Underwriting debt for AI data centers is more challenging than for oil extraction. While oil is a predictable commodity, the value of GPUs depreciates rapidly and their long-term worth is uncertain, making it harder for lenders to gauge the risk of these tech-heavy assets over time.

Related Insights

A financial flywheel, reminiscent of the pre-2008 crisis, is fueling the AI data center boom. Demand for yield-generating securities from investors incentivizes the creation of more data center projects, decoupling the financing from the actual viability or profitability of the underlying AI technology.

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.

Large tech companies are creating SPVs—separate legal entities—to build data centers. This strategy allows them to take on significant debt for AI infrastructure projects without that debt appearing on the parent company's balance sheet. This protects their pristine credit ratings, enabling them to borrow money more cheaply for other ventures.

Unlike the asset-light software era dominated by venture equity, the current AI and defense tech cycle is asset-heavy, requiring massive capital for hardware and infrastructure. This fundamental shift makes private credit a necessary financing tool for growth companies, forcing a mental model change away from Silicon Valley's traditional debt aversion.

Different financing vehicles focus on different layers of data center risk. Securitization primarily underwrites the long-term value of the physical building and tenant lease. The risk of rapid GPU obsolescence is largely ignored by these structures and is instead borne by private credit and equity investors who finance the hardware itself.

The debate over AI chip depreciation highlights a flaw in traditional accounting. GAAP was designed for physical assets with predictable lifecycles, not for digital infrastructure like GPUs whose value creation is dynamic. This mismatch leads to accusations of financial manipulation where firms are simply following outdated rules.

AI data center financing is built on a dangerous "temporal mismatch." The core collateral—GPUs—has a useful life of just 18-24 months due to intense use, while being financed by long-term debt. This creates a constant, high-stakes refinancing risk.

The enormous capital needed for AI data centers is forcing a shift in tech financing. The appearance of credit default swaps on Oracle debt signals the re-emergence of large-scale debt and leverage, a departure from the equity and free-cash-flow models that have characterized the industry for two decades.

Tech giants are no longer funding AI capital expenditures solely with their massive free cash flow. They are increasingly turning to debt issuance, which fundamentally alters their risk profile. This introduces default risk and requires a repricing of their credit spreads and equity valuations.

Companies like CoreWeave collateralize massive loans with NVIDIA GPUs to fund their build-out. This creates a critical timeline problem: the industry must generate highly profitable AI workloads before the GPUs, which have a limited lifespan and depreciate quickly, wear out. The business model fails if valuable applications don't scale fast enough.