A surge in business technology investment was misinterpreted as an AI-powered economic boom. It more likely reflected companies front-loading purchases of semiconductors and electronics to avoid paying impending 25% tariffs, rather than a fundamental acceleration in AI-related capital expenditure.
Related Insights
The strongest evidence that corporate AI spending is generating real ROI is that major tech companies are not just re-ordering NVIDIA's chips, but accelerating those orders quarter over quarter. This sustained, growing demand from repeat customers validates the AI trend as a durable boom.
The current AI spending spree by tech giants is historically reminiscent of the railroad and fiber-optic bubbles. These eras saw massive, redundant capital investment based on technological promise, which ultimately led to a crash when it became clear customers weren't willing to pay for the resulting products.
The US economy is not broadly strong; its perceived strength is almost entirely driven by a massive, concentrated bet on AI. This singular focus props up markets and growth metrics, but it conceals widespread weakness in other sectors, creating a high-stakes, fragile economic situation.
Current AI investment patterns mirror the "round-tripping" seen in the late '90s tech bubble. For example, NVIDIA invests billions in a startup like OpenAI, which then uses that capital to purchase NVIDIA chips. This creates an illusion of demand and inflated valuations, masking the lack of real, external customer revenue.
Major tech companies view the AI race as a life-or-death struggle. This 'existential crisis' mindset explains their willingness to spend astronomical sums on infrastructure, prioritizing survival over short-term profitability. Their spending is a defensive moat-building exercise, not just a rational pursuit of new revenue.
Current AI spending appears bubble-like, but it's not propping up unprofitable operations. Inference is already profitable. The immense cash burn is a deliberate, forward-looking investment in developing future, more powerful models, not a sign of a failing business model. This re-frames the financial risk.
Despite a surge in AI-related capital expenditures that highlights the U.S., Taiwan, and surprisingly Sweden and the UK, this investment trend has not yet become a significant driver of currency returns. For now, it's considered a minor tailwind rather than a game-changing factor for FX markets.
Contrary to the common narrative, large equity inflows into the US from the AI theme are not reliably driving dollar strength. History shows Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has a much stronger correlation with FX performance. Currently, timely FDI indicators are not showing a meaningful pickup, suggesting a key support for the dollar is missing.
Michael Burry, known for predicting the 2008 crash, argues the AI bubble isn't about the technology's potential but about the massive capital expenditure on infrastructure (chips, data centers) that he believes far outpaces actual end-user demand and economic utility.
While spending on AI infrastructure has exceeded expectations, the development and adoption of enterprise-level AI applications have significantly lagged. Progress is visible, but it's far behind where analysts predicted it would be, creating a disconnect between the foundational layer and end-user value.