US stocks slip as Wall Street makes its final moves ahead of Friday's jobs report
NEW YORK — U.S. stocks drifted lower on Thursday as financial markets locked in their final moves before a highly anticipated update coming Friday about the U.S. job market.
The S&P 500 fell 0.5% for its first drop in four days. After sprinting through May and rallying within a couple good days' worth of gains of its all-time high, the index at the center of many 401(k) accounts has lost momentum.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 108 points, or 0.3%, and the Nasdaq composite sank 0.8%.
Trading activity in options markets suggests investors believe the next big move for the S&P 500 could come on Friday, when the U.S. Labor Department will say how many more jobs U.S. employers created than destroyed during May. The expectation on Wall Street is for a slowdown in hiring from April.
A resilient job market has been one of the linchpins that's propped up the U.S. economy, and the worry is that all the uncertainty created by President Donald Trump's on-and-off tariffs could push businesses to freeze their hiring.
A report on Thursday said more U.S. workers applied for unemployment benefits last week than economists expected. The number remains relatively low compared with history, but it still hit its highest level in eight months.
The data came as Procter & Gamble, the giant behind such brands as Pampers diapers and Cascade dish detergent, said it will cut up to 7,000 jobs over the next two years. Its stock fell 1.9%.
The day's heaviest weight on the market was Tesla, which tumbled 14.3%. It's lost nearly 30% of its value so far this year as CEO Elon Musk's relationship with Trump sours amid a disagreement over the president's signature bill of tax cuts and spending.
Brown-Forman, the company behind Jack Daniel's and Woodford Reserve, dropped 17.9% for its worst day since it began trading in 1972.
Its profit and revenue for the latest quarter fell short of Wall Street's expectations, and the company said it expects its upcoming fiscal year to be challenging because of 'consumer uncertainty, the potential impact from currently unknown tariffs' and other things.
The CEO of PVH, which runs the Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger brands, likewise cited challenges from 'an increasingly uncertain consumer and macroeconomic backdrop.'
Its stock fell 18% even though it reported stronger revenue and profit for the latest quarter than analysts expected. The company cut its profit forecast for its full fiscal year, saying it will likely be able to offset only some of the potential hit it will take because of tariffs.
Hopes that Trump will lower his tariffs after reaching trade deals with other countries have been among the main reasons the S&P 500 has rallied back so furiously since dropping roughly 20% from its record two months ago. It's now back within 3.3% of its all-time high.
Trump boosted such hopes Thursday after saying he had 'a very good phone call' with China's leader, Xi Jinping, about trade and that 'their respective teams will be meeting shortly at a location to be determined.'
It's an easing of tensions after the world's two largest economies had earlier accused each other of violating the agreement that had paused their stiff tariffs against each other, which threatened to drag the economy into a recession.
To be sure, nothing is assured amid Trump's on-and-off rollout of tariffs, and markets took the latest detente with China relatively coolly.
Among Wall Street's winners was MongoDB, which jumped 12.8% after the database company likewise delivered a stronger profit than analysts expected.
Circle Internet Group, the U.S.-based issuer of one of the most popular cryptocurrencies, surged 168.5% in its first day of trading on the New York Stock Exchange.
Five Below climbed 5.6% after the retailer, which sells products priced between $1 and $5, reported a stronger profit for the latest quarter than analysts expected. CEO Winnie Park credited broad-based strength across most of its merchandise
All told, the S&P 500 fell 31.51 points to 5,939.30. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 108.00 to 42,319.74, and the Nasdaq composite sank 162.04 to 19,298.45.
In the bond market, Treasury yields held steadier. The yield on the 10-year Treasury rose to 4.40% from 4.37% late Wednesday after tumbling from 4.46% the day before.
Yields dropped so sharply on Wednesday as expectations built that the Federal Reserve will need to cut interest rates later this year to prop up an economy potentially weakened by tariffs.
