GM
General Motors Company
stockNYSE

GM anach

How does that ignore your hotel point? As you said, most people don’t care what car is coming, they only care will it be on time, get them where they’re going, and can they afford it? I gave you a dozen AV providers operating on Uber. With AV ride-hailing eating 30-50% of car ownership, I see it being more like the streaming industry with several providers than the smart phone industry with only 1 or 2. There will be room for a Netflix/YouTube/HBO/Disney/Paramount. But Uber looks like YouTube/Netflix (offers everything), Waymo and Tesla look like HBO/Disney (unique content). You gotta understand what Tesla and Waymo are. Tesla is a mid-tier OEM and elite-tier hype factory with zero experience/success building an Uber network. They promised 1 million robotaxi’s on the road by 2020. Here we are in 2026 and there’s only 170 Cybercabs on the road. At 30-50% of car sales, that’s an implied demand for 30-50 million AV’s annually. So even if Tesla devoted 100% of their manufacturing capacity to robotaxi’s, they could still only meet a maximum of 6.6% of demand. Tesla will be like Papa John’s and eventually partner with Uber. If they don’t, it will bankrupt them. Waymo manufactures AV capability, purchases vehicles from OEM’s, installs it, and rents the vehicle while giving a cut to Uber and Avis for networking/maintaining for them. Even if we assume they continue operating on Uber, it is a super capital-intensive business model comparable to Hertz/Avis/Car Dealerships, which are very low growth/margin businesses. If we assume they don’t partner with Uber at all, they’ll need to spend billions trying to develop a competitive network, which is likely to end up like Google+. From the car providers, I think the AV winner will be Toyota. They are the largest, most efficient, and most trusted manufacturer in the world. They’re also a major stake holder in Waymo/Uber and is developing their own AV capability. Volkswagen/Mercedes/GM/Hyundai are all better bets than Tesla/Waymo. Regulations for these AV’s are still developing so I don’t think assuming first mover advantage is wise. Like in the streaming industry, the real winner won’t be content creators, it will be demand aggregators like Netflix/YouTube. Uber will be the real AV winner. I like Lyft, too. A major factor frequently overlooked is how many dealerships there are literally everywhere. They are experts the business of buying/managing/maintaining/selling cars. Only instead of having their inventory sit on the lot for weeks/months, they can immediately have it generating money by operating on Uber. Making Uber a lot like YouTube.

Why would Dominos, Pizza Hut, and Papa John’s bother dealing with Uber at all? Papa John’s actually resisted dealing with Uber/DoorDash for a long time. Then they realized distributors serve an important purpose. Especially when all their drivers were leaving for Uber. This is not unique to this industry. Why would Coca-Cola bother dealing with McDonald’s at all? Why would Warner Bros and Paramount deal with Netflix at all? Why would food companies bother dealing with Walmart/Costco? Volkswagen, Mercedes, Hyundai, GM, Toyota, Rivian, Lucid, MayMobility, WeRide, and Pony AI all launch their AV’s on the Uber platform within the next 12-24 months. Ford, Nissan, Honda likely will by 2030. Fact of the matter is cars are easy to get. A global network of 200M monthly users is not. I’m very confident that if Tesla insists on being a stand-alone provider, it will take Tesla out of the car industry. Their best bet is to buy out Lyft and take Uber’s approach of partnering with other OEM’s/Fleet Managers. I’m pretty confident, most of Waymo’s future won’t be in ride share. It costs them $105k per car. At current uber rates, that means they have to average at least 100k miles per vehicle just to break even. And that’s before they spend $10B of trying to build a network to compete with Uber. For context, commercial fleets average \~35k miles. I’m certain Waymo’s future will be closer to Cummins than Uber. They’ll sell their AV tech to either OEMs like Honda who are behind on developing their own or to fleet managers to install it on existing vehicles and operate primarily on Uber. Everyone thinks Waymo has some massive lead because they have 4k cars that can’t go above 35mph or take you more than 6 miles. Waymo’s manufacturing capacity has plans to scale to 20k cars a year. Assuming they can afford to purchase 20k cars a year. Volkswagen’s current manufacturing capacity is 24k cars a day. I expect autonomous ride-share will eat 30-50% of car sales by 2035-2040. This means all OEMs will be devoting most of their manufacturing to it. With so many providers, there will be a need for a demand aggregator like Uber. I foresee all car rental companies and car dealerships pivoting to fleet managers running their own cars on Uber and/or servicing Uber’s fleet, which they have $10B allocated to acquiring 150k of their own AV’s. Right now Uber looks like Facebook to Waymo/Tesla’s Google+.

