Month: July 2025
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
Nisa Investment Advisors LLC cut its holdings in shares of MongoDB, Inc. (NASDAQ:MDB – Free Report) by 86.1% during the first quarter, according to the company in its most recent filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 800 shares of the company’s stock after selling 4,955 shares during the quarter. Nisa Investment Advisors LLC’s holdings in MongoDB were worth $140,000 as of its most recent SEC filing.
A number of other hedge funds and other institutional investors have also modified their holdings of the company. HighTower Advisors LLC grew its position in MongoDB by 2.0% during the 4th quarter. HighTower Advisors LLC now owns 18,773 shares of the company’s stock worth $4,371,000 after purchasing an additional 372 shares during the last quarter. 111 Capital acquired a new stake in shares of MongoDB in the fourth quarter valued at about $390,000. Park Avenue Securities LLC raised its position in MongoDB by 52.6% during the first quarter. Park Avenue Securities LLC now owns 2,630 shares of the company’s stock worth $461,000 after acquiring an additional 907 shares during the last quarter. Cambridge Investment Research Advisors Inc. raised its position in MongoDB by 4.0% during the first quarter. Cambridge Investment Research Advisors Inc. now owns 7,748 shares of the company’s stock worth $1,359,000 after acquiring an additional 298 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Sowell Financial Services LLC acquired a new position in shares of MongoDB in the first quarter valued at approximately $263,000. 89.29% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors and hedge funds.
Insider Buying and Selling at MongoDB
In other MongoDB news, CEO Dev Ittycheria sold 3,747 shares of the stock in a transaction on Wednesday, July 2nd. The stock was sold at an average price of $206.05, for a total transaction of $772,069.35. Following the sale, the chief executive officer owned 253,227 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $52,177,423.35. This trade represents a 1.46% decrease in their position. The sale was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which can be accessed through this hyperlink. Also, Director Hope F. Cochran sold 1,174 shares of MongoDB stock in a transaction dated Tuesday, June 17th. The stock was sold at an average price of $201.08, for a total value of $236,067.92. Following the sale, the director directly owned 21,096 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $4,241,983.68. This represents a 5.27% decrease in their position. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Over the last quarter, insiders sold 32,746 shares of company stock valued at $7,500,196. Company insiders own 3.10% of the company’s stock.
MongoDB Stock Up 4.2%
NASDAQ:MDB opened at $218.53 on Friday. The stock has a market cap of $17.86 billion, a P/E ratio of -191.69 and a beta of 1.41. The business’s 50-day moving average price is $201.86 and its two-hundred day moving average price is $213.26. MongoDB, Inc. has a twelve month low of $140.78 and a twelve month high of $370.00.
MongoDB (NASDAQ:MDB – Get Free Report) last released its earnings results on Wednesday, June 4th. The company reported $1.00 EPS for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.65 by $0.35. The company had revenue of $549.01 million during the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $527.49 million. MongoDB had a negative return on equity of 3.16% and a negative net margin of 4.09%. The firm’s revenue for the quarter was up 21.8% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same quarter last year, the business posted $0.51 EPS. On average, equities research analysts expect that MongoDB, Inc. will post -1.78 EPS for the current fiscal year.
Wall Street Analyst Weigh In
Several equities analysts recently commented on the stock. UBS Group upped their price target on shares of MongoDB from $213.00 to $240.00 and gave the stock a “neutral” rating in a research report on Thursday, June 5th. Barclays upped their price target on shares of MongoDB from $252.00 to $270.00 and gave the company an “overweight” rating in a report on Thursday, June 5th. Stifel Nicolaus dropped their target price on shares of MongoDB from $340.00 to $275.00 and set a “buy” rating on the stock in a report on Friday, April 11th. Redburn Atlantic raised shares of MongoDB from a “sell” rating to a “neutral” rating and set a $170.00 price objective on the stock in a report on Thursday, April 17th. Finally, Monness Crespi & Hardt upgraded shares of MongoDB from a “neutral” rating to a “buy” rating and set a $295.00 target price for the company in a research report on Thursday, June 5th. Eight research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating, twenty-six have issued a buy rating and one has issued a strong buy rating to the company’s stock. According to MarketBeat, the stock currently has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and an average price target of $282.39.
MongoDB Profile
MongoDB, Inc, together with its subsidiaries, provides general purpose database platform worldwide. The company provides MongoDB Atlas, a hosted multi-cloud database-as-a-service solution; MongoDB Enterprise Advanced, a commercial database server for enterprise customers to run in the cloud, on-premises, or in a hybrid environment; and Community Server, a free-to-download version of its database, which includes the functionality that developers need to get started with MongoDB.
Featured Articles
Receive News & Ratings for MongoDB Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for MongoDB and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
On July 18, 2025, MongoDB (MDB, Financial) was the subject of a new coverage initiation by the analyst Brett Huff from Stephens & Co. The firm has announced a price target for MongoDB at USD 247.00, marking the first time this specific target has been set.
The rating assigned to MongoDB (MDB, Financial) by Stephens & Co. is “Equal-Weight.” This rating suggests that the analyst sees the stock’s performance aligning with the average returns expected from the market.
This move comes as Stephens & Co. begins its formal analysis of MongoDB (MDB, Financial), providing investors and market watchers with a fresh perspective on the company’s valuation and market position.
Wall Street Analysts Forecast
Based on the one-year price targets offered by 36 analysts, the average target price for MongoDB Inc (MDB, Financial) is $279.66 with a high estimate of $520.00 and a low estimate of $170.00. The average target implies an
upside of 27.97%
from the current price of $218.53. More detailed estimate data can be found on the MongoDB Inc (MDB) Forecast page.
Based on the consensus recommendation from 37 brokerage firms, MongoDB Inc’s (MDB, Financial) average brokerage recommendation is currently 1.9, indicating “Outperform” status. The rating scale ranges from 1 to 5, where 1 signifies Strong Buy, and 5 denotes Sell.
Based on GuruFocus estimates, the estimated GF Value for MongoDB Inc (MDB, Financial) in one year is $379.42, suggesting a
upside
of 73.62% from the current price of $218.53. GF Value is GuruFocus’ estimate of the fair value that the stock should be traded at. It is calculated based on the historical multiples the stock has traded at previously, as well as past business growth and the future estimates of the business’ performance. More detailed data can be found on the MongoDB Inc (MDB) Summary page.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MMS • Zach Lloyd
Article originally posted on InfoQ. Visit InfoQ
Transcript
Shane Hastie: Good day folks. This is Shane Hastie for the InfoQ Engineering Culture podcast. Today I get to sit down with Zach Lloyd. Zach, welcome. Thanks for taking the time to talk to us.
