The US Stock Market plummets, the centennial peak has reached? Is the AI foam about to burst? How to translate Today, SK Hynix's financial report fell short of expectations, and Asian technology stocks suffered another fierce sell-off, causing a bloody market. Looking back at this round of adjustments: The Nasdaq has fallen by about 8% -10% from its high point; The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index has fallen about 25% from its June high; The South Korean KOSPI index plummeted 10.84% in a single day, marking a 35.81% pullback from its historical high. But just as chip stocks were flowing like a river of blood, Apple regained the top spot in global market value, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average hit a new high against the trend. It seems that funds have not completely left the US stock market, but have withdrawn from crowded AI hardware trading and shifted towards assets with more stable cash flow and less valuation pressure. The market also split into two factions: one side shouted "AI foam finally broke", the other side insisted "this is just a healthy clearing, AI main line has never changed". So, the real problem is: Is the US stock market facing a "century long peak" or is it still climbing the "wall of concern" of the bull market? Is the AI foam about to burst completely, or is it just going through periodic valuation repricing? ⬇️ Next, please watch the heated debate between the long and short sides ⬇️ Look at many aspects: the AI main line is intact, this is not the foam burst First argument: Cathie Wood @ CathieDWood | Founder of ARK Invest | XHunt Rank: 170 Cathie Wood believes that the market is still climbing a typical 'wall of concern'. The true peak of a bull market often does not occur when everyone is full of doubts, but rather arises from extreme optimism - when investors generally believe that 'the sky is the limit', risks may truly spiral out of control. The market is now filled with controversy, panic, and skepticism, and it doesn't seem like a typical ultimate top. ⭐ Core judgment: This may still be a normal adjustment in a bull market. The long-term disruptive innovation logic has not changed, and the true peak usually occurs when consensus is extremely consistent. Second Debate: RamenPanda @ IamRamenPanda | XHunt Rank: 3994 RamenPanda has shifted its focus from AI hardware to software and application layers. The market is concerned that a large number of data centers and computing infrastructure will result in overcapacity, but these infrastructures still need to achieve returns through software, platforms, and commercial applications. The Internet era has also experienced excessive infrastructure construction. The early brightest was Cisco, but the real long-term winners were the subsequent rise of Google, Microsoft, and Amazon. The AI era may also replicate a similar path: hardware investment first overheats, and then value gradually shifts to the software and application layers. ⭐ Core judgment: Excess infrastructure may be a necessary stage of technological revolution. Currently, it seems more like a transition from hardware construction to application monetization, rather than the end of the AI era. Three Debates: Investing in TALK Jun @ TJ-Research | XHunt Ranking: 9918 After the release of SK Hynix's financial report, the stock price opened about 8% lower at one point, and then quickly rebounded. Investment TALK believes that this is exactly the opposite of the "sell the news" trend after Micron's previous financial report, and may be a short-term bottoming out signal. If the bad news has been fully priced by the market, even if the financial report falls short of expectations, new sales may begin to decline. More importantly, we have not yet seen a systematic weakening of AI demand guidance. ⭐ Core judgment: Short term emotions have been concentrated and released, but the demand for AI has not yet been falsified. What the market needs is data confirmation, not continued panic. Four Debates: Nico Investment @ tychozzz | XHunt Ranking: 13869 Nico believes that the biggest lesson of this round of sharp decline is that even if the fundamentals are good and the price to earnings ratio is low, at a high level, once the market decides to compress the valuation, the stock price will still fall sharply. The memory and storage module is the most typical example. But 'stock price killing valuation' does not mean 'AI industry logic being falsified'. At present, the Nasdaq's forward price to earnings ratio is close to the level of the end of March this year. Compared to cutting meat in panic, it is more important to control leverage, set profit margins in advance, and hold indices and high-quality companies that can truly deliver performance. ⭐ Core judgment: Emotions can quickly suppress low valuations, but ultimately it is performance that determines stock prices. The AI mainline has not changed, and it may only be a matter of time before high-quality assets return to their previous highs. Five Debates: Stock Market Sage @ hanking66 | XHunt Ranking: 44611 The viewpoint of the American stock market expert is more direct: do not sell stocks in the most panicked moments. In his view, this round of decline has shown the emotional characteristics of the "last drop" - despair, suffocation, and breaking through defenses, with investors interpreting any news with the most pessimistic interpretation. A large number of stocks experienced fierce selling before the release of financial reports, which also means that pessimistic expectations may have been pre priced. ⭐ Core judgment: Buy the dip. Enduring the most extreme emotional stage, opportunities may belong to those who still have the ability to take over. Look at the short side: AI credit cracks have appeared, and the foam is clearing First Debate: ZeroHedge @ zerohedge | Renowned Macro Analysis Media | XHunt Ranking: 200 ZeroHedge believes that the market is re entering the pricing stage of 'circular financing is actually very bad'. Currently, multiple danger signals have emerged: NASDAQ 100 is approaching a 10% technical adjustment; Semiconductor and momentum factor trading have been severely impacted; The credit cracks of AI related enterprises are beginning to emerge; The deal between Nvidia and OpenAI has once again raised concerns about revolving financing; Low cost models and open-source tools in