\> How is this different? This is different because the people who are borrowing money from Ford or GM, most of them are earning real money that they can use to pay the debt back. The AI companies are losing money hand over fist and not making any real profit to pay the money back to NVIDIA.

Like when you go to Home Depot, Lowe’s or Macy’s and they want you to get their credit card to buy their stuff. Or Ford, GM or whatever car manufacturer wants you to buy through their financing. How is this different?

GM GM thetaaaa Been a while

With 87% GM, I expect my dividends to rise. Lol

GM GM snooooo

# How This Active Value ETF Rode to the Top By [Lewis Braham](https://www.barrons.com/authors/lewis-braham?mod=article_byline) Follow Oct 07, 2026 2:00 am EDT Actively managed exchange-traded funds may not be that active after all. Many of the roughly 3,000 actively managed ETFs now trading are quantitatively run by computers that pick hundreds of stocks. That doesn’t sound very active—not in the traditional sense of money managers and teams of analysts doing deep fundamental research on individual companies. The PGIM Jennison Focused Value ETF, by contrast, is old school, holding just 35 well-researched stocks. “We do not drive the investment process by anything quantitative,” says Warren Koontz, head of Jennison Associates’ value group, which oversees about $11 billion, including this ETF. “We drive it by the underlying fundamentals of a company, and asking, ‘Are we buying that at a discount to what we think \[the company is\] worth?’ ” Twelve analysts and two co-managers—Joseph Esposito and Jason McManus—support Koontz on the $164 million ETF. Their deep analytical work has paid off. The ETF’s 25.7% three-year annualized return bests 98% of its peers in Morningstar’s large value fund category. The ETF is largely identical to the top-performing [PGIM Jennison Focused Value](https://www.barrons.com/market-data/funds/pjiax?mod=article_chiclet)  mutual fund, which Koontz and his team started running in December 2019 and which has $356 million in assets. Yet the ETF’s annual expense ratio is only 0.33% compared with the mutual fund’s 1.10%. That’s less than many quantitatively run ETFs charge. (The mutual fund is set to merge with the ETF in November.) Unlike quants, which screen for companies with low historical price/earnings or price/book value ratios, Koontz’s team tries to calculate the expected free cash flow of each company they analyze. “Free cash flow is a pure measure of a company’s ability to generate cash to reinvest into the business and/or give some type of return to shareholders in other ways,” he says. “Earnings are important, but also have a lot more accounting gimmicks or influences, so they become less relevant.” Yes, there are quant funds that screen for companies with high historical free cash flow. But modeling different scenarios where that cash flow is higher or lower than expected in the future and calculating an intrinsic value of the company from that analysis is an active manager’s game. Koontz is seeking unexpected or underappreciated catalysts for growth, not past cash flows like a quant. He wants that cash flow to be durable over the long term. The fund’s portfolio is an eclectic mix of growth-focused, asset-light tech stocks and cheaper, more traditional value plays, since Koontz’s team analyzes cash-flow models instead of assets on the balance sheets, [as more traditional value managers do](http://www.barrons.com/articles/value-funds-amazon-tech-stocks-adcfd689?mod=article_inline). Home builder [Toll Brothers](https://www.barrons.com/market-data/stocks/tol?mod=article_chiclet), insurer [MetLife](https://www.barrons.com/market-data/stocks/met?mod=article_chiclet), and [General Motors](https://www.barrons.com/market-data/stocks/gm?mod=article_chiclet) fall into the latter camp, with forward P/E ratios all below 11. “People might say, ‘Why do you own Toll Brothers when interest rates are so high and houses are hard to afford?’” Koontz says. Yet Toll’s underappreciated value is that it builds high-end homes whose wealthy buyers often purchase them either with cash or with large down payments, so mortgage rates are less important. The stock has “done relatively well in this environment, and it’s part of our diversification strategy to