BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Anecdotal, and Negativity Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 20.5% saturation with 207 hits. Analysis detected 857 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,010 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.7% and a BS Rank of 18% (21,881 of 26,447 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 82.70% of the article peer group.

Wall Street got back to its winning ways last week after navigating a hawkish Federal Reserve meeting, volatile swings in chip stocks, and a critical round of Big Tech earnings. 
The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1% for the week, snapping a three-week losing streak. 
The S & P 500 gained 1% last week, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq climbed 1.6%. 
Both avoided three down weeks in a row. 
For the month, however, performance was more mixed. 
The Dow edged up 0.32% in July, extending its monthly win streak to four. 
It was back-to-back monthly losses for the S & P 500, which slipped 0.13% in July, and the Nasdaq, which fell 3.2%. 
Here's a closer look at what drove the market in the final week of the month. 
Bonds send the Fed a warning 
While the Fed left interest rates unchanged Wednesday afternoon, three out of the 12 members on the central bank's policymaking committee voted for a hike. 
The opposition to holding borrowing costs steady reflected growing concern that inflation has remained above the Fed's 2% target for too long, with higher energy prices on renewed Iran war tensions adding to the pressure. 
During his post-July meeting news conference, Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh attempted to reassure markets that policymakers would act when necessary. 
The bond market that day wanted more than tough talk . 
The 10-year Treasury yield climbed above 4.67%, while the 30-year yield surged above 5.2% to its highest level since 2007. 
Stocks sank on that surge in yields, as investors questioned whether the central bank was falling behind in its inflation fight. 
The Dow on Wednesday plunged more than 1,100 points, or 2.2%, its worst one-day decline since April 2025. 
While stocks recovered and finished the week higher, the 10-year topped 4.7% on Friday. 
Oil was higher Friday but lower overall in a topsy-turvy week. 
Forced selling distorts AI trade 
It turns out that the recent reversal of the "long AI hardware, short software" trade, which had been working all year, was exacerbated by forced selling by Situational Awareness  a highly leveraged hedge fund founded by former OpenAI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner. 
We found out Thursday that the fund had to offload its troubled bets, which ended up stabilizing the rocky AI trade. 
Jim Cramer on Thursday morning called the liquidation "one of the more sure signals to buy ," arguing that the unwind could mark a turning point by removing a significant source of indiscriminate selling pressure. 
The Nasdaq surged Thursday and Friday, though not enough to stay out of the red for the month. 
Jim also emphasized the implosion of Situational Awareness is a cautionary tale about the dangers of investing with borrowed money . 
That's why Jim has consistently cautioned investors against buying stocks on margin. 
Not all AI spending is created equal 
Hyperscaler earnings this week reinforced the idea that Wall Street isn't against AI spending. 
It just wants evidence that the investments will generate profits. 
Microsoft and Amazon showed investors what successful AI spending looks like. 
Microsoft kept its underlying capital spending outlook relatively disciplined while generating $19 billion in quarterly free cash flow . 
Amazon raised its full-year capital expenditure forecast by $20 billion, but Amazon Web Services (AWS) delivered its fastest revenue growth in 18 quarters, and CEO Andy Jassy clearly explained how those investments should translate into higher returns as new data centers come online. 
Investors rewarded both companies, with weekly gains of 21% for Microsoft and 17% for Amazon. 
Microsoft has gone from "most hated" to "most loved," Jim said during Thursday's Morning Meeting , urging investors to "stay long. 
Do not touch it." 
On Friday, he praised Jassy's messaging. 
Meta Platforms , however, reminded investors that spending alone isn't enough. 
Although the Facebook and Instagram parent continued to post strong advertising growth, investors focused on a softer revenue outlook, higher capital spending, and a roughly 91% decline in free cash flow . 
On the post-earnings conference call, CEO Mark Zuckerberg did little to convince investors that Meta's massive AI spending will translate into meaningful financial returns anytime soon. 
Shares fell hard on Thursday and ended the week down more than 6%. 
Jim said Thursday, "My hedge fund hat would say sell it. 
I really didn't like the quarter." 
We sat on our hands. 
Memory knocks an otherwise strong Apple 
Apple faced a different challenge when it reported its quarterly results Thursday evening. 
The iPhone maker beat revenue and earnings expectations , but higher memory prices, supply constraints, and softer guidance overshadowed the quarter . 
Apple has already raised prices on some Macs and iPads to offset those higher costs, and investors are now waiting to see whether the company will do the same with its next iPhone lineup. 
Unlike its hyperscaler peers, however, Apple has largely avoided the AI spending arms race. 
That capital-light strategy has become a competitive advantage with investors, who have rewarded Apple for improving its AI offerings through partnerships with Alphabet . 
Shares of Apple sank on Friday, finishing the week down more than 7%. 
Jim called the Apple quarter "fantastic," arguing Friday that the company's biggest challenge isn't AI but supply. 
"They just can't meet demand." 
(See here for a full list of the stocks in Jim Cramer's Charitable Trust.) 
As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. 
Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust's portfolio. 
If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. 
THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . 
NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. 
NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 1.4%Alexa LoMonaco: 6.2%CNBC: 3.7%Confirmation Bias1.4%This article: 3.4%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.3%CNBC: 1.8%Anchoring Bias3.4%This article: 2.1%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.4%CNBC: 2.5%Availability Heuristic2.1%This article: 4.3%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.0%CNBC: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic4.3%This article: 1.4%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.7%CNBC: 0.4%Hindsight Bias1.4%This article: 6.2%Alexa LoMonaco: 4.7%CNBC: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias6.2%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 2.5%CNBC: 5.1%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 1.2%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.0%CNBC: 0.6%Loss Aversion1.2%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.4%CNBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 4.2%CNBC: 6.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.5%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.6%CNBC: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.5%This article: 6.4%Alexa LoMonaco: 3.1%CNBC: 5.1%Negativity Bias6.4%This article: 0.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.5%CNBC: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias0.6%This article: 2.1%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.5%CNBC: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error2.1%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.2%CNBC: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.1%CNBC: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Alexa LoMonaco: 2.8%CNBC: 2.3%Halo Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.7%Alexa LoMonaco: 2.2%CNBC: 2.1%Recency Bias4.7%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.2%CNBC: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.4%CNBC: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 4.5%CNBC: 3.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 2.4%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.3%CNBC: 0.8%False Dilemma2.4%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.5%CNBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 5.1%CNBC: 3.3%Hasty Generalization2.6%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.1%CNBC: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.4%CNBC: 2.0%Appeal to Emotion0.6%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.8%CNBC: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 20.5%Alexa LoMonaco: 3.2%CNBC: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)20.5%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.6%CNBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.2%CNBC: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.3%CNBC: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.1%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.7%CNBC: 1.1%Anecdotal7.1%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.5%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.1%CNBC: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.5%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.3%CNBC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.2%CNBC: 2.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.1%CNBC: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.2%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.4%CNBC: 2.8%Biased Writer Voice4.2%This article: 1.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.7%CNBC: 0.7%Indoctrination1.6%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%Alexa LoMonaco: 7.8%CNBC: 3.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.8%

1010 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers15%attributed speech858writer words
Selected voice

Jim Cramer

100%flagged-word coverage
132 attributed words87% of attributed speech57% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination+12.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%Jim Cramer: 12.1%12.1%Attempt to Sell a Product -9.2 ptsWriter: 9.2%Jim Cramer: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-4.9 ptsWriter: 4.9%Jim Cramer: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.