When AI’s Story Runs Ahead of the Earnings

The AI story is still one of the biggest forces in markets right now. But over the last few weeks, it’s started to feel less like a simple growth narrative and more like a test: can the earnings, cash flows, and real productivity gains actually keep up with what investors have already priced in?

On the spending side, the numbers are extreme. Recent research from multiple global consultancies estimates that meeting global AI compute demand by 2030 would require about two trillion dollars in new annual revenue just to fund the necessary infrastructure. Even after assuming efficiency gains, they still see roughly an eight hundred billion dollar shortfall between what’s needed and what’s currently in view. Other estimates point to hundreds of billions in annual AI and data-center investment already underway, with major technology companies leaning on complex financing structures to keep that build-out going.

At the same time, surveys of companies tell a more nuanced story about results. Various global AI surveys find that many firms are seeing clear cost and revenue benefits at the use-case level, but only about thirty-nine percent report a meaningful impact on profit at the full-company level. A widely cited academic study goes further, suggesting that roughly ninety-five percent of generative AI implementations in large organizations have had no measurable impact on P&L, mainly because they’re bolted onto old workflows instead of changing how the business actually runs.

Additional consulting research points in the same direction: out of more than 1,200 companies, only about five percentare getting tangible value from AI in the form of revenue growth, cost cuts, or better operations, while around sixty percent see little or none. Other industry round-ups show high adoption and solid ROI in pockets, but also that 70–85% of AI projects still fail or stall before they scale.

Investors face a dilemma. Headlines everywhere say tariffs and AI hype are distorting public markets.

Now, the S&P is trading at over 30x earnings—a level historically linked to crashes.

And the Fed is lowering rates, potentially adding fuel to the fire.

Bloomberg asked where experts would personally invest $100,000 for their September edition. One surprising answer? Art.

It’s what billionaires like Bezos, Gates, and the Rockefellers have used to diversify for decades.

Why?

Thanks to the world’s premiere art investing platform, now anyone can access works by legends like Banksy, Basquiat, and Picasso—without needing millions. Want in? Shares in new offerings can sell quickly but…

My subscribers skip their waitlist*

_{*Past performance is not indicative of future returns. Important Reg A disclosures: masterworks.com/cd.}

Overlay that with the market side: multiple pieces of recent research and commentary flag that AI-linked tech valuations are elevated and, in some cases, may already assume a very optimistic version of the future. Some analysts argue that the long-run revenue opportunity from AI is large enough to justify current capex and valuations. Others, including academics and policy analysts, focus on the growing web of cross-investments, vendor financing, and circular deals between AI infrastructure players and their biggest customers as a classic late-cycle warning sign.

Put simply: the AI engine is real, but the math is tight. Trillions in spending are being justified on earnings that, for now, are still concentrated in a relatively small group of leaders. Outside that core, a lot of organizations are experimenting, spending, and talking about AI — without yet seeing a clean translation into profit.

This is the tension worth watching:

The interesting question now isn’t whether AI matters — it clearly does. The question is which companies can prove, quarter by quarter, that their AI investments are more than a narrative, and whether the rest of the market will be patient enough to wait for everyone else to catch up.

Education, not investment advice.

Sources: