Tech
tech

A direct appeal to Sundar Pichai, CEO of Alphabet, to please fix Google Finance’s most basic feature

Alphabet is a remarkable entity. Today, millions of people will fire up Google Chrome, check their Gmail, and then flick over to YouTube — now the biggest thing in TV, and potentially worth some $550 billion — all while Alphabet’s self-driving car division, Waymo, safely delivers thousands of people to their desired destination... and Google itself handles over 150,000 search queries every single second.

But one tiny bug in the Finance product is enough to make me forget all of that.

Disclaimer: If you aren’t in the mood to dive into a very petty — largely unimportant — gripe about stock charts, please stop reading.

When searching the web for a stock and using Google Finance’s “year to date” return function on its interactive module, the calculation is always, bafflingly, wrong. Take Tesla’s stock as an example.

Tesla stock
Sherwood News

Per this Google module, Tesla’s stock is down 31.67% this year. From memory that sounds broadly correct — Tesla is having a bad year after all — but it’s not quite right.

Let’s do the calculation manually. Using the interactive chart, we can calculate the change from the end of December 31 to yesterday’s close (March 31).

Tesla YTD 2 Google Finance
Screenshot from Google

Doing that, we get -35.83%. About a 4% difference.

So, what’s going on?

It turns out that Google Finance is using the close price from January 2 in the first case, essentially ignoring the first day of trading. We can see this in the below screenshot: drawing a line from January 2 to March 31 gives us Google’s YTD change of 31.67%. But, of course, January 2 should be counted. In this case, Tesla moved quite a bit on the day!

Tesla YTD 3 Google Finance
Screenshot from Google

Rival provider Yahoo Finance correctly tells us it’s -35.83% on its website.

Yahoo Finance
Screenshot from Yahoo Finance

The weirdest thing, however, is that if I navigate to the actual Google Finance website (rather than just using the interactive module that appears at the top of Google Search), the problem fixes itself.

Still, Sundar, if you’re reading this, can you help us out here?

When searching the web for a stock and using Google Finance’s “year to date” return function on its interactive module, the calculation is always, bafflingly, wrong. Take Tesla’s stock as an example.

Tesla stock
Sherwood News

Per this Google module, Tesla’s stock is down 31.67% this year. From memory that sounds broadly correct — Tesla is having a bad year after all — but it’s not quite right.

Let’s do the calculation manually. Using the interactive chart, we can calculate the change from the end of December 31 to yesterday’s close (March 31).

Tesla YTD 2 Google Finance
Screenshot from Google

Doing that, we get -35.83%. About a 4% difference.

So, what’s going on?

It turns out that Google Finance is using the close price from January 2 in the first case, essentially ignoring the first day of trading. We can see this in the below screenshot: drawing a line from January 2 to March 31 gives us Google’s YTD change of 31.67%. But, of course, January 2 should be counted. In this case, Tesla moved quite a bit on the day!

Tesla YTD 3 Google Finance
Screenshot from Google

Rival provider Yahoo Finance correctly tells us it’s -35.83% on its website.

Yahoo Finance
Screenshot from Yahoo Finance

The weirdest thing, however, is that if I navigate to the actual Google Finance website (rather than just using the interactive module that appears at the top of Google Search), the problem fixes itself.

Still, Sundar, if you’re reading this, can you help us out here?

More Tech

See all Tech
$1

Barclays says autonomous couriers — think sidewalk robots and drones — could push delivery costs down to as little as $1 per order, from between $5 and $7 today and closer to $9 for traditional deliveries in high-labor-cost markets. If robots save $4 on every delivery, and enough companies start using them, the food delivery industry, including companies like DoorDash and Uber, could end up with $16 billion in extra profit every year, according to Barclays.

The catch: we’re nowhere near that world yet. Robots and drones handle less than 1% of deliveries today. Even by 2035, Barclays only sees penetration hitting around 10%.

Google’s Wing and Amazon have also been trying to crack last-mile product delivery — a reminder that this is part of a broader race to automate the most expensive leg of e-commerce.

$10B

Uber has long had an asset-light business model: it provided the ride-hailing platform, and its contract workers brought their own vehicles. That’s changing as Uber positions itself at the center of the robotaxi era.

The Financial Times estimates that Uber has committed more than $10 billion to buying robotaxi fleets ($7.5 billion) and investing in the companies that make them ($2.5 billion). That includes yesterday’s announcement that its expanding its investment in Lucid, a deal worth about $2 billion, with plans to buy 35,000 vehicles.

This shift pits Uber against industry leaders like Google’s Waymo and Tesla, whose models involve company-owned vehicles running on proprietary platforms. While these autonomous fleets eliminate the need for drivers, they introduce new capital-intensive requirements for charging, cleaning, storage, and repair.

tech
Jon Keegan

Report: US Treasury wants to get a look at Anthropic’s Mythos model

Anthropic’s relationship with the US government is complicated — and the Treasury Department is reportedly looking to make it even more so.

The Pentagon has officially deemed the startup a national security supply chain risk after it refused to allow its Claude AI to be used for any and all national security applications, including domestic surveillance and autonomous killing.

But since Anthropic’s unusual announcement of its next model, Mythos, other parts of the US government want to get their hands on it.

Bloomberg reports that the US Treasury is interested in getting access to Mythos for its own security testing. Last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent summoned top Wall Street CEOs to Washington to discuss the cybersecurity implications of the new model.

Mythos has not yet been released to the public, as Anthropic has deemed its potential offensive cybersecurity capabilities to be too dangerous for wide release, and has opted to share the powerful new model only with a group of leading tech companies.

Anthropic wants these early access partners to test out the model, hoping to secure any major vulnerabilities before a public release. OpenAI also shared a forthcoming AI-powered cybersecurity tool with a select group of partners to shore up defenses in light of advances in detecting vulnerabilities.

European regulators were apparently left out of the loop from the Mythos announcement, and are also eager to test the new model.

But since Anthropic’s unusual announcement of its next model, Mythos, other parts of the US government want to get their hands on it.

Bloomberg reports that the US Treasury is interested in getting access to Mythos for its own security testing. Last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent summoned top Wall Street CEOs to Washington to discuss the cybersecurity implications of the new model.

Mythos has not yet been released to the public, as Anthropic has deemed its potential offensive cybersecurity capabilities to be too dangerous for wide release, and has opted to share the powerful new model only with a group of leading tech companies.

Anthropic wants these early access partners to test out the model, hoping to secure any major vulnerabilities before a public release. OpenAI also shared a forthcoming AI-powered cybersecurity tool with a select group of partners to shore up defenses in light of advances in detecting vulnerabilities.

European regulators were apparently left out of the loop from the Mythos announcement, and are also eager to test the new model.

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC produces fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and is a fully owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, or Robinhood Money, LLC. Futures and event contracts are offered through Robinhood Derivatives, LLC.