Wheel Loader Weight Classes Explained: Finding Your Perfect Match

This passage highlights the critical role of wheel loader weight in determining a machine’s lifting capacity, maneuverability, fuel efficiency, and transport logistics. Equipment failures often stem from mismatched loaders—compact models struggling under excessive loads or oversized units rendered useless in tight job sites. The right balance ensures efficiency, longevity, and adaptability in various work environments.

This analysis underscores that wheel loader weight is more than just a statistic—it directly impacts performance, project efficiency, and operational costs.

The average weight of a wheel loader ranges from 10,000 to 80,000 pounds (4,500 to 36,000 kilograms), depending on its size and model. Compact models weigh around 10,000 pounds, while large models used in mining can exceed 80,000 pounds.

Defining and Understanding Wheel Loader Weight

Let's get something straight right off the bat - when spec sheets talk about "operating weight," they're not talking about some arbitrary number. They're talking about how much that loader weighs when it's ready to rock and roll.

That means the full chassis, engine, hydraulics, a full tank of diesel, and whatever bucket or attachment you've got hanging off the front.

Why does this matter? Because a machine that weighs 15,000 pounds on paper might actually tip the scales at 18,000 pounds once you've added that oversized bucket, counterweights, and enclosed cab with A/C. And trust me, your transportation guy will definitely notice that difference.

Several factors can swing this weight significantly. That fancy heated cab with air suspension seat? Adds weight. That extra-large fuel tank for longer shifts? More weight. Even the material you're moving matters - a bucket full of wet clay weighs a whole lot more than the same bucket filled with mulch or snow.

I once watched a contractor get stuck (literally) when his loader couldn't handle the weight of saturated material because he'd specced the machine based on dry soil conditions. The weight-to-power ratio just wasn't there, and he ended up with an expensive yellow paperweight until the ground dried out.

Understanding operating weight isn't just about nerding out on specs - it's practical stuff that affects your bottom line in multiple ways:

First, it determines whether the loader can actually do the job you bought it for without tipping over or bogging down. There's nothing quite like the pucker factor of feeling a wheel loader start to teeter when you're lifting a full bucket.

Second, it affects transportation. Weight restrictions on roads and bridges are no joke, and neither are the fines for ignoring them. A machine that requires special permits and escort vehicles can turn a simple delivery into a logistical nightmare.

Third, it impacts site access. Many facilities have weight limits on interior roads, loading docks, and work areas. Show up with a loader that's too heavy, and you might find yourself turned away at the gate.

Fourth, it directly correlates to load capacity. A heavier machine can generally lift more - provided that weight is properly distributed and the hydraulics can keep up.

Finally, it influences fuel burn. Physics doesn't care about your fuel budget - moving more mass requires more energy, plain and simple.

Wheel loader weight is typically measured in pounds in the US market, though you'll occasionally see kilograms on spec sheets from European or Asian manufacturers. Just as important as the total weight is how it's distributed.

A well-balanced machine provides better stability, especially when lifting heavy loads on uneven terrain. I've seen operators nearly flip perfectly good loaders simply because the machine wasn't designed to handle load distribution properly when turning with a full bucket.

Weight Classifications of Wheel Loaders Commonly Used in the US

The US market breaks down wheel loaders into several weight categories – compact, small, medium, large, and sometimes heavy.

Sound straightforward? Well, it would be if everyone used the same definitions. The reality is messier, like trying to get three operators to agree on the best way to dig a trench.

Different manufacturers, industry associations, and even equipment rental houses might classify the same machine differently. Why? Sometimes it's marketing (everyone wants to claim the "most powerful compact loader"), sometimes it's application-specific categorization, and sometimes it's just historical precedent.

The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) tries to bring some order to this chaos. According to them, a "Compact Wheel Loader" weighs 4,500 kg (about 9,920 lbs) or less and is designed for tight spaces where you can't swing a cat without hitting something important.

Their definition of a standard "Wheel Loader" is anything over 4,500 kg that loads material by driving forward into the pile.

That's a good starting point, but real-world classifications tend to be more nuanced. When you're spec'ing equipment, these categories give you a ballpark, not gospel. Always drill down into the specific model's capabilities rather than relying solely on its weight class label.

In-Depth Examination of Wheel Loader Weight Classes

Let's break down these weight classes in practical terms - what you're actually getting, what they can do, and where they shine.

