"Mag7 should actually be called 'Mag700'—this perspective is pretty interesting. The key point is that the current U.S. stock market's 'lack of breadth' (mainly driven by a few major stocks like Mag 7) isn't something to overly worry about, for two reasons: 1. Historical norm: Over the past 100 years (based on Bessembinder's research, covering approximately 1926–2025 and nearly 30,000 U.S. stocks), only about 4% (specifically around 3.7%, approximately 1,082 companies) of stocks created all net wealth (excess wealth relative to Treasury bonds/T-bills, about $91 trillion). Roughly half or more of companies had lifetime returns below Treasury bonds, with a median return that was negative. The extreme skewness and concentration of market returns have always existed—this is not a new phenomenon. 2. Mag 7 are not 'ordinary large companies.' These giants are more like 'small nations' or 'mini indices.' They have absorbed hundreds of companies through massive acquisitions: 1) Google has acquired about 270 companies, Microsoft around 250–270, Amazon about 105, Apple around 100, Meta approximately 95, etc.; 2) Some of these acquisitions include 'monster-level' businesses: If Google were to spin off YouTube, it could directly become one of the top 20 companies in the S&P 500. So, we should think of 'Mag 7' as 'Mag 700.' What appears to be a market with 'poor breadth' is actually driven by hundreds of underlying businesses. From a personal perspective: 1) Market returns have always been contributed by a very small number of super winners, while most stocks are mediocre in the long term or even underperform cash. This is the mathematical result of a 'positively skewed' distribution, not a cyclical anomaly. 2) Ultra-large tech companies are indeed super acquisition machines, with extremely diverse business spans (search + ads + cloud + video + hardware + e-commerce + social + AI, etc.). A single ticker actually bundles numerous businesses that were once independent or could still be independent. Simply equating them to 'a traditional company' underestimates their internal diversity. Tech giants are already multi-business entities internally; externally, they also have massive supply chains, partners, and customer ecosystems (Nvidia's downstream, Apple's suppliers, Google's advertisers, Amazon's third-party sellers, etc.). The large tech ecosystem, including upstream supply chains, forms an enormous business network that impacts countless companies. The effective breadth is much wider than the surface-level ticker count! This post is sponsored by @bitget_zh, 'Bitget Buy U.S. Stocks: Instant Entry, Smooth Trading'