Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Shall TSLA be added to S&P500? (out of main)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
re-posting from the roundable thread:

You need to be profitable in the most recent Qtr and also the sum of the most recent 4 Qtrs. Tesla cannot meet this requirement with Q4 as the last 3 quarters have a $967m GAAP loss. They would need to earn $968 in Q4 - not going to happen.

To get into S&P after Q1 2020, the Q1 2020 net income must be positive and the total of Q4 2019 and Q1 2020 must be at least $265.4m.
I think this is very doable.

See table below:

View attachment 496004
 
Poll - when will TSLA be included in S&P500?
60% expect inclusion in May/June.
From another thread:
Very interesting, and this largely rhymes with this recent analysis by @ReflexFunds.

He also pointed out the fact that because Tesla isn't in the S&P 400 either, there's an even larger 'gradient' between fund ownership of TSLA before and after the inclusion event.

This brings me to the following topic - the magnitude of the move. There was one recent S&P 500 inclusion of a large cap company, the 2018 inclusion of Twitter (TWTR).

Here are the events as I understand them:
Here's the daily chart history of the ~three months of TWTR price changes from April ~20 to July:


Here's the macro environment in that timeframe, Nasdaq futures - it was mostly supportive of any TWTR price moves:


Note the various pricing anomalies:
  • On the day of the Q1 announcement there was no meaningful price reaction to the meeting of the S&P 500 criteria: in fact TWTR dropped and closed at $29. Did the market not realize that this happened? Was there some doubt about Twitter's inclusion?
  • Almost a full month passed and TWTR traded on average volume in a tight 10% band - despite Nasdaq rises being supportive of bigger price moves.
  • June 1: uptick in trading volume and breakout from previous range.
  • June 4, on the day of the S&P committee announcement, TWTR closes on a nice up-move $37.
  • June 5, all hell breaks lose and the big rally continues: stock closes on $39.
  • June 15, on the 9th trading day after the S&P 500 inclusion, TWTR reaches the top and ATH of $47.
  • In the weeks following the S&P 500 inclusion TWTR daily trading volume doubles compared to the pre-inclusion period, despite markets entering the more quiet, lower volume summer lull.
The over +60% rise of TWTR from $29 to $47 was meteoric - and I'd say in large part related to the S&P 500 inclusion event. What's surprising to me is how little this was arbitraged apparently.

Also note that the obvious arbitrage trade of selling TWTR on the day of the index inclusion didn't result in a drop of the price, the rally continued another 9 days with another +20% up-move.

Also, Twitter had a market cap of $22b - Tesla is going to have 4x the market cap or more on inclusion ...

(Also, I couldn't find any information on whether Twitter was included in the larger S&P 400 index already in June 2019.)
 
Some comments made in a different thread, but obviously relevant here:

luvb2b (Post 3233)

i am positioning for an s&p 500 index addition in 2020. i think any good active large cap manager would be aware of this, and it sets up a very natural trade for them in the stock. most active large cap managers are benchmarked to the s&p - and here's the easy outperformance trade based on the s&p index addition: underweight apple, and take tesla to a weight above what it would be if included in the index. on the day tesla is added to the s&p, sell the extra tesla and renormalize your apple weight (or whatever other stocks you underweighted). i think that's part of the reason we have this nonstop lift, you're seeing a huge amount of active managers almost being forced to buy. when it's added to the index, the index trackers will be forced to buy.

Fact Checking (Post 3237)

Very interesting, and this largely rhymes with this recent analysis by @ReflexFunds.

He also pointed out the fact that because Tesla isn't in the S&P 400 either, there's an even larger 'gradient' between fund ownership of TSLA before and after the inclusion event.

This brings me to the following topic - the magnitude of the move. There was one recent S&P 500 inclusion of a large cap company, the 2018 inclusion of Twitter (TWTR).

