This White House of this term is home to a stock market god.

According to the latest disclosed financial documents, Trump completed 3,642 U.S. stock trades in the first quarter of this year, averaging about 58 trades per trading day. This frequency has far exceeded that of most professional fund managers.

If it were just frequent trading, that alone wouldn't attract market attention.

What truly sparked Wall Street discussions is another set of increasingly hard-to-ignore data: over the past year, publicly listed companies that Trump has openly praised are showing a growing overlap with his holdings, government industrial policies, and federal funding flows.

Perhaps most impressive was last year when Trump turned the White House South Lawn into a Tesla product launch event. In front of the media, he sat in a Model S, calling Tesla a "great product," and said the Cybertruck has "the coolest design."

Subsequently, a series of companies including Dell, Intel, Micron, Nvidia, IBM, Apple, Thermo Fisher, and others were gradually added to his public praise list.

Some companies experienced significant stock movements after being named; some had already been positioned in Trump’s accounts before being praised; others received government contracts, subsidies, export licenses, or other policy support simultaneously.

When these events occur individually, they might just be coincidences. But as more coincidences point toward the same set of companies, we can't help but ask: Is Trump supporting American manufacturing and tech industries, or is he shaping a "presidential concept stock" list of his own?

And if such a pattern truly exists, the market’s most pressing question is: who will be the next to be named by the White House?

Common traits of the companies being called out

Starting from the performance on March 2025, when the White House South Lawn was turned into a Tesla showroom, to May 2026, nine listed companies have been publicly named or endorsed by Trump, with the frequency sharply increasing in 2026, most notably Dell and Intel.

On February 10, this year, Trump’s account built a position of $1 million to $5 million; on May 8, he publicly urged "go buy a Dell, they’re great" at the White House, and that day, Dell’s stock surged about 14% intraday. Before that, the Dell family had already committed to investing $6.25 billion into "Trump accounts."

Intel is another typical example. In August 2025, the Trump administration converted an $8.9 billion subsidy owed to Intel under the Chips and Science Act into equity, acquiring about 9.9% at $20.47 per share, making the U.S. government Intel’s largest shareholder, and the community called it a "U.S. state-owned enterprise." Six months later, in early March 2026, his personal account also appeared in Intel. Converting subsidies into equity, government backing, personal holdings, and public endorsements all became positive signals for Intel.

Another iconic moment was Palantir (PLTR). On April 10, he endorsed it on Truth Social, adding the stock code to its name, calling it "already proven to have strong combat capabilities and equipment," making him the first sitting president to do so.

If we expand the scope from Trump himself’s holdings to the listed companies he has publicly praised, the number far exceeds the well-known tech giants. Based on public speeches, White House events, and Truth Social posts, Trump has explicitly praised at least nine listed companies over the past year, causing short-term stock price increases, including Intel, Dell, Micron, Palantir, IBM, Apple, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Tesla, and Nvidia.

Editor’s note: We’ve summarized some common traits among them:

First and most obvious, they are almost all framed around narratives of "AI new technology," "America’s leading manufacturing," and "reshoring of production."

Industrially, they are highly concentrated in the AI computing power and semiconductor chain. Intel, Micron, Nvidia, AMD are chips; Dell is hardware for computing power; IBM is quantum; Palantir is AI software.

Second, each praised company has a government directly able to influence its interests. For example, Intel has a 9.9% government stake; Palantir is a federal contractor; IBM and Intel receive funding from the CHIPS Act; Nvidia and AMD benefit from eased export restrictions to China; Dell received a $9.7 billion Pentagon contract on May 27 after being praised. Apple was praised for its commitment to US investment and manufacturing iPhone glass in Kentucky; Intel and Micron are domestic wafer fabs; Dell makes AI servers assembled in the U.S.; IBM’s quantum factory is in Albany; Tesla, on the day it was praised, Musk pledged to double U.S. production. Trump rarely praises purely overseas capacity; he praises actions like "moving production lines back to the U.S."

To some extent, the narratives of these companies are packaged and elevated into "national security" and "competition with China." Chips are a choke point; quantum is linked to cybersecurity. Of course, being named often requires CEOs to first signal loyalty.

Since Trump took office last year, he has hosted tech giants for dinners, asking them point-blank about their investments in the U.S.

All positive signals start with "getting the relationship right." These CEOs generally show goodwill or have personal ties to Trump.

