P/E is a ratio on earnings, not sales. 25 * $300B (revenue) = $7.5T, yes. But that's using a P/S multiple, not P/E. Your math makes sense if you assume Nvidia

P/E is a ratio on earnings, not sales. 25 * $300B (revenue) = $7.5T, yes. But that's using a P/S multiple, not P/E. Your math makes sense if you assume Nvidia will have 25x P/S... which historically is very high, and unlikely to be the "correct" multiple after all of that growth has already occurred. Unless you expect them to continue growing at same CAGR in perpetuity. Also, very unlikely they will maintain that kind of market share if they reach those valuations. A relatively simple software solution to improve integration with AMD/Intel/TPU offerings that is worth trillions is a bit of a no brainer. It wasn't a financial prerogative until recently, so yes, all the competitor software here sucks, today. Compute is fungible, despite what many say here. The cost differential between implementing good software support for AMD and paying Nvidia ~98% gross margin makes it kind of obvious. A bull case could still see NVDA at a few trillion 5-10 years out... very unlikely it would go much beyond that. I fail to see any remotely rationally made, objective, case for it. At least not one that warrants investing in Nvidia today, at the current valuation, versus other opportunities It can still be a multi-bagger in the short-term due to what looks like dotcom 2.0 enthusiasm.