In stock markets abroad, indexes in Europe were mixed amid modest moves after the European Central Bank cut its main interest rate again, as was widely expected.
The moves were bigger in Asia, where South Korea's Kospi jumped 1.5% after the country's new president and leading liberal politician Lee Jae-myung began his term, vowing to restart talks with North Korea and beef up a partnership with the U.S. and Japan.
Choe writes for the Associated Press.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Advanced Micro Devices Stock Moved Higher Today
AMD stock jumped early in today's trading, but it gave up most of its gains as the market focused on risk factors for the tech sector and broader market. Investors are seeing signs that AMD is positioned to rack up wins in the artificial intelligence (AI) processor space. AMD's new AI processor and server products could deliver significant wins, but geopolitical dynamics and other factors could still create volatility for the stock. 10 stocks we like better than Advanced Micro Devices › Advanced Micro Devices (NASDAQ: AMD) stock ended Friday's trading in the green, despite pullbacks following a pop early in the session. The company's share price closed out the day up 1.1%, but it had been up as much as 4.7% earlier in the session. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) fell 0.2% in the daily session, and the Nasdaq Composite (NASDAQINDEX: ^IXIC) fell 0.5%. Thanks to rising excitement surrounding the company's position in artificial intelligence (AI), AMD stock opened today's trading with a big gain. The company's share price still advanced in the daily session, but it lost some ground as investors weighed new export restrictions for semiconductor technologies and the risk of escalating conflict in the Middle East. AMD stock has seen wild fluctuations over the last couple of years in conjunction with shifting expectations for the company's standing and market opportunity in the AI space. Following the Advancing AI 2025 conference hosted by the hardware specialist last week, market sentiment surrounding the stock has become significantly more bullish. At the conference AMD profiled its recently launched Instinct MI350 graphics processing unit (GPU) and its new server product for data centers. The company also announced that it had entered into a new deal to supply OpenAI with processing hardware, and its indications suggest that it may have also reached a new deal with Amazon. AMD appears to be making some laudable progress in the AI hardware market. While the company may continue to play second fiddle to Nvidia in the high-end data center GPU market, it will likely still have opportunities to score some big wins in the space. On the other hand, AMD stock could see high levels of volatility in the near term. Tech stocks wavered today following news that the Trump administration was implementing new bans on tech exports to China, and the market is also on edge about the possibility that the U.S. could get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. So even though AMD's AI growth bets appear to be moving in the right direction, there are other big catalysts that could shape stock performance in the near term. Before you buy stock in Advanced Micro Devices, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Advanced Micro Devices wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $659,171!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $891,722!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 995% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Keith Noonan has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Advanced Micro Devices, Amazon, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Why Advanced Micro Devices Stock Moved Higher Today was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
250 Million Acre Public Land Sale Would Ruin The Off-Road Industry
Ford Performance at the 2025 King of the Hammers in Southern California's Johnson Valley. Since President Trump took office in January, the amount of threats to anything considered public—from a large slice of our nation's workforce to the media—have been unrelenting. Earlier this month, these threats took on a new form: potentially robbing the American people of millions of acres of public land. Unveiled on June 11th and revised on the 14th, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's budget reconciliation bill outlines over 250 million acres, to be slightly more exact, that could be offered up for sale to private business. As reported on by Jonathon Klein of Ride Apart, this could have a tremendous negative impact on not just our natural resources, but every corner of the outdoor industry as well. For those amongst us who enjoy off-road driving (or hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, cycling, climbing, etc.), the possibility of being cut-off from lands where we savor such activity is very real. Klein points out one particular swath of land in Southern California, Johnson Valley—home to one of the world's top off-road racing events, King of the Hammers—is on the chopping block, which would not only be detrimental to this event, but every single industry that's involved in it. Automakers, the aftermarket performance and racing industries, tourism, general outdoor equipment industries; the list goes on. Take that