Porter & Co.'s 'Trump's New Silicon Dollar' — The Six Stocks Behind the AI Chokepoint Thesis

The Hook

“The entire logic of the silicon dollar is about cutting China out of the physical inputs to AI. Companies caught on the wrong side of that realignment won’t just underperform, they’ll be crippled.”

That’s the headline thesis from Porter & Co., selling a $199 flat-fee package of two special reports: “The Silicon Dollar Playbook” and “The AI Foundation.” The framing is ambitious: the 52-year petrodollar, the informal arrangement where Saudi Arabia priced oil exclusively in dollars, creating permanent global demand for US currency, is dying. In its place, a “silicon dollar” is emerging, where the choke point for global trade shifts from oil to the physical inputs AI cannot function without: power delivery chips, mining royalties, natural gas, oil royalties, water infrastructure, and building materials.

Porter Stansberry has been one of the most influential voices in financial publishing for over two decades. His flagship recommendation of Franco-Nevada (FNV), a gold royalty company, has been a genuine compounder, held and recommended for 20 years. When he presents a big-picture thesis, it’s worth taking seriously.

The Trump administration, the pitch argues, is “mobilizing” for this transition, reopening coal plants, restarting Three Mile Island, green-lighting offshore drilling, and taking direct equity stakes in mining companies. The theory is coherent and, in parts, genuinely insightful. But the “silicon dollar” is a marketing construct, not actual monetary policy. And the five “chokepoint” stocks presented as sure-fire beneficiaries? Let’s walk through each one.

The Big Claim

The promo promises that five specific companies sit at “choke points” where “huge waves of capital have no choice but to flow through”, companies “with the kind of competitive positions that come along once in a lifetime.” There’s a sixth bonus pick as well. The implicit promise is that these stocks will compound like Franco-Nevada has for the past two decades. The $199 flat fee gets you the names, tickers, and analysis. No ongoing subscription required, pay once, get the picks, and ride the silicon dollar wave.

The Mechanism

Chokepoint 1: Vicor (VICR), AI Power Delivery

Vicor makes the power delivery system that sits inside every AI server rack, the specialized component that converts raw electricity into the ultra-high current, low-voltage power that NVIDIA’s GPUs run on. The company has patented its architecture, won ITC infringement cases, and seen royalty revenues grow meaningfully. Revenue is forecast to surge 34% this year, with a backlog over $300 million, up 70% in a single quarter. The US government imposed 100% tariffs on Chinese competitors, effectively walling off the domestic market for Vicor.

At the tease price of roughly $333, Vicor traded at about 80X trailing earnings and roughly 40X 2027 estimated earnings, already pricing in flawless execution. Q2 2026 results ($143 million revenue, roughly $50 million net income) beat expectations. But the stock has fallen sharply from the mid-$270s to around $214, now down about 36% from the tease price. At roughly 70X 2027 estimates, it remains extraordinarily expensive. The company is expanding fab capacity in Massachusetts and may license production to other manufacturers, both costly endeavors with uncertain returns.

Chokepoint 2: Versamet Royalties (VMET), The Next Franco-Nevada

A four-year-old company running the mining royalty model: you don’t want to own the mine, you want a legal right to a percentage of everything that comes out of the ground, forever. Revenue is projected to grow from $12 million in 2024 to nearly $100 million in 2025 to roughly $300 million by 2028. “Potentially delivering 5-8X returns in the next four years alone.”

Versamet is growing fast, but it’s also the most gold-price-levered large royalty company. About 79% of its projected 2028 gold equivalent ounces come directly from gold production. Gold prices have softened in recent months, and VMET shares reflect it, currently around $10.25, down about 23% from the $13.28 tease price. The growth story is real, but so is the risk: Versamet is paying stiff prices for new deals and relying more on debt financing than larger peers like Franco-Nevada or Royal Gold. It’s a levered bet on gold dressed up as an “AI chokepoint play.”

Chokepoint 3: EQT Corp (EQT), “Gods of Gas”

America’s dominant natural gas producer, producing about 6% of all US natural gas at the lowest cost. “Natural gas is the fuel the AI revolution actually runs on, not solar, not nuclear, not yet.” EQT generated “$1 billion in free cash flow in a single month.”

That $1 billion month was January 2026, when an extreme cold snap across the eastern US let EQT sell unhedged production at extraordinary prices, more than double their usual monthly free cash flow. It was a one-off, not an AI-driven phenomenon. At the tease price of roughly $55, EQT traded at about 12X forward earnings, reasonable, not cheap. The stock has drifted to around $52, roughly 5% below the tease. “Gods of Gas” has been a recurring recommendation for four years. The thesis on natural gas demand from AI data centers is real, but EQT’s infrastructure constraints, limited pipeline capacity from the Marcellus to high-demand markets, haven’t changed meaningfully.