Introductions [00:48]
Zach Lloyd: I’m really excited to be here, Shane. Thanks for having me.
Shane Hastie: I’d like to start these conversations with who’s Zach?
Zach Lloyd: Let’s see how I describe myself. So I’m an engineer I’d say first and foremost. I’ve been a software engineer for, oh God, 25-ish years now. I’ve had a career where I’ve gotten the chance to build some really cool stuff. I was a principal engineer at Google. I used to lead engineering for the Google Docs Suite. I helped build really a lot of Google’s spreadsheet product, which was very, very cool experience. I was also an engineering manager and managed a significant team of engineers there.
I have been out of Google. I’m a two-time startup founder and my current company is a company called Warp, which is a AI-powered developer tool. It’s really like a reimagination of the command line terminal, such that as a developer you can, instead of typing commands, you can just tell your terminal what you want it to do and it will agentically do it for you.
I had a brief stint as the CTO at Time Magazine, which was interesting. So I’ve kind of been, it was my only real thing outside of the technology industry.
I’d say what really motivates me is I love building software products. My goal is to just build stuff that is useful for people, whether it’s useful for knowledge workers or useful, most recently for developers, love solving interesting technical problems. But really I’m passionate about building something that other people find useful. That’s a quick summary.
Shane Hastie: Cool.
One of the things that got us in touch was you published the Warp, how we work.
I’d call it a page, a site, a … There are a whole lot of principles and ideas. What made you want to make that so visible?
The “How we Work” document [02:49]
Zach Lloyd: Yes. So what it is it’s basically my accumulated, I guess, knowledge from being an engineer and an engineering manager. I had a period in between the two companies that I founded where I was like, “You know what? I really want to get this all down. I want to get this down from my head, how I think about hiring, how I think about building an engineering culture, how I think about values, all the way into the minutia of how people should structure pull requests and use feature flags, really down into this is my playbook, or if I were to build an engineering team, build an engineering organization or product team, what are the key things that matter to me?”
I put it down initially for myself and then I shared it with friends. I used it a little bit as a basis for doing some consulting for other startups and advising for other startups.
And then when I founded Warp, I was like, this is an awesome thing to publish because from an internal perspective, it’s like our operating system as a team, and then from an external perspective it lets people get a very good sense of the culture we’re building and how we work. And so it lets people who are interested in working with us self-select in. It lets people who are like, “No, I don’t like that culture”, be like, “Okay, that’s not the team for me”. And that’s also, it’s a very useful tool from a hiring standpoint in that regard.
Shane Hastie: So what would you say is the core of culture?
Core engineering culture values [04:33]
Zach Lloyd: I think it starts with the values that we care about. I think different leaders, different cultures are going to value different things, but for me, the type of place that I want to work and the type of people I want to work with, there’s a common set of values that I care about. And for me, those happen to be sort of honesty. Are we able to be very honest and transparent at all times, kind of a no BS type culture? Is it a culture where people are concerned with hierarchy? ‘Cause I really don’t like that. I think that the best ideas are coming from any place in the company. Is it a place where it’s like people’s ideas, the best ideas went out? That really matters to me.
A second value that I, again, this might be different for other people, but for me was being pragmatic, and to me that’s where I see things go wrong. I’ve seen things go wrong in my career is when there’s dogmatism or very rigid thinking in how you do something. I want to work someplace where we realize that solving real world problems is messy, that perfection can actually get in the way and that we’re trying to make a reasonable set of trade-offs and having like-minded people who aren’t so anchored to particular ideas that they won’t adjust them in sort of the face of new information, that really matters to me.
Product-first vs code-first engineers [06:03]
A third value for us is being user-focused or product-focused. The reason I bring this up, so I wrote this essay which I think is maybe somewhat controversial where I distinguish between engineers who are product-first and engineers who are code-first. And as a product-first engineer, what I’m looking for is are you always thinking about the why that you’re building something? What problem is it solving for a user?
And if you can’t name the problem, I think probably going off track. Whereas sometimes what I think of more as a code-first approach is there’s a class of engineering who’s like, they’re really into building with the latest technology. Are my APIs right? Are my abstractions right? And it’s like looking at the code for the sake of the code. And I don’t care about that. I care about good code in the service of a great user experience. I don’t care about … Users don’t use code, let me put it like that. They use the thing that you’ve built. And so I really emphasize that. And that actually is a great filter. Some engineers do not agree with what I’m saying at all here, but to me it’s very, very important value.
So I would start with if you’re someone who’s building a team or you’re hiring or you’re managing, I would always start with what are those core values that you really care about, that you believe in, that you can embody? And then try to build a team of people who subscribe and believe in those same values I think is a good place to start.
Shane Hastie: One of the things that I see in there is just fix small issues because that almost contradict with the product-first versus the code-first engineer?
Zach Lloyd: No, ’cause the idea behind that is that it encourages a culture of ownership. So it’s like the anti-pattern to me would be working someplace where when someone sees an issue, they throw it into Slack or the bug tracker or they’re like, “Hey, I noticed this other engineer on the team broke this thing. They have to fix it”. And so it creates communication overhead and it creates a lack of ownership. So what I’m trying to accomplish with that particular rule or guideline is like we’re all owners of this thing. We also feel responsibility. If you see something, just fix it. And I’m assuming that they’re fixing something that matters to a user. Let me put it that way. If it doesn’t matter to a user, then don’t fix it. But if it’s something that is impacting a user, I would love, I’d love it when engineers just fix stuff.
Shane Hastie: You said that this feeds into your hiring process. How do you hire and how do you hire well?
How do you hire well? [08:59]
Zach Lloyd: Yes, this is really, really hard. I think it’s hard to hire perfectly. So we are looking for generalists, product-focused engineers who have a strong fundamental background in computer science and programming, and also who subscribe to these values, put it that way. So finding those people is like, those are great people. Everyone wants those people. It’s hard to find those people.
When we hire, it basically comes, there’s three sources of people. I don’t know how into the weeds to go here, but you have people who apply. So you have a sort of inbound. You have people who are referred from people who currently work there. And then you have people who aren’t looking for a job, who we have identified is like, “Hey, this person looks like an awesome potential fit. Who we reach out to?” And that’s the three things.
It’s essentially a sales process, whether you’re starting your own company or you’re trying to attract people to your team inside of a big organization. I remember doing this at Google. I was constantly trying to sell great engineers to come work with me. So I think you have to get good at communicating why someone should do that. And then, once you’ve done that, you got to know what you’re looking for. And so for us it’s like product-focused, generalists, really, really strong CS foundations.
