Tesla is still dominating. In the first half of 2026, they secured over 52% of the U.S. EV market. 1. Tesla: 52.3% — 242,100 units sold 2. Chevrolet: 6.1% — 28,267 3. Hyundai: 5.8% — 26,936 4. Cadillac: 4.7% — 21,855 5. Rivian : 4.7% — 21,770 6. Toyota: 4.7% — 21,767 7. Ford: 3.6% — 16,606 8. Kia: 2.7% — 12,627 9. BMW: 2.4% — 10,790 10. Subaru: 2.2% — 10,064 11. Honda: 1.8% — 8,407 12. Lexus: 1.7% — 7,814 13. GMC: 1.4% — 6,645 14. Lucid: 1.1% — 5,208 15. Volvo: 0.9% — 3,964 16. VW: 0.8% — 3,768 17. Mercedes: 0.6% — 3,010 18. Porsche: 0.6% — 2,967 19. Other Brands: 0.6% — 2,596 20. Nissan: 0.4% — 1,774 21. Audi: 0.4% — 1,697 22. Genesis: 0.1% — 560 23. Dodge: 0.1% — 534 24. Jeep: 0.1% — 418 25. Mini: 0.1% — 307 26. Acura: 0.0% — 108 (Data Via Cox Automotive Q2 2026 EV sales)

Last wk, S&P/Nas/Mag7 were +1.2%/+1.7%/+4.0% despite oil +4% & bond ylds +7bps on Iran flare-up. 2 days remain during this seasonally favorable time from the last 3 trading days of June through first 9 days of July. Earning season starts w/ big banks on Tuesday. As I first posted about on June 28th and reiterated on July 5th, the seasonality is historically very favorable from the last three trading days of June through the first nine trading days of July during which the S&P/Nasdaq have advanced 1.6%/2.5% and been up 78% of the time since 1985. The S&P/Nasdaq is up 3.0%/3.6% during the first 10 trading days of this time period in 2026 already. But for the heart of the AI trade, the Semiconductor (SOX) Index is down 7.0% during these last 10 trading days on fears of a “speed bump” that I have been posting about since 6/28. For the AI trade going forward, two separate thoughts with two different implications are beginning to coalesce in my mind. The first thought is that AI revenue growth for the leading LLM models is likely to hit a “speed bump” and slow in the September quarter. Last week, $SPCX and $META released new LLM models that both closed much of the gap with the leading edge models from OpenAI and Anthropic. But Meta plans to price their model at roughly 1/4th the cost of the two leaders with SpaceX aggressive as well. This is particularly relevant as companies switched from token maxing in March to token minimization in June. As an example, the CEO of Coinbase posted on June 26th, “How to keep AI spend flat while token usage grows exponentially... Putting this into practice has cut our AI spend nearly in half, while our token usage continues to grow.” Sam Altman on Thursday: “we have heard enterprises on their concerns about AI costs, and 5.6 sol is a huge step forward for dollars-per-task, as are terra and luna”. But on a positive note, two more public cloud providers have been recently added to the four that already existed of $AMZN, $GOOGL, $MSFT and $ORCL. SpaceX in the past month raised over $100B in equity plus debt and plans to spend hundreds of billions to attack the $28.5 trillion TAM they talked about in their IPO prospectus. News surrounding Meta last week seems to imply that they are launching a cloud offering not because they have excess compute but so 1) they can double their compute spend from 7 MegaWatts in 2026 to 14 MegaWatts in 2027 and 2) have capacity to sell their Muse Spark LLM. So in summary, with this seasonally favorable period of time for the overall market coming soon to a close, I believe cutting back excess exposure is prudent. Reaction by investors on Tuesday to bank earnings which should be strong, may give us a good tell as to the risk vs reward at current levels over the shorter-term. As for the AI trade, I believe selectivity is key as we work our way through the “speed bump” and the positive implications of 4 aggressive public cloud vendors now becoming six versus the negatives of token maxing in March turning to token minimization in June. All the best in the week ahead.