Compact Wheel Loaders

These are the nimble siblings in the loader family, typically weighing between 2,000 to 20,000 lbs - though there's some debate about where "compact" ends.

AEM draws the line at 9,920 lbs, but when you look at what manufacturers actually sell as "compact," you'll find John Deere models up to 19,533 lbs, Cat machines up to 21,742 lbs, and Volvo units reaching 20,944 lbs.

Performance-wise, these little hustlers can typically lift between 3,000 to 8,400 lbs, with breakout forces ranging from 5,500 to 13,600 lbf depending on the model. Bucket capacity usually falls between 0.8 to 2.0 cubic yards - enough for most small to medium jobs.

Where do these machines earn their keep? They're the go-to for landscapers moving mulch, soil, and plants. Snow removal contractors love them for their maneuverability in tight residential areas. They're ideal for nurseries, small construction sites, and anywhere space is at a premium.

The attachment versatility on these smaller machines is impressive - from forks to augers, brooms to snow pushers. I watched a landscaper swap from bucket to forks to auger attachment in about 5 minutes, turning one machine into essentially three different tools. Try doing that with dedicated equipment, and you'd need a much bigger trailer and budget.

Small Wheel Loaders

This is where classification gets fuzzy. These machines generally weigh between 11,000 to 35,000 lbs, occupying that middle ground between the truly compact models and the medium workhorses.

Cat's "small" models, interestingly, range from about 28,000 to 35,500 lbs - heavier than what some might consider "medium."

You'll often find these loaders on general construction sites, moving materials from stockpiles to where they're needed. They're popular for loading trucks, digging foundations, and handling landscaping jobs that would overwhelm compact models.

Municipal crews use them for everything from snow removal to ditch cleaning.

These machines hit the sweet spot for contractors who need more muscle than a compact loader but don't want the transportation hassles of bigger equipment.

As one site supervisor told me: "I can still get it on a trailer behind my F-350, but it won't embarrass itself when loading aggregate."

Medium Wheel Loaders

Now we're talking serious iron. These machines typically tip the scales between 15,000 to 63,000 lbs. John Deere's mid-size models range from about 25,000 to 44,000 lbs, while Volvo's medium offerings go from 32,000 to a hefty 62,600 lbs.

The performance numbers start getting impressive: static tipping loads from 22,000 to over 40,000 lbs, breakout forces from 30,000 to 53,000 lbf, and bucket capacities from 2.5 to 9.2 cubic yards. That's enough to fill a dump truck in just a few passes.

These are the true workhorses of construction sites, quarries, and mid-size mining operations. They're versatile enough to handle almost any material moving task but substantial enough to maintain high production rates.

The balance of power, capacity, and maneuverability makes them ideal for loading trucks, carrying materials across sites, and performing medium digging operations.

I've seen these machines run 12-hour shifts in quarries day after day, year after year. One operator I know has put over 15,000 hours on his medium loader, and it's still moving material like a champ.

That kind of durability doesn't come cheap, but the production numbers justify the investment.

Large Wheel Loaders

These monsters start at 40,000 lbs and can go up to 125,000 lbs. Caterpillar's large loaders exceed 60,000 lbs, while Volvo's range from 59,525 to 124,120 lbs.

Performance specs are equally impressive: static tipping loads up to 76,500 lbs, breakout forces reaching 83,000 lbf, and bucket capacities ranging from 2.9 to 32 cubic yards. That's not moving dirt - that's rearranging the landscape.

These behemoths belong in heavy construction, mining, quarrying, and anywhere else that moves material by the thousands of tons daily. They excel at loading off-highway trucks, handling heavy materials like ore and large rock, and maintaining production rates that smaller machines can't match.

Transportation becomes a major consideration with these loaders - you're looking at specialized hauling equipment, permits, and potentially escort vehicles.

But if you're moving enough material to justify a loader this size, those logistics costs are just the price of doing business.

Heavy Wheel Loaders

The true giants of the industry, these machines can weigh from 100,000 to over 500,000 pounds. The Caterpillar 995 is a prime example, and Komatsu's WE2350 is legendary in mining circles.

These machines aren't just bigger versions of standard wheel loaders - they're purpose-built for extreme applications, primarily in large-scale mining operations. With bucket capacities reaching up to 57 cubic yards, they can move mountains one scoop at a time.