The reason I focus on generalists by the way, is it’s partly the domain that I’m in. We’re not doing super specialized stuff. You don’t need PhD-level expertise, although we’re now opening up some roles on the AI side that are a little bit more specialized. But in general, I like people who just have great problem-solving skills, agnostic to the technology ’cause the technologies, we tend to choose the right technology to solve the problem. And so anchoring on a technology ahead of time is like an anti-pattern to me.
I like people who can work fully across the stack. So I never hire back end versus front end. And again, there’s totally valid differing schools of thought, but to me the best way to get a product feature that works well for a user is if the engineer builds the entire thing. There’s some efficiency here to that, but I think it aligns the incentive of the engineer and the user the best. So those are some of the principles.
Shane Hastie: What does great technical leadership look like?
Models of technical leadership [11:29]
Zach Lloyd: Yes, great question. Actually let me ask you this. Are you asking about management? I see leadership. How do you think of it? Or should I just give you my whole lay of the land?
Shane Hastie: Let’s go top to bottom.
Zach Lloyd: Yes. Okay. So there’s this traditional distinction where it’s like you can have people who are tech leads, maybe not managers, but are like your architects. They’re super knowledgeable about the system. And then flip that they have a counterpart who is a engineering manager whose specialty is maybe more like people management type thing. So it’s like how do you help an engineer develop their career? How do you help them get promoted? And at most big tech companies, those roles bifurcate. So you have two separate things.
My personal view on this is that I actually like a combo. So when I was at Google, I was always on what was the individual contributor track, but I managed people and I always found that my authority as a manager came at least in part because I understood the technology very, very deeply and still contributed as an engineer.
That’s my personal preference. However, I’ve seen people be very successful just as pure ICs. If they’re going to do that, I think they really need to excel in terms of teaching other people on their team the technical skills in terms of doing things like great code review, great design documents, really modeling what technical excellence looks like so that the people who they’re trying to get to build things the right way, do that, see what technical excellence is.
On the flip side, if you’re an engineering manager, I think that the thing that makes the most successful engineering managers I know successful is really deeply felt empathy and really aligning with the interests and being very good at understanding what is the motivation of an engineer who’s on their team? Are they trying to up-level their technical skills? Are they trying to get exposed to more leadership opportunities? Are they trying to run bigger projects?
I’m not quite as great at that. I mean I’m not bad at that, but there are some people who I’ve worked with who just excel and really take joy out of helping other engineers on their team succeed and understanding what their goals are. So that’s how I would think about that role.
Shane Hastie:How do we help engineers grow their careers?
Growing engineering careers [14:08]
Zach Lloyd: There’s a bunch of ways to answer this. So depending on where you’re at in your career, there’s probably some next up skillset that you want to improve upon. So when you’re really early in your career, and we hire a bunch of people who are right out of college at work, the first thing I emphasize is just become an excellent software engineer. And what that means is can you write code that is production quality code? Is it well-tested? When there’s a bug in it, are you proactive in fixing it? Do you take code review comments well and adjust? Do you really learn the language?
So at the beginning of the career, my advice is hone your technical skills, just become an excellent IC engineer. Usually when engineers are a couple years into doing that, I think that the focus shifts a bit to taking on more responsibility, shipping things that have more impact, maybe leading smaller teams, building some other skills that you’re going to need if eventually you’re going to be either the technical lead archetype or you’re going to be an engineering manager.
And so I think that’s about finding the right opportunities when people have demonstrated that they have the technical skills to take on projects that have higher scope or projects that require a leadership aspect. As an engineering manager, the trickiness there tends to be like, are there enough opportunities for that type of thing? At Google, I saw some crazy anti-patterns around optimizing for people’s promotions, which was really interesting. At Google, I don’t know how much digressing to this, but at Google, everyone is at a level. So you start as a SWE-2 or SWE-3, become a senior engineer or staff engineer or senior staff engineer or principal engineer. And a lot of what seems to drive career progression is can you get to that next level on the ladder? And each level on the ladder has a very well-defined rubric and that rubric is sliced up into, I think I forget what it is, like four things. It’s like impact, scope, leadership, whatever.
And so there’s a lot of managing to the rubric, which I do think can create these perverse incentives where it’s like you’re not necessarily managing to what the person truly needs in order to develop themselves. It’s like you’re managing so that you can put together a promotion packet that a committee of other managers will look at and be like, “Yes, this person deserves to go up one rung on the ladder”. And there’s huge amounts of money at stake in this, right? It’s a very high stakes type thing. And so that I try to stay away from. We don’t organize Warps career progression around that.
And the other problem with that is that it creates adverse business outcomes because you end up having as a manager to create opportunities for people to demonstrate these checkbox skills on the ladder, which the canonical examples, you make a project that doesn’t need to exist in order to give someone a leadership opportunity to ship a project and you end up, this happens all the time. It’s like a crazy system. I would try to avoid that and try and just focus on genuinely what is it that the person wants to grow at and how can you help them succeed.
Shane Hastie: I know you have some thoughts on, we’re in the world of AI today, on engineers using the generative AI tools.
AI tools for engineers [17:47]
Zach Lloyd: So I just posted something on LinkedIn on this and I got in a lot of trouble, but my thought is it’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when as far as developers really need to learn to use these tools as best they can to ship more software. There is fear around them. There is I think rightful frustration around using them. I don’t know if you’ve used them, but if you used them six months ago, nine months ago and you asked AI to build you a feature, you’d probably get something that didn’t work very well and you might just decide, “Hey, this isn’t worth my time. This isn’t worthwhile. Technology’s not good enough”.
The technology is changing extremely quickly to the point where I think it is useful not for every task. I also think the correct way of thinking about it right now as an engineer is as another tool in your toolbox. So it’s raising the abstraction level from, it’s not that dissimilar, the shift from assembly language to programming language, formal programming language. And then even within formal programming languages, there’s a huge difference between working in C and working in Python or JavaScript.
And this is a step change to where the way that you can work is by simply directing an AI to do some amount of the work for you. You should consider it like a draft where you then review it and iterate and get to a point where it’s at the quality bar where if you had written it by hand that it’s still there. But I basically think as an engineer, if you want to continue in this field, you need to start thinking of yourself not as a coder, but as a producer of software and the way you produce software, you have to use the best possible method for that. And that might not be writing code by hand. That might be guiding AI and hopping in and iterating with it. And so that’s my take on it.
It is a struggle as an engineering manager and leader to change the habits of people on my team to approach programming problems in this way. And this is where I got in trouble on LinkedIn because I was like, “How do you get senior engineers who want to use these tools?” And then a lot of people were like, “The engineers know best about what tools they should be using. Why are you telling them to use these tools? They’ll use them when the tools are good enough”. And there’s truth to that. But I actually think people need a nudge and people need to learn a new skill set ’cause there’s actually skill in how do you prompt the AI, how do you work with it. So that’s my take on it.