China continue to lower profit expectations. If AI giants invest in each other, purchase from each other, and contribute revenue to each other, it will be difficult for the market to determine how much of it comes from real terminal demand and how much is just capital circulating within the industry chain. ⭐ Core judgment: The credit and financing expansion of AI industry is hitting the wall, and the foam may enter the clearing stage earlier than most investors expected. Second Debate: Phyrex @ PhyrexNi | XHunt Ranking: 784 Phyrex is more concerned about the leverage risk behind the US stock market. At present, the scale of US investors borrowing to buy stocks is about $1.53 trillion, and the net credit balance of securities firms has dropped to about negative $1.061 trillion; Margin debt increased by approximately $86 billion in a single month and has been rising for three consecutive months. This means that not only are US stocks overvalued, but their dependence on financing funds is also increasing. Once the incremental funds slow down, the mechanical buying that drove the rise in the past may transform into mechanical selling. This risk will also be transmitted to Crypto. When deleveraging across markets, BTC is more likely to be sold as a high beta risk asset first, rather than immediately rising independently as "digital gold". However, short positions in the US stock market are also at a high level, with Russell 3000 having a short ratio of nearly 6% and S&P 500 at around 3.5%, so there is also a possibility of a short selling rebound in the market. ⭐ Core judgment: The real risk may not necessarily be the falsification of AI technology, but rather the simultaneous occurrence of overvaluation, high leverage, and slowing capital inflows. Once deleveraging is initiated, both the US stock market and BTC may experience mechanical selling. Three Debates: Peter Schiff @ PeterSchiff | Economist and Founder of SchiffGold | XHunt Ranking: 1486 Peter Schiff believes that AI itself is a real technology, but AI related stocks have formed a serious foam. China's low-cost models, open-source technologies, and intensified industry competition will continue to lower the profit margins and moat expectations of American AI companies. If huge capital expenditures cannot be converted into matching cash flows, more valuation "air" still needs to be squeezed out. ⭐ Core judgment: AI technology is real, but AI stock foam is also real. The foam may have burst, and the next step is to continue clearing. Four Debates: CryptoPainter @ CryptoPainter | XHunt Ranking: 2207 CryptoPainter sees the sharp decline in the South Korean stock market as a stress test for the AI infrastructure narrative. He does not deny the need for AI computing power and data centers, but is wary of the circular investment, excessive financing, and high leverage that surround this narrative. Therefore, this round of adjustment may not replicate the complete collapse of the industry in the year 2000, but may repeat the intense deleveraging in the Korean market: the technological direction is still established, but the prices of related assets have significantly retreated due to overly fragile valuations and financing structures. For Crypto, if BTC breaks down again, one of the most likely external triggers is still the continued decline of the US stock market. ⭐ Core judgment: The authenticity of AI technology does not necessarily mean that the prices of related assets are reasonable. Compared to industry zeroing, a more realistic risk is financing and leverage liquidation, which will be transmitted to BTC through the US stock market. Five Debates: Helen @ penghullen | XHunt Ranking: 40426 Hellen compares today's AI boom with the British railway foam and the Internet foam. Both railways and the Internet have truly changed the world, but capital mania still leads to excessive infrastructure construction. The larger the investment and operation of some projects, the more severe the losses. This is similar to the dilemma faced by some large model enterprises: the more users there are, the higher the computational and reasoning costs, but the revenue may not necessarily cover the investment. The Internet did not disappear because of the bursting of the foam, but the Nasdaq still fell for 31 consecutive months, retreating about 78% from its peak. ⭐ Core judgment: great technology and huge foam can coexist. AI may change the world, but the prices of related assets may still deviate significantly from their true value and demand. Summary of viewpoints from both parties According to multiple opinions The current sharp decline is mainly due to the collapse of crowded trading and emotional killing of valuations, and there is no data to prove that AI demand has systematically collapsed. New competitors and low-cost models may not necessarily eliminate American tech giants, but may instead lower the threshold for AI usage and expand the application market. The AI mainline is not over yet, and the market may continue to move forward in the 'wall of concerns'. The air side believes that The moat of AI companies is not as deep as the market imagines. Overvaluation, high capital expenditures, leverage, and revolving financing collectively supported the past rise. Once the income and cash flow cannot match the investment, the entire valuation system will be re priced. The technological revolution will not disappear, but the investment foam may burst ahead of schedule. Finally What technology stocks in the US are experiencing is not a complete rejection of the long-term logic of AI, but rather the market starting to recalculate an account: If the return on capital expenditure is insufficient, the tide of revolving financing recedes, and China's low-cost model continues to suppress prices, how much of the moat of American technology leaders is left? The adjustment of the Nasdaq, the halving of storage stocks, and the sharp decline of South Korean chip stocks are essentially concentrated releases of this concern. But it may be too early to assert that the 'centenary peak' has been reached. The real watershed is not in the current emotional killing of valuations, but in the coming quarters and even longer: whether AI revenue and free cash flow can match huge capital expenditures, and whether industry chain demand can spread from circular procurement between giants to truly paying end users.