After a stint on the high-yield desk at Goldman Sachs, David Tepper launched the hedge fund Appaloosa Management in the early 1990s. Over the last couple of decades, Tepper has generated an average annual return in the mid to high 20% range — highlighted by an outsize performance in 2009 after he bought distressed bank securities near their lows during the financial crisis.

Combined with his ownership of the Carolina Panthers football team, Tepper’s fortune has made him an investment personality whose moves are dissected for clues about the market’s direction. During the second quarter, Appaloosa’s 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission showed that the firm fully exited its position in Lyft (LYFT +0.40%) while simultaneously adding more than 1.3 million shares of its ride-hailing rival, Uber Technologies (UBER +0.32%). Uber is now one of Appaloosa’s five largest positions, representing about 7% of the portfolio.

Investors watching Tepper closely see this transaction as more than a simple rotation. Rather, it reflects a calculated judgment about relative competitive strength and long-term value creation in an intense ridesharing and delivery landscape.

Breaking down Tepper’s Lyft trade

According to filings, Appaloosa initiated its stake in Lyft during the first quarter of 2024, buying 467,618 shares. Throughout the rest of the year, its position grew to 13.5 million shares. While Tepper held the stock for roughly two years, his fund steadily pruned the position throughout 2025 and fully exited during the second quarter of this year.

Today’s Change

(0.32%) $0.25

Current Price

$78.80

Key Data Points

Market Cap

$160BMarket cap calculated using publicly traded shares outstanding only. Does not include unlisted, private, or dual-class non-traded shares. Implied market cap may vary.

Day’s Range

$77.85 – $80.22

52wk Range

$65.41 – $101.99

Volume

12.8M

Avg Vol

20.7M

Gross Margin

35.42%

I think the decision to exit was influenced less by any problems at the company and more by a broader desire for sharper focus in the industries in which Lyft operates. The company continues to post respectable growth in rides and gross bookings, but it remains a much narrower service provider whose scale lags that of Uber.

Analyzing Uber’s business results

Uber and Lyft compete in overlapping markets, yet Uber’s more-diversified platform and stronger financial momentum make it a more compelling long-term holding. During the second quarter, it reported gross bookings of $58 billion, up 24% year over year. The number of trips grew 18% to 3.9 billion, driven by robust growth in monthly active platform consumers (MAPCs).

These performance metrics translated to 33% growth in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. Free cash flow for the quarter totaled $2.8 billion, lifting Uber’s trailing-12-month free cash flow above $10 billion for the first time. This performance proves Uber commands impressive operating leverage across its mobility and delivery segments, both of which are supported by the company’s expanding higher-margin advertising services.

Should you buy Uber stock right now?

The consensus price target for Uber among Wall Street analysts is $101, implying roughly 30% upside to current trading levels. This disconnect between the share price and Wall Street’s forecast can largely be explained by persistent anxiety over the disruption promised by autonomous vehicle (AV) fleets.

Expanding services from Alphabet‘s Waymo and Tesla‘s Robotaxi have come with a perception of increased competitive pressures. This has resulted in significant multiple compression relative to Uber’s historical valuation profile. Nevertheless, management is quietly scaling up its own AV partnerships and targeting several cities for launches over the coming quarters.

UBER PE Ratio data by YCharts; PE = price to earnings.

Uber’s network effects, global footprint, and proven ability to convert rider and order volumes into expanding margins provide a durable foundation that robotaxi fears shouldn’t erode overnight (if at all). The combination of accelerating free cash flow, an attractive valuation, and its model for adapting to embrace autonomous vehicles creates an asymmetric opportunity most investors appear to be overlooking.

The Infowars founder can only be forced to pay about $6 million, the Texas Third Court of Appeals ruled in a unanimous opinion, citing state laws that limit lawsuit damages.

The ruling does not affect a separate $1.25 billion judgment against Jones in Connecticut, where he was also found liable for defaming and causing emotional distress to relatives of the 20 first-graders and six educators killed in the Newtown shooting.

