Which NVIDIA Quarter Does Samsung's Earnings Selloff Resemble?

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 14:30:00 +0900

This is a follow-up to Samsung 2Q26 preview, Micron FY3Q26 earnings, NVIDIA elasticity and the Korea HBM cycle, late-July Big Tech calls and the memory thesis, and hyperscaler financing and memory bottlenecks. Related hubs: Exclusive Analysis and AI HBM.

TL;DR

Samsung Electronics’ 2Q26 preliminary earnings were strong on the surface. Revenue was about KRW 171 trillion and operating profit was about KRW 89.4 trillion. Sales rose 27.74% quarter over quarter and operating profit rose 56.21%. Operating profit was up 1,810.26% year over year. These figures were disclosed by Samsung Electronics.

Yet the stock fell 6.92% on July 7 and another 6.25% on July 8. The two-day decline was 12.7%.

That is not the same as the famous NVIDIA August 2024 sell-on reaction. NVIDIA fell 6.4% on the first reaction day in August 2024, but rebounded 1.5% the next day. Samsung did not bounce. It fell again.

Across 17 NVIDIA post-earnings reactions, the closest analogue is NVIDIA’s Q4 FY26 report on February 25, 2026. NVIDIA fell 5.5% on the first reaction day and 4.2% the next day, for a two-day decline of 9.4%. The reaction-vector distance from Samsung’s path is 2.55, the smallest in the sample.

The key point is not that a strong earnings print is useless. The point is that a strong print alone was not enough once the market started asking whether AI infrastructure growth was slowing. NVIDIA’s large post-print drawdowns eventually recovered, but the recovery came only after a new catalyst directly killed the fear that had caused the drawdown. For Samsung, the equivalent catalyst is late-July Big Tech CapEx guidance.

The practical conclusion is Wait. This is not a mechanical dip-buy setup yet. The next gates are late-July hyperscaler CapEx commentary, DRAM/NAND price momentum, and Samsung’s clean 3Q operating-profit path.

1. What was strange about Samsung’s earnings reaction

The numbers were strong.

Samsung Electronics announced 2Q26 preliminary earnings on July 7, 2026. The company disclosed the following consolidated figures.

Metric	2Q26 preliminary	1Q26	2Q25
Revenue	about KRW 171T	KRW 133.87T	KRW 74.57T
Operating profit	about KRW 89.4T	KRW 57.23T	KRW 4.68T
Revenue growth		+27.74% QoQ	+129.31% YoY
Operating profit growth		+56.21% QoQ	+1,810.26% YoY

Samsung also disclosed estimate ranges of KRW 170T to KRW 172T for sales and KRW 89.3T to KRW 89.5T for operating profit. Korean disclosure rules required the company to publish a single median figure.

The stock reaction was the problem. Samsung closed at KRW 318,000 on July 6, KRW 296,000 on July 7, and KRW 277,500 on July 8. Based on yfinance daily close data:

Date	Close	Daily return	Read-through
2026-07-06	KRW 318,000	+2.75%	pre-announcement base
2026-07-07	KRW 296,000	-6.92%	announcement-day selloff
2026-07-08	KRW 277,500	-6.25%	no bounce
Two-day cumulative		-12.74%	post-print path

Compared with the June 18 high of KRW 362,500, the July 8 close was already 23.45% lower. Samsung was not falling from a calm setup. It was already volatile before the earnings print, and the good number failed to stop the selling.

The key is that the market was no longer asking only how much Samsung earned. It was asking whether the pace of earnings improvement could keep accelerating.

2. Why compare Samsung with NVIDIA

Samsung is a memory company. NVIDIA is a GPU platform company. Their businesses are different. But both have been core price signals for the AI infrastructure cycle.

NVIDIA moved first when the AI infrastructure boom began. As bottlenecks moved downstream into HBM, DRAM, eSSD, substrates, and power infrastructure, Samsung and SK hynix began facing the same market question: is the next leg still accelerating?

Question	Meaning
Did earnings improve?	confirmed result
Did earnings beat the bar?	surprise versus expectations
Will the next quarter be better?	guidance and pricing
Is the growth rate still rising?	the part stocks care about most
Will hyperscalers keep spending?	the final payer for AI memory demand

Samsung’s two-day selloff came from that last layer. The print was strong, but expectations were already high. Some investors had expected operating profit above KRW 90T. At the same time, the market was worried about possible hyperscaler CapEx moderation. Korean single-stock leverage products, futures, and ETF flows amplified the move.

