SKU: 29635527490
pachira aquatica indoor plant

pachira aquatica indoor plant Money Tree Plants ‘Pachira aquatica’ 8" Pot / Self Watering / With Pot

Sale price$23.93 Regular price$26.59
Save 10%

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 13 - Jul 18

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

pachira aquatica indoor plant Money Tree Plants ‘Pachira aquatica’ 8" Pot / Self Watering / With PotThe Money Tree Plant, known as Pachira aquatica, is one of the best low maintenance houseplants prized for its braided trunk, lush green leaves, and association with prosperity and good fortune. In short, it's called the Money Tree because of its symbolic ties to luck, wealth, and good fortune, not because it actually grows money, though some people do jokingly wish it did! Originating from tropical wetlands, this plant has gained immense popularity

The Money Tree Plant, known as Pachira aquatica, is one of the best low-maintenance houseplants prized for its braided trunk, lush green leaves, and association with prosperity and good fortune. In short, it's called the Money Tree because of its symbolic ties to luck, wealth, and good fortune, not because it actually grows money, though some people do jokingly wish it did! 

Originating from tropical wetlands, this plant has gained immense popularity in modern homes, offices, and even business spaces across the world. The Money tree bonsai is a compact, artistic version of the traditional plant, often used to symbolize wealth and harmony in feng shui practices. 

According to the principles of Feng Shui, the Money Tree is believed to bring luck, financial prosperity, and positive energy when placed in specific areas of a home or office. It is commonly placed in the southeast corner—known as the "wealth corner"—to invite abundance and growth. The braided trunk is said to trap fortune within its folds, while the five-lobed leaves represent the five fundamental elements: earth, water, fire, wind, and metal, creating a balanced flow of chi (energy). 

The Pachira aquatica extremely fast growing up to 24 inches per year.

In its natural habitat, the Money Tree can grow up to 60 feet tall, but as a houseplant it can grow up to 6 feet tall indoors, and up to 12 feet tall outdoors in ideal your garden.

Native to Central and South America, the money tree plant has several other common names such as Malabar Chestnut, Guiana Chestnut, Chinese money tree, and Provision Tree.

The Money tree is admired for its glossy, hand-shaped palmate leaves that radiate from a central point, often with five to seven leaflets per stem, resembling an open hand.

The most iconic form features a braided trunk, achieved when several young stems are woven together while pliable and then grow as one. This braided appearance adds a sculptural quality and is often viewed as a symbolic protection of wealth.

The Money tree blooms during spring with large, showy white or cream-colored flowers with long stamens and a pleasant fragrance. These flowers later develop into large, woody seed pods containing edible chestnut-like nuts. 

One of the plant’s most unique qualities is its adaptability to various environments—it can thrive indoors with minimal care, tolerate low humidity if acclimated properly, and purify indoor air. Its symbolic significance, combined with its ornamental structure, makes it a favorite for gifting during housewarmings, business openings, and holidays.  

When and How to Water Your Monet Tree Plant 

The Money Tree is moderately drought-tolerant due to its thick, water-storing trunk, but it thrives with a consistent watering schedule that avoids soggy roots. Always check the top 2 inches of soil for dryness before watering to prevent overwatering. Water your Money Tree every 7–10 days during the growing season with deep watering and reduce to once every 3–4 weeks in the dormant season.  

From March to August, during the growing season, water thoroughly once every 7–10 days, ensuring excess water drains out of the pot. This is the Money tree plant’s active period, when it needs more hydration to support new foliage growth. Make sure the soil remains moist but never soggy, and consider misting the leaves lightly to increase humidity. 

From September to February, in the dormant season, reduce watering to once every 3–4 weeks, providing just enough to prevent the roots from drying out. Overwatering in winter is a common mistake that can lead to root rot. Keep it in a warm spot and ensure proper drainage during these cooler months. 

Light Requirements – Where to Place Your Money Tree 

When growing indoors, the Money tree plant thrives in bright, indirect light for 6–8 hours a day.

Place them near east- or south-facing windows, but avoid direct sunlight, which can scorch the leaves.

They also adapt well to fluorescent lighting, making them ideal for offices and low-light homes.

When grown outdoors, place your Pachira Money Tree in a location that receives partial shade or filtered sunlight for 4–6 hours daily.

Direct outdoor sun, especially in hot climates, can burn the leaves. A shaded patio, balcony, or under taller plants works well, as long as there's good airflow. 