Here are the events as I understand them:
Here's the daily chart history of the ~three months of TWTR price changes from April ~20 to July:


Here's the macro environment in that timeframe, Nasdaq futures - it was mostly supportive of any TWTR price moves:


Note the various pricing anomalies:
  • On the day of the Q1 announcement there was no meaningful price reaction to the meeting of the S&P 500 criteria: in fact TWTR dropped and closed at $29. Did the market not realize that this happened? Was there some doubt about Twitter's inclusion?
  • Almost a full month passed and TWTR traded on average volume in a tight 10% band - despite Nasdaq rises being supportive of bigger price moves.
  • June 1: uptick in trading volume and breakout from previous range.
  • June 4, on the day of the S&P committee announcement, TWTR closes on a nice up-move $37.
  • June 5, all hell breaks lose and the big rally continues: stock closes on $39.
  • June 15, on the 9th trading day after the S&P 500 inclusion, TWTR reaches the top and ATH of $47.
  • In the weeks following the S&P 500 inclusion TWTR daily trading volume doubles compared to the pre-inclusion period, despite markets entering the more quiet, lower volume summer lull.
The over +60% rise of TWTR from $29 to $47 was meteoric - and I'd say in large part related to the S&P 500 inclusion event. What's surprising to me is how little this was arbitraged apparently.

Also note that the obvious arbitrage trade of selling TWTR on the day of the index inclusion didn't result in a drop of the price, the rally continued another 9 days with another +20% up-move.

Also, Twitter had a market cap of $22b - Tesla is going to have 4x the market cap or more on inclusion ...

(Also, I couldn't find any information on whether Twitter was included in the larger S&P 400 index already in June 2019.)
 
Last edited:
So I think what @Fact Checking is alluding to is that if Tesla had, say, sold all 60,000 of their $310 Strike CALLS on (again, just say) Fri, Dec 27, 2019 when the Closing SP was $430, then we could estimate the value of those CALLS once more using the Black Scholes Calculator:

View attachment 501874
So the cash payout on Dec 31, 2019 (which IS in 2019Q4 wrt Tesla's Financial Reporting period) would be:

$157.58 * 60,000 * 100 = $945,480,000​

Yes, that's a pool of up to $945 million dollars, from which Tesla could choose (at its discretion) to add to its 'Other Income' line for 2019Q4, with these effects:
  • securing a net profit for FY2019 (net profitable over last 4 qtrs, and profitable in the last)
  • meeting the last outstanding requirement for TSLA to be listed on the S&P 500 (February?)
  • likely exploding the last of the Shortzes ICE-bergy-bits, triggering a short squeeze. :D
So yeah, its is kinda a METEOR incoming, spelling DOOM for the DINOSOURS. Or variations thereof. I think that was the jist of the comment that there has been an 'unexplainable' rise in TSLA from $430 at the end of Dec 2019 to $545 early last week. Somebody at a large brokerage knows if Tesla redeemed a large number of those CALL contracts:



Further, Tesla would only redeem enough to make 2019 a profitable year as a whole. FI, if Tesla already knew they had $345M in profits for 2019Q3, then they'd only need to cash in $625M of those CALLS. That would still leave Tesla with over 20,000 CALL contracts at the $310 Strike expiring on Mar 19, 2021. Glorious. :cool:

Subtracting known losses for the 1st 3 qtrs of 2019, then adding back in the number of CALLS redeemed also then gives that Brokerage effective early information as to Tesla's likely profitability for Q4.

Knowledge is (TRADING) Power.

Cheers!

Tesla's motivation wouldn't be the S&P 500 inclusion, but to profitably sell the time value of one leg of their bull call spread.

The benefit is a significant chunk of additional cash, gained 4 years earlier than any hedge payout in 2024. This cash can be used to expand faster.

S&P 500 inclusion is just a happy side effect.

A Path to S&P Inclusion ....NOW:
@Fact Checking - your comment above was related to the potential that Tesla's Call options gains could bring sufficient GAAP profits in Q4 to ensure S&P inclusion with the Q4 filing. In a separate post I commented that the gains would not likely be counted as income.
However:
There is an obscure item on Tesla's Balance Sheet that could bring huge upside to Q4....enough to achieve full year 2019 GAAP Profits and inclusion into the S&P. I have hesitated to bring this up in the past because it could easily be a big Nothing Burger and also because it is a very technical tax accounting issue. But since this is the weekend and your post touched on early S&P inclusion, I thought I would share it.