This analysis therefore does not compare Samsung’s business model with NVIDIA’s business model. It compares post-earnings price paths and the fear behind those paths.

3. Timing adjustment: NVIDIA reports after the close

NVIDIA usually reports after the US market close. The earnings information is not reflected in the announcement-day close. The real reaction appears in the next regular trading session.

Samsung’s guidance was reflected in the Korean session on the announcement day. So the timing has to be aligned as follows.

Company	Reporting style	First trading session with full reaction
Samsung Electronics	reflected in the Korean session	announcement day
NVIDIA	after-market release	next trading day

In this note, NVIDIA’s reaction D0 means the first trading day after the after-market release. NVIDIA’s D+1 means the following trading day. This aligns NVIDIA’s D0 with Samsung’s July 7 and NVIDIA’s D+1 with Samsung’s July 8.

Without this adjustment, the comparison would be wrong.

4. NVIDIA’s 17-quarter post-earnings reaction table

The table below combines NVIDIA quarterly revenue, growth rates, and post-earnings stock reactions. Revenue and report timing are sourced from NVIDIA IR and SEC 8-K releases. Stock returns are calculated from yfinance daily close data.

Quarter	Report date	Revenue	QoQ	YoY	Reaction D0	D+1	Two-day	T+20
Q1 FY23	2022-05-25	$8.3B	n/a	n/a	+5.2%	+5.4%	+10.8%	+0.9%
Q2 FY23	2022-08-24	$6.7B	-19.3%	n/a	+4.0%	-9.2%	-5.6%	-27.1%
Q3 FY23	2022-11-16	$5.9B	-11.9%	n/a	-1.5%	-1.7%	-3.1%	+6.5%
Q4 FY23	2023-02-22	$6.1B	+3.4%	n/a	+14.0%	-1.6%	+12.2%	+27.5%
Q1 FY24	2023-05-24	$7.2B	+18.0%	-13.3%	+24.4%	+2.5%	+27.5%	+38.2%
Q2 FY24	2023-08-23	$13.5B	+87.5%	+101.5%	+0.1%	-2.4%	-2.3%	-12.9%
Q3 FY24	2023-11-21	$18.1B	+34.1%	+206.8%	-2.5%	-1.9%	-4.3%	-3.7%
Q4 FY24	2024-02-21	$22.1B	+22.1%	+262.3%	+16.4%	+0.4%	+16.8%	+33.9%
Q1 FY25	2024-05-22	$26.0B	+17.6%	+261.1%	+9.3%	+2.6%	+12.1%	+33.3%
Q2 FY25	2024-08-28	$30.0B	+15.4%	+122.2%	-6.4%	+1.5%	-5.0%	-1.2%
Q3 FY25	2024-11-20	$35.1B	+17.0%	+93.9%	+0.5%	-3.2%	-2.7%	-10.4%
Q4 FY25	2025-02-26	$39.3B	+12.0%	+77.8%	-8.5%	+4.0%	-4.8%	-13.3%
Q1 FY26	2025-05-28	$44.1B	+12.2%	+69.6%	+3.2%	-2.9%	+0.2%	+15.0%
Q2 FY26	2025-08-27	$46.7B	+5.9%	+55.7%	-0.8%	-3.3%	-4.1%	-2.2%
Q3 FY26	2025-11-19	$57.0B	+22.1%	+62.4%	-3.2%	-1.0%	-4.1%	-6.6%
Q4 FY26	2026-02-25	$68.1B	+19.5%	+73.3%	-5.5%	-4.2%	-9.4%	-8.6%
Q1 FY27	2026-05-20	$81.6B	+19.8%	+85.0%	-1.8%	-1.9%	-3.6%	-5.7%

The key message is clear. Strong results did not always lift the stock. As the AI cycle matured, the market became more sensitive to the change in growth rate than to the level of revenue.

5. The closest analogue is NVIDIA Q4 FY26

Samsung’s path was:

Company/event	D0	D+1	Two-day
Samsung 2Q26 preliminary earnings	-6.92%	-6.25%	-12.74%

We compare this two-day vector with all 17 NVIDIA quarters.