Avoid low-light environments indoors or full sun outdoors, as both can cause stress. While adaptable, poor lighting leads to slow growth, leaf drop, or legginess. Rotate the plant occasionally for even light exposure and symmetrical growth. 

Optimal Soil & Fertilizer Needs 

Use a well-draining peat-based soil mixed with perlite or sand and fertilize once a year in the spring. The goal is to prevent waterlogging while retaining enough moisture for root absorption. Avoid heavy or clay-based soil. Planet Desert has specialized potting soil, opens in a new tabGo to Soil cactus mix blend 1 gal 4 qt cacti succulent dirt compost growing media that includes an organic substrate with mycorrhizae to help with the growth of a healthy root system, to help your money plant thrive. 

Fertilize once a year in the spring with a balanced, water-soluble NPK fertilizer of about 5-10-5. Do not fertilize in the dormant months, as the plant's growth slows and excess nutrients can harm it. Adding organic matter such as worm castings or compost can enhance soil fertility, especially in pots. Make sure the container has drainage holes and never let the plant sit in standing water. 

Indoor Money Tree Growing Requirements 

When growing indoors, the Money Tree prefers temperatures between 65°F and 80°F, moderate humidity, and bright indirect light. To keep it healthy, place it near a bright window where it can receive 6–8 hours of filtered sunlight daily—east, south, or west-facing windows are ideal. Avoid direct sun, which can scorch the leaves, and supplement with a grow light if natural light is limited. The plant thrives in humidity levels of around 50–60%, which you can maintain with a humidifier, pebble tray, or regular misting, especially during dry winter months. Consistent temperatures are important; keep the plant away from drafts, heaters, or AC vents, as sudden changes can lead to leaf drop or stress. With stable conditions and good light, the Money Tree makes a striking and low-maintenance indoor companion. 

Hardiness Zones & More 

In the United States, this is mostly grown as an indoor plant, but if you live in warmer climates like southern Florida or Hawaii, specifically in USDA Zones 10-12, you may be able to cultivate it outdoors year-round with care.

In these zones, choose a location that receives bright morning sunlight with partial shade in the afternoon to avoid scorching the leaves.

Humidity should be maintained at moderate to high levels, ideally above 50%, to support healthy growth and prevent leaf drop. Use a humidity tray or humidifier to maintain 40–60% humidity indoors during winter. 

Wildlife – Money Tree Flower Attracts the Following Friendly Pollinators 

The Money Tree Flower is known to attract a variety of friendly pollinators, including butterflies, bees, bats, and hummingbirds. These creatures play a crucial role in the ecosystem by helping to pollinate plants and ensure their reproduction.  

Butterflies
Bees
Hummingbirds
Lady Bugs
Multi Pollinators
Other Birds

According to the ASPCA, the Pachira aquatica is non-toxic to humans, cats, dogs, and horses. This makes it a great option for pet-friendly households. However, ingestion of large amounts may still cause mild stomach upset.

How to propagate a Money Tree 

The Chinese money tree can be propagated easily through stem cuttings taken during spring or early summer. Choose a healthy branch with at least two leaf nodes and cut it using clean, sharp scissors. Dip the cut end in rooting hormone and plant it in moist, well-draining soil. Keep the pot in bright, indirect light and maintain consistent humidity using a plastic dome or humidity tray. Roots typically form in 3–4 weeks. Once rooted, treat the new plant like a mature specimen. 

Key Takeaways

  1. According to feng shui, the popular houseplant money tree is a symbol that, when placed in homes or offices, attracts wealth, good fortune, and positive energy.
  2. This tropical plant can grow up to 24 inches per year, making it extremely fast-growing option for indoor greenery.
  3. According to ASPCA, it is non-toxic to cats and dogs, making it a pet-friendly houseplant.
  4. Money Tree plants are often grown and styled as bonsai, featuring braided trunks and compact foliage for decorative appeal.
  5. The plant thrives indoors with bright, indirect light and is easy to maintain with moderate watering and occasional pruning.

The Bottom Line 

Overall, the Money Tree ‘Pachira aquatica’ is a stylish, popular houseplant with braided stems and lush green leaves. It thrives with moderate watering, bright indirect light, and well-draining soil. Known for its symbolism of good fortune and prosperity, it is a popular choice for both indoor and outdoor décor. With its non-toxic nature, humidity tolerance, and low maintenance needs, it’s an excellent plant for beginners and collectors alike. As both a botanical treasure and a Feng Shui favorite, the Money Tree truly lives up to its name—bringing a sense of calm, balance, and prosperity to all who grow it. Order your very own Money tree for sale today! 

