
Forestar (FOR) Q3 2025 Earnings Call Transcript
Tuesday, July 22, 2025, at 11 a.m. EDT
CALL PARTICIPANTS
President and Chief Executive Officer — Andy Oxley
Chief Financial Officer — Jim Allen
Chief Operating Officer — Mark Walker
Vice President — Chris Hibbetts
Need a quote from one of our analysts? Email pr@fool.com
RISKS
Management cited "While affordability constraints and weaker consumer confidence" as ongoing headwinds negatively impacting the pace of new home sales and lot deliveries.
Gross profit margin declined to 20.4% from 22.5% in the prior year quarter, with management attributing part of the decrease to the closeout of "one community with an unusually low margin."
Lot delivery guidance was lowered to "14,500 to 15,000 lots" for FY2025, down from prior expectations, in response to slower market conditions.
TAKEAWAYS
Revenue: $390.5 million in GAAP revenue, up 23% compared to Q3 FY2024, driven by higher lot sales volume and pricing mix.
Net Income: $32.9 million, or $0.65 per diluted share, down from $38.7 million, or $0.76 per diluted share, in the prior year, due to margin compression and lower one-time gains.
Lots Sold: Lots sold totaled 3,605, representing an 11% increase from Q3 FY2024 and a 6% sequential increase from the previous quarter.
Lots Under Contract: 25,700, up 26% year over year, representing 38% of owned lots and $2.3 billion in future revenue.
Gross Profit Margin: Gross profit margin was 20.4%, down from 22.5% in the prior year quarter. After adjusting for an unusually low-margin community, the normalized gross profit margin was approximately 21.1%.
SG&A Expense: $37.4 million, or 9.6% of revenue, up from 9.2% last year, attributed to new market expansion and a 16% higher community count.
Average Lot Sales Price: $106,600, influenced by a greater proportion of higher-priced lot deliveries.
Liquidity: $792 million, including $189 million in unrestricted cash and $603 million in undrawn revolver capacity.
Debt and Capital: Total debt stands at $873 million, with a net debt to capital ratio of 28.9% and $70.4 million in senior notes maturing within twelve months as of June 30, 2025.
Book Value Per Share: $33.04, up 11% year over year, reflecting growth in stockholders' equity.
Revenue Guidance: Management reaffirmed full-year revenue guidance of $1.5 billion to $1.55 billion for FY2025, despite reduced volume expectations.
Lot Delivery Guidance: Lowered to 14,500-15,000 lots for FY2025, citing slower homebuyer demand.
Capital Expenditure: $372 million invested in land and development, with approximately 80% allocated to development versus 20% to acquisition.
Owned Lot Position: 102,300 total lots as of June 30, 2025, with 67% owned and 33% controlled; 10,000 finished lots at quarter-end.
Backlog Exposure: 27% of owned lots were subject to a right of first offer with D.R. Horton, as detailed in executed agreements as of June 30, 2025.
D.R. Horton Relationship: 15% of D.R. Horton home starts in the past 12 months, and 23% of its finished lot purchases in Q3 FY2025 were from lots developed by Forestar Group Inc.
New Market Expansion: Entered seven new markets over the past year, including the Pacific Northwest and Northern California, supporting a 16% increase in community count.
Development Cost Trends: Management stated development costs have "stabilized," remaining "flattish" sequentially.
Pricing Outlook: Higher average lot pricing year to date has been attributed mainly to sales mix, with some support from national lot supply constraints.
Strategic Focus: Continued emphasis on capital efficiency, inventory turnover, and targeting entry-level/first-time buyer segments.
SUMMARY
Forestar Group (NYSE:FOR) management attributed a 23% revenue increase to higher lot sales and price mix, while acknowledging net income (GAAP) fell due to lower gross margins and the absence of prior-year asset sale gains. Year-to-date pricing has exceeded initial expectations for FY2025, leading to maintained revenue guidance of $1.5 billion to $1.55 billion for FY2025, despite reduced lot delivery targets of 14,500 to 15,000 lots in response to slowed demand. Lot backlog reached a five-year high, reflecting expanded contracts and reinforcing growth visibility. Leverage remains moderate, and liquidity is described as strong, with management underlining operational flexibility as a competitive advantage.
