THE ETERNAL SOVEREIGN

Tag: artificial-intelligence

  • If the late 1990s are any guide, the AI boom may still have plenty of room to run.

    Many investors have compared today’s AI expansion to the dotcom boom of the late 1990s, when the infrastructure powering the internet was rapidly developed. The comparison makes sense given the enormous amount of capital now being invested to commercialize transformative, potentially world-changing technology. It also feels familiar because technology stocks fueled one of the strongest market rallies in history more than 25 years ago, and similar optimism is now surrounding AI, with investors aggressively raising valuations for companies expected to benefit from the trend.

    The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Comparison

    Although we don’t view the analogy as perfect — for several reasons discussed below — it is still useful to compare the trajectory of the tech-heavy Nasdaq-100 during the rise of AI with its performance during the early internet era, marked by the launch of Netscape, the first mainstream web browser.

    As shown in the chart titled “Based on the Dotcom Era Comparison, the AI Bull Market Seems Fairly Reserved,” the recent climb in the Nasdaq-100 has been far more gradual than the explosive surge seen over a comparable four-year stretch in the late 1990s. From this perspective, the current AI-driven bull market — now approaching four years in duration — could still have significant upside ahead. Since the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, the Nasdaq-100 has gained more than 140%, whereas the index soared over 1,090% from Netscape’s debut to the peak of the dotcom bubble in March 2000.

    Performance of the Nasdaq 100 During 1994-2001 and 2022-2026

    We’re not suggesting history will repeat itself or that the Nasdaq-100 is destined to surge another 900% before collapsing. The broader point is that the market’s current trajectory may be more rational than many assume, and the present environment could resemble 1997 more than the euphoric conditions of late 1999 or early 2000.

    Why This Cycle May Be Different

    We recognize that “this time is different” can be dangerous language in investing. Still, every historical cycle has unique characteristics. While the AI boom shares some similarities with the dotcom era from a market perspective, the differences may be even more important.

    Stronger market leaders.

    Today’s dominant AI companies are largely financing the AI buildout through internal cash flow rather than speculative fundraising. Their business models are broader and more durable than the website-centric companies of the dotcom era, while their balance sheets are significantly healthier than those of the fiber-optic equipment firms that led the late 1990s rally. Certain AI niches may display speculative behavior, but those are not the primary drivers of the public markets.

    More grounded valuations.

    At the peak of the dotcom bubble in March 2000, the technology sector traded at roughly 58 times forward earnings estimates, versus about 25 times today. Back then, investors often focused on “clicks” and “eyeballs” instead of financial fundamentals. In contrast, today’s AI leaders are generally being valued based on revenue growth, earnings potential, and cash flow generation.

    More mature IPOs.

    Technology IPOs today tend to be larger, supported by established business models and meaningful revenue streams. Even companies that are not yet profitable often have a clearer and more believable path toward profitability than many internet startups did during the dotcom boom.

    AI adoption is still in its early stages.

    The current phase is centered on building AI infrastructure, while mass AI adoption has only just begun. During the late 1990s, speculative enthusiasm shifted heavily toward consumer internet companies that ultimately struggled to monetize their user bases, even after the infrastructure was built. Today, the eventual winners of the AI adoption phase remain uncertain. However, the financial strength of the infrastructure providers creates a stronger foundation for future AI-driven businesses to emerge.

    Summary

    There are undeniable parallels between the current AI-driven bull market and the dotcom boom of the late 1990s. Technology stocks are again leading the market, valuations are elevated, speculative pockets exist, and the underlying technological advances could reshape everyday life.

    At the same time, there are key differences in the quality of market leadership, valuation discipline, the scale of speculation, and the stage of the technology cycle. Those distinctions suggest the current environment may be more sustainable than the final stages of the dotcom bubble.

    Overall, the view remains constructive: this bull market may still have further room to run, with the technology sector continuing to lead. Industrials are also expected to benefit as AI infrastructure expands and adoption accelerates.