You won't see these on typical construction sites or quarries - they're specialized tools for specialized jobs, where moving massive volumes of material is the only priority.

The capital investment, operating costs, and maintenance requirements put them in a category all their own.

Wheel Loader Weight Classifications in the US

Look at those weight ranges and you'll notice significant overlap. That's not a mistake - it's the reality of how these machines are classified and marketed.

The takeaway? Don't get hung up on whether something is called "compact" or "small" - focus on the specific capabilities you need for your application.

Performance metrics generally scale with weight, but there's more to the story. Technology, design, and hydraulic systems all play major roles in determining what a machine can actually do, regardless of its weight class.

I've seen "compact" loaders outperform older, heavier machines simply because their hydraulic systems were more efficient and their weight distribution was better engineered.

Each class has its place, and the key is matching the right machine to the job at hand. The most expensive loader isn't always the right choice - sometimes that nimble compact model will run circles around its bigger siblings in the right application.

The Impact of Wheel Loader Weight on Key Operational Factors

Let's talk about how wheel loader weight affects your bottom line in ways that might not be obvious at first glance.

Fuel Consumption

Physics doesn't lie - moving more mass requires more energy. Heavier machines with larger engines typically burn more fuel, full stop. A compact loader might sip fuel at 2-3 gallons per hour, while a large loader can guzzle 8-12 gallons or more.

But here's where it gets interesting - using an oversized loader for light-duty work is like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture. I've seen contractors running medium loaders for jobs a compact could handle, then wondering why their fuel costs are through the roof.

The tech in newer medium and large loaders helps mitigate some of this thirst. Features like CVT transmissions, economy modes, and smart engine management can make a significant difference.

One quarry operator told me his new loader with these features saved nearly 20% on fuel costs compared to the older model it replaced - despite being in the same weight class.

Load weight matters too. Consistently overloading your machine forces the engine to work harder, burning more fuel and potentially causing premature wear.

I've watched operators try to move more material per cycle by overloading, only to end up burning more fuel per ton moved. Sometimes less is more.

Maneuverability

This one's pretty straightforward - smaller machines can dance in spaces where larger loaders lumber. Compact and small loaders can navigate tight urban construction sites, landscaping projects, and indoor facilities that would be no-go zones for their bigger siblings.

That articulated steering helps all loaders make tighter turns than you might expect, but physics still applies. A 100,000-pound loader needs more room to maneuver than a 10,000-pound model, no matter how well it's designed.

I once watched an operator try to squeeze a medium loader through a gap that was technically wide enough - but he forgot to account for the turning radius. The result? A damaged fence, a dented loader, and a very unhappy project manager. Right-sizing your equipment for the space constraints of your job can prevent these expensive lessons.

Transportation Costs

Moving heavy equipment isn't cheap, and weight is a primary cost driver. Once you cross certain weight thresholds, you need specialized trailers, permits, and sometimes escort vehicles.

A compact loader might travel on a standard trailer behind a pickup truck, while a large loader requires a lowboy and potentially specialized routing to avoid weight-restricted bridges and roads.

The numbers add up quickly. A basic equipment transport might cost $3-5 per mile for a compact loader, but jump to $10-15 per mile or more for a large loader requiring permits.

For short hauls, you might even pay a higher per-mile rate because the fixed costs of loading, securing, and permitting get spread across fewer miles.

One contractor I know chose medium loaders over large ones specifically because he could transport them without special permits in his state.

The slightly lower production rate was offset by the flexibility of being able to move machines between sites quickly and at lower cost.

Overall Operational Efficiency

This is where everything comes together. The right weight class for your specific application will maximize your tons moved per gallon of fuel, minimize your transportation and maintenance costs, and optimize your cycle times.

Larger loaders can move more material per cycle, but that advantage disappears if your trucks can't keep up or if the loader spends too much time traveling. I've seen operators with large loaders sitting idle, waiting for trucks to return - that's expensive iron earning zero return.

Technology has become a major efficiency factor across all weight classes. Onboard weighing systems prevent under or overloading trucks. Telematics track everything from idle time to fuel consumption patterns.

Even tire pressure monitoring systems help maintain optimal performance and prevent downtime.

