Goldman Sachs Names Five Best-in-Class Growth Stocks, Traders Back Only One
Goldman Sachs research, as reported, spotlighted five growth stocks; traders publicly agreed with only one and a post on X drew heavy engagement.
1. Palantir Technologies Inc. (PLTR)
Insidermonkey lists Palantir as one of “Goldman Sachs’s top growth stock picks,” reporting a Goldman-related stake of $2,215,027,028 and strong company metrics: 5-year sales growth 32.58% and 5-year earnings growth 177%, with a quoted stock upside of 46.99%. The same write-up notes a concrete corporate development, that on February 18 Palantir named Rackspace Technology its dedicated data migration and global implementation partner for Foundry and the Artificial Intelligence Platform, or AIP, with Foundry described as facilitating enterprise data integration and analytics and AIP as operationalizing AI in real-world business decisions. Insidermonkey’s piece also frames these company-level moves inside its own hedge-fund–mimicking strategy, which the site says has returned 427.7% since May 2014; that context helps explain why Palantir’s metrics caught attention on trader feeds.
2. Shopify Inc. (SHOP)
Insidermonkey also places Shopify among companies it attributes to Goldman Sachs’ growth picks, reporting a purported Goldman stake of $2,121,559,619, 5-year sales growth of 15.08%, 5-year earnings growth of 31.58% and a listed stock upside of 31.54%. The write-up highlights a February 17 Truist Securities upgrade from Hold to Buy by analyst Terry Tillman, who raised his price target from $110 to $150 and pointed to an industry-wide drop in software valuations tied to AI anxiety while noting Shopify has “been able to show strong and accelerating growth” when peers are struggling. That combination of reported institutional stake, step-up analyst coverage and a visible growth story helps explain why Shopify was floated in the media as a Goldman-linked pick and why it figured in the X conversation about the bank’s recommendations.
3. Boeing Co. (BA)
MarketBeat published a January 17, 2025 video framing three stock picks that align with what it described as Goldman Sachs’ 2025 sector outlook, and Boeing was the manufacturing name MarketBeat highlighted, with a projected 26% upside potential listed on the video’s summary. MarketBeat’s clip, which shows in the supplied metadata as having 18,430 views and 288 likes on a channel with roughly 621,000 subscribers, transcribes commentary tying Boeing to a new contract with the nation’s aviation sector and an expected roughly 5% annual growth in that market over the next decade, remarks MarketBeat attributes to its take on Goldman’s outlook. MarketBeat’s segment serves as a public interpretation of Goldman’s sector guidance favoring manufacturing and domestic producers, not as a direct Goldman Sachs company-by-company release, so Boeing’s inclusion is MarketBeat’s read of Goldman’s thematic emphasis.
4. Intel Corp. (INTC)
MarketBeat’s January 17 video also singled out Intel on the thesis that Goldman Sachs favors domestic manufacturers, calling out “Intel’s 40% discount and domestic manufacturing boost” and including a transcribed fragment indicating the stock was trading near $19.20 against a consensus price target “for $29 and change,” figures MarketBeat presented as implying roughly a 62% upside. The clip frames Intel as a beneficiary of the U.S. focus in Goldman’s outlook, with MarketBeat arguing much downside was already priced in and domestic production tailwinds could drive outperformance in 2025. As with Boeing, those claims come from MarketBeat’s coverage of Goldman Sachs’ sector view and should be read as alignment rather than as an official Goldman Sachs top-three company list.
5. Chevron Corp. (CVX)
Rounding the five names MarketBeat associated with Goldman’s sector emphasis, MarketBeat highlighted Chevron for its positioning amid expected energy supply constraints, presenting Chevron as the energy-sector exposure that lines up with Goldman Sachs’ call that energy and net exporters could outperform. That framing appears in MarketBeat’s January 17 video alongside the Boeing and Intel segments and is presented as MarketBeat’s selection of stocks that match Goldman’s stated preference for manufacturing, energy and domestic producers in 2025. Taken together with the company-level metrics noted for Palantir and Shopify, these five names have become the touchpoints of the wider debate: a Goldman-linked research thread, Insidermonkey’s company attributions and MarketBeat’s interpretation of Goldman’s thematic outlook.
Conclusion and what this means for Goldman employees and traders The underlying materials state that Goldman Sachs research, as reported, spotlighted five “best-in-class” growth stocks, but the primary Goldman note naming those five was not reproduced in the material reviewed; instead, Insidermonkey attributes Palantir and Shopify to Goldman-linked lists and MarketBeat interprets Goldman’s sector outlook to support Boeing, Intel and Chevron. The Original Report also says investor analysis publicly agreed with only one of the five picks and that a post about the recommendations “garners significant engagement on X,” a split that has already put the bank’s front-office calls under scrutiny from trading desks and wealth-management clients alike. At the same time, Business Insider’s summary of Goldman Sachs’ asset-class model recommends emerging market equities over US stocks, forecasting 8% returns for emerging markets in 2026 and 6% average returns through 2030 while projecting 7% next-12-month growth for US stocks, context that matters for how client advisers frame these company calls to customers. Zacks, republished on Nasdaq, continues to rate Goldman Sachs itself as a Zacks #2 (Buy) with a VGM Score of A and a Growth Style Score of B, forecasting 10.3% year-over-year earnings growth for GS, a reminder that market participants are evaluating both Goldman’s research and Goldman the firm. Expect continued scrutiny: traders will track earnings, partnerships and analyst revisions on these five names closely, while Goldman’s shop will need to clarify which names were in the original note if it wants to stem public debate and align internal distribution with external commentary.
Know something we missed? Have a correction or additional information?
Submit a Tip