Shane Hastie: One of the things we have seen with the take-up of these tools, a couple of things happening. One, pull requests seem to have got bigger. One study done in Australia, 300% more code being produced when using the generative AI tools, and about 400% more bugs.
AI tool challenges [20:54]
Zach Lloyd: Yes. That doesn’t surprise me. More code equals more bugs almost axiomatically. And one of the best engineers I ever worked with a Google, I was like, “What’s your main principle for writing great code?” And he’s like, “Write less code”. The more you can delete, the better. So that’s not a good sign.
I would say that using these tools, you cannot advocate responsibility for the quality of the code any more than if you were using IntelliSense in your IDE and be like, “Oh well, the tab complete, put this function so I just used it”. That’s totally unacceptable. And so you as an engineer using the tool, have to maintain responsibility for the thing that you’re submitting.
I also think one of just the cardinal rules of good software engineering is small PRs, small discrete changes. And so one of the anti-patterns to me in using AI is trying to one shot or zero shot through one prompt a huge thing. And this is where I think there’s actual skill in using this stuff. You should still decompose the problem exactly as though you were going to write the components one by one, but you can just save a ton of time. And that’s actually the interesting part of the engineering a lot of the times, it’s like what’s the right decomposition? And then you should use the AI to help you write the components. But what you shouldn’t do is be like, “Write me this whole app that does this or this whole system that does that”, because the more code there is, the less you’re going to comprehend it, the more bugs that are going to be. And so that’s, I think I diagnosed that as a misuse, not an intrinsic issue with AI. That’s my take. But I don’t know, people probably disagree.
Shane Hastie: For the junior engineer who’s coming into the profession today and these tools are their norm, one of the concerns that I’ve certainly heard and seen is how do we help that person get the underlying skills to do that decomposition well?
The impact on junior engineers? [23:13]
Zach Lloyd: Yes, it’s a great question. I have some friends who run coding bootcamps and I know professors of CS and I think that you, it’s like when I was in college, I learned C, and I’ve never written a professional program in C in my life, but I am glad that I learned C because it lets you learn, understand how memory works, how the function call stack works, basically how computers work. And so what I think will be problematic for junior engineers is if you don’t learn the basics and you are just trying to go straight to the AI that is making your apps for you, I think that’s a recipe for stuff that doesn’t work in a production environment.
I think that’s fine for prototyping. I think that’s fine for low stakes applications. Like you’re making, I don’t know, a landing page or something like that, but I don’t think anyone who’s working at Google or at a bank or at SpaceX or whatever should ever be generating code without an understanding of how code works.
So I would still teach people the fundamentals. And then I think that to your question, how do you teach people to do production software engineering, decomposing things right, I don’t know, the main way that I learned that I still think works, which is I got code reviews and design doc reviews from engineers who knew what they were doing when I didn’t know what I was doing. And I think this is one of the reason why I think it’s important that the more senior engineers learn how to use these AI tools is because they’ll learn how to review and improve the experience of junior developers using these AI tools.
Changes needed in the ways we train engineers [25:11]
I think a bad outcome would be a world where the more experienced generation of developers shuns these tools. The junior developers use these tools. The more advanced or experienced developer just think that the junior developers are misusing these tools and it’s just a mess. So I think there needs to be almost a redesign of the engineering curriculum and engineering like how you teach an engineer in light of the fact that these tools now exist. That’s what I think.
Shane Hastie: Yes. I have a grandson who’s studying computer science at the moment, and they’re making them write their test programs on paper by hand.
Zach Lloyd: Oh my god. What? Is that to prevent cheating with AI or what is that?
Shane Hastie: That is what I believe it’s about.
Zach Lloyd: That’s not good. Wait, that’s not … Yes. I think that the curriculum has to be re-imagined so that you learn the basics, but then you learn the tools you’re going to use as a pro engineer, and AI is definitely going to be one of them, and you learn how to use it correctly. The risk is this stuff is changing so so quickly that I think it’s very hard to know what the heck to do ’cause the technology has advanced tremendously in the last six to nine months, so it’s a hard thing to figure out exactly what to do.
Shane Hastie: Well, Zach, we’ve meandered a lot, a lot of really interesting stuff in there. If people want to continue the conversation, where do they find you?
Zach Lloyd: Yes, I think the easiest thing is to just reach out to me on LinkedIn. I’ll respond to people DMing me there. I’m also on Twitter, X. I don’t use that as much. I think for this group of people, LinkedIn is probably the best place.
Shane Hastie: Well, thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us.
Zach Lloyd: Thank you for having me, Shane. This was awesome. I hope people enjoyed it.
Mentioned:
.
From this page you also have access to our recorded show notes. They all have clickable links that will take you directly to that part of the audio.
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
Nisa Investment Advisors LLC cut its holdings in shares of MongoDB, Inc. (NASDAQ:MDB – Free Report) by 86.1% during the first quarter, according to the company in its most recent filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 800 shares of the company’s stock after selling 4,955 shares during the quarter. Nisa Investment Advisors LLC’s holdings in MongoDB were worth $140,000 as of its most recent SEC filing.
A number of other hedge funds and other institutional investors have also modified their holdings of the company. HighTower Advisors LLC grew its position in MongoDB by 2.0% during the 4th quarter. HighTower Advisors LLC now owns 18,773 shares of the company’s stock worth $4,371,000 after purchasing an additional 372 shares during the last quarter. 111 Capital acquired a new stake in shares of MongoDB in the fourth quarter valued at about $390,000. Park Avenue Securities LLC raised its position in MongoDB by 52.6% during the first quarter. Park Avenue Securities LLC now owns 2,630 shares of the company’s stock worth $461,000 after acquiring an additional 907 shares during the last quarter. Cambridge Investment Research Advisors Inc. raised its position in MongoDB by 4.0% during the first quarter. Cambridge Investment Research Advisors Inc. now owns 7,748 shares of the company’s stock worth $1,359,000 after acquiring an additional 298 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Sowell Financial Services LLC acquired a new position in shares of MongoDB in the first quarter valued at approximately $263,000. 89.29% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors and hedge funds.
Insider Buying and Selling at MongoDB
In other MongoDB news, CEO Dev Ittycheria sold 3,747 shares of the stock in a transaction on Wednesday, July 2nd. The stock was sold at an average price of $206.05, for a total transaction of $772,069.35. Following the sale, the chief executive officer owned 253,227 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $52,177,423.35. This trade represents a 1.46% decrease in their position. The sale was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which can be accessed through this hyperlink. Also, Director Hope F. Cochran sold 1,174 shares of MongoDB stock in a transaction dated Tuesday, June 17th. The stock was sold at an average price of $201.08, for a total value of $236,067.92. Following the sale, the director directly owned 21,096 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $4,241,983.68. This represents a 5.27% decrease in their position. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Over the last quarter, insiders sold 32,746 shares of company stock valued at $7,500,196. Company insiders own 3.10% of the company’s stock.