  • The Hidden SpaceX Opportunity: Five Semiconductor Stocks Driving Momentum Ahead of Its IPO.

    A $2 trillion IPO doesn’t emerge in isolation. Long before SpaceX lists on a public exchange, the technology stack behind its reusable rockets and AI-powered systems is already being built by a select group of publicly traded firms—and according to Dylan Jovine, founder of Behind the Markets, most investors are looking in the wrong place.

    “SpaceX doesn’t exist without chips,” Jovine argues. The company’s ability to autonomously land rockets and expand its Starlink satellite network depends heavily on semiconductor technology—designed, fabricated, packaged, and delivered by companies investors can access right now.

    Here are the five stocks Jovine sees as best positioned to gain from this trend.

    Taiwan Semiconductor: The Foundry Powering Every Player on This List

    No matter which company designs the next breakthrough in AI chips—whether it’s NVIDIA, AMD, Intel, or even Elon Musk’s rumored AI5—Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is almost always the one that brings those designs to life in silicon.

    Jovine calls TSMC the backbone of the entire AI chip ecosystem, a view reinforced by its latest earnings results.

    “TSMC benefits regardless of who wins the chip race,” he notes. “They’re positioned to succeed across the board.”

    The company commands a leading role in advanced semiconductor manufacturing—one that rivals, and in some respects even surpasses, SpaceX’s dominance in orbital launches.

    That advantage only deepens as chip designs grow more complex. With next-generation GPUs, AI5, and emerging agentic AI processors demanding increasingly advanced fabrication, TSMC’s technological edge becomes more difficult—not easier—for competitors to match.

    Intel: A CPU Revival the Market Is Only Beginning to Recognize

    The rise of agentic AI—systems capable of taking action, not just generating responses—is quietly reshaping demand across the semiconductor landscape.

    In the early phase of the AI boom, GPUs dominated, with roughly eight GPUs sold for every CPU. According to Jovine, that ratio has already tightened to around four-to-one, and Intel’s CEO has indicated it could eventually move closer to parity.

    For Intel, whose core strength has long been CPU design, that shift represents a major tailwind. “It’s like a comeback story,” Jovine suggests, likening it to a powerful return rather than a fading legacy.

    The stock has already begun to reflect this changing narrative, climbing more than 100% in the past month. Still, Jovine argues the opportunity is rooted in structural demand, not short-term hype. With the so-called “Magnificent Seven” expected to pour nearly $200 billion into AI infrastructure, the need for CPUs—especially for agentic workloads—is scaling faster than the industry was built to handle.

    That gap between demand and supply is exactly where pricing power tends to emerge.

    For those concerned about entering after a sharp rally, Jovine takes a balanced view: periods of consolidation are both natural and necessary. The broader trend, he believes, is still in its early stages.

    AMD: Positioned to Capture Both Ends of the AI Boom

    Advanced Micro Devices is benefiting from the same surge in CPU demand that’s boosting Intel, while also gaining from its exposure to GPUs.

    The stock has jumped करीब 70% over the past month, fueled by the broader wave of enterprise spending on AI infrastructure.

    Microsoft has indicated that around 90% of Fortune 500 companies are now exploring agentic AI solutions—and AMD plays a key role in enabling that shift.

    The investment case is clear: as businesses push cloud providers to integrate more autonomous, agent-driven capabilities, that demand cascades down to chipmakers. AMD is right in the middle of that flow.

    NVIDIA: “Cheap” on a Different Scale

    It’s not a word most investors would use for NVIDIA—but Jovine does: cheap, at least in relative terms.

    While Intel and AMD have surged on the CPU narrative, NVIDIA has been moving sideways, consolidating as it waits for the next phase of its growth story.

    The initial GPU-driven rally may have cooled, but the rise of agentic AI is setting the stage for a fresh wave of demand in high-performance computing.

