2026-01-04 04:22:02

Recently, Morgan Asset Management analyst Michael Cembalest made an interesting observation — the contribution of capital expenditure in the tech sector to US GDP growth over the past three quarters was as high as 40%-45%. How outrageous is this figure? Compared to the first three quarters of 2023, when this proportion was less than 5%.

In other words, this wave of US economic growth is not driven by traditional consumption, but is directly propelled by "investment engines" like AI, data centers, and information processing equipment. What does this mean?

For the stock market, this will strengthen performance expectations across the entire computing power industry chain — chips, servers, cloud infrastructure, and companies at each link have reasons to be optimistic about the outlook. But it also harbors risks: the current economic growth and profit expectations are overly dependent on the capital expenditure pace of a few tech giants. If these major players start to slow down capex, macro growth and corporate earnings expectations could collapse simultaneously. This highly concentrated growth driver appears quite fragile.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NotAFinancialAdvice

· 16h ago

40%-45%？ These numbers are a bit outrageous, it feels like Big Tech is forcibly supporting the US economy. Once these big players cut their capex in half, what will happen next is really uncertain. The computing power industry chain is indeed attractive, but honestly, such high concentration is a bit intimidating.

View OriginalReply0

NotGonnaMakeIt

· 01-04 04:49

My goodness, 5% suddenly skyrocketed to 40-45%? This feels like just blowing bubbles... Wait, so the US economy is now supported by a few tech giants? That’s quite stimulating. If Capex slows down, it’s game over? This logic seems a bit scary. The chip sector is indeed about to take off, but with such high risks, do you really dare to go all in? Blame AI, now everything is inseparable from AI... This is probably why I’ve recently been optimistic about the computing power chain, but I don’t dare to bet too heavily. It feels like a huge gamble, betting that CAPEX will never stop.

View OriginalReply0

SingleForYears

· 01-04 04:45

40% to 5%, this shift is really outrageous. The US economy is now relying on AI to survive this wave. Now I understand, once FAANGs tighten their wallets, the entire economy could directly stall, the risk is huge. Wait, does this mean that the chip and server markets are far from over? I need to take another look. Basically, it's a bet that the AI wave won't stop, but I feel like this logic is a bit too fragile. So the current profit expectations are actually betting on Meta and OpenAI's capex plans, which is a bit ironic. GDP growth and stock price increases are pointing in the same direction. If there's a real reversal, it would be very dangerous. All I can say is that tech stocks are now dancing on the ceiling; once they can't move anymore, it's game over.

View OriginalReply0

TokenStorm

· 01-04 04:43

The 40%-45% figure indeed can't be sustained anymore, jumping directly from 5%. This is a reflection of the giants疯狂砸钱. But the problem is, once capex hits the brakes, the entire economic growth logic collapses, and this risk factor is a bit outrageous. --- The AI wave has indeed driven the entire industry chain, but now it's like gambling on who is the last to leave, with no clear bottom in mind. --- In simple terms, this is just a few giants' capital expenditure artificially supporting economic figures. It's too fragile, and historical concentration levels haven't often ended well. --- The day capex slows down will come, and all profit expectations will need to be re-priced. Only then will the retail investors realize what a bubble burst really means. --- From on-chain data and macro narrative logic, the recent surge is essentially due to shrinking arbitrage space. Whoever takes the last position will be doomed. --- GDP growth relies entirely on tech giants' capex; this is the eye of the storm. The closer to the center, the more dangerous it is, but FOMO still pushes me to keep moving forward.

View OriginalReply0

MidnightMEVeater

· 01-04 04:38

Good morning to everyone at 3 a.m. This is the classic sandwich attack. The Federal Reserve has prepared the bread for you, now just wait to see who bites first. From 40% to 5%, the speed of this shift... I keep saying that tech giants are engaging in dark pool trading, treating the entire macro fundamentals as a liquidity trap to exploit.

View OriginalReply0

DefiOldTrickster

· 01-04 04:34

Oh no, it's the same old trick, just like the crazy ICO days. 40% of capex supporting GDP? I knew this thing was doomed, just wait and see.

View OriginalReply0

failed_dev_successful_ape

· 01-04 04:31

Damn, jumping from 5% directly to over 40%? This is the real story behind AI hype. The US economy has been hijacked by a few tech giants. Wait, when capex slows down, is that the bottoming opportunity? GDP relies entirely on big corporations, sounds like a bubble in the air, my friend. Now I understand why only tech stocks are making money; other industries are being drained. If this trend continues, I guess by this time next year, we'll be hearing more bearish forecasts. Energy chips are indeed a sweet chain, but the risks are not without reason. As expected, it's still all about betting on compute power; betting that big firms won't slow down simultaneously.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCry

· 01-04 04:30

The shift from 40% to 5% shows that AI is really just forcing the economy to survive. Speaking of which, once these tech giants hit the brakes, how will it all end? It feels like we're in Schrödinger's bubble right now. I should have gone all in on chips earlier; now I regret it. The dependency is ridiculously high... I'm really worried that if the sentiment of big companies changes one day, it could collapse. So are the current expectations still based on AI concept stocks? It feels a bit虚. The concentration is so high that the risk is even greater; it seems the market hasn't realized this yet. Q1 capex data needs to be closely watched; that's the real truth.

View OriginalReply0