Jim Allen stated, "Over the last three years, that [gross margin] range has kind of been in the 21% to 23% range," suggesting no clear trend toward further margin erosion.
Capital structure was positioned as a key differentiator, with management referencing competitor challenges accessing project-level development loans.
New market entry and increased diversification of the customer base were highlighted as ongoing priorities to drive future growth opportunities.
Mark Walker noted, "The availability of contractors and necessary materials remains solid. The land development cost has stabilized."
INDUSTRY GLOSSARY
Lot Banker: An intermediary acquiring finished lots for resale to builders, often providing bridge financing or inventory management.
Right of First Offer: A contractual arrangement giving a specified party, here D.R. Horton, the first opportunity to purchase lots before they are offered to others.
Full Conference Call Transcript
Andy Oxley: Thanks, Chris. Good morning, everyone. I'm also joined on the call today by Jim Allen, our Chief Financial Officer, and Mark Walker, our Chief Operating Officer. The Forestar Group Inc. team delivered a solid third quarter generating $32.9 million of net income or $0.65 per diluted share on $390.5 million of revenue. Lots sold increased 11% year over year and 6% sequentially to 3,605 lots. Additionally, lots under contract to sell increased 26% from a year ago to 25,700 lots representing 38% of our owned lot position and $2.3 billion of future revenue, which is the highest contracted backlog we have had during the last five years.
While affordability constraints and weaker consumer confidence continue to impact the pace of new home sales, we maintained strong liquidity through disciplined investment in inventory. Our experienced operators are adjusting the pace of development where appropriate, and we are moderating our land acquisition investments. Over 80% of our investments this quarter were for land development. We remain focused on turning our inventory, maximizing returns, and consolidating market share in the highly fragmented lot development industry. Our unique combination of financial strength, operating expertise, and a diverse national footprint enables us to consistently provide essential finished lots to homebuilders and navigate current market conditions effectively. We will now discuss our third quarter financial results in more detail.
Jim Allen: Thank you, Andy. In the third quarter, net income was $32.9 million or $0.65 per diluted share, compared to $38.7 million or $0.76 per diluted share in the prior year quarter. Revenues for the third quarter increased 23% to $390.5 million compared to $318.4 million in the prior year quarter. Our gross profit margin for the quarter was 20.4% compared to 22.5% for the same quarter last year. The current year quarter was negatively impacted by the closeout of one community with an unusually low margin. Excluding the effect of this item, our current year quarter gross margin would have been approximately 21.1%. Our pretax income was $43.6 million compared to $51.6 million in the third quarter of last year.
And our pretax profit margin this quarter was 11.2% compared to 16.2% in the prior year quarter. The prior year quarter was positively impacted by a $5 million gain on sale of assets. Pretax profit margin in the prior year quarter, excluding the gain on sale, would have been 14.6%. Lots sold in our third quarter increased 11% to 3,605 lots, with an average sales price of $106,600. Our average sales price this quarter was impacted by an outsized mix of lot deliveries from communities with higher price point lots. We expect continued quarterly fluctuations in our average sales price based on the geographic and lot size mix of our deliveries.
Chris Hibbetts: In the third quarter, SG&A expense was $37.4 million or 9.6% as a percentage of revenues compared to 9.2% in the prior year quarter. Our increase in SG&A is primarily driven by the expansion of our operating platform, including entering seven new markets alongside D.R. Horton's footprint, and increasing community count by 16% in the last year. We are pleased with the progress we have made building our team, and we continue to attract high-quality talent. We remain focused on efficiently managing our SG&A while investing in our teams to support future growth.