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 29635527490

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell pachira aquatica indoor plant

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.8 ★★★★★
Based on 2075 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
G
Verified Purchase
garynini
Omaha, US
★★★★★ 5
Clear, cogent, and illuminating
Format: Kindle
Clear, cogent, and illuminating explanation of the difference between two approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalism and the Living Constitution
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015
C
Verified Purchase
Chris Morton
Belleville, US
★★★★★ 5
Excellent!!!
Format: Kindle
A wonderfully refreshing argument for "the living constitution". Most surprisingly is that much of the argument is based in the philosophy of Edmund Burke, father of modern conservatism.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on February 22, 2017
M
Verified Purchase
Matt Cockerill
Natrona Heights, US
★★★★★ 5
Five Stars
Format: Hardcover
Strauss demolishes originalism in a concise and accessible volume.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 11, 2014
S
Verified Purchase
Stephen J. Jaros
Chelsea, US
★★★★★ 3
Ultimately disappointing .. but still a good read
Format: Hardcover
This book does have a few commendable features. It is written in laymen's language, you don't have to be a constitutional law scholar like David A. Strauss to comprehend the arguments. And it's short. Won't take more than a couple of hours to read. But as a critique of the "originalist" constitutional doctrine, it is hit and miss. For example, Strauss argues that originalism has three major flaws (p.18): 1) the impossibility of determining what the understanding of the founding fathers was on a particular issue. 2) the impossibility of translating an original understanding so that it addresses today's problems. 3) no answer for Thomas Jefferson's question about why we, the living, should be governed by the "dead hand" of past generations, including the founders. Of these three, the first is the most telling, because it is indeed sometimes the case that we do not know what the founders would have thought about a particular issue, because that issue simply did not exist at the time of the enactment of the constitution or a particular amendment, or because that original meaning could be lost to history. The patent-ability of new life forms as a result of genetic engineering being a good example (but, other technological examples, like cases related to airplanes and cars, are NOT good examples, since while the founders were unaware of these technological advances, it's safe to assume they would recognize them as transportation vehicles, so their understanding of ships and horse carriages would apply to them). That's why i am what Strauss might call a "sometimes originalist" - my view is that IF there is no reasonable doubt about what the enactors of a constitutional provision would have thought about a case, then that should control the decision a court arrives at. But obviously, if the issue was unknown to the enactors, or if their views are forever lost to us due to the passage of time, then there is no "original understanding" of that particular issue, and some other method of constitutional interpretation must be relied on. The second and third objections are far less compelling to me. The second objection is IMO a non-issue. To ask "well, we know that in 1880 the enactors of the 14th amendment did not believe its equal protection clause outlawed employment discrimination against women, but would they believe that if they were living in the year 2000, with all the economic/cultural/technological changes that have developed over those 120 years?" is an irrelevant question. It's like asking if the 1969 Congress that enacted the Clean Air Act would still enact it if that Congress were to debate the issue in 2010: it's purely speculative and ungermane, since neither statutes nor constitutional provisions have expiration dates on them. Likewise, the 3rd objection is both shallow and disingenuous. Shallow because Jefferson clearly understood that the constitution, like laws enacted by the legislature, are subject to change by later generations, who can amend the constitution or pass new legislation to supersede what previous generations have accomplished. Disingenuous, because the invocation of Jefferson seems to be a tactical decision by Strauss, a way to tweak originalists by citing one of the very greatest of our founding fathers. Yet Jefferson can also be quoted to support an originalist view. For example, in 1801 he said: "The Constitution on which our union rests, shall be administered by me according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the people of the United States, at the time of its adoption....These explanations are preserved in the publications of the time, and are too recent in the memories of most men to admit of question." (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, quoted from a letter dated 3/27/1801). The first part of this quote clearly indicates that Jefferson believed that constitutional provisions should be interpreted according to original understanding, not "modern, evolved" standards of meaning as David Strauss would contend. The second part speaks to the need i identified before, that of knowing within the bounds of reasonable doubt what the enactors understood a provision to mean. Beyond all this, though, is David Strauss's contention that a "living constitution", as defined by a common-law like accretion of judicial precedent in constitutional matters that leave the original meaning of the text behind, is necessary because otherwise our constitution would become an archaic relic unable to meet the demands of a