The human factor remains critical, though. An experienced, well-trained operator in a properly sized machine will outperform a novice in even the most advanced loader. As one fleet manager put it: "I'd rather have a great operator in a good machine than a good operator in a great machine."

The takeaway? Weight matters, but it's just one piece of a complex puzzle. The most efficient operation comes from matching the right weight class to your specific application, investing in operator training, and leveraging technology to optimize performance across your entire equipment fleet and workflow.

Comparative Analysis: Advantages and Disadvantages of Weight Classes for Specific US Tasks

Let's get practical and look at how different weight classes perform in specific applications.

flowchart TD
    A[Wheel Loader Weight Classes\nFor Specific Tasks] --> B[Landscaping]
    A --> C[General Construction]
    A --> D[Heavy Construction]
    A --> E[Mining & Quarrying]
    A --> F[Agriculture]
    A --> G[Waste Management]
    
    B --> B1[Compact: Excellent maneuverability, fits\nthrough gates, limited capacity]
    
    C --> C1[Medium: Balanced power/maneuverability,\nversatile for varied tasks, moderate fuel costs]
    
    D --> D1[Large: High productivity, handles heavy\nloads, higher fuel & transport costs]
    
    E --> E1[Heavy: Maximum power & capacity,\nlimited mobility, high operating costs]
    
    F --> F1[Compact/Small: Better than tractors\nfor material handling, limited for field work]
    
    G --> G1[Medium/Large: Efficient for high volumes,\nrequires specialized attachments]
    
    style A fill:#f9f9f9,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px
    style B1 fill:#d4f1f9,stroke:#333
    style C1 fill:#fff2cc,stroke:#333
    style D1 fill:#ffe6cc,stroke:#333
    style E1 fill:#f8cecc,stroke:#333
    style F1 fill:#e1d5e7,stroke:#333
    style G1 fill:#d5e8d4,stroke:#333

No theoretical fluff here - just real-world pros and cons based on what actually happens on job sites across America.

Landscaping

Compact loaders dominate this sector, and for good reason. Their maneuverability lets them navigate between trees, around water features, and through narrow gates without leaving a path of destruction.

They can hop on and off trailers easily, allowing crews to move between multiple job sites in a day.

The advantage of compact machines is obvious when you're placing materials in precisely landscaped areas - you're not rebuilding what you just finished.

As one landscaper told me, "I can put a scoop of mulch exactly where I need it without crushing the irrigation lines we just installed."

The trade-off? Limited capacity. When moving large volumes of material, compact loaders require more cycles, which means more time. And if you're handling large trees or massive boulders, you might find yourself at the edge of a compact loader's capabilities.

General Construction

Medium-sized wheel loaders shine on construction sites where versatility is key. They can handle everything from unloading deliveries to backfilling foundations to clearing debris - all with enough power to maintain productivity but without the transportation and maneuverability issues of larger machines.

I watched a medium loader on a mixed-use development project go from loading dump trucks with excavation spoils in the morning to placing pallets of brick around the site in the afternoon. That kind of flexibility is valuable, especially on projects where different tasks come up daily.

The downside? They're generalists, not specialists. For very heavy lifting or high-production loading, they can't match the output of large loaders. And in extremely tight spaces, they may struggle compared to compact models.

Heavy Construction & Infrastructure

Large wheel loaders earn their keep on major infrastructure projects, where moving massive volumes of material quickly is the priority. Highway projects, dam construction, and airport development all benefit from the high production rates these machines deliver.

The productivity advantage is substantial - a large loader can fill an articulated dump truck in just 3-4 passes, while a medium loader might need 6-8 passes to do the same job.

When you're moving thousands of yards of material daily, that efficiency translates directly to schedule and budget performance.

The disadvantages are equally clear: higher fuel consumption, more complex transportation requirements, and limited maneuverability. I've seen large loaders sitting idle for hours on congested sites because they simply couldn't navigate to where they were needed.

Mining & Quarrying

Heavy wheel loaders are purpose-built for these environments, where durability and massive capacity are essential. They can withstand the punishing conditions of mining operations while maintaining the production rates needed to feed crushers and fill haul trucks efficiently.

A quarry manager once told me, "In this business, it's all about tons per hour. A loader that can fill a 100-ton truck in three passes instead of five basically prints money."