    Jovine points to research suggesting a potential $24 trillion valuation for NVIDIA—a figure that naturally invites skepticism, yet is argued on the basis of the company’s dominant market position and exceptional pricing power in GPUs.

    With the Magnificent Seven collectively committing massive capital to AI infrastructure, the question becomes less about if demand materializes and more about where that spending ultimately flows—and NVIDIA remains a primary destination.

    Amkor Technology: The Overlooked Link in the Semiconductor Chain

    The least recognizable name on the list may offer one of the more compelling opportunities.

    Amkor Technology operates in semiconductor packaging—a segment that was historically viewed as a low-margin, commoditized business.

    That perception is shifting. As chip architectures grow more complex, companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing are increasingly producing “chiplets”—modular components that must be precisely assembled before they can function as a complete system.

    This is where Amkor comes in. Modern chip packaging now involves highly advanced processes, requiring precision engineering at microscopic scales. As complexity rises, so does the value—and strategic importance—of companies providing these services.

    Jovine highlights a key signal: when TSMC built its major fabrication plant in Arizona, Amkor followed by establishing its own facility just seven miles away. That proximity isn’t accidental—it reflects a tightly linked supply chain, with Amkor’s performance increasingly tied to TSMC’s production volumes.

    After rallying about 65%, the stock saw a modest pullback in late April. Jovine views this not as a red flag, but as a typical consolidation phase following a sharp repricing—suggesting the broader investment thesis remains intact.

    AI Spending Keeps the Momentum Alive

    SpaceX may be capturing the spotlight, but the real enablers are already trading in public markets. From chip design and fabrication to advanced packaging, the backbone supporting what could be the most anticipated IPO in history runs through these companies—and the Magnificent Seven’s record-level AI spending continues to reinforce that demand.

    This trend has staying power. The cycle doesn’t fade until the capital behind it does.

  • Nvidia: AI Boom May Be Losing Steam as $78bn Forecast Falls Short of Expectations

    Nvidia’s (NASDAQ: NVDA) $78bn revenue projection would once have sparked a broad rally in global equities. This time, investors paused.

    The stock initially slipped before edging slightly higher in post-market trading. In this stage of the AI cycle, rapid expansion alone is no longer enough to impress the market.

    Over the past two years, artificial intelligence exposure commanded a premium almost regardless of valuation. Capital flowed aggressively into the AI infrastructure layer, with Nvidia at the epicentre. Its chips became foundational to hyperscale data centres, sovereign digital strategies, and enterprise AI rollouts. Valuations climbed on expectations of sustained, exponential demand. Now, scrutiny has intensified.

    A $78bn forecast confirms demand remains robust—but it also suggests expectations were already set near perfection. Markets are no longer rewarding size alone; they are evaluating the durability, quality, and profitability behind that growth.

    Investors are calling for tighter operating discipline. They want clearer visibility on margins, pricing strength, and forward orders. Strong revenue growth does not automatically guarantee lasting shareholder returns when valuations assume near-flawless execution.

    Nvidia’s competitive position remains strong. It continues to underpin the AI infrastructure ecosystem. Hyperscale cloud providers are spending aggressively, governments are advancing sovereign AI ambitions, and enterprise adoption is accelerating. The structural tailwinds remain intact.

    What has changed is the market’s tolerance for uncertainty. Premium valuations now demand premium predictability—stable gross margins, resilient pricing power, and a more diversified revenue mix.

    Markets are likely to scrutinise customer concentration, especially reliance on a limited group of hyperscale clients. They will question whether current capital expenditure by major cloud operators marks a cyclical high or the start of a sustained multi-year investment cycle.

    Any indication that AI-driven capex is plateauing rather than accelerating could trigger disproportionate market reactions. Competitive pressures are also building. As large cloud providers ramp up in-house chip development, investors will increasingly assess how defensible Nvidia’s ecosystem remains amid the rise of alternative silicon architectures.

