• StoneX (SNEX) maintains Buy rating and $475 target on Tesla (TSLA), even as it forecasts Q3 deliveries of 446,500—down 10% YoY and slightly below consensus.
  • The firm expects energy storage deployments to jump 20% sequentially to 16.2 GWh, potentially offsetting weaker vehicle volumes.
  • Tesla's Q3 delivery report next week will test whether growth in storage and services can sustain the bull case amid margin pressure and negative free cash flow.

StoneX Bullish on Tesla, Sees Energy Storage Offsetting Delivery Dip

StoneX reiterated its Buy rating and $475 price target on Tesla ahead of next week’s Q3 delivery report, according to a note obtained by Roic AI. The firm expects 446,500 deliveries, down 10% year-over-year and slightly below consensus. However, energy storage deployments are forecast to jump 20% sequentially to 16.2 GWh, helping offset weaker vehicle volumes.

That forecast implies a weaker comparison against Q3 2025, when Tesla delivered a record 497,099 vehicles, aided by a rush to obtain the U.S. federal EV purchase credit before it expired. The firm’s bullishness rests materially on energy: its 16.2 GWh estimate would represent a major acceleration from Tesla’s 13.5 GWh deployed in Q2 2026 and would be above the 12.5 GWh deployed in Q3 2025. Another recent analyst estimate, from UBS (UBS), is even higher at 16.9 GWh. Storage is inherently lumpy quarter to quarter, so these forecasts carry execution risk.

This is not a consensus view on deliveries. UBS recently projected 470,000 Q3 deliveries and retained a $385 price target, illustrating that analysts differ both on near-term volume and what Tesla’s longer-term opportunities justify in valuation.

Tesla is a large global electric-vehicle and clean-energy company. Its principal products include Model 3, Model Y, Cybertruck and other EVs; Megapack utility-scale batteries; Powerwall home batteries; solar products; charging infrastructure; vehicle software such as Full Self-Driving subscriptions; and developing autonomy, robotaxi, AI-compute and Optimus humanoid-robot initiatives. Tesla says its stated mission is to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy.

Q2 Results Show Why Deliveries Alone Are Incomplete

The Q2 results show why deliveries alone are an incomplete measure of Tesla’s health. Revenue beat market expectations, but adjusted EPS of $0.33 missed expectations, operating margins fell sharply, and free cash flow turned negative as the company accelerated investment.

Energy storage remains strategically important but is not immune to margin volatility. Tesla deployed 13.5 GWh in Q2, a 53% sequential increase, yet energy gross margin fell to 20.4% from 39.5% in Q1. Management attributed much of that decline to an approximately $240 million warranty true-up for legacy vendor-cell issues and the absence of prior-quarter tariff benefits.

No major executive or corporate restructuring is indicated in the available recent materials. The reported senior team continues to include Elon Musk as CEO and Vaibhav Taneja as CFO.

Policy Shift Adds Pressure to U.S. EV Demand

The major U.S. policy shift is the end of the federal clean-vehicle tax credit. The IRS says the New Clean Vehicle Credit is unavailable for vehicles acquired after September 30, 2025; previously, eligible buyers could receive up to $7,500. That policy deadline pulled purchases into Q3 2025, making current year-over-year delivery comparisons unusually difficult and potentially weighing on U.S. EV demand afterward.

For Tesla, this raises the importance of financing offers, vehicle pricing, product competitiveness, regional incentives, and non-U.S. sales. State and utility incentives still vary by location, but they do not fully replace the uniform federal purchase incentive.

Grid-scale batteries benefit from expanding renewable generation and the need to balance supply and demand on electricity networks. Tesla’s Megapack deployments therefore give it exposure to a different demand cycle than consumer vehicle sales: utilities, developers, and commercial customers invest based on grid reliability, renewable integration, electricity-price volatility, and capacity needs.

That diversification is the strongest factual basis for StoneX’s thesis. In Q3 2025, Tesla’s energy-storage revenue rose 44% year over year to $3.4 billion while storage deployments reached 12.5 GWh; Q2 2026 deployment remained strong at 13.5 GWh.

Competition and Trade Landscape Shifts

Tesla faces a more contested global EV market, especially in Europe. Chinese brands have grown rapidly: five Chinese-owned groups increased European new-car sales around 71% year over year in August 2026, while their overall market share rose to 10.8% from 6.6%. Tesla’s August sales in that report rose 53%, but the broader trend remains one of heightened price and model competition.

Trade policy reshapes that competition rather than removing it. The EU’s countervailing duties on Chinese battery-electric vehicles remain in place through 2029, and Chinese-made EVs represented 17% of EU BEV sales in Q1 2026, down from a 22% peak in 2024. Tesla has also reduced its reliance on China-built vehicles in Europe, with its share of Chinese BEV imports dropping from 26% in 2024 to 19% in Q1 2026.

Outlook: Delivery Reaction and Long-Term Debate

The immediate market reaction will likely depend on the comparison among three figures: Tesla’s reported deliveries versus StoneX’s 446,500 estimate and broader consensus; storage deployments versus StoneX’s 16.2 GWh forecast and UBS’s 16.9 GWh estimate; and subsequent margin, cash-flow, and capex commentary, because the Q2 results demonstrated that top-line growth can coexist with earnings disappointment.

A delivery result near StoneX’s forecast would likely focus attention on the post-tax-credit demand environment. A storage result near or above 16 GWh would strengthen the diversification argument, but investors will still look for evidence that storage growth produces sustainable margins rather than merely greater revenue.

Longer term, the bull case hinges on energy storage becoming a larger, more recurring and grid-linked earnings contributor, with services, software, charging, and AI initiatives reducing Tesla’s dependence on vehicle unit growth. The bear case points to less subsidy-supported U.S. EV demand, Chinese and legacy automaker competition pressuring pricing, volatile energy margins due to warranty costs and tariffs, and elevated capital investment extending negative free cash flow.

In short, StoneX is making a mix-shift thesis: short-term auto deliveries may be soft, but high-growth storage can preserve the strategic growth narrative. The Q3 report will show whether Tesla can convert that strategic narrative into durable revenue, margins, and cash generation.

Correction: A previous version of this article misstated the sequential change in energy storage deployments. Tesla deployed 13.5 GWh in Q2 2026, a 53% sequential increase from Q1 2026, not a 20% increase. The error has been corrected.