🇹🇷 Share of new cars sold in Türkiye that are electric: 2015: <0.1% 2016: <0.1% 2017: <0.1% 2018: <0.1% 2019: <0.1% 2020: 0.2% 2021: 0.6% 2022: 1% 2023: 7% 2024: 11% 2025: 22% Source: International Energy Agency, Global EV Outlook 2026, via Our World in Data

🇺🇸US DATA RUNS HOT: INFLATION STICKY, DEMAND FIRM INFLATION • Headline PCE MoM: +0.2% vs +0.1% est.; prior -0.1% • Headline PCE YoY: +3.7% vs +3.6% est.; prior +3.7% • Core PCE MoM: +0.2% vs +0.2% est.; prior +0.1% • Core PCE YoY: +3.3% vs +3.3% est.; prior +3.3% GDP • Q2 GDP annualized: +1.5% vs +1.5% est.; prior +1.5% • Personal consumption: +3.4% vs +3.2% est.; prior +3.2% • GDP Price Index: +6.4% vs +6.2% est.; prior +6.2% • Core PCE QoQ: +3.6% vs +3.4% est.; prior +3.4% INCOME & SPENDING • Personal income MoM: +0.4% vs +0.2% est.; prior +0.2% • Personal spending MoM: +0.2% vs +0.1% est.; prior +0.3% • Real personal spending MoM: 0.0% vs 0.0% est.; prior +0.4% DURABLE GOODS • Durable goods orders MoM: +1.1% vs +0.5% est.; prior +0.5% • Durables ex-transportation: +0.4% vs +0.6% est.; prior +0.7% • Core capital goods orders: +0.2% vs +0.7% est.; prior revised to +1.7% • Core capital goods shipments: +1.4% vs +1.0% est.; prior revised to +2.4% BOTTOM LINE: Inflation remains sticky while consumer demand and headline durable goods beat expectations. GDP growth was in line, but stronger price pressures could keep the Fed cautious on rates.

🚨 SlowMist TI Alert 🚨 The Shai-Hulud malware has resurfaced via the npm account atool(i@hust.cc), with over 600 malicious versions published. Notably, high-download packages such as size-sensor@1.1.4 (4.2M dl/mo), echarts-for-react@3.1.7 (3.8M dl/mo), and @antv/scale@0.6.2 (2.2M dl/mo) are at elevated risk. The attack carries risks: 1. AI agent hijacking: Claude Code, Codex, and VS Code tasks can trigger a Bun bootstrapper that re-executes the malicious payload. 2. Credential harvesting: The malware collects credentials from cloud services, GitHub, npm, local environments, and CI/CD pipelines. Using ^ to specify version ranges may cause npm to automatically install versions that have been compromised or contain security risks. Detection & Mitigation Measures: • Audit dependencies for any package published by atool (i@hust.cc) and check for suspicious preinstall scripts • Remove compromised packages and rotate all exposed credentials • Inspect CI/CD pipelines and local Node.js projects for malicious hooks or workflows • Revert to safe package versions or known-good dependencies ⚠️ Critical Action: Treat any system with affected packages as potentially compromised. Apply mitigation steps immediately.

TL;DR Self-evolving agents that write their own questions and answer them can fall into "co-cheating," where the proposer and solver quietly agree on the same mistakes. Splitting source documents to evaluate across folds fixes this and lifts performance by over 8 points. Title: False Frontiers: Diagnosing and Mitigating Co-Cheating in Self-Evolving Search Agents URL: Points 🔁 Proposer and solver share source-derived errors, letting false agreement cycle back as reward — the paper calls this "co-cheating" 📉 Standard Dr. Zero systems show 6.1% and 8.8% false-agreement mass ✂️ CrossFit splits source documents into two folds, scoring each proposer's questions with a solver trained only on the other fold 📊 CrossFit alone cuts false agreement to 3.0%/3.7%; combined with MSV it drops to 2.0%/1.7% 🚀 Average downstream Cover-EM improves by 8.8 and 8.4 points over Dr. Zero 🧩 Multi-hop tasks see the biggest gains, averaging over 10 points 💰 Compute cost rises 1.72-2.7x over baseline, though a half-budget variant still works What stands out: without auditing the evaluator's own training history, apparent progress can be an illusion. #SelfEvolvingAgents# #ReinforcementLearning#

