Traditional metrics like GDP fail to capture the value of intangibles from the digital economy. Profit margins, which reflect real-world productivity gains from technology, provide a more accurate and immediate measure of its true economic impact.
Related Insights
The best barometer for AI's enterprise value is not replacing the bottom 5% of workers. A better goal is empowering most employees to become 10x more productive. This reframes the AI conversation from a cost-cutting tool to a massive value-creation engine through human-AI partnership.
Unlike traditional software that optimizes for time-in-app, the most successful AI products will be measured by their ability to save users time. The new benchmark for value will be how much cognitive load or manual work is automated "behind the scenes," fundamentally changing the definition of a successful product.
Contrary to expectations, analysis shows that sectors with low profit per employee, such as healthcare and consumer staples, stand to gain the most from AI. High-tech firms already have very high profit per employee, so the relative impact of AI-driven efficiency is smaller.
Focusing on AI for cost savings yields incremental gains. The transformative value comes from rethinking entire workflows to drive top-line growth. This is achieved by either delivering a service much faster or by expanding a high-touch service to a vastly larger audience ("do more").
OpenAI's new GDPVal framework evaluates AI on real-world knowledge work. It found frontier models produce work rated equal to or better than human experts nearly 50% of the time, while being 100 times faster and cheaper. This provides a direct measure of impending economic transformation.
The narrative of AI destroying jobs misses a key point: AI allows companies to 'hire software for a dollar' for tasks that were never economical to assign to humans. This will unlock new services and expand the economy, creating demand in areas that previously didn't exist.
Marks questions whether companies will use AI-driven cost savings to boost profit margins or if competition will force them into price wars. If the latter occurs, the primary beneficiaries of AI's efficiency will be customers, not shareholders, limiting the technology's impact on corporate profitability.
While AI investment has exploded, US productivity has barely risen. Valuations are priced as if a societal transformation is complete, yet 95% of GenAI pilots fail to positively impact company P&Ls. This gap between market expectation and real-world economic benefit creates systemic risk.
Traditional SaaS metrics like 80%+ gross margins are misleading for AI companies. High inference costs lower margins, but if the absolute gross profit per customer is multiples higher than a SaaS equivalent, it's a superior business. The focus should shift from margin percentages to absolute gross profit dollars and multiples.
According to the Kalecki-Levy equation, gross investment spending immediately becomes revenue for another company. Unlike consumption-driven revenue which has immediate wage costs, the cost of investment (depreciation) is recognized slowly over time, creating a powerful, immediate boost to aggregate corporate profits.