Jensen Huang has traveled with him and publicly thanked him; the Dell family donated $6.25 billion to "Trump accounts"; Oracle’s Larry Ellison has been a supporter for years, deeply involved in Stargate and TikTok deals; Musk was an ally during the praise period; Arvind Krishna was directly named in the White House.

Although the official line is that the president’s assets are held in trusts managed by his children, with third-party accounts operated independently, and Trump himself not involved in specific trades, we can observe that Trump’s endorsements often overlap in timing with his own holdings and trades.

For example, Palantir was heavily bought in March, then a few weeks later Trump publicly praised it on Truth Social; Dell was bought between $1 million and $5 million on February 10 and publicly endorsed it in May; Apple and Thermo Fisher were bought and praised on nearly the same day.

If these patterns are correct, predicting Trump’s next endorsement becomes straightforward.

Who might be the next to be called out?

The most likely group includes companies already involved with the government: MP Materials (MP), Lithium Americas (LAC), IonQ (IONQ), Rigetti (RGTI), D-Wave (QBTS), and others.

MP Materials is one of the most critical U.S. rare earth magnet suppliers, mainly mining and separating rare earths for permanent magnets used in fighter jets, electric vehicles, and missile systems.

In July 2025, the U.S. Department of Defense gained about 15% equity through stock arrangements, transforming it from a regular listed company into a "quasi-strategic asset." Notably, this happened before Intel’s government stake.

Interestingly, compared to Intel’s frequent mentions, MP remains relatively low-profile and has not been a focus of political narratives. This "already involved but not yet discussed" status itself suggests a lag in pricing.

Lithium Americas is a typical lithium resource developer, with its core asset being the Thacker Pass lithium mine in Nevada, one of North America’s largest known lithium resources. Lithium’s strategic importance is obvious: essential for EVs, batteries, military energy systems.

The U.S. Department of Energy holds about 5% equity through warrants and project structures, with about 5% economic interest in Thacker Pass. The project is also linked with General Motors (GM), forming a "government + industry + listed company" tripartite structure.

More critically, the DOE explicitly classifies Thacker Pass as a "national security-level strategic lithium asset."

Additionally, according to the Wall Street Journal, several companies including IonQ, Rigetti, and D-Wave are discussing support through "government equity or quasi-equity arrangements" with at least $10 million in grants. Quantum computing firms like QUBT and Atom Computing are also under discussion within similar frameworks.

Quantum computing remains in early stages, but its uniqueness lies in its intersection with national security and fundamental research.

Longer-term, the U.S. government has already launched a roughly $2 billion quantum technology support plan, with IBM receiving about $1 billion, GlobalFoundries (GFS) about $375 million, and the rest allocated to labs and companies.

IBM has already been fully priced in the market, and the next step naturally involves more "pure" quantum targets. Notably, the market has already pre-priced this: in the Kalshi market betting on "which companies will the government invest in this year," Rigetti and D-Wave have over 80% probability.

GlobalFoundries (GFS) is worth highlighting. It received the $375 million quantum grant, is a domestic wafer fab, and has both chip manufacturing and local production lines—making it a prime candidate to be mentioned in a "Made in America" chip initiative.

Beyond companies already involved, some structurally aligned firms with deep government ties but not yet holding explicit equity can also be considered.

However, these are more likely to be named through contracts, exports, or ecosystems, rather than direct endorsements.

Oracle (ORCL) might be the best positioned, given Ellison’s personal relationships, Stargate, TikTok deals, and his existing holdings—only awaiting a formal endorsement. Broadcom (AVGO), a key supplier for AI chips and data centers, also already holds positions.

Additionally, some companies driven by CEO personal relationships deserve attention. US Steel (X), for example, in the Nippon Steel acquisition, the government holds a "golden share" beyond ordinary equity, and the "protect American steel" narrative can be revived at any time. Apple, though previously called out, has a $650 billion US investment pledge that can be repeatedly leveraged. Tesla’s prospects depend on the relationship repair with Musk, making it the most volatile in this list.

It’s important to note that the above is a pattern deduction based on publicly disclosed industrial policies and shareholding clues, not a certainty or investment advice. These targets carry high political premiums, which are always a double-edged sword: they can push stock prices up after a post, but also suppress valuations when sentiment shifts.

After all, relying solely on the "White House stock god" endorsement makes the stock price’s upward momentum quite fragile.