Chokepoint 4: Viper Energy (VNOM), Permian Mineral Royalties

“This company collects passive royalty income from 87,000 mineral acres in the heart of the Permian Basin. It employs no drillers. It operates no rigs. It just owns the mineral rights to the land.” West Texas is “rapidly becoming the premier destination for AI data center construction” because it sits on top of cheap natural gas. “Mailbox money at the choke point of the silicon dollar era.”

Viper is a well-run royalty company and a subsidiary of Diamondback Energy (FANG). It pays a healthy dividend, roughly 5.8% annualized at the tease price, and directs about 90% of cash flow to shareholder returns. But the AI data center angle is thin. Viper’s value is overwhelmingly driven by oil prices, not gas, and certainly not AI. At the tease price of $46, VNOM is now around $41, down about 11%. A recent acquisition (Riverbend) paused the debt-reduction path and caused some investor concern. Viper is a solid energy royalty play, but calling it an “AI chokepoint” stretches the metaphor.

Chokepoint 5: WaterBridge Infrastructure (WBI), Produced Water Management

“The most important company in the Permian Basin that nobody’s ever heard of.” The Permian is “at risk of grinding to a halt” because it’s running out of places to put wastewater. WaterBridge owns the largest produced water pipeline network in America. Market share in the Delaware basin jumped from 5% to 39% after regulators shut down the competition. “50% EBITDA margins.” “Priced like a boring pipeline business.”

WBI is the only stock in this promo that’s actually up, currently around $32, up about 7.6% from the $29.75 tease. It’s a genuine infrastructure business with a regulatory moat and real barriers to entry. The 50% EBITDA margins are legitimate, though at roughly 40X forward earnings and 8-9X EV/EBITDA, it’s not obviously cheap. The water problem in the Permian is genuine and worsening, WaterBridge solves it. This is probably the most underappreciated pick in the group, though calling it an “AI chokepoint” requires some imagination.

Bonus: Amrize (AMRZ), “The AI Foundation”

A company over 100 years old, “hiding in plain sight,” that has become “one of the single most important suppliers to the AI data center build-out.” “Unassailable physical moat.” Trading at “a dramatic discount to its closest peer.” The CEO made “the largest concentrated open market purchase in corporate history.”

Amrize is the North American cement and aggregates business spun out of Holcim in 2025. It’s the largest cement and aggregates company in the US, operating hundreds of local near-monopoly quarries. The “physical moat” part is genuine, you can’t economically transport rocks long distances, so local quarries have natural monopolies. Data centers need enormous amounts of concrete. CEO Jan Jenisch bought roughly $50 million at the IPO and has kept buying, real skin in the game.

But the valuation gap is closing. At the tease price of roughly $54, Amrize traded at about 20X forward earnings versus peers Martin Marietta and Vulcan at roughly 27X. The stock is now around $47, down about 13%. The roofing and building envelope business, which makes up about 25% of revenue, is dragging on results, Q2 2026 reportedly missed on profit, and EBITDA guidance was cut. The thesis is intact: America needs cement for data centers, bridges, roads, and housing. But this is a multi-year story, not a quick trade.

The Real Picks

📊 Market Data (Aug 10, 2026 close): All six tickers verified active via Polygon API. VICR’s decline has been the most dramatic, from a high near $273 down to $221. WBI remains the only positive performer. The average portfolio return of -13.1% compares to an S&P 500 that’s up roughly 4-5% over the same period.

Does the Math Check Out?

The “silicon dollar” is a narrative, not a policy. There is no official “silicon dollar” program. The petrodollar was never a formal treaty, it was an informal military and economic cooperation arrangement that has indeed been weakening. But the idea that AI infrastructure will replace oil as the basis for global dollar demand is speculative. The dollar still dominates oil trade at roughly 80% plus, and diversification into other currencies is driven more by US sanctions policy than by any coordinated replacement.

The “chokepoint” framing is real for some of these companies. Vicor genuinely has patent-protected technology that NVIDIA and other chipmakers need. WaterBridge genuinely controls critical water infrastructure in the Permian. Amrize genuinely has local monopoly quarries. But calling EQT or Viper Energy a “chokepoint” stretches the metaphor, these are commodity producers and royalty companies, not irreplaceable gatekeepers.

The aggregate performance is poor. Five of six stocks are down since the tease. The average return of -13.1% comes in about two months, during which the S&P 500 is up roughly 4-5%. The “silicon dollar” portfolio has underperformed by about 17-18 percentage points. That’s a thesis getting rejected by the market, not one playing out.

Recycled picks are a red flag. EQT has been the “Gods of Gas” for four years. Versamet was teased in April. Amrize was pitched in January. Viper Energy is a regular recommendation. Only Vicor is relatively new. This isn’t a ground-up analysis of AI chokepoints, it’s a repackaging of existing recommendations under a new marketing theme.

