4 ms·

Net buying of corporate equities by American households, trusts, funds and non-profits has averaged $660bn per year for the last few years [1]. $200bn is not fu

Net buying of corporate equities by American households, trusts, funds and non-profits has averaged $660bn per year for the last few years [1]. $200bn is not fundamentally a stretch for the American equity markets, let alone capital markets more broadly. [1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/20260319/html/f224.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/20260319/html/f22... line 16, 2023 to 2025

idiotsecant 5mo ago
A third of all spending is not fundamentally a stretch?
- JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
  > A third of all spending is not fundamentally a stretch? Where did you get spending? That's net buying of stocks by non-financial Americans. It's the new money that has, on average, gone into the U.S. stock market from that section of investors every year. A third of it going into these new issuances doesn't need to break anything.
  - djeastm 5mo ago
    Dumb question here, but would it necessarily mean the other stocks they might've bought (i.e. the rest of the market) will not get the cash infusion and will thus likely drop in valuation?
    - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
      > would it necessarily mean the other stocks they might've bought (i.e. the rest of the market) will not get the cash infusion and will thus likely drop in valuation? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Almost certainly, to some degree. But that doesn’t mean anything has to drop. Just not rise, or not rise as much as it would have. Or potentially some other company that would have gone public or sold shares doesn’t do it now.
  - themafia 5mo ago
    > A third of it going into these new issuances doesn't need to break anything. Other than it not going somewhere more productive. Are you willing to just bury 1/3 of your income in the back yard?
soared 5mo ago
A 30% increase in one year, across only 3 companies, seems like a of a stretch. Especially given current economic/etc climates.
- JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
  > 30% increase in one year 30% above the average. Households bought $1.6 trillion in Q3 of 2025, for example. (Foreigners bought a further $650 and $700 billion in Q3 and Q4, respectively.) American capital markets are ridiculously deep.
  - coliveira 5mo ago
    > capital markets are ridiculously deep. American market valuation is more than twice the entire US GDP. So ridiculous is a good description of what's going on.
    - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
      > American market valuation is more than twice the entire US GDP Stock versus flow.
      - raincole 5mo ago
        Everyone knows one is stock and the other is flow. It doesn't mean that we can't measuring the ratio between them. Actually, measuring ratios between "stock" and "flow" values is one of the favorite things analysts and economists do! (e.g., rent vs house price, P/E, fixed cost vs marginal cost...) There is even a name for marketcap/GDP, Buffett Indicator. And historically the current value is very high. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffett_indicator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffett_indicator

idiotsecant 5mo ago

A third of all spending is not fundamentally a stretch?

JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
> A third of all spending is not fundamentally a stretch? Where did you get spending? That's net buying of stocks by non-financial Americans. It's the new money that has, on average, gone into the U.S. stock market from that section of investors every year. A third of it going into these new issuances doesn't need to break anything.
- djeastm 5mo ago
  Dumb question here, but would it necessarily mean the other stocks they might've bought (i.e. the rest of the market) will not get the cash infusion and will thus likely drop in valuation?
  - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
    > would it necessarily mean the other stocks they might've bought (i.e. the rest of the market) will not get the cash infusion and will thus likely drop in valuation? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Almost certainly, to some degree. But that doesn’t mean anything has to drop. Just not rise, or not rise as much as it would have. Or potentially some other company that would have gone public or sold shares doesn’t do it now.
- themafia 5mo ago
  > A third of it going into these new issuances doesn't need to break anything. Other than it not going somewhere more productive. Are you willing to just bury 1/3 of your income in the back yard?

soared 5mo ago

A 30% increase in one year, across only 3 companies, seems like a of a stretch. Especially given current economic/etc climates.

JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
> 30% increase in one year 30% above the average. Households bought $1.6 trillion in Q3 of 2025, for example. (Foreigners bought a further $650 and $700 billion in Q3 and Q4, respectively.) American capital markets are ridiculously deep.
- coliveira 5mo ago
  > capital markets are ridiculously deep. American market valuation is more than twice the entire US GDP. So ridiculous is a good description of what's going on.
  - JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
    > American market valuation is more than twice the entire US GDP Stock versus flow.
    - raincole 5mo ago
      Everyone knows one is stock and the other is flow. It doesn't mean that we can't measuring the ratio between them. Actually, measuring ratios between "stock" and "flow" values is one of the favorite things analysts and economists do! (e.g., rent vs house price, P/E, fixed cost vs marginal cost...) There is even a name for marketcap/GDP, Buffett Indicator. And historically the current value is very high. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffett_indicator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffett_indicator