Mark Walker: New home sales have been slower than last year as continued affordability constraints and weaker consumer confidence continue to weigh on demand. However, mortgage rate buy-down incentives offered by builders are helping to bridge the affordability gap and spur demand for new homes, particularly at more affordable price points. Our primary focus remains developing lots for new homes at prices that target entry-level and first-time buyers, which is the largest segment of the new home market. The availability of contractors and necessary materials remains solid. The land development cost has stabilized. We have also seen improvement in cycle times despite continued governmental delays.
Our teams utilize best management practices and work closely with our trade partners to develop lots to drive operational efficiency.
Jim Allen: D.R. Horton is our largest and most important customer. 15% of the homes D.R. Horton started in the past twelve months were on a Forestar Group Inc. developed lot. And 23% of their finished lot purchases this quarter were lots developed by Forestar Group Inc. With a mutually stated goal of one out of every three homes D.R. Horton sells to be on a lot developed by Forestar Group Inc., we have a significant opportunity to grow our market share within D.R. Horton.
We continue to work on expanding our relationships with other homebuilders, and intermediate 15% of our third quarter deliveries or 530 lots were sold to other customers, which includes 331 lots that were sold to a lot banker who expects to sell those lots to D.R. Horton at a future date. We also sold lots to eight other homebuilders, one of which was a new customer.
Mark Walker: Our total lot position at June 30 was essentially flat from a year ago, at 102,300 lots, of which 68,300 or 67% was owned and 34,000 or 33% were controlled through purchase contracts. 10,000 of our owned lots were finished at quarter-end, and the majority are under contract to sell. Consistent with our focus on capital efficiency, we target only a three to four-year supply of land and lots and manage development phases to deliver finished lots at a pace that matches market demand.
Owned lots under contract to sell increased 26% from a year ago to 25,700 lots or 38% of our owned lot position. $230 million of hard-earned money deposits secured these contracts, which are expected to generate approximately $2.3 billion of future revenue. Our contracted backlog is a strong indicator of our ability to continue gaining market share in a highly fragmented lot development industry. Another 27% of our owned lots are subject to a right of first offer to D.R. Horton based on executed purchase and sale agreements.
Chris Hibbetts: Forestar Group Inc.'s underwriting criteria for new development projects remains unchanged at a minimum 15% pretax return on average inventory, a return of our initial cash investment within thirty-six months. During the third quarter, we invested approximately $372 million in land and land development, which was relatively flat with the prior year quarter. Roughly 20% of our investment was for land acquisition, and 80% was for land development. Although we have moderated our land acquisition investment, our team remains disciplined, flexible, and opportunistic when pursuing new land acquisition opportunities.
Our current land and lot position will allow us to return to strong volume growth in future periods, and we still expect to invest approximately $1.9 billion in land acquisition and development in fiscal 2025, subject to market conditions.
Jim Allen: We have significant liquidity and are using modest leverage to keep our balance sheet strong and support our growth objectives. We ended the quarter with $792 million of liquidity, including an unrestricted cash balance of $189 million and $603 million of available capacity on our undrawn revolving credit facility. Total debt at June 30 was $873 million, with $70.4 million of senior note maturities in the next twelve months. And our net debt to capital ratio was 28.9%. We ended the quarter with $1.7 billion of stockholders' equity, and our book value per share increased 11% from a year ago to $33.04.
Forestar Group Inc.'s capital structure is one of our biggest competitive advantages, and it sets us apart from other land developers. Project-level land acquisition and development loans are less available and have become more expensive in recent years, impacting most of our competitors. Other developers generally use project-level development loans, which are typically more restrictive, have floating rates, and create administrative complexity, especially in a volatile rate environment. Our capital structure provides us with operational flexibility while our strong liquidity positions us to take advantage of attractive opportunities as they arise. Andy, I will hand it back to you for closing remarks.
Andy Oxley: Thanks, Jim. As outlined in our press release, we are maintaining our fiscal 2025 revenue guidance of $1.5 billion to $1.55 billion while lowering our lot delivery guidance to 14,500 to 15,000 lots in response to current market conditions. Our team has a proven track record of adjusting to changes in market conditions quickly, and we are closely monitoring each of our markets as we strive to balance pace and price to maximize returns for each project.
