After a period of market volatility, Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has garnered renewed attention from investors and analysts alike, as GLJ Research, led by Gordon Johnson, raises its price target but maintains a bearish outlook. Recent trends show conflicting sentiments swirling around the electric vehicle company, with some investors noting strong potential for future expansion while critics continue to raise concerns about Tesla’s valuation and business fundamentals. Despite headlines driving investor curiosity, the voices of long-standing skeptics like Johnson shape the conversation about where the stock could be headed and what may influence its trajectory in a rapidly evolving industry.
GLJ Research’s Gordon Johnson, recognized for his skeptical perspective on Tesla, adjusted his price target for the stock to $25.28, up from $19.05, yet maintains a ‘Sell’ recommendation, indicating continued concern about the company’s fundamentals. This new target is approximately 95 percent lower than Tesla’s current closing price of $431.40, highlighting the breadth of disagreement among market watchers on Tesla’s true worth. Johnson’s analysis reflects ongoing doubts about the company’s recent strategies and prospects.
Why does Johnson keep doubting Tesla’s value?
According to Johnson, Tesla’s overreliance on regulatory credits and what he describes as “weakening demand” have fed his view of the company’s limited profitability outside core automotive sales. He has repeatedly referenced past vehicle delivery reports and price cuts as indicators of underlying challenges in the EV market. In his own words,
“Our valuation is based on reality rather than narrative,”
Johnson asserts, underlining a stance that diverges sharply from many bullish analyst forecasts.
How do other analysts view Tesla’s potential?
Market sentiment about Tesla differs widely, with some investment analysts arguing the company’s strengths extend well beyond vehicle production into technology such as autonomous driving. Wedbush’s Dan Ives, for example, foresees promising opportunities if Tesla executes its plans for products like Robotaxi and Cybercab. Meanwhile, sentiment-focused investors have shifted outlooks, as observed with Dan Nathan’s recent softening stance, suggesting technicals and market feeling drive share price movement in addition to fundamental metrics. Johnson, however, remains steadfast, offering,
“I have been consistent about Tesla’s valuation concerns and have not changed my view,”
emphasizing his long-held reservations.
How do current perspectives compare to those from earlier reports?
Earlier news reports covering Johnson’s bearish approach portrayed price targets as even lower, often hovering below the $20 mark. The narrative around Tesla has typically oscillated between optimism about technological innovation and doubt about inherent profitability, especially as vehicle delivery numbers and global demand for EVs fluctuated over multiple quarters. The company’s journey has been punctuated by strong positive sentiment whenever new products or software were announced, but persistent skepticism has continued in some corners of the analyst community, keeping debate robust.
Tesla’s situation illustrates the enduring divide between bulls and bears as electric vehicles capture a larger share of the automotive landscape. Those looking at regulatory credit reliance, pricing strategies, and delivery performance might view the company with caution. In contrast, many major investors see promise in expansion into software and autonomous tech products, betting on innovation to carry future growth. For those tracking the story, it can be helpful to watch both sides of the argument—cautious skepticism rooted in financial statements versus enthusiasm around potential breakthroughs—to make more informed decisions. Risk-tolerant investors, in particular, should weigh these contrasting opinions, especially in an industry where fortunes can shift quickly based on consumer adoption and global policy trends.