changing society, and that the formal amendment process is too slow and cumbersome. Professor Strauss correctly notes that Jefferson believed that our institutions must evolve with the development of society; however, he crucially fails to note that to Jefferson, the primary mechanism of such innovation was to be the actions of the legislature. Constitutional provisions are expounded in broad, general language not to enable future judges to interpret them in light of changing societal conditions, but to permit elected bodies, like legislatures and congress, wide latitude to address the problems of today. Legislative bodies, which directly reflect the ebbs and flows of societal change and are accountable to the people, were Jefferson's preferred vehicle of constitutional innovation, not the decisions of insulated, life-tenured court judges. On this point, unlike on many others, Jefferson was in agreement with John Marshall. As Jean Edward Smith (1996) writes "When (in McCulloch v. Maryland) Marshall spoke of the Constitution as "intended for ages to come" and of the need to adapt it "to the various crises of human affairs", he was alluding to the responsibility of Congress, not the Court. And the limits on Congress were defined by the political process, not the judiciary" (p. 445). Thus, for example, while the enactors of the 14th amendment did not intend for it to ban employment discrimination against women, it also was not intended to prevent Congress or the state legislatures, at the time of the enactment or in the future, from enacting legislation that does protect women from employment discrimination should that type of legislation be deemed necessary or advisable. Jefferson was far more wary of "innovative" actions by judges, exemplified by his belief that "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning, the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please". Yet it is exactly this type of judicial activism that Strauss means when advocates a "living constitution". Strauss's fundamental error is revealed on page 103 when he says that "We cannot say that the text of the constitution does not matter ... no (textual) provision of the constitution can be overruled in the way a precedent can, or disregarded the way original understandings often are". What Strauss is saying here (well, he wouldn't put it this way, but this is my view of the matter) is that when a judge wants to be activist, to impose his/her personal policy preferences on a case, it's very important that the judge somehow, through clever verbal gymnastics, no matter how convoluted, "ground" that ruling in some actual constitutional-textual language. This is very important for achieving the political purpose of maintaining respect for the court in the eyes of the public. But to me, Strauss creates a false dichotomy: The text of the constitution is ONE AND THE SAME with its "original understanding". The 'text', the actual words of the constitution, does not exist independent of the original understanding of those words, the text is merely the communicative vessel used to convey that original understanding. That's the way language works. It's a method to convey meaning. Thus, to invoke the Due Process Clause of the 5th amendment to outlaw Federal segregation laws (as the Court did in 1955) when the enactors of the 5th amendment clearly (as Strauss admits) did not intend for it to mean that, is the SAME THING as ignoring the "text" of the constitution, since the text and original understanding are one and the same. Overall, i recommend this book. One will learn alot about constitutional history, and Professor Strauss is surely correct in that the "living constitution" view is in fact the dominant way in which the Court has gone about its business in practice, regardless of what legal theoreticians have thought. But, don't expect to be convinced by much Professor Strauss has to say about why this is a good thing.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
R
Ross L. Meyer
Dallas, US
★★★★★ 5
Originalist v Living Document , 5 - 4
Format: Hardcover
I found the author's arguments to be logical and compelling. Those who embrace the so-called originalist view of the Constitution, for example Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, claim that they know - with great certainty - the absolute intent of the Constitution's authors. Further they claim that the Constitution provides specifics and principles which of course it does. It is simple to understand the specifics, but what about the principles? Principles, it seems to me, can and do have differing interpretations. One of the definitions of the word principle found in Merriam-Webster states, "a moral rule or belief that helps you know what is right and wrong and that influences your actions." As we all know, rules and beliefs frequently mean different things to different people. If it were not so, Supreme Court decisions would inevitably be decided 9 - 0. Many are familiar with the Supreme Court's case District of Columbia v. Heller in which Justice Scalia opined that the Second Amendment shouldn't stop the U.S. from barring certain weapons. While his opinion certainly seems reasonable to me, I cannot find that principle in the Constitution. Rather it seems to be a logical conclusion based on modern society, mores, and laws - perhaps, as Professor Strauss argues, Common Law. Whether one accepts the originalist view of the Constitution or, as I, believes a living interpretation of the great document is preferable, the one thing we can all agree on is that our nation is one of laws. To that end, it is incumbent on all citizens to accept and abide by the pronouncements of our judges, agree with them or not.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 18, 2014

recommand products