In recent weeks, as I watched the entertainment in the market with a constant prayer if AI was neglected in the price, great technology responded with something much more constructive.
The biggest gas will be in AI at up to $600,000 million in 2026. When companies of this size raise capital at this scale, they are not responding to a cycle, they are not trying to define it.
The impact of these numbers is magnified when the corporate language is stripped away and brought to the macroeconomic level. Inversion, considered as the gross formation of physical capital, It predicts more than 21% of GDP, which will exceed $30 billion by 2025.
Inversion in software, servers and data centers related to artificial intelligence is estimated to have accounted for 37% of real PIB growth in the first new months of 2025. So the inversion of more than 600,000 million concentrated in digital infrastructure for a few actors is not a footnote.
From a purely financial point of view, the effect is immediate, as the increased reversal increases the combined demand and compensates for the loss of traction of the other more powerful engines.
AI is not an add-on, it is the one who takes charge of this estate and does it most profoundly.
But asking yourself in this reading is not enough. The true economic effect of AI is not where it is today until it allows it to produce labor with lower returns. Hi productivity enters This is a unique factor that has disappointed developed economies for years.
The most conservative estimates point to a sustained medium-term improvement in labor output if adoption is broad and effective. In an economy like the United States, there is a difference between growth inertia or the restoration of structural dynamism.
The problem is that productivity is not tied to contention. Every relevant technological leap means a profound reorganization of the workforce. Artificial intelligence is no exception.
automation of tasks, especially for administrative workers, of analytical and digital services brings pressures to the labor market that are not always properly absorbed. Less stability, salary adjustments and forced transitions are part of the process.
From a macroeconomic perspective, this may limit the positive impact on growth is reflected in lower affordable rents and higher public consumption in the area of social protection.
The interpretation of what is happening in the market class is vital if we bear in mind that, with the exception of the Meta, every cancellation announcement has been followed by a sharp punishment of shares, as the loss of capitalization in the last two weeks has been 840,000 million euros combined. No sido and bromo.
For more detail on this tension in announcements and prices, it’s worth looking at the returns these companies have traditionally generated on their upside capital, which is would mean the transfer of enormous capital to its results.
By current metrics, Alphabet (Google) has a return on capital (ROIC) of around 26-30%; Microsoft seeks 22-24%; Amazon, for its part, shows a more modest ROIC, around 12-13%, reflecting its huge asset base; while Meta reports the highest return of nearly 30%.
If these clawback charges apply to combined capital expenditures in excess of $630,000 million, the implied net benefit required to support them would be in the range of an additional $130,000 to $180,000 million net under the ROIC provision. cited.
Now, taking the revenues reported by these four companies in their most recent ventures, they are in the range of $1.7-2 billion annually, with more modest twenty-year growth than the reported expansion of capital expenditures; Translating these inverse increases into a comparable jump in revenue in a single year would be extremely challenging, as assuming an average net margin of 26% would tend to generate an additional $585,000 million in revenue, far more than the markets are willing to enjoy without clear first fruits.
This rudimentary math helps explain why the market has been punished by price factors at each announcement – because in the short space there is no direct line between an inversion and an immediate increase in earnings or benefits to justify the real values – even though the strategic logic of the big space remains solid.
For this reason, it is better than discussing gas to accept what is actually consolidating. These companies not only strengthen the technological trend, but organize the next stage of the economy and life as we know it.
They control consumption, channel distribution, mediate social relations and structure access to knowledge. They did not invent all these items, but they were integrated and must be converted to them a coherent system that is difficult to disappoint and convenient for the user.
The AI is not an add-on, it is the one taking over the management of this estate and doing it most profoundly. To deny it is sterile.
The relevant debate is not whether this inversion is exaggerated, as long as we are aware of the type of society we are inverting. The capital has chosen you, the story is complete, and the process is progressing without apparent friction. To understand this is not simply to celebrate it, but to assume that the future being built is not a rupture until the acceleration of reality that drives our present.
Leave a Reply