Rank	NVIDIA quarter	Report date	D0	D+1	Two-day	Distance from Samsung
1	Q4 FY26	2026-02-25	-5.46%	-4.16%	-9.39%	2.55
2	Q3 FY24	2023-11-21	-2.46%	-1.93%	-4.34%	6.21
3	Q3 FY26	2025-11-19	-3.15%	-0.97%	-4.10%	6.48
4	Q1 FY27	2026-05-20	-1.77%	-1.90%	-3.64%	6.74
5	Q2 FY26	2025-08-27	-0.79%	-3.32%	-4.09%	6.79

Q4 FY26 is the clear match. It is not just the numbers. The drivers were similar.

NVIDIA’s Q4 FY26 revenue was $68.1B, up 73% year over year and 20% quarter over quarter. The next-quarter revenue guide was $78B. The print was strong. But the stock fell 5.5% on the first reaction day and 4.2% on the next day.

The market was asking whether the next step could still get better. Customer concentration, hyperscaler spending durability, AI CapEx peak risk, and competition were all in focus.

Samsung faced the same structure. KRW 89.4T of operating profit was strong, but investors had already moved the bar higher. The market wanted proof that the growth rate was still accelerating, not only proof that the current profit level was high.

6. Why the August 2024 NVIDIA sell-on is the wrong template

The intuitive comparison is NVIDIA Q2 FY25 in August 2024. NVIDIA fell 6.4% on the first reaction day. That resembles Samsung’s July 7 decline.

But the next day changes the conclusion.

Case	D0	D+1	Read-through
NVIDIA Q2 FY25, August 2024	-6.4%	+1.5%	one-day selloff, then bounce
NVIDIA Q4 FY25, February 2025	-8.5%	+4.0%	one-day selloff, then strong bounce
NVIDIA Q4 FY26, February 2026	-5.5%	-4.2%	two-day selloff
Samsung 2Q26	-6.92%	-6.25%	two-day selloff

The August 2024 and February 2025 NVIDIA reactions were dip-and-bounce. Samsung was dip-and-continue. That distinction matters. A one-day sell-on can be a dip-buy setup. A two-day selloff can mean the market has not finished digesting the fear.

7. Did NVIDIA recover immediately after large post-print selloffs?

No.

There were three NVIDIA quarters with a first-reaction-day decline worse than 5%: Q2 FY25, Q4 FY25, and Q4 FY26. All three were still below the pre-announcement price after 20 trading days.

NVIDIA quarter	D0	T+5	T+10	T+20
Q2 FY25, August 2024	-6.4%	-14.6%	-5.1%	-1.2%
Q4 FY25, February 2025	-8.5%	-10.6%	-11.8%	-13.3%
Q4 FY26, February 2026	-5.5%	-6.4%	-4.9%	-8.6%

All three fell further by T+5. All three failed to recover the pre-announcement price by T+20.

The sample is small, so this is not a deterministic rule. But it is enough to reject the simple idea that strong earnings plus a large drop automatically equals an immediate buying opportunity.

8. The real low and recovery took weeks

The second attached analysis goes further. It asks when NVIDIA actually bottomed and when it recovered.

Anchor	Pre-print base	Low	Max drawdown	Time to low	Breakeven	New high	Low-to-later-high
Q2 FY25, August 2024	$125.55	$102.78 on 2024-09-06	-18.1%	6 sessions	2024-10-07, 5.5 weeks	2024-10-14, 6.5 weeks	+45.3% to 2025-01-06
Q4 FY25, February 2025	$131.24	$94.29 around 2025-04-04 to 2025-04-08	-28.2%	27 sessions	2025-05-14, 11 weeks	2025-06-25, 16 weeks	+119.6% to 2025-10-29
Q4 FY26, February 2026	$195.55	$165.17 on 2026-03-30	-15.5%	23 sessions	2026-04-14, 6.5 weeks	2026-04-24, 8 weeks	+42.7% to 2026-05-14

The pattern is important.

First, the low did not arrive immediately. Even the fastest case took six trading sessions. The slower cases took more than a month.

Second, breakeven took 5.5 to 11 weeks.

Third, the rebound was eventually large. But it did not come from cheapness alone. It came after a catalyst removed the fear behind the selloff.

9. The rebound trigger had to kill the exact fear

9-1. August 2024: the Fed addressed macro fear

The August 2024 drawdown was about macro fear. Weak labor-market data raised recession concerns. Regulatory noise also hurt sentiment.

The rebound trigger was the Fed’s 50bp cut on September 18, 2024. The fear was rates and recession. The Fed directly addressed that fear.

9-2. February 2025: tariff fear required a policy reversal

The February 2025 post-print decline later deepened because of tariff shock. NVIDIA moved toward a 12-month low in early April.