The $199 flat fee is the actual business model. The special reports are repackaged from existing subscriber recommendations. If the picks flop, Porter & Co. keeps the $199 with minimal additional cost. If they succeed, those $199 buyers become upgrade candidates for the $1,425-per-year subscription. It’s a smart business model.

What They Got Right

1. The “hard assets” angle on AI is genuinely underappreciated. Most AI investing focuses on chips and software. The physical infrastructure, power management (Vicor), raw materials (Versamet, Viper), energy (EQT), water (WaterBridge), and building materials (Amrize), is where less obvious but equally important bottlenecks exist. This is a useful analytical framework.

2. Vicor’s patent moat is substantiated. The ITC infringement findings and subsequent royalty deals confirm that Vicor’s power delivery architecture is genuinely valuable and difficult to replicate. The 100% tariff on Chinese competitors strengthens the competitive position.

3. The produced water problem in the Permian is genuine and worsening. WaterBridge’s market share jump from 5% to 39% after regulatory action demonstrates a real barrier to entry. More drilling means more wastewater, and WaterBridge is a scaled solution.

4. Amrize’s CEO has significant skin in the game. Jan Jenisch buying $50 million plus at the IPO and continuing to add is the kind of insider signal that matters. He chose to run Amrize rather than stay at Holcim.

5. The royalty business model is genuinely powerful. Both Versamet and Viper benefit from the “mailbox money” structure, no operational risk, no capital costs, just a percentage of production. Franco-Nevada has been a phenomenal compounder. The model works.

6. The $199 entry-level pricing is consumer-friendly. Getting six tickers with detailed analysis for a one-time $199 fee, with no recurring subscription obligation, is better value than most newsletter offers.

What They Got Wrong

1. The “silicon dollar” is a marketing construct, not economics. Framing a portfolio of hard-asset AI plays as a “new monetary order replacing the petrodollar” is creative storytelling. It inflates reasonable investment theses into something they’re not.

2. Performance has been poor. Five of six picks are down, with an average loss of 13.1% in two months while the market rose. The “chokepoint” thesis, however compelling on paper, is not translating into stock performance.

3. The “Gods of Gas” thesis has been flat for four years. EQT has been recommended repeatedly since 2022, and the stock has gone nowhere. Calling a stock a “god” multiple times doesn’t make it perform.

4. The EQT “$1 billion free cash flow” number is misleading. Presenting a one-off January cold-snap windfall as evidence of AI-driven demand overstates the case. EQT generates roughly $400 to $500 million in free cash flow in a normal month, still impressive, but less than half the cited figure.

5. Most picks are recycled from previous promos. Readers paying $199 for “new” analysis are largely getting repackaged existing recommendations. Vicor is the only genuinely new pick. The rest have been in Porter & Co. portfolios for months or years.

6. No exit strategy or risk management is discussed. The promo presents all six stocks as buy-and-hold “chokepoints” without discussing position sizing, stop losses, or scenarios where the thesis breaks. Real investing requires knowing when to sell, not just what to buy.

The Verdict

Vicor (VICR): Interesting but expensive. The power delivery thesis is real and Q2 results confirm the trajectory. But at 70X 2027 estimates, you need everything to go right. Worth watching if it drops further.

Versamet (VMET): A levered gold bet, not an AI play. If you want exposure to gold royalties with high growth, Versamet is one of the best options available. But understand what you’re buying, it’s a bet on gold, not AI.

EQT (EQT): Fine company, wrong narrative. EQT is a well-managed natural gas producer trading at a reasonable multiple. But four years of “Gods of Gas” hasn’t moved the stock. The AI data center demand for gas is real but gradual.

Viper Energy (VNOM): Solid income play, mislabeled. Viper is a good energy royalty company with a roughly 5.8% yield. But the AI connection is tenuous. Buy it for the yield and Permian exposure, not the “silicon dollar.”

WaterBridge (WBI): The surprise winner. Up 7.6% is the best performance in the group. The produced water infrastructure thesis is genuine and underappreciated. Small and somewhat illiquid, but the regulatory moat and growing Permian water problem give it real tailwinds. This one deserves further research.

Amrize (AMRZ): Long-term compounder with near-term headwinds. The cement and aggregates thesis is sound, America needs building materials for data centers, housing, and infrastructure. The CEO’s insider buying is a genuine signal. But the Q2 profit miss and guidance cut mean patience will be required.

For more on how the “chokepoint” thesis gets used in newsletter marketing, see our coverage of AI infrastructure plays in the accelerated AI promo. For context on Porter Stansberry’s approach to these macro-themed pitches, see our profile of Porter & Co.’s publishing strategy.

This is not financial advice. NewsletterVetter has no position in any stock mentioned. All investment decisions involve risk, and past newsletter recommendations should not be relied upon as indicators of future results. Porter & Co.’s advertising claims about “5-8X returns” and the “silicon dollar” framework are marketing constructs and should not be treated as financial projections. Always do your own research before investing.