TL;DR: Tesla has deferred the recognition of $1.8B in tax benefits on the P&L because they could not conclude it was likely that they would have income in the future to take advantage of these benefits. Once profitability is likely (and supported by the auditors), this $1.8B (or a portion thereof) gets recognized immediately to GAAP profits. If Tesla concludes now that profitability is likely in 2020 and thereafter, $1.8B (or a portion) gets included in Q4 profits.

The Long Version
When a company incurs a loss, they record a tax benefit because they can reduce taxes in the future by offsetting future tax income with these tax losses. It's called a "Net Operating Loss Carryforward" (a Tax Asset).
So you would typically see a P&L as such:

$(100,000) - Pretax Income (Loss)
$ 30,000 - Tax Benefit (Expense)
$ (70,000) - Net Income (Loss)

However, the accounting rules state that you can only record this benefit if "it is more likely than not" that you will be able to use this benefit (tax asset) in the future.
Tesla has not recognized any of these benefits over the past 15 years because they could not confidently conclude and support to the auditors that profitably in the future was "more likely than not".
Here is Tesla's wording from the 2018 10K:
As of December 31, 2018, we recorded a valuation allowance of $1.81 billion for the portion of the deferred tax asset that we do not expect to be realized.....Management believes that based on the available information, it is more likely than not that the U.S. deferred tax assets will not be realized, such that a full valuation allowance is required against all U.S. deferred tax assets.

You can see this deferred benefit (valuation allowance) on their deferred tax asset schedule from the 2018 10K below:
View attachment 501942

Tesla's position on this tax accounting is correct.

Here is the important point: As soon as Tesla can support to the auditors, that "it is more likely than not", that profitability will be achieved in 2020 and beyond, this tax benefit comes back to earnings immediately. If not all of the $1.8B a substantial amount would.

Points Against Recognition in Q4
  • Since Tesla has never had a full year profit in its history, they and their auditors may take a conservative approach and deem future profits unlikely.
  • Despite 2 profitable Qtrs in 2018, Telsa still concluded (as seen in the 2018 10K) that it was "more likely than not" they would not be able to recognize the tax benefits with future profits.
Points For Recognition in Q4
  • Tesla has been profitable in 4 of the last 6 Qtrs
  • With Model 3 fully ramped, GF3 producing vehicles and Model Y entry assured for 2020, profitability is "more likely than not".
  • Elon will likely state during the Q4 earnings call that Tesla expects a full year profit in 2020. Telsa can't state this publicly while simultaneously stating in the 2019 10K that future profits cannot be assured for taking the tax benefits.
  • Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) needs to be applied consistently. You can't take the position: "profits are more likely than not but let's not take the earnings benefit just to be conservative". Profits are either "more likely than not" or they're "more unlikely than not". If it is the former, you take the benefit to earnings.
I'm not sure which way this will go. If the huge benefit is not taken in Q4 2019, it's certain we'll see it in 2020.
My brain tells me that they will take the huge benefit in Q4 2019 but my gut says they won't.

TeslaQ has been all over the Balance Sheet pushing questions on Warranty Reserves, Accounts Receivables, etc.......but they're not talking about this one.

Let's see how this plays out.
2 new reasons out of the blue that could mean S&P inclusion in February. All of our Christmas' have come at once, and early.
Chance of S&P inclusion by March = 30%?
Chance by June = 69%;)
EOkxl-FUYAMSyOV
 
  • Love
Reactions: Artful Dodger
2 new reasons out of the blue that could mean S&P inclusion in February. All of our Christmas' have come at once, and early.
Chance of S&P inclusion by March = 30%?
Chance by June = 69%;)
placeholder_image.svg
Caution: Pending further discussion. The ideas are not fully vetted. Follow along in that thread.