The math checks out - when you're moving material by the millions of tons, even small efficiency gains multiply quickly.

The drawbacks? These specialized machines come with specialized costs - both upfront and operational. They're transportation nightmares, sometimes requiring partial disassembly to move between sites.

And their massive thirst for fuel makes them expensive to operate, even when perfectly matched to the application.

Agriculture

Compact and small wheel loaders have found their niche on farms across America, often complementing or replacing traditional tractors for certain tasks.

They excel at loading feed, moving hay bales, and clearing barns - tasks where their maneuverability and lifting capacity outshine agricultural tractors.

One dairy farmer explained it perfectly: "My tractor is still better for field work, but the loader is my go-to for everything around the buildings.

I can get into tighter spaces, turn inside the barn without hitting the walls, and lift pallets higher than my tractor ever could."

The limitation? They lack the specialized attachments and PTO capabilities that make tractors so versatile for field operations. And in wide-open spaces where maneuverability isn't an issue, purpose-built agricultural equipment often performs better.

Waste Management

Medium and large wheel loaders dominate waste handling facilities, where their combination of power, durability, and specialized attachments makes them ideal for moving diverse materials in challenging conditions.

The sealed cabs, specialized air filtration systems, and solid tires available on loaders in these weight classes help them withstand the harsh environment of transfer stations and landfills.

As one facility manager put it, "These machines take a beating every day. We need something that won't fold under pressure."

The trade-off varies by facility type and size. Some operations would benefit from the increased capacity of larger loaders but lack the space for them to operate effectively. Others struggle with the balance between machine size and the ability to sort through mixed waste streams precisely.

Ultimately, choosing the right wheel loader weight class isn't about getting the biggest or most expensive machine - it's about honest assessment of your specific needs. The perfect loader for a landscaper would be useless in a quarry, and vice versa.

Understanding these trade-offs is the difference between equipment that boosts your bottom line and expensive yellow iron that sits idle more often than it should.

Market Analysis: Usage Rates and Trends of Wheel Loader Weight Classes in the United States

Let's talk numbers. The US loader market hit nearly $6 billion in 2023 and is projected to grow at a healthy 5.2% annually through 2030. That's a lot of yellow iron moving a lot of material.

So which weight classes are contractors actually buying? The trends tell an interesting story.

Compact wheel loaders are the hot ticket right now, seeing significant growth in the US market. Why? They fit perfectly into the boom in urban infill development, landscape renovation projects, and smaller-scale construction that's happening across the country.

With North American sales estimated at 7,000-8,000 units annually, these machines have found their sweet spot.

I recently spoke with a rental fleet manager who's been steadily increasing his compact loader inventory while holding steady on larger machines. His reasoning was simple: "The demand is there.

Contractors are working in tighter spaces, fuel costs matter more than ever, and these smaller machines are way more capable than they were ten years ago."

Medium wheel loaders continue to hold their ground as the versatile all-rounders of the industry. Their balance of power and maneuverability makes them the default choice for general construction, aggregates operations, and municipal work.

They're not the flashy new thing, but they remain the reliable backbone of many fleets.

Large and heavy wheel loaders are seeing more specialized demand, with sales closely tied to activity in mining, quarrying, and major infrastructure projects. When these sectors boom, so do sales of bigger machines.

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has provided a boost here, funding the kind of massive projects that require serious material-moving capability.

Technology is reshaping the market across all weight classes. Electric and hybrid loaders are gaining traction as fuel costs and emissions regulations push contractors toward greener alternatives.

The first wave of these machines focused on compact models, but we're starting to see electrification creep into the medium class as well.

Automation and smart features are no longer futuristic concepts – they're selling points. Features like auto-bucket leveling, return-to-dig functionality, and machine control integration have moved from premium options to expected equipment on many new loaders.

When it comes to market share, the big three – Caterpillar, Deere, and Komatsu – continue to dominate US wheel loader sales. But European manufacturers like Volvo and Liebherr have been making inroads, particularly in specialized applications and with buyers focused on fuel efficiency.

Perhaps the most significant market shift has been the growing preference for renting rather than buying. More contractors are opting to rent loaders for specific projects rather than carrying the capital expense and maintenance responsibilities of ownership.

This trend affects usage patterns across weight classes as companies can now right-size their equipment for each job without long-term commitment.

