NVDA
The $1 trillion flex
Raymond James analyst Simon Leopold basically looked at Nvidia’s latest numbers and said, “Yeah, this thing might still be underhyped.” He raised his price target 46% to $515 from $352 after Wednesday’s earnings and floated the idea that Nvidia could hit $1 trillion in annual sales by fiscal 2029.
That’s not a typo. It’s the kind of forecast that sounds like it was cooked up in a sci-fi writers’ room, except the math starts with Nvidia already posting $96.2 billion in quarterly revenue.
Why the Street might still be behind
Leopold’s case is simple: demand is apparently not the bottleneck. Nvidia says customers want more compute than it can currently supply, which means the company’s growth is being capped more by capacity than by enthusiasm.
A few moving pieces make the bull case less wild than it sounds:
- Nvidia expects revenue to grow roughly 70% in fiscal 2028.
- That could put annual sales around $690 billion to $700 billion.
- From there, reaching $1 trillion in fiscal 2029 would require another big leg up, roughly 43% to 45% growth.
The real question: can supply keep up?
This is where the story gets interesting. Nvidia is basically saying, “We could sell more — if we could make more.” The company expects capacity and manufacturing yields to improve, and its projections already reflect what it thinks it can ship with confidence.
There’s also a product mix angle. Nvidia’s revenue opportunity per gigawatt rises from about $25 billion with Blackwell to $40 billion with Vera Rubin, which means the company may not need a miracle in physical capacity to keep stacking revenue.
Big picture
The stock-market version of this story is that Nvidia is still the main character in the AI boom, and the sequel might be even bigger than the first movie. But the plot twist is the same one that’s been hanging over the stock for a while: if supply, competition, or AI spending cools off, the math gets a lot less glamorous, fast. Until then, bulls are basically staring at the ceiling and asking, “What if it’s actually higher?”