Goldman Sachs Maintains Neutral Rating on Tesla: Robotaxi and Optimus Can't Justify Current Valuation
nashnova research
Tesla's Q3 gross margins beat expectations, but Goldman keeps its Neutral rating and $360 target, arguing that Robotaxi and humanoid-robot profits aren't arriving fast enough to support the stock price. Wall Street is sharply divided.
What did the Q3 income statement actually show?
Overall gross margin hit 19.6%, above Goldman's 18.5% forecast; auto gross margin was 18.1%, also a beat. This means → the car business itself is getting leaner.
But operating profit came in at just $718 million, well below Goldman's $1.043 billion estimate. In plain terms = the extra gross-profit dollars were eaten up by R&D, compute depreciation, and new-product ramp costs — none of it reached the bottom line.
Adjusted EPS of $0.48 beat expectations, yet after stock-based compensation it was only $0.20, below Goldman's $0.24 call. This reflects how sensitive Tesla's reported profit is to the treatment of equity awards.
FSD adoption is surging — so why isn't Goldman convinced?
Active paying FSD users reached 1.74 million, up roughly 18% quarter-on-quarter and 67% year-on-year; the FSD attach rate on North American deliveries topped 75%.
Goldman cautions: the figure blends one-time purchases with subscriptions. This means → the user count looks strong, but how much recurring monthly revenue it actually produces remains unclear.
Robotaxi has logged 3.1 million paid, fully driverless miles as of October 18. Management confirmed the $0.30-per-mile operating-cost target has not yet been met. In plain terms = the cars are running, but every mile still loses money.
How far is Optimus from making money?
The humanoid robot has entered production at the Fremont plant, but hardware and manufacturing processes are still iterating. External customer deliveries are penciled in for around late 2027.
Management plans to integrate the AI5 chip by roughly April 2027. This means → the core compute hardware isn't finalized; the product is still changing shape.
Goldman states explicitly: Tesla's autonomous-driving data advantage does not directly translate into robot capability. In plain terms = knowing how to drive is not the same as knowing how to work — the robot faces an entirely different set of physical tasks.
How did Goldman arrive at the $360 target?
The model uses 150× forward earnings — summing quarters five through eight — and includes stock-based compensation. This means → even at an extremely high multiple, the math lands below today's share price.
Goldman's own forecasts project 2027 and 2028 revenue at roughly $127.3 billion and $145.1 billion, with EPS of $1.75 and $2.45. This reflects a model that already bakes in strong AI-driven growth — and still finds the stock overvalued.
Against the October 21 close of $386.47, the $360 target implies roughly 6.85% downside.
Why is Wall Street so divided?
Piper Sandler raised its target to $475, maintaining Overweight — roughly 22.91% upside from the October 21 close. UBS raised to $425, keeping Neutral.
UBS expects Robotaxi to become a meaningful financial contributor only by late 2027 or 2028, broadly in line with Goldman's cautious timeline.
Goldman frames the core disagreement: whether FSD, Robotaxi, and robots can deliver incremental profit sooner and at greater scale than the consensus expects. In plain terms = the Street largely agrees Tesla *can* do these things — the fight is over *when the money shows up*.
市场有风险，内容仅供研究参考，不构成投资建议。