    This shift does not negate the AI revolution — it sharpens its contours.

    The implications stretch far beyond a single company. Semiconductor peers, advanced memory manufacturers, data-centre infrastructure providers and AI-centric software firms have largely traded in tandem with Nvidia’s rally. A more discerning market is now separating businesses that translate AI adoption into concrete earnings from those still priced primarily on long-term potential.

    Dispersion within AI equities is likely to widen over the coming year. Infrastructure leaders with strong cash flow and resilient balance sheets may continue to attract support. By contrast, application-layer companies that have yet to prove sustainable monetisation could face heightened volatility.

    Institutional investors are applying greater discipline to their assumptions. Portfolio managers who heavily overweighted AI leaders during the initial surge are revisiting long-term growth trajectories beyond peak deployment phases. Scenarios in which hyperscale spending moderates into 2027 are increasingly part of valuation models, with capital intensity and return on invested capital under renewed scrutiny.

    AI companies are being assessed more like established enterprises than early-stage disruptors. Market psychology has matured.

    For Nvidia, this phase could ultimately reinforce its leadership if operational execution remains strong. Consistent free cash flow, ongoing innovation cycles and deep integration across the AI value chain offer structural advantages. However, expectations have risen materially. Earnings announcements may drive sharper volatility as the scope for positive surprise narrows.

    Markets are transitioning from thematic enthusiasm to detailed financial examination. Compelling narratives must now be backed by measurable precision.

    The AI expansion is tangible. The capital investment is tangible. The demand is tangible. But investors are no longer rewarding mere participation in the theme — they are rewarding disciplined growth, sustainable margins and transparent capital deployment.

    Nvidia’s $78bn revenue outlook affirms that large-scale AI expansion continues. The subdued market response underscores a parallel reality: momentum alone is insufficient to justify elevated valuations.

    The next stage of the AI cycle will favour companies capable of turning market leadership into reliable profitability. Those that fall short may discover that even strong revenue growth offers limited insulation when expectations are already stretched.

    Sources: Nigel

  • Alphabet Signals AI Confidence as Capital Spending Ramps Up

    Google plans to increase capital expenditures to as much as $185 billion this year, significantly exceeding market expectations of around $120 billion. Robust growth in search advertising and Google Cloud has provided Alphabet with the financial flexibility to pursue this aggressive investment strategy. According to Morgan Stanley analysts, the sharp rise in spending signals that AI is driving higher engagement and improved monetisation across Google’s core businesses, with search revenue climbing 17% and cloud revenue surging 48% in the most recent quarter.

    Meta conveyed a similar message after projecting annual capital expenditures of $135 billion, supported by evidence that AI is enhancing advertising effectiveness. However, not all technology giants have been able to convince investors that rising capital spending is justified. Microsoft, for example, saw its shares fall sharply—erasing more than $350 billion in market value—after its cloud performance disappointed, even as its own capital investment ramped up.

    Amazon is also under pressure to sustain strong growth at AWS while continuing to expand data-center capacity. In contrast, Alphabet’s sharply rising cloud backlog highlights growing demand for AI infrastructure and tools, lending credibility to its aggressive spending plans.

    The trade-off, however, is immediate. Morgan Stanley estimates that Alphabet’s free cash flow per share could decline by 58% in 2026 and by as much as 80% in 2027 as higher capital expenditures flow through the business. In effect, the company is sacrificing near-term cash returns in exchange for longer-term strategic positioning.

    Alphabet now stands at a crossroads. Strong advertising and cloud growth point to early benefits from AI investments, but the sheer scale of spending increases execution risk. If the added capacity delivers sustained revenue growth, the strategy will appear well-timed. If growth slows, Alphabet could face a thinner cash buffer and heightened expectations. For now, the company is betting that leading with investment is essential to staying ahead—and the market will be watching closely to see whether returns keep pace.

