23 Comments
User's avatar
Scenarica's avatar

The trailing returns are undeniable and the data presentation is effective. But the most important analytical question this piece raises is one it doesnt quite ask, and the answer determines wether these numbers represent the beginning of a multi-decade buildout or the peak of the most concentrated capital cycle since fibre optics in 2000.

Every number in this piece is a trailing return. Micron +770%. Bloom Energy +1,647%. Intel +483%. Extraordinary. But trailing returns tell you what already happened. The investment question is always about whats priced in versus whats still ahead. And the way to test that is to ask: what has to be true about the future for these valuations to be sustained?

For Nvidia at $216B revenue, the market is pricing continued GPU demand at current or higher volumes for at least 3-5 more years. Thats a reasonable assumption if the scaling thesis holds. But Jensen Huang himself said the multi-gigawatt training campus era is "largely behind us" and the future is distributed inference. If inference requires fewer GPUs per unit of compute than training does, Nvidias revenue trajectory flattens even if total AI compute demand keeps growing. The market hasnt priced the architectural shift.

Bloom Energy at +1,647% is the number I keep coming back to because it reveals exactly how much specificity is embedded in these returns. A 16x gain on a fuel cell company requires the market to believe that onsite fuel cells will power the next generation of data centres rather than grid electricity, renewables, or nuclear. Thats a very precise technological bet. If the distributed inference thesis proves correct and compute moves to the edge and into existing commercial buildings, the massive centralised data centre buildout that justifies Blooms valuation loses its demand base. The return was real. The question is wether the thesis underneath it survives the next architectural transition.

The one-third of S&P gains coming from five chip stocks is the data point that should concern every passive investor reading this piece. The S&P 500 returned 31%. Roughly 10 points of that came from five companies. The other 495 companies in the index generated a collective return of about 21%. The "rising tide" wasnt a tide. It was a wave concentrated in a very small part of the ocean, and every index fund holder in America is riding that concentration wether they chose to or not.

The innermost loop thesis is correct about where the value creation is occuring. The Perez framework is the historical counterweight: every major infrastructure buildout in history has produced extraordinary returns for early investors followed by a brutal shakeout that destroyed capital for late ones. Railroads, electricity, automobiles, fibre optics, each one followed the same pattern. Extraordinary returns during the installation phase. Crash during the overcapacity phase. Sustained but lower returns during the deployment phase that follows. The question for anyone reading this piece and deciding wether to allocate capital to the innermost loop today is which phase we're currently in, and the honest answer is that the data supports both "still early" and "approaching the transition" simultanously.

Tom's avatar

More interested Peter’s point that this is more than trailing returns.

The Synthesis's avatar

Micron answered the trailing question in March: revenue nearly tripled, 75% gross margins, $33B guide for next quarter. Stock fell anyway. That's the tell. When operators post numbers that would have justified the multiple a year ago and the market shrugs, you're watching a re-pricing of the forward story, not the back catalog.

Doc Nibs's avatar

By “transition” are you talking about what the framework calls the “turning point”? As in, it’s transitioning to the point where the reset/crash comes next (think baby falling down when first learning to walk before it runs).

Jeffrey Crawford's avatar

The electricity demand required by the global expansion of data centers needed to power AI growth is enormous. Best investments seem to be in the areas of batteries, renewables and nuclear energy. Betting on the infrastructure needed in the scene to support AI/data center expansion is a smart investment. Like betting on companies that built roads, bridges etc when automobiles came on the scene. Didn’t matter which auto company won , roads and bridges etc would be needed.

The Synthesis's avatar

The roads-and-bridges analogy has one wrinkle worth chewing on: Micron tripled revenue last quarter with 75% gross margins, and the stock still fell. Demand being real doesn't mean the supplier captures the value. Power and grid plays may rhyme more with railroads (commodity, capital-heavy, cyclical) than with the toll roads investors imagine.

Mark Burriss's avatar

I’m interested in how China could disrupt all this with low cost, low energy AI…

Lesetja R T Mogoba's avatar

https://sebastianbarros.substack.com/p/nvidia-wants-to-make-every-home-a

Template delta version control consideration:

The virtual power grid play reconfigured as the virtual compute grid,💭 leveraging homes in a distributed & decentralised outfits used for digital twinning gamification and crypto mining

Otis Bradley's avatar

Fascinating outrageous and incredible example of exponential growth. Moore's Law to Infinity and beyond. You used to talk about bitcoin a lot which has obviously faltered over the last six months. Does it still fit in?

Nathan Brantley's avatar

The insight here is that power has become the price of admission to intelligence. Capital has finally made the journey from betting on software to betting on atoms: the infrastructure layer where belief compounds through physics, not code. This is the rare moment when individual conviction can still find efficiency in the market's repricing cycle, before consensus fully calculates what we're building.

Erik Hochstein's avatar

Ok - did I miss something - this was AI voice and summarized correct ?

ShootyBear's avatar

Yeah the voice reading is from the previous post.

Bob Marsh's avatar

Very exciting. I’m so interested in this subject.

Sean Hadeed's avatar

I always get so excited reading and listening to your articles and podcasts. Thank you.

Jim T. Malone's avatar

What about all the water needed for cooling?

Doc Nibs's avatar

FYI, to anyone following Peter! I received a “like” and comment on my post for one “whatsappme at (and number) claiming to be Peter himself. It’s a money scam seeking crypto investment, and they reply to questions (poorly).

Tom's avatar

It seems Berkshire Hathaway has an enormous amount of cash. Hopefully they find investing in the singularity.

Erik Hochstein's avatar

FOURTH TURNING ? I don’t mean this in a Terminator way - but the simple fact that AI can, will, and should replace sooo many jobs - I see the word “threat”, “replacement” and all the negative language about AI - and this means defense mode - plus all you see about AI is a lot of $$ - people will start believing the rich are using AI to control even more …

Thomas Alan White's avatar

Progress can have unexpected results. I remember recently some Nobel prize winning economist pointed out that progress does not necessarily eliminate poverty and suffering. It doesn't always lift all boats.

When we switched from a horse and sailboat economy, there obviously were winners and losers.

The monks knowledge Renaissance is going to be front and center in all of this and make change at perhaps a dangerous and painful rate. Although I enjoyed and agreed with your analysis I think you are actually missing an important point. Hyper aggressive capitalism tends to be negative at some point and cannibalize things. Eliminating jobs through AI could be a negative way to generate wealth. But what AI is doing is manipulating more efficiently what we already know. Is not ushering in a new age like the monks knowledge Renaissance is going to do on steroids.

Because you love these big issues so much you really should dive into this because it will have a much bigger effect. Nothing in the future will remain untouched by this knowledge Renaissance.

Peter Michael Echols's avatar

Peter, I really appreciate you making an effort to share this investment information. Even though you don't call it that. Thank you for having the guts to tell the truth and share.

Peter Diamandis's avatar

you are very welcome. I think this is critical insight for everyone!

Peacock Capital's avatar

<p>31% S&P return is impressive, but the real question is what comes next. Concentration in a few names always looks genius until it does not.</p><p>We recently analyzed unusual options activity suggesting some big players are hedging their tech exposure heavily. Full breakdown at Peacock Research: https://peacockcapital.substack.com/p/an-84-million-bet-that-semiconductors</p>