The rebound trigger was the 90-day tariff pause. A policy shock created the fear; a policy reversal removed it.

9-3. February 2026: GTC addressed AI CapEx peak fear

This is the most relevant anchor for Samsung.

NVIDIA’s Q4 FY26 print was strong, but the market worried that AI investment might peak in 2026. Hyperscaler concentration, AI return-on-investment questions, and customer spending durability all mattered.

The rebound catalyst was GTC 2026. Jensen Huang said NVIDIA had visibility into at least $1T of demand or orders through 2027, compared with the prior year’s $500B figure through 2026. Data Center Dynamics and Constellation Research reported the comments.

This directly addressed the fear. The market worried that AI CapEx was peaking; NVIDIA answered that demand through 2027 was much larger.

Even then, the bottom came after GTC, not on GTC day. The stock bottomed on March 30, about two weeks later.

10. Applying the lesson to Samsung

Samsung’s selloff fear has two parts.

First, memory pricing and HBM demand may have been priced too quickly.

Second, if hyperscalers slow AI infrastructure spending, memory pricing and volume could both weaken.

Therefore, the rebound does not need another reminder that 2Q earnings were good. The market already knows that. The rebound needs evidence that the fear is wrong.

Samsung selloff fear	Required catalyst	Timing
Big Tech AI CapEx slowdown	Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon maintaining or raising 2026 to 2027 CapEx	late-July 2026 earnings calls
Memory price-growth slowdown	DRAM/NAND spot and contract-price momentum staying firm	weekly checks and 3Q negotiations
HBM catch-up doubt	HBM4/HBM4E qualification, production shipments, NVIDIA mix	2H26 IR and earnings calls
2Q one-off cost confusion	clean 3Q operating-profit path after bonus/provision adjustments	3Q preview and 3Q earnings
flow-driven liquidation	foreign and program-selling slowdown, lower leverage-product volatility	daily flow checks

The most important gate is late-July Big Tech earnings. If Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon keep or raise AI infrastructure spending plans, Samsung’s selloff can be reclassified as a flow correction rather than demand damage.

If two or more hyperscalers talk about slowing the pace of AI infrastructure investment, the NVIDIA Q4 FY26 template becomes more relevant and the correction can last longer.

11. Why the Fed put is weaker this time

Two of NVIDIA’s prior recoveries had macro or policy support.

In August 2024, the Fed cut rates by 50bp.

In early 2025, a tariff pause reversed a policy shock.

In February 2026, GTC provided a company-driven demand reset.

Samsung now has less help from the first two channels. Since June 2026, strong US labor data and inflation concern have made rates a constraint again. The market is not confidently pricing a near-term Fed rescue.

That makes the third channel more important: direct demand confirmation. Late-July hyperscaler CapEx commentary can play the same role for Samsung that GTC played for NVIDIA in March 2026.

12. Practical view: wait for proof, then scale in

The conclusion is not a strong sell call. It is also not an automatic buy call.

The stance is Wait.

A strong print followed by a two-day selloff can be a signal that the market has moved from current profit level to next growth rate. That is a different regime.

The entry gates are:

Gate	Meaning	If confirmed
late-July Big Tech CapEx maintained or raised	final demand for AI memory remains intact	selloff fear weakens
DRAM/NAND price momentum holds	2Q pricing logic continues into 3Q	3Q earnings support improves
Samsung clean 3Q QoQ remains healthy	underlying earnings path survives provision noise	quality of earnings improves

If two of these three gates pass, the case for staged entry improves. If all three weaken, the correction can extend.

The main mistake would be to assume that record earnings automatically lead to a bounce. NVIDIA’s history says otherwise. The rebound required a catalyst that killed the specific fear behind the selloff.

13. Samsung versus SK hynix

This note focuses on Samsung, but the read-through also matters for SK hynix.

Samsung has a huge earnings base, a lower multiple, and HBM4/HBM4E catch-up optionality. But investors also have to deal with HBM purity, foundry and S.LSI losses, bonus provisions, and foreign-flow pressure.

SK hynix has cleaner HBM exposure and a stronger position in NVIDIA’s supply chain. But it is already priced as the winner. If Big Tech CapEx remains strong, SK hynix is the trend-reacceleration candidate, while Samsung is the re-rating candidate where the Micron/NVIDIA read-through has been partly erased.