While we expect home affordability constraints and cautious homebuyers to continue to be a near-term headwind for new home demand, we are confident in the long-term demand for finished lots and our ability to gain market share in the highly fragmented lot development industry. Continued execution of our strategic and operational plans, combined with constrained finished lot supply across the majority of our diverse national footprint, positions us for further success. With a clear direction, a dedicated team, and a strong operational and financial foundation in place, I am excited about Forestar Group Inc.'s future. John, at this time, we'll open the line for questions.
Operator: Thank you. At this time, we will be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press 1 on your telephone keypad. You may press 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. It may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment, please, while we poll for questions. Once again, please press 1 if you have a question or a comment. The first question comes from Trevor Allinson with Wolfe Research. Please proceed.
Trevor Allinson: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. First one's on gross margins. You called out the single community had I think you said roughly a 70 basis point impact on margins. Excluding that, it still seems like gross margins took a step down both sequentially and year over year in the quarter. Should we think about this 21% gross margin rate being a good run rate going forward? Or were there other kind of one-time impacts in the quarter that impacted your margins?
Jim Allen: Just one moment. The range of 21 to 23%. So at the lower end of the range for this quarter, but we haven't really seen anything that would indicate significantly lower margins going forward.
Trevor Allinson: Okay. You guys were cut off for quite a long time. I really only caught the end of that question. Could you repeat the beginning or the answer? Could you repeat the beginning of it? I'm not sure if other people had the same technical difficulty. But I think I only caught probably the last five or six words of your answer.
Jim Allen: Okay. Sorry about that. Yeah. It's really mostly mix. I mean, again, if you exclude that one closeout community, our margins, our normalized margin for the quarter would have been 21.1%. We try to do that every quarter, adjust for unusually high or low margin lot sales, or kind of one-time items. Over the last three years, that range has kind of been in the 21% to 23% range. So this quarter, it's a little bit lower. But, you know, and we're continuously managing price and pace at each community to maximize returns. We underwrite to returns, not to margin.
So we're always going to have a mix of higher or lower margins depending on which communities are delivering in the period. So this quarter was kind of at the lower end, but at this point, we see no indication of reduced margins.
Trevor Allinson: Okay. Alright. That's very helpful. And apologies if others could hear you clearly and had to repeat the answer there. Second question is around development costs. You mentioned again that they've stabilized. I think you used similar language last quarter. Have you started to see the development costs actually decline sequentially? Or is it just more of stabilization as you say and those are kind of flattish quarter over quarter?
Jim Allen: Yeah. It's flattish, and it didn't stabilize for quite some time now. Sometimes we see some upticks in some categories and some downward mobility in others as well. But for the most part, we're just classifying it as stable.
Trevor Allinson: Okay. Makes sense. Thank you. Thanks for all the color, good luck moving forward.
Jim Allen: Thanks.
Operator: The next question comes from Anthony Pettinari with Citigroup. Please proceed.
Asher Sohnen: Hi. This is Asher Sohnen on for Anthony Pettinari. Thanks for taking my question. I wanted to clarify about the guide. I mean, you trimmed your volume guidance but reiterated revenue, which I guess implies better pricing. Is that just a function of maybe the mix of which communities are delivering or are there other puts and takes on pricing that we should think about?
Jim Allen: Yeah. I mean, if you just kind of look back to our original guidance, and the ASP implied in that, you know, to date, we've realized a higher ASP. Which is partly due to lot price increase, but largely due to mix as well. So if you just look at the average selling price to date, what that implies for the fourth quarter, it leads to us leading our revenue guidance at the same level.
Asher Sohnen: Great. Thanks. And then just to clarify on that last point. What is what would you point to as driving those lot price increases?
Jim Allen: Yeah. I mean, we just have a real...
Mark Walker: Yeah. In our original guidance, we had implied a low single-digit ASP increase, you know, just based on the kind of national shortage of finished lots. And so it really is community by community where the lots are located for the price, but then I said, a large part of our ASP increase is just due to mix.