    Sources: Pratyush Thakur

  • AI holds up a mirror to tech—and the reflection is unsettling

    Tech just suffered a selloff of a different kind. This was not about rates, recession fears, or a routine earnings disappointment. It was the market catching its own reflection in the AI mirror—and flinching.

    When confidence cracks, the Nasdaq does not rotate. It drops the floor. The S&P followed along, dutifully diversified in theory, while tech still steers the wheel.

    The trigger was AMD, but the message was broader. In a fully priced bull market, “good” results are not good enough when investors have already paid in advance for perfection. When expectations stretch into the stratosphere, even a strong quarter feels like a letdown. AMD was not punished for weakness—it was punished for failing to deliver magic commensurate with the valuation it carried.

    What followed was less about fundamentals than positioning. This was the market unwinding a narrative that had become too tidy, too crowded, too self-assured. When everyone leans the same way, even a minor wobble turns into a shove.

    And the shove traveled fast. Once the story lost its grip, selling turned indiscriminate. Yesterday’s AI champions were treated like stale trades. Hardware names sank alongside software darlings. Picks, shovels, and miners all landed in the same risk bucket as investors dumped exposure wholesale.

    This was never just a chip story. The real fault line runs through software—and it is psychological. The market is now entertaining a new fear: not that AI lifts all boats, but that it punctures the hulls of those that assumed they were unsinkable.

    Software cracked first because belief ran deepest there. It was the cleanest narrative in the market—AI as a quiet margin expander, a tailwind that boosted earnings without disrupting the underlying structure. That assumption is now being dismantled in real time.

    The uncomfortable inversion is coming into focus. The companies that digitized the fastest may also be the most exposed. AI is not arriving as a polite consultant. It is entering as a tireless shadow workforce—one that never negotiates, never sleeps, and learns faster than corporate hierarchies can adapt. And it writes code, too.

    That is why this moment feels like a break, not a revision. When markets stop debating how much something earns and start questioning why it exists, prices do not drift lower. They fracture.

    You can see it in the tape. This is not a careful repricing—it is an exit rush. One day the debate is about margins; the next it is about whether the product becomes a feature inside a larger model.

    Once that fear enters the room, it spreads quickly across anything tied to monetized knowledge work—data platforms, marketing software, legal tools, analytics, even media and advertising adjacencies. If AI does the work, who gets paid for it? That is the question markets are stress-testing in real time.

    For years, software earned its margins by controlling workflow—owning the screen, the process, the friction. Humans did the thinking; software rented them the tools and charged a recurring toll. Predictable. Scalable. Defensible. That doctrine is now under review.

    Bitcoin and gold sliding alongside tech is telling. When risk sentiment turns, speculative layers lose sponsorship first. It is not ideology—it is mechanics. When leverage gets pulled back, froth goes first.

    This does not mean tech is finished. It means tech is being tested.

    Every cycle follows the same arc: markets fall in love with innovation, price it as destiny, then recoil when destiny arrives with disruption and bills. AI is no longer just a growth story—it is a competitive weapon. That creates winners and losers, not a rising tide. The trade is shifting from owning the theme to owning the survivors.

    This is what a regime change looks like within a sector. Euphoria gives way to scrutiny. Momentum yields to forensic analysis. Markets stop paying for possibility and start paying for proof.

    Ironically, the most technologically advanced firms often feel the shock first—they sit closest to the blast radius. If your business automates knowledge work and a universal automation engine shows up, you do not get to pretend the rules stayed the same.

    Panic, of course, is rarely precise. Markets swing the hammer before identifying the nail. These moments tend to overshoot because fear moves faster than analysis.

    This looks less like the end of AI and more like a narrative reckoning. The market is re-evaluating who captures value, who loses the toll booth, and who gets displaced.

    AI is not killing tech.
    It is forcing tech to prove it has a moat—not just a story.

    When markets stop buying dreams, they start auditing business models.

    Sources: Stephen Innes