MongoDB Stock Up 4.2%
NASDAQ:MDB opened at $218.53 on Friday. The stock has a market cap of $17.86 billion, a P/E ratio of -191.69 and a beta of 1.41. The business’s 50-day moving average price is $201.86 and its two-hundred day moving average price is $213.26. MongoDB, Inc. has a twelve month low of $140.78 and a twelve month high of $370.00.
MongoDB (NASDAQ:MDB – Get Free Report) last released its earnings results on Wednesday, June 4th. The company reported $1.00 EPS for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.65 by $0.35. The company had revenue of $549.01 million during the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $527.49 million. MongoDB had a negative return on equity of 3.16% and a negative net margin of 4.09%. The firm’s revenue for the quarter was up 21.8% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same quarter last year, the business posted $0.51 EPS. On average, equities research analysts expect that MongoDB, Inc. will post -1.78 EPS for the current fiscal year.
Wall Street Analyst Weigh In
Several equities analysts recently commented on the stock. UBS Group upped their price target on shares of MongoDB from $213.00 to $240.00 and gave the stock a “neutral” rating in a research report on Thursday, June 5th. Barclays upped their price target on shares of MongoDB from $252.00 to $270.00 and gave the company an “overweight” rating in a report on Thursday, June 5th. Stifel Nicolaus dropped their target price on shares of MongoDB from $340.00 to $275.00 and set a “buy” rating on the stock in a report on Friday, April 11th. Redburn Atlantic raised shares of MongoDB from a “sell” rating to a “neutral” rating and set a $170.00 price objective on the stock in a report on Thursday, April 17th. Finally, Monness Crespi & Hardt upgraded shares of MongoDB from a “neutral” rating to a “buy” rating and set a $295.00 target price for the company in a research report on Thursday, June 5th. Eight research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating, twenty-six have issued a buy rating and one has issued a strong buy rating to the company’s stock. According to MarketBeat, the stock currently has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and an average price target of $282.39.
MongoDB Profile
MongoDB, Inc, together with its subsidiaries, provides general purpose database platform worldwide. The company provides MongoDB Atlas, a hosted multi-cloud database-as-a-service solution; MongoDB Enterprise Advanced, a commercial database server for enterprise customers to run in the cloud, on-premises, or in a hybrid environment; and Community Server, a free-to-download version of its database, which includes the functionality that developers need to get started with MongoDB.
Featured Articles
This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest and most accurate reporting. This story was reviewed by MarketBeat’s editorial team prior to publication. Please send any questions or comments about this story to contact@marketbeat.com.
Before you consider MongoDB, you’ll want to hear this.
MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street’s top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on… and MongoDB wasn’t on the list.
While MongoDB currently has a Moderate Buy rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.
Just getting into the stock market? These 10 simple stocks can help beginning investors build long-term wealth without knowing options, technicals, or other advanced strategies.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
Investor Dan Ives Says Microsoft and Nvidia To Hit $5000000000000 Market Cap … – The Daily Hodl
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
Dan Ives, the global head of technology research at Wedbush Securities, is predicting that two big-named tech stocks will hit astronomical market caps.
In a new CNBC Television interview, the investor says Microsoft (MSFT) and Nvidia (NVDA) will likely each hit $5 trillion market caps by the end of next year as artificial intelligence (AI) advances.
“We’re seeing the use cases when it comes to AI exploding and that’s bullish for software and the hyperscalers led by, of course, Redmond and [CEO Satya] Nadella in terms of everything that Microsoft [is doing] – not just $4 trillion, we think that could be a $5 trillion market cap along with Nvidia in the next 18 months.”
Microsoft has a market cap of $3.8 trillion and is trading for $511 per share at time of writing. Meanwhile, Nvidia is trading for $173 per share at time of writing and has a market cap of $4.2 trillion.
Ives also believes that several software companies may have explosive breakouts in the coming months.
“Software has underperformed. But now it’s not just Palantir, which obviously is our top one in terms of AI revolution. MongoDB, Snowflake, I think IBM is seeing a massive renaissance of growth when it comes to what we’re seeing on AI monetization…
I think software, and even cybersecurity, is what I believe could be a significant outperformer across all of the tech sector in the second half of the year.”
Palantir (PLTR) is trading for $153 per share at time of writing, while MongoDB (MDB) is trading for $218 per share.
Meanwhile, Snowflake (SNOW) is trading for $211 per share at time of writing, and International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) is trading for $282 per share.
Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram
Don’t Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox
Check Price Action
Surf The Daily Hodl Mix
 
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any losses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing.
Generated Image: Midjourney
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MMS • RSS
Posted on nosqlgooglealerts. Visit nosqlgooglealerts
On July 17, 2025, MongoDB (MDB) experienced a significant surge in trading volume, with a total of $484 million in shares exchanged, marking a 45.43% increase from the previous day. This surge placed MongoDB at the 234th position in terms of trading volume for the day. Additionally, MongoDB’s stock price rose by 4.24%, extending its winning streak to three consecutive days, with a cumulative increase of 8.44% over this period.
MongoDB’s recent performance can be attributed to several factors, including its strong financial results and strategic initiatives. The company has been focusing on expanding its cloud services, which has attracted a growing number of enterprise customers. This shift towards cloud-based solutions has been a key driver of MongoDB’s revenue growth, as more businesses seek to leverage the scalability and flexibility of cloud infrastructure.
Furthermore, MongoDB’s commitment to innovation and continuous improvement of its database technology has positioned it as a leader in the NoSQL database market. The company’s Atlas platform, which provides a fully managed cloud database service, has been particularly well-received by developers and enterprises alike. This platform offers a range of features, including automated backups, high availability, and advanced security measures, making it an attractive option for businesses looking to modernize their data management strategies.
In addition to its technological advancements, MongoDB has also been proactive in building strategic partnerships and alliances. These collaborations have helped the company expand its market reach and integrate its solutions with other leading technologies. By leveraging these partnerships, MongoDB has been able to offer more comprehensive and integrated solutions to its customers, further enhancing its competitive position in the market.
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MongoDB isn’t exactly a household name. Unless, of course, you’re living in the land of databases or cutting through the dense jungles of unstructured stuff that needs to be stored.
In the realm of data, MongoDB is kind of a big deal. One might say it has even achieved “celebrity status” as the go-to document database for building scalable, high-availability internet apps.
