As we all know, U.S. stocks are long and bears are short, as long as they are not in too high a position, it is difficult to lose money for a long time, and U.S. stocks represent the most competitive companies in the world, with pricing power and can make money from all over the world, making the profit growth of U.S. stocks far exceed the level of domestic economic growth in the United States. At this juncture, as the U.S. stock market continues to prosper, outperforming most of the world's **, believing in the national fortune, "fixed investment in the Nasdaq" has become a trend. The U.S. stock market is relatively inclusive, welcoming global investors and global companies to raise funds, and theoretically the whole world can participate in this wealth-making machine. The top 10 in the world's market capitalization are basically American companies, giants like Microsoft and Apple, with $3 trillion, which is comparable to the total market value of many countries. U.S. stocks, with a total market value of more than 60 trillion yuan, rose 30% in a year, which can create an increase in wealth of 18 trillion US dollars, close to the GDP of one China. Overseas investors are already very happy to go to the US stock market to earn better returns than the home market, but from a larger perspective, the US stock market has created tens of trillions of dollars of wealth in a year, Chinese, Japanese and Europeans, how much can they participate? Most people are subject to time differences, foreign exchange, and asset structure, and it is impossible for them to easily buy U.S. stocks, let alone benefit from their entire net worth. Perhaps we should see more clearly, who is the biggest beneficiary of the prosperity of tens of trillions of wealth and US stocks? 1. U.S. stocks are all state-owned enterprisesIn A-shares, the first vote often depends on the shareholder structure, one to see the proportion of major shareholders and whether the interests are consistent. Second, looking at the changes, are there any expert institutions to add or decrease positions. Third, look at the flow of funds, whether the number is more or less, the more scattered the more difficult it is to rise. In the investment framework of U.S. stocks, it is rare to hear an emphasis on analyzing the structure of shareholders. But what is interesting when you look it up is that the shareholder structure of most of the large US companies is very similar. Apple, Microsoft, Google, the first few major shareholders of the big giants are the same, and then look at other waist companies, in the 1000-10000 billion market value of the company, the major shareholders are still these few companies. 
The total holdings of the top U.S. stocks** and the common ** are basically 20%+, while most of the founders, plus executives, have more than 20% of the shares. At the end of 2022, the total asset size of U.S. stocks was 22 trillion (in addition to ETFs**), while the total market value of U.S. stocks that year was 52 trillion (U.S. stocks** led to a shrinkage in 2022), accounting for 40%. Excluding the holding of bonds and other products, the total market value of U.S. stocks excluding ADR, etc., in fact, the common ** basically accounts for about 20%+ of the equity of U.S. companies, which is more reliable. 
If we default to the fact that the largest shareholder is the boss of the company, then the boss of most U.S. stock companies is the common **. This is strange because ** companies like BlackRock, Vanguard, Schwab, and State Street are not directly proportional to their sphere of influence. This is basically not the case in China, let's compare the shareholder structure of domestic head companies: among the companies with large market capitalization, the shareholder structure of state-owned enterprises is similar, and they are all SASAC or ** investment, which accounts for more than 50%. There are ** institutions but very few, considering the positioning of state-owned enterprises, this structure is impossible to change. Therefore, it is not possible to have a structure like that of U.S. stocks. 
Secondly, if we look at private enterprises, the shareholder structure changes more freely, and among the leading companies: Tencent, Pinduoduo, Alibaba, BYD, CATL, NetEase, Meituan, Nongfu Spring, its structure is not like that of U.S. stocks. 
The major shareholders are either some PE institutions that invested in the early stage (South Africa**, SoftBank) or the founding families (BYD, CATL), and none of the largest shareholders of a company are co-shareholders**. Of course, they also have common ** in their shareholder structure, but the embarrassing thing is that BlackRock and Pioneer have the highest proportion of Chinese private companies, or foreigners, China's common**, what E Fund, its shareholding ranking does not reach the top ten to be disclosed. China's head private enterprises, the biggest beneficiary of the rise is either a small number of major shareholders, then foreigners who invest in the start-up period, and then overseas commons, and then the turn to get the local **, even if their own company makes money and does not benefit others first, how to play? Second, the advantages of the common ** ecologyOf course, this is not to encourage everyone to buy**, let these ** become bigger can make A-shares rise like U.S. stocks. China's public offering is currently controversial, bringing only pain and losses to investors, because they have only learned a little bit from the United States. The common ecology of U.S. stocks, first see its advantages. With 20%+ joint shareholdings, they are often able to act together as a whole, producing two significant advantages. One is to manage the development of the company, not to play with the left hand and the right hand. You may have noticed that among the trillion-dollar giants of U.S. stocks, basically each company focuses on different areas. And China's giants are competing for every track, high-tech, low-tech, basically can't find businesses that do not overlap, why do Chinese companies love involution? The main thing is that after the realization of this shareholding structure, they are both shareholders of Apple and shareholders of Google, if Apple and Google burn money, then both of them will fall in the short term, and the long-term market value will be swapped or unchanged, zero-sum game. Unless it is more conducive to social progress and to expand the market, this kind of left-handed right-handed play is not allowed as a boss. This kind of orientation is to encourage overseas expansion infinitely, and it is necessary to grab the business of foreign ** without shareholding, and the company with ** performance does not buy, and it will fall casually. Tencent and Ali have been fighting each other for a long time, and there is also a shortage of common shareholders, one is from South Africa and the other is from Japan. This kind of holding structure is also more conducive to the restructuring and merger of peer companies to achieve scale effect. The second is to control shareholder