As one equipment dealer told me, "Five years ago, about 70% of our wheel loader business was sales. Now it's closer to 50-50 between sales and rentals. Contractors want flexibility, and renting gives them that."

The bottom line? The wheel loader market is evolving, with technology and changing work patterns driving demand for more specialized, efficient machines across all weight classes.

Understanding these trends helps contractors and fleet managers make smarter decisions about which loaders will deliver value today and remain relevant tomorrow.

Historical Evolution: Changes in Wheel Loader Weight and Design in the US Market

The wheel loader hasn't always been the sophisticated machine we see on job sites today. In fact, if you could park a 1940s loader next to a current model, you might struggle to recognize them as relatives.

Early wheel loaders were essentially agricultural tractors with buckets bolted on – crude but effective for their time. Operators manipulated these primitive buckets using cable systems that required substantial physical effort and offered limited control.

Ever tried threading a needle while wearing boxing gloves? Operating these early loaders was something like that.

The game changed in 1939 when Frank G. Hough developed the Hough Model HS Payloader – the first purpose-built rubber-tired wheel loader. This machine could actually drive between locations at a decent clip rather than crawling along like its tracked predecessors.

Construction crews suddenly had a material handler that could keep pace with the rest of their equipment.

The 1950s brought another revolution: articulated steering. Mixermobile introduced it in 1953, and Euclid popularized it in 1959. This design – splitting the frame and connecting it with a vertical pivot – gave these increasingly heavy machines the maneuverability they desperately needed.

Try imagining a modern construction site with only rigid-frame loaders – you'd need twice the space for the same work.

Volvo's H-10 in 1954 added another key innovation by positioning the cabin and bucket over the larger wheels. This wasn't just about looks – it dramatically improved weight distribution and lifting capacity.

By the early 1960s, manufacturers had moved pivot arms to the front, giving operators a fighting chance to actually see what they were doing without performing yoga in the cab.

The fascinating thing about wheel loader evolution is that it's gone in two directions simultaneously. On one hand, manufacturers have built ever-larger machines to meet the demands of growing mining and heavy construction operations.

On the other, they've developed increasingly capable compact loaders for urban work and space-constrained projects.

Technology has been the great enabler in this evolution. More powerful engines in smaller packages have allowed compact loaders to punch above their weight class. Advanced hydraulic systems deliver greater lifting forces without adding bulk.

Electronic controls and automation features boost productivity and precision across all size categories.

Materials science has played its part too. The use of high-strength steels and composite materials has improved the power-to-weight ratio of modern loaders.

A machine that might have weighed 40,000 pounds in the 1980s to achieve a certain lifting capacity might do the same job today at 35,000 pounds, while burning less fuel and requiring less maintenance.

Look at the evolution of specific models and the trend becomes clear. The Caterpillar 992, for instance, has grown substantially over its generations – not just in weight and physical dimensions, but in capacity, speed, and technological sophistication.

Each iteration has been built to move more material more efficiently, meeting the ever-increasing scale of mining and construction projects.

What's particularly interesting is how these changes have been driven by operator demands as much as engineering possibilities.

Features we now take for granted – enclosed cabs, climate control, ergonomic controls, visibility enhancements – all evolved because operators refused to accept the bone-jarring, dust-eating, visibility-challenged experience of earlier machines.

An old-timer I know who's operated loaders since the 1970s put it perfectly: "These newer machines don't beat you up like the old ones did. I used to go home feeling like I'd been in a boxing match. Now I can work a 10-hour shift and still have energy to play with my grandkids."

This evolution continues today, with electrification, autonomous operation, and integrated machine control systems pushing the boundaries of what wheel loaders can do – and how much they weigh to do it.

Conclusion: Strategic Considerations for Wheel Loader Weight in the US

After all the specs, weight classes, and market trends, what’s the real takeaway?

Weight isn’t just a stat—it dictates fuel use, transport, maneuverability, and costs. Industry classifications help, but marketing labels blur the lines. A “compact” loader from one brand might outweigh another’s “small” model. Focus on capabilities, not categories.

The best contractors don’t chase the biggest machine—they match weight to needs, factoring in transport, material, and job constraints. Get it right, and your loader drives profit. Get it wrong, and it drains cash. In this market, that’s the weight that really matters.

FAQ