The punishing financial verdicts against Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, in recent years have forced him into bankruptcy, led to some of his personal property being put up for auction and led to him leaving his Infowars platform. For decades, he used the platform to push conspiracy theories about the United Nations, the federal government, gun control and more.

Sandy Hook families have yet to collect any money from Jones, who has waged lengthy appeals in state and bankruptcy courts as his company faces liquidation. He remains on air after moving onto new websites and streaming platforms.

Friday’s ruling did not throw out the trial court’s finding of defamation against Jones. Still, he called it “a gigantic victory for the First Amendment,” and said he will continue to appeal the case to the state Supreme Court to get the remaining damages thrown out.

“I got lawyers who are good constitutional lawyers and they are not backing down,” Jones said.

Jones has already tried to appeal the Connecticut judgment to the U.S. Supreme Court but was denied last year.

The decision by the Texas Third Court of Appeals left intact more than $4.1 million in compensatory damages awarded by a jury to Sandy Hook parents Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis for defamation and emotional distress. But it slashed more than $45 million in additional punitive damages down to $1.5 million to comply with the state’s $750,000 cap for each plaintiff.

The court found Heslin and Lewis did not show evidence that the harassment following Jones’ hoax claims rose to a level that would allow them to exceed the cap. It also said the trial judge improperly allowed the parents to seek higher damages after trial.

Mark Bankston, an attorney for Heslin and Lewis in the Texas lawsuit, shrugged off the appeals court ruling as “irrelevant” given that Jones still faces massive financial judgments in Connecticut.

“The families care not at all about this irrelevant ruling which affects only two of the 19 claims they all share. Jones still faces over a billion dollars of liability, so this changes absolutely nothing. All it does is highlight the absurdity of Texas law,” Bankston said.

Newtown families harassed as Jones claimed the massacre was a hoax

Heslin and Lewis’s 6-year-old son Jesse Lewis was among those killed in the Sandy Hook attack. Their lawsuit against Jones and the 2022 verdict marked the first time he was held financially liable for peddling lies about the massacre, claiming it was faked by the government to tighten gun laws.

Jones portrayed the lawsuit as an attack on his First Amendment rights, but conceded during the trial that the shootings were “100% real” and that he was wrong to have lied about them.

At the Texas and Connecticut trials, victims’ relatives testified that Jones’ followers — believing his claims that the shooting didn’t happen — subjected them to death and rape threats, in-person harassment and abusive comments on social media. Jones argued there was no proof that linked him to those actions.

Heslin and Lewis told jurors that an apology wouldn’t suffice and initially called on them to make Jones pay more than $150 million for the years of suffering he has put them and other Sandy Hook families through.

Almost immediately after the punitive damages in Texas were announced, Jones’ trial attorney predicted the award would be reduced to $1.5 million on appeal.

Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families in the Connecticut lawsuit, said Friday’s ruling has no bearing on the ongoing lower court proceedings in Texas involving the liquidation of Infowars’ parent company.

The Onion steps in to mock Jones and help frustrated families

Jones and his company have filed for bankruptcy, and those legal proceedings continue. The satirical website The Onion also moved to take over Jones’ Infowars platforms and turn his bullhorn of conspiracy theories into parody sites.

Jones gave up the Infowars brand in April and moved to a new location, switching his shows to new websites and posting them on his personal X account. The Onion, meanwhile, has set up its own Infowars webpage on its website, running videos of shows parodying Jones.

A proposed licensing deal that would give The Onion temporary authority to use Infowars’ trademarks, copyrights and intellectual property has been put on hold because the liquidation proceedings have been stayed during Jones’ appeals.

In November 2024, the Chicago-based satirical outlet was named the winner of a bankruptcy court auction of the assets of Infowars’ parent company, Free Speech Systems, aimed at helping pay some of the defamation judgments. A federal judge overturned the auction results, citing problems with the process and The Onion’s bid.

___ This story has been corrected to show that Jones is still liable for $4.1 million in compensatory damages in addition to $1.5 million in punitive damages.

___ Dave Collins contributed from Hartford, Connecticut.