To get a little nerdy (and because I’ve used it for years), Mongo’s NoSQL posture delivers a flexible schema that lends it to agile development. It’s super versatile, enabling users to start building applications without fretting over complicated database configurations. It’s been a fixture in my cloud deployments for years, and it keeps on keepin’ on.
So… about that name: According to lore, it’s derived from the word “humongous,” as in managing large amounts of data. Which makes sense, given its purpose. And since 2007, Mongo’s purpose has been data, forging its place as a well-established and persistent service within countless product architectures.
MongoDB now has a worldwide footprint of over 57,000 customers, making it the most used modern database on the planet. This is due in no small part to its document modeling, scalability, and deployment options—which include AWS, Azure, and GCP.
It also has a website. Or websites, to be more precise. That includes properties for documentation, client libraries, and more. Like most enterprise software companies, it has developed an expansive ecosystem of digital content used for everything from marketing to technical briefs to thought leadership.
When I was covering ContentCon25 in Chicago last month—Contentstack’s fourth annual customer event and its largest to date—I had a chance to connect and chat with a lot of smart people at agencies and end customers, as well as Contentstack’s team, including CEO Neha Sampat (you can read our interview and the event coverage here).
When I saw MongoDB on the event’s customer list, I was curious to hear how an enterprise software company approached its CMS and DXP decision-making, and how Contentstack was fulfilling its needs.
I caught up with Mongo’s Director of Marketing Operations, Bill Mitchell, who has been involved with the Contentstack relationship from day one. As a veteran marketing technologist with hard-earned experience at global brands like Pure Storage and HP, Bill brings deep insight to B2B web strategies. We chatted about the experience of moving to a modern composable solution, the role of data and content, and even where AI is presenting opportunities and challenges.
Feel free to watch the highlight video below on CMS Critic TV, or keep scrolling for more of the good parts:
Finding the right tool for the job
MongoDB has been working with Contentstack for about two and half years, and according to Bill, it’s been a solid ride. But their previous content management system—which was custom built—wasn’t cutting it for a myriad of reasons.
“We needed to look at a new CMS stack for our company,” he said. “We were on an open source, proprietary tool. It was free, but a ‘get what you pay for’ kind of thing. We threw a lot of manpower at it, and it was limited.”
Part of the challenge was overcoming the internal culture of “build or buy.” As Bill explained, MongoDB is an engineering culture with smart people everywhere. This made the idea of a homegrown solution a possible pathway—and a big reason why the previous CMS was a custom job.
The upside of having a technical culture? They weren’t afraid of technical problems. The downside? As Bill expressed, those technical resources focused more on maintaining an ailing stack versus investing in new features and capabilities.
Driving a lot of the challenges was a lack of basic control for his content team. They knew they needed a platform with forward thinking, something that could adapt to market changes and was future-proofed for capabilities like personalization. As a data leader, he was focused on leveraging a broad range of integrations across a marketplace of options. The previous system lacked all those things.
“Everything was hand-orchestrated APIs, and it was just messy and wouldn’t scale,” Bill explained. “We had to find a way to get a better platform underneath us, so we could move forward.”
Of course, finding a new solution required arduous discovery, something enterprises with Mongo’s size and scale are accustomed to when considering a big software transformation. They conducted an expansive search, looking at different technology vendors, and arrived at Contentstack—a choice that he and his team have been very happy with.
When approaching the decision, I asked Bill how that team consideration played into the calculus. The solution needed to fit into Mongo’s stack, but it had to work for its people, regardless of what roles they might have across the company’s marketing and web teams.
“I came at it as a technologist,” he said. “I had a development team and the skills and expertise they brought to the table. I wanted to make sure we had a solution that one, worked for them, two, worked for us company-wise, and three, worked for others. We have multiple teams that have now adopted Contentstack, and if we had gone in other directions, that friction would be much more pronounced.”
While Bill was confident that his team could have rolled with the punches that other solutions might have presented, Contentstack helped his team overcome a number of technical limitations by unifying behind a single technology. With lots of teams working on multiple web projects, having confidence was going to be a key factor. Bill also said that Contentstack set him up with one of their certified partners to help make the transition successful.
Now that they’re operating at full speed, Contentstack is also providing continued innovation. As Bill explained, the partnership empowers MongoDB with a clear path for what’s ahead, and how customers like MongoDB can harness new features in the best ways.
“It’s setting a trajectory where, as they build new capabilities, we get to adopt them,” he said. “It’s putting us in a much better position to be forward-thinking about how we build digital web experiences.”
Realizing the roadmap for personalization
ContentCon25 was the splashdown for Contentstack’s new Data & Insights capabilities, which leverages the relationship between content and context – the latter term popping up across the CMS and DXP space as a sort of portmanteau for data. As Contentstack’s CEO, Neha Sampat, explained, the two need to interoperate to bring AI-powered personalization to life.
Data & Insights, which was made possible via the acquisition of the Lytics CDP earlier this year, brings a stunning scope of features to the marketer’s toolkit. This was all demoed live at ContentCon, where features like Audience Insights, Opportunity Explorer, Real-Time Data Activation, and Flows were test-driven on stage to the delight of many in the audience.
The emphasis on context came over the last 12 months as the company rolled out its new Contentstack Personalize solution, an A/B/n multivariate testing and segmentation engine. The suite also included the platform’s Brand Kit, which aimed to align AI-generated content at scale with a brand’s voice, as well as a bevy of new extensions for Contentstack Automate.
“Content is critical, but data is the foundation that makes content work. You need both. Without data, content lacks personalization. Without content, data has nothing to fuel.”
Personalization continues to be the “Holy Grail” for marketers, and the promise of generative AI has made it more attainable than ever before. Of course, there are still challenges that persist, but as Bill relayed, Contentstack’s foray into personalization is showing real promise. It’s all still relatively new, but it’s clearly becoming a game changer—and appealing to both the technical and marketing sides of Bill’s brain.
“It’s interesting, because when we first went down this path, personalization was not part of their feature set,” he said. “And now, in that split personality world where the technology piece of me says we could deliver personalization multiple different ways, the marketer in me says we need it to be easy, efficient, and scalable, and get the power into more hands, rather than having a few people with technical capabilities trying to orchestrate content and manage different experiences.”
Bill went on to explain how MongoDB is leveraging Contentstack to distribute these skill sets to more people on his team, so personalization can be harnessed in a more holistic way. Composability is a critical part of this, as MongoDB is using Segment as its CDP, and they have a roadmap that aligns with a number of Contentstack’s features. He said they’re already personalizing to a few audiences on specific pages of their site, with ambitions to expand.
“I’m envisioning a world where we’re personalizing to multiple segments on multiple pages,” he said, “completely changing how we approach that particular problem or opportunity.”