(Can't believe I'm being the un-optimistic one. I expect Q1 will trigger it though)
 
From quarterly thread:
Yeah, its not really up to management. GAAP rules are (and the auditor's will insist that) once it is "more likely than not" that the company will be profitable going forward, then the company must declare the accumulated deferred tax allowances on its books. To NOT claim them would misrepresent the true financial state of the company, thus would be a false statement by company Officers, and malpractice by Auditors.

It either is or it isn't. We here at TMC understand that it very likely IS (far beyond a 50/50 chance), so the remaining issue is when the Company makes the call and when Auditors sign off on the decision.

Whether that's 2019Q4, or if they wait to confirm that 2020Q1 is profitable, the day is coming like a steam engine, woo-WOO... $1.81B in deferred tax allowances will be released across the balance sheet and P&L statement, which will be huge.

Read the two case studies posted last weekend over in Main by @FrankSG to see the effect on market cap for Amazon and Twitter after they claimed their respective deferred tax allowances. Its like 2 years of free growth gifted to the company by a gracious tax department (ha!)

Cheers!
I'm sticking with:
Chance of S&P inclusion by March = 30%
Chance by June = 69%
 
i posted this in the roundtable thread, but thought i would repost here in case my comment gets lost:

From Tesla's Q4 report:

We expect positive GAAP net income going forward, with possible temporary exceptions, particularly around the launch and ramp of new products.Continuous volume growth, capacity expansion, and cash generation remain the main focus.

Not sure how to take this in context with the GF3 ramp and now the Model Y ramp and the effects it has on Q1. Would this push S&P 500 addition to much later in the year?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: willow_hiller
i posted this in the roundtable thread, but thought i would repost here in case my comment gets lost:

From Tesla's Q4 report:



Not sure how to take this in context with the GF3 ramp and now the Model Y ramp and the effects it has on Q1. Would this push S&P 500 addition to much later in the year?

I think the Y Q1 ramp is enough of a known that they would state it directly. So I expect this is just hedging against other ramps in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MP3Mike
i posted this in the roundtable thread, but thought i would repost here in case my comment gets lost:

From Tesla's Q4 report:



Not sure how to take this in context with the GF3 ramp and now the Model Y ramp and the effects it has on Q1. Would this push S&P 500 addition to much later in the year?

Although, Zachary did say Q1 will have impacts due to seasonality and the ramps of GF3 3 and Fremont Y, so it may take till Q2....
 
I think it's unlikely we get $156 million GAAP profit for Q1. Could we even get a GAAP loss for Q1? Q2 will be better, but will it be enough?

at this point, i'm thinking 25% chance after Q2 and 75% after Q3. Of course I will revisit as we get more information about Q1 like the production/delivery report in two months. Maybe someone modeling Q1 will give us a better idea too as we have a lot more information with Q4.

Just trying to get my thoughts together...
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: willow_hiller
I think it's unlikely we get $156 million GAAP profit for Q1. Could we even get a GAAP loss for Q1? Q2 will be better, but will it be enough?

at this point, i'm thinking 25% chance after Q2 and 75% after Q3. Of course I will revisit as we get more information about Q1 like the production/delivery report in two months. Maybe someone modeling Q1 will give us a better idea too as we have a lot more information with Q4.

Just trying to get my thoughts together...

Assuming Tesla realizes they're about to post a small profit in Q1, could that push them over the threshold for future profitability being "more likely than not"? At that point they could recognize a portion of their deferred valuation allowance to push them over $156 million GAAP for Q1.
 
Assuming Tesla realizes they're about to post a small profit in Q1, could that push them over the threshold for future profitability being "more likely than not"? At that point they could recognize a portion of their deferred valuation allowance to push them over $156 million GAAP for Q1.

I was wondering the exact same thing and thought it was worth asking TheAccountant.

Even if it doesn't work for Q1 and we post a loss, would it help for Q2 if we post a bigger GAAP profit of say $100 million? The outlook is better since Q3 and Q4 are likely to be profitable. That would only leave 2021 Q1, but Model Y and GF3 will be pumping out vehicles like crazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: willow_hiller
I was wondering the exact same thing and thought it was worth asking TheAccountant.