Asher Sohnen: Of where those are located. Okay. Understood. Thanks. I'll turn it over.
Operator: The next question comes from Michael Rehaut with JPMorgan. Please proceed.
Alex Isaac: Hi, good morning. This is Alex Isaac on for Mike. Appreciate you taking my question. I wanted to ask about the new markets you entered and curious if there's any like regional focus as well as also, like, what you're seeing on the ground, you know, between the regions that you operate in.
Andy Oxley: Yeah. So, as we've talked about, we are opening up in the Pacific Northwest, Northern California, Salt Lake, Reno. So those are all new markets for us. We have team members now, boots on the ground, and are in the process of building out support around those as market conditions allow.
Alex Isaac: Thanks for the color on that. Those are all new markets in the last year, but we didn't have any new markets necessarily in this quarter.
Alex Isaac: Okay. That sounds great. Appreciate that. And one other question, you mentioned, you know, all the capital structure. There's been some questions that we've received related to some of the other competitors in the land development space, and their restructure. Is there an interest or would there be any consideration of conversion to a REIT, you know, for Forestar Group Inc. or has that been something that you've considered?
Jim Allen: No. Not really. I mean, we're a developer as opposed to, you know, land banker just providing financing. So I think that's really our business model and our focus.
Alex Isaac: That sounds great. Appreciate all the color.
Operator: Once again, if you have a question or a comment, please indicate so by pressing star 1 on your touch. The next question comes from Barry Hames with Sage Asset Management. Please proceed.
Barry Hames: Thanks so much for taking my question. D.R. Horton on their call talked about a slower growth in their community count as they go through the next few quarters, you know, into next fiscal year. You know, I think they talked about having been in double digits and getting down to more of a mid-single digit. It sounded like maybe over a couple of quarters, but could you talk about how that might affect your thoughts going forward as you start thinking about the next fiscal year? Thanks so much.
Andy Oxley: Well, we still have a lot of growth opportunity within Horton because at the moment, we're about 15% of their lots. And our mutually stated goal is to basically double that in the intermediate term. So I think that we will continue to see growth and market share consolidation within Horton. But also, you know, we are increasing our customer base with other builders as well and continuing to add new customers to the mix. So we think we have significant opportunity to grow both within the Horton footprint and outside.
Barry Hames: Great. Thanks so much. Appreciate it.
Operator: If there are any remaining questions, please indicate so now by pressing star 1.
Andy Oxley: Thank you, John. And thank you to everyone on the Forestar Group Inc. team for your focus and hard work. Stay disciplined, flexible, and opportunistic, as we continue to consolidate market share. We appreciate everyone's time on the call today and look forward to speaking with you again to share our fourth quarter results on Tuesday, October 28.
Operator: This concludes today's conference, and you may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.
Where to invest $1,000 right now
When our analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,055%* — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500.
They just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now, available when you join Stock Advisor.
*Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025
This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. Parts of this article were created using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on The Motley Fool's insights and investing approach. It has been reviewed by our AI quality control systems. Since LLMs cannot (currently) own stocks, it has no positions in any of the stocks mentioned. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
AGL Investors Have Opportunity to Join agilon health, inc. Fraud Investigation with the Schall Law Firm
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm, announces that it is investigating claims on behalf of investors of agilon health, inc. ('Agilon' or 'the Company') (NYSE: AGL) for violations of the securities laws. The investigation focuses on whether the Company issued false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose information pertinent to investors. Agilon announced on August 4, 2025, that President and CEO Steven Sell was stepping down immediately. The Company also withdrew its full-year 2025 financial guidance. Based on this news, shares of Agilon fell by more than 27.2% in after hours trading on the same day. If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click here to participate. We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law Firm, 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2460, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at 310-301-3335, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also reach us through the firm's website at or by email at bschall@ The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder rights litigation. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and rules of ethics.


Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Ambiq Micro's IPO Could Signal the Next Wave of AI-Driven Chip Stocks
Key Points Ambiq Micro debuted to much fanfare on the first day of trading following its highly touted IPO. The company is a pioneer in ultra-low-power semiconductors used at the edge. While Ambiq Micro's future looks bright, that are potential risks investors shouldn't ignore. 10 stocks we like better than Ambiq Micro › Since generative artificial intelligence (AI) burst on the scene more than two years ago, some of the biggest beneficiaries have been chipmakers. More specifically, advanced semiconductors provide the computational horsepower necessary to breathe life into these AI algorithms. Nvidia, Broadcom, and Arm Holdings have all been at the forefront of AI chip design and reaped the rewards. Nvidia and Broadcom stocks have soared 961% and 439%, respectively, since late 2022, while Arm has gained 173% since its September 2023 initial public offering (IPO). Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue » Ambiq Micro (NYSE: AMBQ) made a big splash during its public debut, as the low-power chip designer's stock surged 61% on its first day of trading last Wednesday, though it has since leveled off. Investors have been keen to profit from the ongoing adoption of AI, and the robust demand for Ambiq Micro stock suggests that power-miserly AI chip stocks could mark the next frontier. The power conundrum One of the biggest challenges associated with the increasing adoption of AI is the issue of power consumption. Most chipmakers have taken a brute-force approach, increasing the sheer magnitude of computational horsepower to decrease the time necessary to train and run these next-generation algorithms. The complex calculations required are computationally intensive, resulting in an increasing amount of energy consumption. Ambiq is taking a different approach. In the S-1 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) prior to its IPO, the company described itself as a "pioneer and leading provider of ultra-low-power semiconductor solutions designed to address the significant power consumption challenges of general-purpose and AI compute -- especially at the edge." Ambiq suggests its hardware and software innovations "deliver two to five times lower power consumption than traditional semiconductor design." The company is currently focused on the edge, including personal devices, as well as the medical and healthcare industries. Many of these applications are currently handled by small devices with limited battery life, where reduced power consumption is critical. In the future, Ambiq is working to expand its ultra-low-power technology to other areas of AI, including high-performance computing (HPC), data centers, and automotive, which could mark the next wave of AI chip solutions. A growing opportunity The need for power-miserly solutions could usher in the next wave of AI chips, and Ambiq's results are intriguing. For the year ended Dec. 31, the company generated revenue of $76 million, up 16% year over year, while its loss per share of $113.81 improved 24%. The trend continued in the quarter ended March 31, as revenue of $15.7 million climbed 3%, while its loss per share of $18.96 improved 30%. There is a significant concentration risk. Ambiq divulged that its top five customers accounted for 92% of revenue in the most recent quarter. Furthermore, wireless device specialist Garmin, Alphabet 's Google, and "another confidential customer" represented 38%, 25%, and 23% of net sales, respectively, according to its regulatory filing. Ambiq's flagship system-on-a-chip (SoC) is designed for smaller form-factor devices, such as smartwatches, fitness trackers, hearing aids, virtual and augmented reality glasses, and livestock tracking devices. Chief technology officer (CTO) Scott Hanson noted the company's next frontier is smart glasses. "We spent the last 10-plus years figuring out how to build the lowest power chips, and so we're in a great position to attack the same problem (on glasses)," he said. The low-power wearable chips market is expected to grow by 15% annually between 2024 and 2030 to nearly $28 billion. When viewed in the context of Ambiq's 2024 sales of $76 million, the opportunity is apparent. Every rose has its thorns It's important to remember that while Ambiq's potential is clear, risks abound. It has only just entered the glare of the public spotlight, and investors should keep in mind the aforementioned concentration risk and mounting losses, though its results are moving in the right direction. There's also the matter of Ambiq's valuation. As of market close on Monday, the stock had a market cap of roughly $673 million and trailing-12-month sales of $76.6 million. That works out to about 9 times sales, and while that's certainly not outrageous, it is a high price to pay for an unprofitable company with little public track record. As such, investors interested in taking a stake in this ultra-low-power pioneer should make Ambiq a small part of a well-balanced portfolio. Should you invest $1,000 in Ambiq Micro right now? Before you buy stock in Ambiq Micro, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Ambiq Micro wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $624,823!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,064,820!* *Stock Advisor returns as of August 4, 2025

Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
The real reason behind the stunning U.S. job revisions and why Trump's firing of the BLS commissioner is utter nonsense
'For the FOURTH month in a row, jobs numbers have beat market expectations with nearly 150,000 good jobs created in June. American-born workers have accounted for ALL of the job gains since President Trump took office and wages continue to rise.' - White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, July 3rd, 2025 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad.' - President Donald Trump, August 1st, 2025 What a difference a month makes. Strong leaders share the credit and accept the blame. Weak leaders take all the credit and lay the blame on others. Talk about a classic case of shooting the messenger. If you don't trust the payroll data, then just go to the companion survey, which showed a huge 260,000 jobs decline in July and down 402,000 since the end of the first quarter (in the aftermath of all the tariff-related uncertainty if you are seeking out a culprit). And with no revisions to blame, either. What a sham. We are on a slippery slope, folks. President Trump said BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer would be 'replaced with someone much more competent and qualified,' claiming in a social- media post the government's jobs numbers were manipulated. What utter nonsense, but nary a peep from Congress who worry about being primaried. Never mind that Ms. McEntarfer wasn't merely nominated to the post by then President Joe Biden, but she was confirmed by the Senate 86-8 in January 2024 – and Vice President JD Vance, then a senator, was among those voting for her! Did she all of a sudden become incompetent? Hard to fathom. I hardly would fire a BLS commissioner because of the headline or revisions to the data, which are normal – in fact, the sort of downward revisions we saw in the last two months, while very large, is hardly without precedent. We have seen revisions close to this no fewer than two dozen times back to 1980. Nobody else ever got fired over it. This was a large two-month downward revision, to be sure, but that is only because the numbers in May and June were grossly overstated and every other employment statistic showed that it was nonfarm payrolls was the odd man out. And the revisions only corrected that anomaly. The plain fact of the matter is that there is nothing insidious nor nefarious going on. No attempt to mislead and no sloppy usage of the data. No case for Erika McEntarfer, who has been a government statistician since 2002 which covers a span where Bush, Obama, Biden, and Trump were in the Oval Office, to be fired. This is one part ruse and one part deflection. That's all it is. The fact that this last two-month revision (-258,000) was so big only attests to how the Establishment survey was so out of sync with the other data which is why the consensus on the first release has been consistently below what came out initially. So, I ask: what is so difficult to figure out here beyond the sampling problem which the BLS did not create? The issue is with the post-Covid plunge in the business 'response rate'. This is not about the BLS which is forced to deal with the data that companies send in with respect to the initial release. It seems completely lost in this discussion that the root of the problem is the historically low company response rate to the first round of the monthly survey – this is a survey that depends on business cooperation and the reality is that the response rate does not approach anything that can be considered reliable until that second revision comes in. Maybe the BLS should simply stop publishing the payroll data so quickly – think of the first release as something no more than an incomplete snapshot of the labor market because it is no easy task 'to get it right' in the days that follow a month in a market as complex and large as a 130 million workforce, and all the churning that goes on beneath the surface. What we gain in speed of delivery of the data we lose in the veracity given the naturally lower sample size once the response rate rises in the next two months. The one thing to consider is that it is an entire employment report, replete with a wealth of information beneath the headline, even if incomplete at first. But there is typically a high error term in the first go-around and especially since the pandemic as a record low share of businesses 57% get in their responses now in time for the first payroll release. Pre-covid it was over 80% in terms of the response rate. By the time the third revision comes in, and the response rate goes to 94%, where it's always been in the past and it is only then that the BLS truly has enough information collected for anyone to get an accurate portrayal of what the labor market really looked like in the month of the first release. It's really something that only now are people paying attention to the fact that first estimates get revised as more accurate information is received. This has been a fact of life… forever. Nobody was talking about it a month ago, funny enough. And there will be future benchmark revisions in the future as even more information comes in. Everyone who