returns with joint power, and there are often many companies that undervalue and break a pile of cash in Hong Kong stocks, mainly because the company's cash distribution ratio is small, and it is either used privately or invested in meaningless projects. Several times the PE of the company promised to pay 100% dividends or cancel the repurchase of the annual profit in the future, is there a reason why it will not rise to a reasonable PE? To cure them, the common way is to **unite**, the shareholders' meeting votes against, but tens of thousands of shareholders of a company, 9 percent are too lazy to vote, can not be called, can never govern the management. In the U.S. stocks, cash should be divided, and 100% distribution of profits is the norm, because it is easy for them to unite, but it is too difficult to unite. Try not to let the cash lie on the account, the value of assets will inevitably return, so it is difficult for large companies in the US stock market to break the net, and the dividend repurchase is to exchange fake money for real money, which is also the key to why the valuation of US stocks has risen so much but is not outrageous. However, because of this, overcorrection and excessive dividend repurchases have finally led to dozens of times or even negative PBs of many U.S. stock giants. It can also be seen here that the common shareholding is actually similar to the shareholding structure of China's state-owned enterprises. Of course, there are differences in this, state-owned enterprises have local competition factors, secondly, state-owned enterprises serve the economic goal greater than profit maximization, many of the United States common ** is also a listed company, subject to supervision, there are requirements for their own shareholders to make profits. Therefore, some state-owned enterprises do not play cards according to routines. Combining these two points, the level of the holding scale is up, which is helpful for the EPS and dividend ratio of listed companies, and these two points are the key to the health of the stock price. The scale of the A-share companies does not support them to support these two points. Third, efforts are still needed in the long termThe joint holding of so many U.S. stocks is bound to cause some problems, such as this regulation and corruption issue. Such a large piece of fat flowed through it, and the oil and water were going to fill the Great Lakes. China's development is stuck at this step. Compared with BlackRock, the largest common ** company in the United States, with a management scale of $10 trillion in Q3 2023, 2023 is a big bull year, with revenue of $17.8 billion and a profit of 56900 million. 
And China's largest ** E Fund, with a scale of 157 trillion yuan, revenue of 13.9 billion, profit of 383.7 billion. 2022 is the Year of the Bear. BlackRock take rate 017%, compared to E Fund 088%。There are such harsh commissions in the years when they are not profitable, and that's the problem. Regarding the rates of the two, it has also been introduced before on Knowledge Planet. 
We can also often hear the problem of China's ** collusion, for example, helping listed companies to speculate on stock prices and let executives, and then secretly take commissions, anyway, the loss is not a commission, so that you can earn more, one cut A share leeks, and the other cut ** leeks. The problem is that China's ** holders are too small and scattered, and individuals are as powerless in the face of ** as in the face of shareholder voting in listed companies. Secondly, individual investors' judgment of the market often follows the high and low, the holding period is unstable, and it is easy to be hot-headed, easier to accept guidance and blindness. But 84% of BlackRock's asset mix is made up of institutional investors. 
The largest co-holder of U.S. stocks is U.S. stocks, including U.S. pension plans, accounting for 469%, the largest buyer can't afford to mess with, and it is difficult to steal profits or charge high commissions.
The second is to shift to passive investment and reduce rent-seeking behaviors caused by active investment. The fund allocation management behavior has been transferred to the index compilation business, and in addition to the common index department, there are also professional companies, such as NASDAQ, S&P, MSCI, etc., which are listed and regulated. The index compilation of A-shares and Hong Kong stocks is not a public company, so there is no incentive to do a good job.
As a result, the proportion of Americans' salaries is smaller than that in China. It is the norm to get a salary of 6-70,000 yuan for 100,000 US dollars, and people with lower salaries avoid paying pension plans in order to survive, and this is an advantage at the same time, but also its disadvantages, the poorer the poorer.
The ecology of the common ** accounts for the majority of the economy does not happen overnight. If the long-term rate goes down, even if the scale rises, the industry is destined to have a low growth rate. The domestic blending ecology and the expansion of the scale at a high level are actually in order to grab the pain brought by high growth, they think, the rate has fallen for a long time, and it is a long process to absorb users. But I didn't think that if I forcibly went up, it would fall. Therefore, the correct way is to first form a large credible investment pool similar to the American pension plan, and then it will buy **, even if the institution manages the scale of large, it does not have bargaining power in front of **, and can honestly accept low growth growth. IV. ConclusionIn the end, it became clear that the first beneficiary under the structure of the U.S. stock market is still all Americans, and its benefit link is very clear. But A-shares**, the beneficiaries are not necessarily all the people. As long as every American participates in the pension plan, he or she holds more or less equity in all the companies in the US stocks, which is why the US stock market is a reservoir of wealth. It can be said that the distribution system of listed core enterprises in the United States is similar to the distribution model of domestic state-owned enterprises, which is a kind of ownership by the whole people, unless no taxes are paid and pensions are not paid. This mechanism fully encourages globalization, avoids ineffective involution, and increases the likelihood of ***, but the disadvantage is that the lower salary ratio is lower, and it is difficult for the poor to share the wealth of this plan. At present, the entire domestic ** ecology must also be reshuffled, and the public offering ** business model for individual investors is indeed problematic, such ** is not completely wrong, at least many people will no longer look at**advocate to invest on their own**. However, the entire industry should not be denied because of this, and it should be developed with reference to the common advantages of the US stocks, which is a very advanced national ownership system and the basis for why the United States is strong.