Back in February, as Contentstack was introducing its Contentstack EDGE concept—effectively repositioning its platform as an “Adaptive DXP”—Bill was quick to address the question of how data and content coexist.
“Content is critical, but data is the foundation that makes content work,” he posted on LinkedIn. “You need both. Without data, content lacks personalization. Without content, data has nothing to fuel.”
This might be one of the most significant motivating factors behind his continued enthusiasm for Contentstack. As an ecosystem, Bill sees it bridging the gap between content and data. Traditional DXPs haven’t had the composable posture to meet this urgent need, one that’s essential to realizing the value of AI.
On that note… what about AI?
As I reported from the ground at ContentCon, the conversation around AI was at a fever pitch. There was barely a session that didn’t evoke some modicum of discussion about an AI-powered feature, or how AI was affecting the entire trajectory of the DX industry.
For her part, Neha Sampat focused on the positive opportunities being activated by AI. During her opening keynote, she painted a picture of what’s ahead for those daring enough to make the journey. As she said, there’s no bridge from the “safe” to the promise of the future. Crossing that chasm is an act of courage.
But even the best-built bridges can make people anxious, especially when you’re taking the first steps across. I asked Bill what he thought about the outlook with AI, how the market is changing, and where MongoDB is headed with its own AI trajectory.
Is it scary? Sure, he admitted. But the momentum is undeniable.
“You’re taking steps without really knowing that it’s the right step,” he said. “You know you need to move forward. There’s no doubt AI is going to drive change from top to bottom in every organization. I think in our world, we’re trying to do the basics, get chatbots going, and help people find content and answers to problems. But on the internal side, we’re still struggling to really crack the code, if you will, on the best way [for AI] to bring scale and opportunities to how we do business more effectively. And that’s beyond just the web.”
In terms of the early AI gains, Bill’s documentation team launched an AI chatbot for its dedicated docs site a year and a half ago. It was initially focused on documentation, allowing users to ask a question, be served an answer, and link to the correct doc for a more complete story. Given its success, they’ve pulled it into Mongo’s dotcom site, where it’s evolving the experience in new ways.
“We’re building out this custom LLM that has all our content housed in it,” he said. “Now we’re trying to figure out the right recipe for what it is, because it’s not just a web experience anymore.”
As Bill mentioned, a lot of the AI-powered topics being discussed on stage at ContentCon—things like automating campaign generation or setting up audience segmentation—are still being classically orchestrated. Although everyone sees and understands the potential for AI, tapping into the full potential is still an ongoing process. This is where Contentstack’s culture of support and guidance is proving decisive for customers as they try to predict what’s next.
For Bill, finding solid ground to land AI is the goal. “Leading into AI, there’s still trepidation around driving content without human oversight, which will limit the variations for personalization,” he said. But the potential to scale up to the right number of variants is a game-changer.
At ContentCon, the Magic 8-Ball predictions were focused on 2030 and anticipating how things will change in just five years. Neither Bill nor I had any idea what the software and marketing world might look like, but he had one response that rang true:
“I know it’ll be a hell of a lot different than it is today.”
Leveraging the power of human support
As the composable, MACH-driven approach has caught fire, enterprises have struggled with the role of accountability in the equation. In many cases, agency partners have assumed the risk associated with any recommended technologies in a stack. But for some organizations, internal teams have been struck with hosting overages or other issues related to a point of failure. In those cases, who’s responsible?
When I spoke to Contentstack about this in Amsterdam at the MACH TWO Conference back in 2023, they were already evolving their “Care Without Compromise” program to answer this conundrum. Since then, it has become a foundation for its composable ambitions, providing a deeper relationship promise for customers to help ensure success.
Does it work? According to Contentstack, the program boasts a 98% customer satisfaction rating and a 97% customer retention rate. While the company furnished those numbers, they’re pretty compelling metrics.
I asked Bill about his experience with Contentstack’s support, and what the idea of “Care Without Compromise” really means to a customer like MongoDB.
“Having worked with lots of technology vendors, I tend not to put much faith in those statements, but I was really surprised by how well they’ve catered to us,” he said glowingly. “We had to get off the ground with content modeling, new tools, and integrations. We were working with a vendor on some of these things, but Contentstack was in there, making sure we had the right advice.”
As Bill explained, Contentstack was involved in multiple dimensions of the relationship, supporting Mongo’s decision-making around strategic pathways. And now, as they transition to personalization, AI, and other advanced features, Contentstack’s support and technical services teams are engaged, conducting periodic check-ins and helping them think through what’s next.
“They’re rolling stuff out all the time, which is great from a product side,” he said. “But there are people to help us ensure we can build a plan to utilize it, which is important. Otherwise, it’s just shelfware, and we’re not able to take advantage of it.”
Looking for guidance on Contentstack? Talk to an expert.
Upcoming Events
CMS Connect 25
August 5-6, 2025 – Montreal, Canada
We are delighted to present the second annual summer edition of our signature global conference dedicated to the content management community! CMS Connect will be held again in beautiful Montreal, Canada, and feature a unique blend of masterclasses, insightful talks, interactive discussions, impactful learning sessions, and authentic networking opportunities. Join vendors, agencies, and customers from across our industry as we engage and collaborate around the future of content management – and hear from the top thought leaders at the only vendor-neutral, in-person conference exclusively focused on CMS. Space is limited for this event, so book your seats today.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
Stephens has begun coverage of MongoDB (MDB, Financial) with an “Equal Weight” rating and has set a price target of $247. Despite competitive pressures, Stephens views MongoDB’s Atlas product as a “rare, high-quality asset.” The firm notes that MongoDB’s peers are developing similar database functionalities, which adds a layer of competitive tension in the market.
Wall Street Analysts Forecast
Based on the one-year price targets offered by 36 analysts, the average target price for MongoDB Inc (MDB, Financial) is $279.66 with a high estimate of $520.00 and a low estimate of $170.00. The average target implies an
upside of 27.97%
from the current price of $218.53. More detailed estimate data can be found on the MongoDB Inc (MDB) Forecast page.
Based on the consensus recommendation from 38 brokerage firms, MongoDB Inc’s (MDB, Financial) average brokerage recommendation is currently 1.9, indicating “Outperform” status. The rating scale ranges from 1 to 5, where 1 signifies Strong Buy, and 5 denotes Sell.
Based on GuruFocus estimates, the estimated GF Value for MongoDB Inc (MDB, Financial) in one year is $379.42, suggesting a
upside
of 73.62% from the current price of $218.53. GF Value is GuruFocus’ estimate of the fair value that the stock should be traded at. It is calculated based on the historical multiples the stock has traded at previously, as well as past business growth and the future estimates of the business’ performance. More detailed data can be found on the MongoDB Inc (MDB) Summary page.