follows the data closely knows that there is a high error term in the initial release of everything from payrolls to retail sales to GDP. It is all written up each month in the detailed notes to the data releases. The price paid to receive information quickly is the accuracy, as it pertains to the initial report. Nobody is amazed that we got July data on the first day of August? And this number will get revised too, for sure. These are preliminary estimates only with a large error term only because the sample size with the first stab at the employment report is so small. Why is everyone so shocked? It's not as if the BLS hides from the fact that the smaller the sample size, the larger the error term … this is taken right from the report (the range of possibilities is huge but is stated for the record): 'The confidence interval for the monthly change in total nonfarm employment from the establishment survey is on the order of plus or minus 136,000 … The precision of estimates also is improved when the data are cumulated over time … in the establishment survey, estimates for the most recent 2 months are based on incomplete returns; for this reason, these estimates are labeled preliminary in the tables. It is only after two successive revisions to a monthly estimate, when nearly all sample reports have been received, that the estimate is considered final.' Maybe the way the BLS reports the data should be changed, but it is at behest of the companies reporting in their payroll on time and accurately. Maybe those in the trading pits should be forced to wait two to three months for the better estimate instead of being spoon fed something quick with a low sample size. You just need to compare the business response rate of the first NFP estimate to the month containing the second revision – as aforementioned, from around 58% to 94% -- to see how the BLS is forced to make guesswork out of the 42% of the business universe that fail to report their headcount on time. The information trickles in the next two months. Maybe there should be a financial penalty applied to the firms who don't send in their information on time. I've been talking about this discrepancy for the past few years … and, in fact, the revisions have constantly been on the downside. The next question is why have the revisions been squarely to the downside, even before last Friday's report? Prior to what we saw unfold on Friday, there were downward revisions to every month of the year, and they totalled 188,000. That was before the downward two-month revision of 258,000 in May and June. Ergo, this has been a pattern all year long and transcends what happened in the July report. There is also the question as to why the data are constantly being revised lower. This is akin to asking why the prior payroll data were so artificially inflated. Once again, at the time of that initial release, the BLS is compelled to deal with whack load of guesswork. It must fill in the gaps from the fact that, once again, the initial response rate is historically so low. There is a huge information gap. The lower the sample size, the wider the confidence interval and the higher the error term – a basic premise of statistical analysis. The issue is that since Covid, the small business sector, in particular, has been slow to send in their updated staffing level numbers to the BLS in time for that first survey. And we know for a fact that the small business sector (fewer than 50 employees) has created no jobs at all over the past six months and have on net fired -42k workers over the May-July period. The BLS very likely was extrapolating small business job creation that simply did not exist over the spring and into the summer and that anomaly was corrected last Friday. End of story. Nobody from the White House discusses this, but what happened on Friday with the revisions is that nonfarm payrolls, which had been the odd man out, was brought into alignment with the vast array of other very soft labor market indicators of late. For example, the average private sector nonfarm payroll print of 51,000 from May to July now more closely approximates (actually a little higher) the ADP comparable of 37,000. Mr. President – it's not as if the BLS is any further away from telling the same story as ADP is. Do you want to know the name of the person who is president and CEO of ADP so you can dismiss here too (if you can)? Her name is Maria Black. Maybe she needs to be subpoenaed. Over this same May-July period, the Fed's Beige Book showed half the country posting flat to negative job growth. All the payroll numbers did on Friday was reflect that. The University of Michigan consumer sentiment data on employment in July lined up as the fourth worst reading since the end of the Great Financial Crisis in mid-2009. The Conference Board's consumer confidence survey showed only 30% of those polled stating that jobs were 'plentiful', the lowest since April 2021 – surely households would have a pretty good idea of what their job situation is, don't you think? But just in case you want to have the President and CEO of the Conference Board fired too, his name is Steve Odland, and I'm sure he is not too hard to find. There are plenty of culprits around these days spreading bad labour market news. David Rosenberg is founder of Rosenberg Research.