The share buyback machine in the United States has never been stronger.
By late August, companies had already announced more than one trillion dollars in repurchases, the fastest pace on record. Executions lived up to expectations.
The numbers are impressive, but investors should ask what they really mean.
Share buybacks are more than a technical detail. They have become one of the dominant forces driving up the equity market, influencing liquidity, valuations, and even the perception of corporate strength.
The flow is powerful today, but it carries risks that are not always obvious.
How big has the wave become
The S&P 500 set a new record in 2024 with $942.5 billion in buybacks.
And that record is already under threat. In the first quarter of 2025 alone, companies spent $293.5 billion, up more than 20% from the prior quarter. The 12-month tally to March touched $999 billion, according to S&P Global.
The activity is highly concentrated. Only 20 companies accounted for nearly half of total repurchases in the first quarter.
Apple alone spent $26.2 billion, Meta $17.6 billion, NVIDIA $15.6 billion, and Alphabet $15.1 billion. JPMorgan bought back $7.5 billion.
The sector breakdown shows that technology leads share buybacks with $80 billion, followed by financials at $59 billion and communication services at $45 billion.
Announcements have been even larger. Apple refreshed its program with $100 billion in May. NVIDIA unveiled a $60 billion authorization in its most recent earnings report.
JPMorgan and Bank of America added $50 billion and $40 billion respectively over the summer.
Birinyi Associates noted that buyback plans topped $1 trillion by August 20, the earliest that milestone has ever been reached. July alone saw $166 billion in new announcements, the highest ever for that month.
Why boards keep spending
The drivers are clear. First, corporate cash flows remain strong. The largest technology groups are generating enormous free cash from cloud, mobile, and increasingly AI.
They are able to fund multibillion-dollar capex programs while still setting aside tens of billions for shareholders.
NVIDIA’s results in August were a big case in point.
Second, the banks regained flexibility after this year’s stress tests. Capital return plans at JPMorgan and Bank of America show that financials are back to being major buyers.
Third, repurchases offset stock-based compensation. S&P points out that only 14% of companies actually cut their diluted share count by more than 4% year-on-year. Much of the spending simply keeps share counts flat against rising option grants.
Fourth, buybacks play a market role. They act as an automatic stabilizer during periods of selling.
When markets fell in April, company programs continued to execute, cushioning the downside. Corporate desks have become the most reliable “dip buyers” in the US market.
The tax overhang
It’s not all good news for share buybacks.
Policy is the one headwind. Since January 2023, repurchases are subject to a 1% excise tax under the Inflation Reduction Act. S&P estimates the levy cut operating earnings per share for the index by about half a percentage point in the first quarter.
That is manageable at current levels, but the administration has proposed raising that rate on certain occasions.
A 2 to 4 percent rate would change behavior at the margin. Boards may shift a portion of distributions toward dividends.
The EPS optics of buybacks would also diminish. The current effect is small, but the trajectory of policy is a variable investors cannot ignore.
Does the bid really make equities safer
There is a common assumption that buybacks provide a floor for the market. There is truth in that, but the support is conditional.
Repurchases are discretionary and pro-cyclical.
They are strongest when profits are high and valuations elevated, and they vanish when earnings contract. In other words, companies buy the most stock at the top of the cycle and the least at the bottom.
That means investors cannot treat buybacks like a bond coupon or dividend stream.
They are not a permanent safety net. In recessions, programs are scaled back quickly to preserve cash. The “liquidity floor” created by buybacks is real today, but it is a mirage in downturns.
Another point is effectiveness. At record stock prices, every dollar spent retires fewer shares.
The EPS benefit of buybacks is shrinking compared to 2022 and 2023. This limits their ability to keep earnings optics climbing when valuation multiples are already stretched.
What investors should really focus on
There are three markers worth monitoring.
The first is actual execution versus authorizations. Announcements make headlines, but they are only capacity. The true market impact comes from the dollars spent each quarter, disclosed in 10-Qs and tracked by S&P.
The second is the blackout cycle. Repurchases dip around earnings releases, reducing flow by roughly 30% versus open windows. Investors often mistake this for structural weakness. In fact, many companies continue buying through pre-programmed 10b5-1 plans, just at a lower rate.
The third is the capex trade-off. AI build-outs are swallowing tens of billions in cash. If margins compress or borrowing costs rise, boards may prioritize investment and balance sheet strength over discretionary buybacks. The moment that shift happens, the buyback bid weakens.
The bullish and the bearish case
From a bullish perspective, buybacks are functioning like private-sector quantitative easing.
The flow is steady, automated, and large enough to dampen volatility. As long as cash flows remain healthy, companies will keep absorbing their own stock, shortening selloffs and prolonging the bull market.
The bearish case is that we are near the peak of buyback effectiveness.
Valuations are high, free cash flow will face pressure from rising capex, and tax risk is not trivial. The buyback bid disappears precisely when investors need it most.
In that sense, 2025 may represent a blow-off top in financial engineering, an era when EPS was flattered by record spending that may not be sustainable.
The post Is the US market strong only because of share buybacks? appeared first on Invezz