Even if it doesn't work for Q1 and we post a loss, would it help for Q2 if we post a bigger GAAP profit of say $100 million? The outlook is better since Q3 and Q4 are likely to be profitable. That would only leave 2021 Q1, but Model Y and GF3 will be pumping out vehicles like crazy.
Assuming the loss in Q1 is not monstrous, they won't need any extra help to get to 4 quarters of profit after Q2. $400M Q2 '19 loss will fall off - so even just a profit in Q2 will do.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: sparcs
Assuming the loss in Q1 is not monstrous, they won't need any extra help to get to 4 quarters of profit after Q2. $400M Q2 '19 loss will fall off - so even just a profit in Q2 will do.

So really the problem is Q1 due to the need for a $156M GAAP profit. The odds get pretty high for S&P500 addition after Q2 because that $400M from 2019 drops off.

Thanks. I forgot to account for that drop off. Definitely gives me a ballpark idea on how to set my expectations.
 
Last edited:
From Papa's thread:

Let's talk a second about S&P500 inclusion. In terms of possible effect upon TSLA's share price, I've heard estimates as high as plus $100 from S&P500 inclusion. The increase might be even more in TSLA's case because inclusion could actually set most of the remaining shorts scrambling to cover. Lots of 401Ks offer index funds that mimic an index such as the S&P500. The S&P500 is the grandaddy of indexes in certain ways because it does a better job of mimicking the performance of America's top businesses than other funds. Now, consider that the indexes are weighted relative to a company's market cap, so when Tesla is brought into the S&P500 it's going to require S&P500 index funds to buy LOTS of shares. Funds can't leave out shares in companies, they have to buy, and this situation puts significant buying pressure on the stock.

Index Funds are HUGE these days. A number of years ago a report came out that showed the vast majority of fund managers fell short of achieving the results of the indexes. Investors took this information to heart and started moving money into index funds. It's diversification and one of the highest returns of funds out there. What's not to like?

Moreover, once the big brokerage houses have acquired their shares, they aren't selling those shares anytime soon. It's like you're bidding the stock price up and then just sitting on the acquired shares. When there's bad news, unlike T. Rowe Price in recent times, the index funds are not selling their shares. Thus S&P500 inclusion gives TSLA both a boost up in value around the time of the inclusion and removes a large number of shares from circulation, which puts constraints on available shares when people are buying (and as we all know about supply and demand, if there's a restricted supply but robust demand, the price rises until it reaches an equilibrium).

Elon and other Tesla execs manage the company as they did before, but the stock price rises with inclusion and likely stays higher.
 
The best part of SP500 inclusion is I won't have to read any more discussions about how you get added to the index (for about the 500th time).

You should be happy that we discussed the index inclusion months ago. Shorts just started to learn about this after the stock rallied from $200 to 600.

It's actually nice to have some uncertainty around SP500 inclusion. We know we will join the index, but we don't know when, and we don't know the impact. This hurts the shorts a lot. Their Puts keep expiring worthless, so their attacking power has dropped a lot and continue to drop. They can't attack hard, because longs would pick up shares and Calls then join the index. They can't go long either, because in their view the stock is too high. They could buy Calls to hedge, but the premium is very high because we expect to join index. Shorts just get hurt as long as we are not in the index.

Long investors are in a good situation. The stock is fundamentally quite undervalued. I can just hold and wait, or I can buy more, if it goes higher, great, if it goes lower, I can buy even more.

The same goes with BlockRock investment. If they added large number of TSLA shares in Q4, that would hurt Shorts a lot. If they didn't buy, that means they might buy in future quarters.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: adiggs and sparcs
My view now is the chances of S&P after Q1 are slim. In fact I forecast a loss for Q1.
- Increase in SGA by $100M. This will continue to increase as Zach said, even though the $100M included a provision for CEO reward
- Further rewards to Musk might make even higher provisions necessary as the Market cap is above 100B
- Feature Complete delayed, unlikely to be this quarter. So no FSD revenue release