influence not just over compute, but also AI platforms and customers.

Why a potential Nvidia-Anthropic deal matters

If the reported discussions result in participation by Nvidia—potentially as an early strategic backer—it would strengthen more than just Anthropic’s funding prospects. Strategic investors often have outsized influence in how companies position their technology and partnerships, especially in fast-moving AI supply chains where chips, infrastructure, model ecosystems, and developer tools can be just as important as model performance.

For Nvidia, a relationship with Anthropic at a scale that could support a record-setting public offering would be consistent with its push to stay tightly embedded in the AI stack. Reuters’ account suggests Nvidia could benefit by reinforcing ties with a major customer while also taking a more prominent role around the timing and structure of an IPO.

Link to Anthropic’s infrastructure footprint

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph highlighted Anthropic’s increasing demand for AI compute capacity. On Aug. 11, Cointelegraph reported that Bitcoin miner Riot Platforms had secured a 20-year agreement to supply 191 megawatts of capacity from its Rockdale, Texas campus to a “leading frontier AI” company.

Cointelegraph stated that the customer was Anthropic and that the deal was valued at about $9 billion, citing a Bloomberg report that also referenced people familiar with the matter. While such capacity agreements don’t automatically translate into IPO readiness, they can signal the scale of near-term compute requirements—an issue that matters to investors assessing how quickly an AI company can sustain growth in training and inference.

Nvidia’s software leverage and the Hugging Face acquisition

The Nvidia angle in this story also connects to its broader strategy beyond chips. Earlier in August, Cointelegraph reported that Nvidia had agreed to acquire Hugging Face for $12.9 billion, extending its reach into the AI software and developer tooling ecosystem.

Hugging Face, as described in Cointelegraph’s earlier reporting and in remarks by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, serves more than 18 million developers and hosts over three million models. Huang said Nvidia to acquire Hugging Face would bring control of a major platform for AI models as AI companies increasingly compete across chips, software, and the developer tools used to build and deploy models.

In that context, the Reuters report—if confirmed—would underline a two-pronged approach: Nvidia aims to maintain leverage at the infrastructure level and also deepen its influence over the software layers where models are published, accessed, and integrated into applications.

What to watch next

Because Reuters characterizes the negotiations as ongoing and potentially changeable, investors and industry participants should watch for follow-on reporting that clarifies whether Nvidia is expected to participate formally, how the offering size would be structured, and whether either company provides updated statements as talks progress. The broader implication—however it plays out—remains clear: AI capital formation and strategic partnerships are increasingly shaped by control of both compute and the platforms developers rely on.

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has received a total of £72 million (about $97 million) from two crypto-linked billionaires, after Christopher Harborne matched a record donation initially announced by Ben Delo. The pair’s contributions are described as the largest ever given to a British political party, according to reporting cited in the original coverage.

Harborne announced on Saturday that he would donate £36 million, following Delo’s earlier announcement. Reuters reported Farage’s response, noting that Reform welcomed the donations as a way to ensure the party can compete in the upcoming political fight.

Key takeaways

• Reform UK received £72 million total, combining contributions of £36 million each from Ben Delo and Christopher Harborne.
• Harborne matched Delo’s donation after Delo announced his package the day earlier.
• The funding is framed by Reform as enabling a “level playing field” for the next general election campaign.
• The donations come amid ongoing political scrutiny in the UK over crypto-linked financial influence, following an earlier Farage scandal.
• Delo’s background includes a US legal resolution tied to BitMEX-related charges and a later presidential pardon, per earlier Cointelegraph reporting.

Why the donations are drawing attention

The scale of the donations is itself notable: the combined £72 million is presented in the original report as the largest ever made to a British political party, underscoring how quickly Reform has become a focal point for debates over money in UK politics.

Harborne said he was motivated to match Delo’s donation and, according to a quote carried by The Telegraph in the underlying report, he expected no direct personal outcome—describing it as support for a party “ready for government.” Delo, a co-founder of the BitMEX cryptocurrency exchange, said he wanted to help ensure a “fair fight” at the polls.

In remarks attributed to The Telegraph, the funding timeline was also used to manage risk around potential legal or administrative interruption. Delo described the donation as effectively £1 million per month until a general election expected in 2029, but said he paid the entire amount up front so it could not be blocked, rather than drip-feeding funds over time.

Reform’s “level playing field” argument

Farage welcomed both donations, stating that the money would allow Reform to contest the next general election on “a level playing field,” Reuters reported. That framing is important for understanding how Reform is positioning the contributions: rather than describing them as advantage-making capital, the party’s leadership is presenting the donations as a mechanism to counterbalance the resources of other parties.

However, the political context is not purely about campaign budgeting. The original coverage points to heightened scrutiny from UK lawmakers after Reform became associated with crypto-linked figures and large transfers during a period that has already seen contested discussion about whether digital-asset money should be treated differently under UK campaign finance rules.

Scrutiny after the earlier crypto funding controversy

Last month, Cointelegraph reported that Farage was under investigation after receiving millions of dollars in donations and gifts connected to the crypto industry. The underlying reporting cited Christopher Harborne and George Cottrell among the figures tied to the controversy, while noting that Farage denied wrongdoing.

Cointelegraph also reported that Farage resigned as a Member of Parliament in July amid the crypto scandal. The resignation triggered a by-election that Farage won with 63% of the vote, according to the original piece, ahead of a satirical candidate known as Count Binface.

Beyond individual allegations, the donations have intensified broader concerns among lawmakers about the potential influence of digital assets on UK political decision-making. In the underlying report, it was noted that Labour MPs were reportedly considering making a crypto-donation moratorium—announced in March pending legislation—permanent, in response to what Farage characterized as “gifts” from Harborne and Cottrell.

Taken together, the new donations place Reform’s campaign financing squarely inside an active policy debate: whether limits on crypto-related political giving are necessary, and how any such limits might be enforced in practice as crypto industry figures continue to engage with UK electoral politics.

Delo’s US legal history and pardon

The wider scrutiny around the donation also intersects with the personal legal history of one of the donors. Earlier Cointelegraph reporting stated that Delo was one of three BitMEX co-founders who pleaded guilty in the US to federal charges tied to violations of the Bank Secrecy Act.

That reporting added that Delo agreed to pay a $10 million fine in 2022 but did not serve prison time. It further noted that Delo, alongside Arthur Hayes and Samuel Reed, later received a presidential pardon from then-President Donald Trump in March 2025.

While the donation news is focused on UK politics, this US dimension is relevant for readers trying to understand why crypto-linked political contributions are polarizing: the donations are not only raising questions about UK campaign finance oversight, but also resurfacing attention to the donors’ broader regulatory and legal track records.

Looking ahead, investors, voters, and political watchers will likely focus on two practical questions: whether UK authorities or lawmakers introduce additional restrictions on crypto-related political donations, and how Reform responds to ongoing inquiries as the party prepares for the next general election. The larger issue behind the headline figure is how—or whether—crypto money will be treated as ordinary political funding as the debate over fairness and influence continues to escalate.