Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-21225House OversightFinancial Record

Technical discussion of free growth theory and corporate return metrics

The passage is an academic‑style analysis of dividend rates, market‑cap growth, and a proposed "free growth theory." It contains no specific names, transactions, dates, or allegations involving high‑p Distinguishes between reported dividend rate and imputed dividend rate. Defines free growth index as the ratio of annual change in reported return to annual change in marke Suggests corporate bond da

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #011013
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage is an academic‑style analysis of dividend rates, market‑cap growth, and a proposed "free growth theory." It contains no specific names, transactions, dates, or allegations involving high‑p Distinguishes between reported dividend rate and imputed dividend rate. Defines free growth index as the ratio of annual change in reported return to annual change in marke Suggests corporate bond da

Tags

research-leadfinancial-flowfinancial-analysisresearch-methodologycorporate-financehouse-oversighteconomics

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Global Financial Data reports annual rate of return, growth rate in market cap, and “imputed dividend rate” as the difference. Dividend rate itself is reported as something a little different. | made no attempt to get to the bottom of this distinction, just as | made none to allow for editorial bias in the Piketty-Zucman website. I chose the imputed version for logical consistency. This direct information obviates the chain of reasoning from (4.2) to (4.5), and allows me to jump to the latter. “Productivity gain” in (4.5) is simply annual change in reported rate of return. Acceleration is annual change in reported market cap growth rate. (4.6a) defines the free growth index as their ratio. @(SM), the green line, tracks it in the charts. It too fluctuates around the number one. Gains in dividend rate have coincided as often with gains in market cap growth rate as with drops. This seems only to expound what everyone knows. Of course firms are likelier to raise dividends in years of growth, and cut them in years of decline. I never claimed that free growth theory does more than state the obvious. What is made obvious by the data is that a change in total return is the prime mover enabling market cap and dividend rate to accelerate or decelerate as a pair. What is made obviously wrong would be a thrift theory casting dividend restraint as the prime mover. Were that so, market cap acceleration would coincide with lower rather than higher dividend rates. This pretty much completes my evidence for free growth theory. | have not found other promising data sources. One is tantalizingly close to hand. There is not much reason why corporate bond history is less transparent to the world than corporate stock history. A qualified expert might reconstruct market caps of both, side by side, to show a picture of the whole corporate sector. Surely I am not the only person who would take interest. What is the history of leverage, and of total return, and its growth and yield components, to debt and equity claims cap-weighted together? Chapter 4 Mill’s Idea 1/11/16 22

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.