Private credit funds have taken massive market share by heavily lending to SaaS companies. This concentration, often 30-40% of public BDC portfolios, now poses a significant, underappreciated risk as AI threatens to disintermediate the cash flows of these legacy software businesses.
Related Insights
A market bifurcation is underway where investors prioritize AI startups with extreme growth rates over traditional SaaS companies. This creates a "changing of the guard," forcing established SaaS players to adopt AI aggressively or risk being devalued as legacy assets, while AI-native firms command premium valuations.
Unlike prior tech revolutions funded mainly by equity, the AI infrastructure build-out is increasingly reliant on debt. This blurs the line between speculative growth capital (equity) and financing for predictable cash flows (debt), magnifying potential losses and increasing systemic failure risk if the AI boom falters.
Today's market is more fragile than during the dot-com bubble because value is even more concentrated in a few tech giants. Ten companies now represent 40% of the S&P 500. This hyper-concentration means the failure of a single company or trend (like AI) doesn't just impact a sector; it threatens the entire global economy, removing all robustness from the system.
The long-held belief that a complex codebase provides a durable competitive advantage is becoming obsolete due to AI. As software becomes easier to replicate, defensibility shifts away from the technology itself and back toward classic business moats like network effects, brand reputation, and deep industry integration.
A new risk is entering the AI capital stack: leverage. Entities are being created with high-debt financing (80% debt, 20% equity), creating 'leverage upon leverage.' This structure, combined with circular investments between major players, echoes the telecom bust of the late 90s and requires close monitoring.
AI is making core software functionality nearly free, creating an existential crisis for traditional SaaS companies. The old model of 90%+ gross margins is disappearing. The future will be dominated by a few large AI players with lower margins, alongside a strategic shift towards monetizing high-value services.
The increased volatility and shorter defensibility windows in the AI era challenge traditional VC portfolio construction. The logical response to this heightened risk is greater diversification. This implies that early-stage funds may need to be larger to support more investments or write smaller checks into more companies.
While many firms are just now reacting to AI's impact, major credit investors like KKR have been actively underwriting AI-driven business model risk for nearly six years. This proactive, long-term approach to assessing technological disruption is a core part of their due diligence process, not a recent development.
The global economy's reliance on a few dominant tech companies creates systemic risk. Unlike a robust, diversified economy, a downturn in a single key player like NVIDIA could trigger a disproportionately severe global recession, described as 'stage four walking pneumonia.' This concentration makes the entire system fragile.
The existential threat from large language models is greatest for apps that are essentially single-feature utilities (e.g., a keyword recommender). Complex SaaS products that solve a multifaceted "job to be done," like a CRM or error monitoring tool, are far less likely to be fully replaced.