MDB Key Business Developments
Release Date: June 04, 2025
- Revenue: $549 million, a 22% year-over-year increase.
- Atlas Revenue: Grew 26% year over year, representing 72% of total revenue.
- Non-GAAP Operating Income: $87 million, with a 16% non-GAAP operating margin.
- Customer Count: Over 57,100 customers, with approximately 2,600 added sequentially.
- Net ARR Expansion Rate: Approximately 119%.
- Gross Margin: 74%, down from 75% in the year-ago period.
- Net Income: $86 million or $1 per share.
- Operating Cash Flow: $110 million.
- Free Cash Flow: $106 million.
- Cash and Equivalents: $2.5 billion.
- Share Repurchase Program: Increased by $800 million, totaling $1 billion.
- Q2 Revenue Guidance: $548 million to $553 million.
- Fiscal Year ’26 Revenue Guidance: $2.25 billion to $2.29 billion.
- Fiscal Year ’26 Non-GAAP Income from Operations Guidance: $267 million to $287 million.
For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.
Positive Points
- MongoDB Inc (MDB, Financial) reported a 22% year-over-year increase in revenue, reaching $549 million, surpassing the high end of their guidance.
- Atlas revenue grew 26% year over year, now representing 72% of total revenue, indicating strong adoption of their cloud-based platform.
- The company achieved a non-GAAP operating income of $87 million, resulting in a 16% non-GAAP operating margin, which is an improvement from the previous year.
- MongoDB Inc (MDB) added approximately 2,600 new customers in the quarter, bringing the total customer count to over 57,100, the highest net additions in over six years.
- The company announced a significant expansion of their share repurchase program, authorizing up to an additional $800 million, reflecting confidence in their long-term potential.
Negative Points
- Despite strong results, MongoDB Inc (MDB) noted some softness in Atlas consumption in April due to macroeconomic volatility, although it rebounded in May.
- The non-Atlas business is expected to decline in the high single digits for the year, with a $50 million headwind from multiyear license revenue anticipated in the second half.
- Gross margin slightly declined to 74% from 75% in the previous year, primarily due to Atlas growing as a percentage of the overall business and the impact of the Voyage acquisition.
- The company experienced slower than planned headcount additions, which could impact future growth and operational capacity.
- MongoDB Inc (MDB) remains cautious about the uncertain macroeconomic environment, which could affect future consumption trends and overall business performance.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
A number of stocks jumped in the afternoon session after the second quarter (2025) earnings season got off to a strong start.
Quarterly earnings reports released during the week exceeded Wall Street’s expectations, fueling investor confidence. Around 50 S&P 500 components reported, with 88% of those exceeding analysts’ expectations, FactSet data revealed. Investors were also encouraged by several positive reports that painted a picture of a resilient consumer. One key report revealed that shoppers increased their spending at U.S. retailers more than economists had anticipated. Precisely, retail sales increased 0.6% from May, surpassing the 0.2% estimate. This robust consumer spending is a crucial pillar supporting the economy.
Adding to the positive sentiment, the latest data on unemployment claims showed a decrease in the number of workers applying for benefits, signaling that layoffs remain limited and the job market is steady. This combination of strong earnings reports, retail sales, and a solid labor market suggests the economy is navigating challenges successfully.
The stock market overreacts to news, and big price drops can present good opportunities to buy high-quality stocks.
Among others, the following stocks were impacted:
Citizens Financial Group’s shares are not very volatile and have only had 6 moves greater than 5% over the last year. In that context, today’s move indicates the market considers this news meaningful, although it might not be something that would fundamentally change its perception of the business.
Citizens Financial Group is up 12.4% since the beginning of the year, and at $49.03 per share, has set a new 52-week high. Investors who bought $1,000 worth of Citizens Financial Group’s shares 5 years ago would now be looking at an investment worth $1,949.
Here at StockStory, we certainly understand the potential of thematic investing. Diverse winners from Microsoft (MSFT) to Alphabet (GOOG), Coca-Cola (KO) to Monster Beverage (MNST) could all have been identified as promising growth stories with a megatrend driving the growth. So, in that spirit, we’ve identified a relatively under-the-radar profitable growth stock benefiting from the rise of AI, available to you FREE via this link.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
MMS • RSS
Posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news
Let’s talk about the popular MongoDB, Inc. (NASDAQ:MDB). The company’s shares led the NASDAQGM gainers with a relatively large price hike in the past couple of weeks. Shareholders may appreciate the recent price jump, but the company still has a way to go before reaching its yearly highs again. With many analysts covering the large-cap stock, we may expect any price-sensitive announcements have already been factored into the stock’s share price. However, what if the stock is still a bargain? Let’s examine MongoDB’s valuation and outlook in more detail to determine if there’s still a bargain opportunity.
We’ve found 21 US stocks that are forecast to pay a dividend yield of over 6% next year. See the full list for free.
Is MongoDB Still Cheap?
Great news for investors – MongoDB is still trading at a fairly cheap price. Our valuation model shows that the intrinsic value for the stock is $281.90, which is above what the market is valuing the company at the moment. This indicates a potential opportunity to buy low. However, given that MongoDB’s share is fairly volatile (i.e. its price movements are magnified relative to the rest of the market) this could mean the price can sink lower, giving us another chance to buy in the future. This is based on its high beta, which is a good indicator for share price volatility.
What kind of growth will MongoDB generate?
Investors looking for growth in their portfolio may want to consider the prospects of a company before buying its shares. Although value investors would argue that it’s the intrinsic value relative to the price that matter the most, a more compelling investment thesis would be high growth potential at a cheap price. However, with an extremely negative double-digit change in profit expected over the next couple of years, near-term growth is certainly not a driver of a buy decision. It seems like high uncertainty is on the cards for MongoDB, at least in the near future.
What This Means For You
Are you a shareholder? Although MDB is currently undervalued, the negative outlook does bring on some uncertainty, which equates to higher risk. Consider whether you want to increase your portfolio exposure to MDB, or whether diversifying into another stock may be a better move for your total risk and return.
Are you a potential investor? If you’ve been keeping tabs on MDB for some time, but hesitant on making the leap, we recommend you research further into the stock. Given its current undervaluation, now is a great time to make a decision. But keep in mind the risks that come with negative growth prospects in the future.
If you want to dive deeper into MongoDB, you’d also look into what risks it is currently facing. For example, we’ve discovered 2 warning signs that you should run your eye over to get a better picture of MongoDB.
If you are no longer interested in MongoDB, you can use our free platform to see our list of over 50 other stocks with a high growth potential.
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
Article originally posted on mongodb google news. Visit mongodb google news