Jim Cramer Sold 1 AI Chipmaker Over $80 Billion in Debt. But He Defended NVIDIA

Market impact: mixed, with the fundamental evidence currently favoring NVDA—but the financing risk remains a valuation overhang.

The article’s immediate catalyst is already stale: it was published August 29, 2026, but refers to NVIDIA reporting “tonight” on August 26. NVIDIA has since reported fiscal Q2 revenue of $96.2 billion, data-center revenue of $89.0 billion, 75% gross margin, and third-quarter revenue guidance of $108 billion ±2%. Those figures materially weaken the near-term bear case that AI demand is being sustained mainly through questionable financing structures.

For NVDA, the key distinction versus Broadcom is balance-sheet capacity. NVIDIA generated approximately $21.3 billion of free cash flow in the quarter, returned about $26 billion to shareholders, and retained roughly $99 billion under its repurchase authorization. That gives investors a credible argument that NVIDIA can support ecosystem investment and customer incentives without depending on an $80 billion debt raise.

However, the financing criticism is not irrelevant. NVIDIA has announced partnerships intended to mobilize more than $500 billion of third-party capital for AI infrastructure, while its conference-call materials cited hyperscaler capital expenditures approaching $800 billion in 2026 and $1.3 trillion in 2027. This reinforces demand visibility, but it also raises the market’s sensitivity to customer returns on AI investment, credit quality, and whether infrastructure spending can continue once financing becomes more expensive or customer utilization disappoints.

The short-term trading effect is therefore likely to depend less on Jim Cramer’s apparent inconsistency and more on whether investors view NVIDIA’s results as sufficiently strong relative to an exceptionally high expectation bar. Strong revenue growth, stable margins, free cash flow, and continued Rubin/Blackwell adoption support NVDA and the broader AI-semiconductor complex. Conversely, any evidence of weaker cash conversion, rising receivables, customer concentration, supply commitments without matching orders, or dependence on externally financed buyers could revive the “circular demand” narrative and pressure NVDA’s valuation.

The accessible market data show NVDA at $217.55, down 4.59%, while AVGO was at $368.79, down 0.75%; this indicates that strong reported fundamentals did not eliminate near-term volatility or expectation risk.

Trader focus:

subsequent disclosures on free cash flow, receivables, customer financing arrangements, hyperscaler capex, China exposure, and the pace of Vera Rubin deployment. The bullish interpretation remains dominant while cash generation and demand conversion stay strong; the bearish interpretation gains traction if growth increasingly requires financing structures that shift risk from chip vendors to customers or third-party capital providers.