Jim Cramer criticized a DoorDash short tied to Uber, after DASH rallied post–second-quarter results

DoorDash, Inc. has been a market focal point for investors trying to measure how ride-hailing platform competition and local delivery economics will play out, even as the companies operate in different categories. In a market note carried by Yahoo Finance, Jim Cramer argued that shorting DoorDash because of Uber was a “bad trade,” setting up a contrast between the narrative of competitive pressure and what investors were pricing in after DoorDash’s latest results.

The Yahoo Finance report placed the discussion in the context of DoorDash’s recent stock momentum. DoorDash shares were described as down about 12.5% over the past year, while also showing a gain of roughly 1.3% year-to-date. Those figures frame the broader point that DoorDash has not kept pace with the market tone that typically follows strong sector narratives.

The same report said DoorDash’s stock rose after the company posted results for its second quarter on August 5. On August 6, the shares closed about 2.9% higher, suggesting that the earnings release and related commentary were enough to lift sentiment in the immediate aftermath.

Cramer’s specific criticism, as characterized in the Yahoo Finance article, centered on the logic used by traders who attempted to express a bearish view on DoorDash by referencing Uber. The underlying idea of such a trade is that investor attention and consumer behavior captured by Uber could eventually flow through to delivery demand, or influence pricing, take rates, or customer retention dynamics at DoorDash. Cramer disputed that framework, according to the report.

While the segment described by Yahoo Finance focused on the trade’s reasoning, it also highlighted a common challenge in the “adjacent competitors” narrative: investors often try to connect business outcomes across companies that do not share the same balance sheet drivers or route economics. Uber’s core ride-hailing and mobility model is structurally different from DoorDash’s marketplace and local merchant delivery model, even though both can compete indirectly for consumer time and for delivery-adjacent spending.

Sector participants have long monitored delivery platforms for signs of operating leverage, merchant and driver recruitment, and changes in customer order frequency or average order size. But in the absence of detailed, company-specific disclosure tied directly to Cramer’s trade critique in the Yahoo Finance post, it remains unclear what, if any, specific metrics or guidance underpinned the “bad trade” claim beyond the general view that the Uber-linked short thesis did not hold up.

The Yahoo Finance item also did not spell out the mechanics of the trade being criticized, such as whether it was a pure short, a hedge versus another name, or how long the position was held. It likewise did not provide detail on any particular valuation model or analyst forecast Cramer referenced. As a result, the most defensible takeaway from the reported commentary is about trade logic, not a new set of disclosed DoorDash fundamentals.

Looking ahead, investors will likely continue to weigh whether DoorDash’s operational performance can offset broader market concerns reflected in its longer-term stock decline. The next earnings report and any updates around margins, customer engagement, and marketplace economics should offer a clearer basis for judging whether the market is discounting Delivery competition correctly, or whether the “Uber-linked” framing is still driving expectations more than the underlying delivery unit economics.