In 2023, more than 5,000 attended the 30th Annual "OWN IT!" Baron Conference at New York's iconic Met Opera House. The 2024, 31st Annual "Building Legacy" Baron Conference on November 15th at The Met… features exceptional executives of SpaceX...MSCI...Arch Capital...and Red Rock Resorts...the Baron Capital team...incredible entertainment...and an ice cream cone served by former ice cream truck driver Ron... Oh yeah...good luck winning one of three awesome Tesla Y door prizes. All expenses, including door prizes...are paid by @BaronCapital...not our clients... Investors should consider the investment objectives, risks, and charges and expenses of the investment carefully before investing. The prospectus and summary prospectuses contain this and other information about the Funds. You may obtain them from the Funds’ distributor, Baron Capital, Inc., by calling 1-800-99-BARON or visiting Please read them carefully before investing. Portfolio holdings as a percentage of net assets as of June 30, 2024 for securities mentioned are as follows: Space Exploration Technologies Corporation - Baron Asset Fund (2.9%), Baron Fifth Avenue Growth Fund (0.9%), Baron Focused Growth Fund (10.3%), Baron Global Advantage Fund (6.1%), Baron Opportunity Fund (2.8%), Baron Partners Fund (13.2%*); Tesla, Inc. - Baron Fifth Avenue Growth Fund (3.2%), Baron Focused Growth Fund (8.6%), Baron Global Advantage Fund (3.3%), Baron Opportunity Fund (3.5%), Baron Partners Fund (28.9%*), Baron Technology Fund (2.5%); MSCI Inc. - Baron Asset Fund (0.5%), Baron Durable Advantage Fund (2.1%), Baron FinTech Fund (2.5%), Baron Focused Growth Fund (3.1%), Baron Growth Fund (9.8%), Baron Partners Fund (1.8%*); Arch Capital Group Ltd. - Baron Asset Fund (4.8%), Baron Durable Advantage Fund (2.1%), Baron FinTech Fund (3.0%), Baron Focused Growth Fund (6.4%), Baron Growth Fund (12.7%), Baron International Growth Fund (2.8%), Baron Partners Fund (9.5%*); Red Rock Resorts, Inc. - Baron Discovery Fund (1.6%), Baron Focused Growth Fund (3.9%), Baron Growth Fund (1.5%), Baron Partners Fund (1.5%*), Baron Real Estate Fund (1.7%), Baron Small Cap Fund (3.6%). *% of Long Positions. Portfolio holdings are subject to change. Current and future portfolio holdings are subject to risk. All expenses associated with this conference are paid by Baron Capital, Inc. No conference expenses are paid by Baron Funds. BAMCO, Inc. is an investment adviser registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Baron Capital, Inc. is a broker-dealer registered with the SEC and member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA).

Had the chance to catch up on earnings from @BitGo and @FWDind Quick Summary: BitGo is mainly representative of the infra layer being compressed with few catalysts in the short term. Margins are compressing across the board. Assets on platform are resilient and institutional clients keep onboarding, but there isn't much to be excited about beyond prices going up again. Take rates on the core trading business continue to compress, derivatives are still soft, and the competitive landscape is fierce. Staking shows the same dynamic: institutions negotiate lower take rates, so growth comes in at worse economics. Stablecoin-as-a-Service is still relatively small. Beyond the fact that stablecoin supply hasn't grown much, you're essentially underwriting the growth of the market outside USDT and USDC. A very small slice, and not one I'm particularly bullish on. The silver lining: BTGO traded flat on the print, so pretty much all of this looks priced in already. And underneath the margin noise, the parts of the business that are hardest to replicate keep compounding: the custody relationships, the regulated footprint, and the stablecoin reserve balances that grow regardless of where take rates settle. 📊 Headline Financials Total Revenue: $4,329.4M, +14.7% QoQ, +79.6% YoY (mostly gross-recognized spot pass-through) Revenue Net of Direct Costs: $42.5M vs $49.0M in Q1, roughly -13% QoQ. The economically relevant line Net Loss: (19.0)M vs $(60.7)M in Q1. Improvement is mostly a smaller unrealized BTC mark ( (18.8)M vs $(53.7)M) plus SBC normalizing off the IPO spike Adjusted EBITDA: $(4.2)M vs $(1.7)M in Q1 and +$3.0M in Q2'25. Excluding +$5.6M of realized disposal gains they don't strip out, underlying is closer to $(10)M Cash: $159.0M. 2,523 BTC (~$147.7M). No corporate debt. New $50M buyback. $1.3M restructuring charge tied to ~$15M annualized savings 🔍 Segment Detail Digital Asset Sales: $4,197.5M rev, +14.7% QoQ, +84.3% YoY. Net contribution ~$7.1M. Margin 17 bps vs 32 bps in Q1 and 19 bps in Q2'25 on lower spot spreads and lower derivatives mix. Q1's mix-driven margin improvement reversed in one quarter Staking: $64.7M rev, +30.9% QoQ, -28.8% YoY. Take rate 6.0% vs 16.1% in Q1 and 10.0% in Q2'25. Volume up, monetization down. Take rate path of 7.6% → 16.1% → 6.0% over three quarters makes this the least predictable line Subscriptions and Services: $27.5M rev, +7.7% QoQ, +8.5% YoY. Includes one-time ecosystem/implementation work Stablecoin-as-a-Service: $38.8M rev, +1.7% QoQ, +148.0% YoY. Take rate 8.0% vs 7.4% in Q1 and 2.6% in Q2'25. Restricted reserves at $4,634.9M, +5.5% QoQ and +39.9% YTD, the durable driver. ~$155M annualized run rate at improving take rates Interest Income: $0.8M