own it,” he says. Holding Toll with Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon.com, the fund’s three largest holdings, does indeed provide diversification in a concentrated portfolio. Yet Koontz would argue Microsoft is both a growth and a value stock after recent concerns about artificial-intelligence coding tools replacing traditional software caused a selloff, the so-called software apocalypse. He sees concerns about AI’s disruption of the software industry as temporary. “Software companies haven’t really been disintegrating from any type of sales standpoint,” Koontz says. Microsoft and others are developing their own AI coding agents specific to their businesses that may prove better than more generic ones. In addition, “Microsoft was early in AI development with their huge investment in ChatGPT,” he notes. The company has numerous ways to both defend itself and profit from AI. Apple is also catching up with its Siri AI and Apple Intelligence development, but perhaps more importantly, it’s allowing outside AI compatibility with its new iOS 27 operating system. “Apple was behind in AI and still is technically, but the average iPhone user doesn’t care whether it’s ChatGPT or Perplexity or Gemini they’re using,” Koontz says. “They just want the ability to use it.” Apple’s compatible AI offerings “puts it in a better place.” Combining such high-tech darlings with a company like GM, which was reviled [for going bankrupt](https://www.barrons.com/articles/SB124000819087830417?mod=article_inline) during the 2008-09 financial crisis, is part of the fund’s secret sauce, enabling it to do well in different market environments. Koontz often looks for talented new executives who are turning a once distressed business around, and with [Mary Barra](https://www.barrons.com/articles/gm-ceo-mary-barra-evs-cruise-china-88e0f834?mod=article_inline), who became GM’s CEO in 2014, he has found one. “Barra has done a wonderful job, and every time GM reports their \[earnings\] numbers, they’re better than people imagine,” he says. Even so, the company has a forward P/E of just 5, according to Morningstar. Though 21% of the fund is in tech stocks, 18% is in financial services, which also adds balance. Yet because the fund is concentrated, Koontz wants the highest-quality banks and insurers with manageable debt loads and skilled management teams to avoid the volatility caused by distressed balance sheets and poorly underwritten loans he witnessed firsthand in 2008. He likes [JPMorgan Chase](https://www.barrons.com/market-data/stocks/jpm?mod=article_chiclet) and [PNC Financial Services Group](https://www.barrons.com/market-data/stocks/pnc?mod=article_chiclet). “JPMorgan obviously has a huge number of different businesses, and certainly it’s one of the best-managed banks on the planet with \[CEO\] [Jamie Dimon](https://www.barrons.com/articles/jpmorgan-chase-jamie-dimon-plans-69881fc5?mod=article_inline),” he says. But PNC has a bigger active weight versus the fund’s benchmark, and “we think it’s more favorably positioned from a loan portfolio standpoint.” With the [bond yield curve steepening](https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-10-05-2026/card/latest-bond-selloff-marked-by-steepening-yield-curve-dBJlmhph1j36N5ufMHOz?mod=article_inline), traditional bank lenders like PNC stand to benefit from a widening spread between short- and long-term interest rates. Koontz’s portfolio might seem eclectic, with its high-tech and old industrial combos. But eclecticism is what you expect from a traditional active manager seeking value wherever he can find it. [https://www.barrons.com/articles/active-value-etf-620d4be0](https://www.barrons.com/articles/active-value-etf-620d4be0) # Top 10 Holdings ||**Company / Ticker**|**Portfolio Weighting**| |:-|:-|:-| ||**Microsoft / MSFT**|6.3%| ||**Apple / AAPL**|5.7| ||[**Amazon.com**](http://Amazon.com) **/ AMZN**|4.7| ||**JPMorgan Chase / JPM**|4.3| ||**ExxonMobil Holdings / XOM**|4.0| ||**Shell / SHEL**|3.6| ||**Walmart / WMT**|3.4| ||**Toll Brothers / TOL**|3.2| ||**Alphabet / GOOGL**|3.0| ||**Advanced Micro Devices / AMD**|3.0| ||**Total Weighting**|41.2%| Source: Morningstar

Revolut GM on the UK’s first in-store facial recognition checkout: 'Here’s how our pioneering technology is set to disrupt the high street'