Lens	Samsung Electronics	SK hynix
Strength	earnings level, low multiple, HBM catch-up option	HBM purity, customer trust, leadership position
Burden	HBM certification, foundry/S.LSI, provision interpretation	high expectations, crowded-winner risk
Rebound condition	clean 3Q earnings and HBM customer proof	Big Tech CapEx durability and HBM allocation
Style	under-reflected alpha candidate	trend re-acceleration candidate

Both depend on the same final question: will hyperscalers keep spending?

14. Conclusion: Samsung needs better disproof, not just better earnings

Samsung’s 2Q26 preliminary earnings were strong. But the stock fell sharply for two straight days. Compared with 17 NVIDIA post-earnings reactions, Samsung’s path looks much closer to NVIDIA Q4 FY26 in February 2026 than to the August 2024 one-day sell-on.

In that NVIDIA case, the company posted strong numbers but failed to recover the pre-announcement price for about a month. The recovery began only after GTC 2026 directly challenged the AI CapEx peak fear with a $1T through-2027 demand statement.

Samsung’s equivalent proof point is not another reminder that 2Q earnings were strong. It is hyperscaler confirmation that AI infrastructure spending remains firm into 2027.

That is why the late-July Big Tech earnings calls matter. Until then, the right discipline is to wait for evidence rather than buying only because the stock has fallen after a record print.

Evidence classification

Fact

Item	Evidence
Samsung 2Q26 preliminary earnings	Revenue about KRW 171T and operating profit about KRW 89.4T, Samsung official newsroom, 2026-07-07
Samsung comparison periods	1Q26 revenue KRW 133.87T and operating profit KRW 57.23T; 2Q25 revenue KRW 74.57T and operating profit KRW 4.68T, Samsung official newsroom
Samsung price path	July 6 KRW 318,000, July 7 KRW 296,000, July 8 KRW 277,500, yfinance daily close calculation
Samsung two-day reaction	July 7 -6.92%, July 8 -6.25%, two-day -12.74%
NVIDIA Q4 FY26 event	February 25, 2026 event confirmed on NVIDIA IR
NVIDIA Q1 FY27	Revenue $81.6B, up 85% YoY and 20% QoQ, NVIDIA IR financial reports
GTC 2026 $1T comment	Demand/order visibility through 2027 reported by Data Center Dynamics and Constellation Research
NVIDIA price-path calculations	yfinance daily closes, 17 quarters aligned with next-day reaction for after-market releases

Inference

Item	Interpretation
Samsung/NVIDIA comparison	This is a price-path and fear comparison, not a business-model comparison.
Q4 FY26 similarity	Two-day path is the closest, and the fear set also overlaps: expectations, CapEx durability, and customer concentration.
Late-July Big Tech calls	If AI CapEx concern drove the Samsung selloff, hyperscaler guidance is the most direct disproof.
Wait stance	The print was strong, but the stock is asking about growth-rate durability. Confirmation should come before aggressive buying.

Speculation

Item	Possible path
Positive path	Big Tech CapEx holds or rises, DRAM/NAND price momentum holds, and Samsung’s clean 3Q earnings path improves.
Negative path	Two or more hyperscalers slow AI infrastructure spending or memory price momentum weakens.
Recovery timing	NVIDIA analogues suggest breakeven can take weeks, not days. For Samsung, mid-August to September is more realistic if catalysts turn positive.

Blocked

Item	Why it is blocked
Samsung 2Q26 segment detail	Preliminary earnings do not yet disclose DS, foundry, or S.LSI detail.
Late-July hyperscaler CapEx guidance	Not yet reported.
Samsung clean 3Q QoQ	Requires later earnings and IR detail after provision adjustments.
Exact consensus beat for all 17 NVIDIA quarters	Some quarters are verified, but a uniform consensus data set for every quarter was not fully obtained.

Sources and calculation notes

Samsung Electronics, Earnings Guidance for Second Quarter 2026
NVIDIA Investor Relations, Financial Reports
NVIDIA Investor Relations, 4th Quarter FY26 Financial Results
Data Center Dynamics, Jensen Huang says NVIDIA has one trillion dollars in orders through 2027
Constellation Research, Nvidia GTC 2026 and $1 trillion order flow
Stock calculations: yfinance daily closes for 005930.KS and NVDA, from 2022-05-20 to 2026-07-08. For NVIDIA, after-market releases are aligned so the next regular trading day is reaction D0.

Earnings Reaction on Korea Invest Insights