same scenario and multiply it by every other parcel of land that outdoor enthusiasts could lose access to, and the damage would be extensive. For a good overall picture of what's on the chopping block, The Wilderness Society has created a handy map. Competitors at the 2020 King of the Hammers in Johnson Valley, California. But why is all of this land potentially for sale? As stated in the bill itself, as much as $15 billion in revenue could come from expanded oil, gas, coal, and geothermal leasing. Other aims include increased housing production, domestic energy security and timber production, as well as, in the bill's summarized words, 'ensuring states and counties benefit from energy projects on federal lands.' The Wilderness Society has also outlined a handful of counter arguments. In its words, 'research suggests that very little of the land managed by the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) and USFS (US Forest Service) is actually suitable for housing.' It also explains that the federal government can revoke national monument status and that certain changes would negatively impact sovereign Tribal Nations. We can't forget the fact that increased energy production carries its own environmental hazards, too. It's all bad and very unnecessary. One thing that truly makes America great is its beautiful natural land that's here for all of us to savor, and this bill could cut off a very significant portion of it. And again, there's the immense adverse effect on every single outdoor industry, especially off-road driving and racing, and the massive amount of American companies that feed it. Contact your US senator and let them know how you feel. Especially if you live in Utah, which is Senator Mike Lee's turf. He's Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the creator of this bill—ironically, as many as 18 million acres of his state's land could potentially be up for sale. That's a lot of territory for off-road driving, hunting, shooting, fishing, climbing, camping, hiking, mountain biking, and so on.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Supreme Court delivers another blow to California's imperiled emissions standards
The Supreme Court reinstated legal challenges by oil and gas companies Friday to California's strict emissions standards for motor vehicles, standards that the Trump administration is likely to halt on its own in the near future. Federal law allows California to set tighter limits on auto emissions than the national standard, and since 1990 has allowed other states to adopt California's rules, an option taken by 17 states and the District of Columbia. But fuel companies affected by the increasing use of electric vehicles contend the state's standards are too restrictive and have sued to overturn them. Lower federal courts ruled that companies had failed to show they were being harmed by the standards, and therefore lacked legal standing to sue, because electric car sales are increasing for other reasons. The Supreme Court disagreed in a 7-2 decision. 'The whole point of the regulations is to increase the number of electric vehicles in the new automobile market beyond what consumers would otherwise demand,' Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion. 'The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court.' But dissenting Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said lawyers in the case had told the court that the Environmental Protection Agency, under President Donald Trump, was about to withdraw its approval of California's waiver from nationwide standards, 'which will put an end to California's emissions program.' The EPA took that action during Trump's first administration, which was reversed under President Joe Biden. Meanwhile, legislation passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Trump would prevent California from banning sales of new gasoline-powered vehicles in 2035, a law the state has challenged in court. The Supreme Court 'is already viewed by many as being overly sympathetic to corporate interests,' and Friday's ruling 'will no doubt aid future attempts by the fuel industry to attack the Clean Air Act,' said Jackson, a Biden appointee. In a separate dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the court should have returned the case to a lower court to await the EPA's action. Kavanaugh, however, said fuel companies affected by California's current standards could seek to prove in court that they were arbitrary and unlawful. His opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan. Liane Randolph, chair of the California Air Resources Board, said it was not a full-scale rejection of the state's emissions standards. 'This ruling does not change California's Advanced Clean Cars rulemaking, nor does it dispute what data has shown to be true: vehicle emissions are a huge source of pollution with grave health impacts, consumer adoption of zero emission vehicles continues to rise, and global auto manufacturers are committed to an electric future,' she said in a statement. But attorney Brett Skorup of the libertarian Cato Institute said the ruling was 'a welcome rebuke to judicial gatekeeping' and affirmed that 'predictable economic harms from government regulation' entitle 'injured parties (to) have their day in court.' The case is Diamond Alternative Energy v. EPA, No. 24-7.
