Lyft blamed the snow. Their Q1 guidance came in soft, and the company pointed to Winter Storm Fern—heavy snow and ice that hit the East Coast—as the reason for weaker-than-expected adjusted EBITDA of $120-140 million versus analyst estimates of $139.4 million. Lyft flags storm-hit quarter

The stock dropped 17% on Wednesday, the biggest decline since February 2025. A $1 billion share buyback announcement couldn't offset investor disappointment over the soft forecast.

Here's what bugs me about this: there aren't any direct quotes from Lyft executives explaining the storm's impact. The company mentioned Winter Storm Fern "disrupted travel and dampened ride demand," particularly on the East Coast, but that's it. No specific markets. No data on how many rides were lost. No geographic breakdown of the damage. Just a vague weather reference in the earnings materials.

Weather affects rideshare—that's obvious. When it snows hard, fewer people order rides. But Uber operates in the same markets and didn't cite weather as a major headwind in their recent earnings. That asymmetry matters. If both companies face the same storms but only one blames the weather for missing guidance, that tells you something about execution and margin for error.

Lyft's gross bookings guidance for Q1 came in at $4.86-5 billion, with a midpoint roughly in line with analyst expectations of $4.95 billion. So bookings aren't the problem—it's profitability. The EBITDA miss suggests higher costs or lower take rates, and blaming the weather distracts from those underlying issues. Lyft shares tumble after revenue miss and soft outlook

The Q4 results weren't bad. Lyft posted adjusted EBITDA of $154.1 million, above the $147.1 million estimate, and generated $1.12 billion in free cash flow for all of 2025—higher than the $993.4 million analysts expected. The business is functional. But when you miss forward guidance and blame external factors without specifics, investors lose confidence. Lyft Q4 results

The $1 billion buyback is a statement. It signals management believes the stock is undervalued. But buybacks don't fix operational challenges. They return cash to shareholders, which is fine if the core business is solid. If the core business has margin pressure and weather sensitivity that competitors don't seem to face, a buyback looks more like financial engineering than strategy.

I'm pro-gig economy, and Lyft provides valuable flexible work opportunities for drivers and convenient rides for millions of people. But this earnings call raises more questions than it answers. Why didn't Uber cite the same storm impacts? Why no specific data on the affected markets? Why frame it as a temporary disruption when Q1 guidance suggests persistent margin pressure?

Here's what I think happens: Lyft needs to show Q2 guidance that's strong and blame-free, or investors will assume Winter Storm Fern was a convenient scapegoat for deeper issues. If Q2 comes in weak with another external excuse, the market will stop believing them. The next quarter matters more than this one.