President Trump frequently touts his administration's investment in Intel (INTC.US), especially the chipmaker's massive share price surge since the deal was unveiled. Yet the broader portfolio of publicly traded companies backed by the U.S. government tells a far less flattering story.

Data reveals that stocks striking deals with the Trump administration often follow a predictable path: a sharp rally around the official announcement, followed by severe volatility, with gains typically evaporating almost as quickly as they appeared. The "sugar high" pattern is fully on display with USA Rare Earth Inc. (USAR.US) as a case in point. The stock spiked more than 80% in the five trading days around the January announcement of its government partnership. But within weeks, those gains—and then some—were completely erased, with shares closing Monday at $15.71, far below the post-deal peak above $30.

This is not an isolated incident. Analysis shows that of the 17 publicly listed companies receiving government investment, 14 closed last week below their levels on the day after the deal was announced. Even investors who successfully positioned themselves before the government's move often walked away with losses: compared to the 10 trading days prior to the official announcements, 11 of the 17 companies currently deliver negative returns. "This certainly looks like a sugar high," said Tad DeHaven, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute who has studied government holdings and is critical of the Trump administration's approach. "There appears to be a short-term benefit... but in the long run, it comes down to fundamentals."

The picture at the individual stock level is even more stark. Trilogy Metals (TMQ.US) American depositary shares surged from $2.09 to a high of $10.60 within days of the government's October equity deal announcement, only to quickly retreat to their current $3.62. MP Materials Corp. (MP.US) soared over 150% in the five weeks following government backing, but has since fallen nearly 27% over the past year. Even Intel, hailed as the poster child, has retreated 37% from its June peak driven by the Apple chip partnership news, ranking as the fifth-worst performer among S&P 500 constituents during that period.

Three Survivors and an Oversold "Hundreds of Billions"

Only three of the 17 companies currently trade above their announcement-day levels: Intel, Nippon Steel (which received a "golden share" with super voting rights from the government, though not an equity stake), and MP Materials Corp., the rare earth magnet company that struck a deal with the government in July 2025. But even MP Materials, while offering positive returns to investors who bought immediately after the deal and held on, peaked in October and currently trades well below its 52-week high amid sharp volatility.

Intel remains the administration's recurring talking point. Trump recently posted an image on Truth Social depicting himself as a stock trader in the Oval Office, writing: "I made hundreds of billions of dollars for the USA—not for myself—in stocks and many other types of holdings." "Hundreds of billions" is an overstatement, though the value of the government's Intel stake has indeed grown from an estimated $8.9 billion at the time of the deal to over $50 billion today. Intel shares closed Monday at $97.19, down over 5% on the day, yet still more than four times their pre-announcement price from August 2025.

A Portfolio Spanning Six Sectors, and Deal No. 32

Intel serves as the early template the Trump team is trying to replicate. The government recently completed its 32nd corporate investment: a privately held oil drilling company named North American Blue Energy Partners, which secured a 100-year lease on land in Venezuela with an estimated 65 billion barrels of oil reserves. The government's portfolio now spans quantum computing, semiconductors, oil drilling, steel, nuclear energy, and rare earth mineral companies.

The Trump team often describes these investments as "passive," but concerns persist that the government's dual role as both investor and regulator could distort markets with political influence. Retail investors should be especially wary, as many of these companies have underperformed their respective industry indices—a public market signal that serves as a warning for those hoping to ride the coattails of government holdings. Economic research also leans toward the skeptics. A 2025 survey of economists found that a vast majority believe government equity stakes tend to hurt both company performance and corporate governance.

Legal and Political Landmines Looming Before November

The cracks in this "government concept stock" rally extend beyond share prices. A shareholder lawsuit is reportedly challenging the legality of the government's stake in Intel in court. The complaint argues that the CHIPS Act does not authorize the Commerce Department to use equity as a condition for subsidies, and if the court agrees, the legal foundation for the entire government portfolio could crumble. Political risk is also mounting: polls suggest Democrats could reclaim at least one chamber of Congress in the midterms, and Elizabeth Warren, who would likely chair the Senate Banking Committee, has already questioned Commerce Secretary Lutnick about the Intel investment. Henrietta Treyz, co-founder of research firm Veda Partners, warns that a Democratic-led committee subpoenaing corporate executives and government officials for hearings "is one of the most immediate risks investors need to watch"—and the midterm elections are now less than two months away.

The mechanics offer a sobering explanation. According to AInvest analysis, the government's claimed $4 trillion-plus in new investments (Apple's $600 billion, Meta's $600 billion, Stargate and Nvidia at roughly $500 billion each) are essentially "commitments spread over many years, while the market priced them all in one afternoon." Announcements can instantly re-rate price-to-earnings multiples, but only real cash and orders can keep gains intact. DeHaven from the Cato Institute sees it more clearly: the Trump team is "improvising as they go"—they "have never offered a serious legal analysis of anything, and it all points to the ad-hoc nature of the entire operation."