Last wk S&P/Nas/Mag7 +1.0%/+1.6%/+4.7%. The forced asset sale by Situational Awareness helped drive a sharp rally on 7/30. On 7/29, I wrote, “From a technical standpoint, I believe forced liquidations and margin calls in both retail accounts and hedge funds that typically run with leverage over the past couple of weeks is leading to a technical bottom… In summary, my view is that we could have seen at least a short-term bottom today with a strong rally ahead of us in the sectors most caught in the latest speedbump.” On Thursday 7/30, the Morgan Stanley TMT (Tech Media and Telecom) Momentum Index rebounded a record 19% on Thursday and added another 1% on Friday. This followed a decline of 54% from 6/22-7/29. It is now down 44% from 6/22. This is why I focus on avoiding “speed bumps” as I warned about on my 6/20 post. It is hard to predict how bad they will be and down 50% requires a 100% gain to get back to even. I feel like the near-term low on the current speedbump was seen on 7/29. Looking at Mag7 results this earnings season, stock reaction to earnings results mostly came down to two factors: 1) did estimates go up for CQ3 if capex went up and 2) did you report results before or after the Situational Awareness (SA) forced sale. $MSFT results strengthened my recent view that co-Pilot could be a winner in enterprise AI longer-term. As I wrote in my earnings preview. “It operates natively within the Microsoft 365 ecosystem where enterprise work already happens.” There are ~450M M365 paid seats but only ~30M Co-Pilot. Microsoft guided above consensus for CQ3 while capex remained unchanged. Azure also saw growth improve sequentially from 39% to 43% y/y with guidance to 45% for CQ3. Helped by the SA forced sale, the stock saw the 5th highest one day percentage stock move in history at +16% on Thursday. $META unfortunately had both revs & operating income go down for Q3 while revising up capex & opex. They also did not announce any definitive plans around a public cloud offering or API for their foundational models to monetize this spend. The stock declined 8% in reaction on Thursday which likely would have been worse if not for the SA forced sale. $AMZN while guiding both revs & operating income below consensus for Q3 and increasing capex, had AWS rev growth accelerate from 28% in Q1 to 37% in Q2 which was the highest growth rate since Covid in Q4:2021. AWS normalized operating margins expanded 1% sequentially. The stock rallied 15% on Friday in reaction to earnings following a 4% rally on Thursday as investors continued to regross in the AI names. But this brings me to $GOOGL which remains my long-term winner in consumer AI with the complete AI stack. Google like Amazon guided capex higher while implied revs & operating income declined for Q3. But Google Cloud Platform performance crushed AWS performance. GCP saw revs accelerate from 63% in CQ1 to 82% in CQ2 while operating margins expanded 3% sequentially. But Google unfortunately reported a week prior to the SA forced sale and saw their stock decline 7% in reaction the next day. $AAPL was the anti-AI trade leading up to their results and their stock hit an all-time high intra-day on Wednesday. The stock as a result declined 1% on Thursday as investors regrossed AI names on the SA forced sale and fell 7% on Friday in reaction to revenue & gross margin guidance that was below consensus. Big picture, I think the severe drawdown in the AI favorites from 6/22-7/29 was good for the market. It reminded investors of the need to be vigilant and the perils of excessive leverage/risk taking. Long-term bond yields hitting new 20 year highs last week and the unresolved Iran war are factors I am monitoring. In summary, out of the mega-cap earnings the past two weeks and the forced SA sale, my favorites are $GOOGL, $AMZN and $MSFT. I increasingly view value as shifting from the model layer which is increasingly getting commoditized to the infrastructure layer which includes the public clouds. I think the short-term bottom in the current speed bump was on 7/29. Best of luck in the week ahead.