Skip to main content
logo
  • Funds
    Overview

    Fund Explorer

    • Investment Trusts
    • OEICs
    • ETFs

    Capabilities

    • Investment Trusts
    • Fixed Income
    • Equities
    • Multi-Asset
    • ETFs

    Fund Information

    • Fund news and announcements
    • Regulatory updates
    • Administrative information
    • Policies
    • Legal Documents
    • Fund Management Charges
    • Assessment of Value
  • Investment Themes
    Overview
    • Sustainable investing
  • Insights
    Overview

    Market Insights

    • On the Minds of Investors
    • The Weekly Brief
    • Investment Principles
    • Investment Outlook 2026
    • Monthly Market Review
    • Foundations of Alternatives
    • Why Alternatives?
    • Investing in your future

    Portfolio Insights

    • Asset Allocation Views
    • Fixed Income Views
    • Equity Views
    • Investment Trust Insights
  • How to Invest
  • About Us
    Overview
    • Diversity, Opportunity & Inclusion
    • Our Leadership Team
  • Contact Us
  • Role
  • Country
Manage your account
Search
Menu
Search
You are about to leave the site Close
J.P. Morgan Asset Management’s website and/or mobile terms, privacy and security policies don't apply to the site or app you're about to visit. Please review its terms, privacy and security policies to see how they apply to you. J.P. Morgan Asset Management isn’t responsible for (and doesn't provide) any products, services or content at this third-party site or app, except for products and services that explicitly carry the J.P. Morgan Asset Management name.
CONTINUE Go Back

Recent AI deals recall 1990s telecom network deals

Key players in the AI ecosystem, including AI model developers, hyperscalers (large data centres) and semiconductor chip companies, have recently announced large partnerships. The deals reflect the race to meet exploding demand for computing power and AI leaders are coordinating across the value chain in an attempt to ensure that supply keeps up with the speed of innovation.

The scale and circular nature of these commitments, where suppliers, customers and investors overlap, has prompted comparisons to the vendor-financing loops of late-1990’s tech bubble, which featured similar deals related to the buildout of internet and telecommunications infrastructure. At that time, many telecom equipment makers extended loans or equity stakes to their own customers to finance network expansion. The practice boosted reported sales and demand on both sides. However, when credit tightened, those circular flows unraveled, contributing to the sector’s collapse and broader dot-com crash.

Focusing on fundamentals offers a different perspective

While some caution is warranted, we think the real question is not whether today's deals resemble the dot-com era, but whether the underlying fundamentals do.

We identify three key distinctions:

1. Robust balance sheets

In the 1990s, much of the buildout was financed by companies with limited profitability and relied heavily on external capital. Today's wave is largely funded from hyperscalers that have robust margins and free cash flow. Considering that many past bubbles burst as credit conditions tighten, this buildout appears more resilient to that kind of stress.

In a further contrast with the dot-com bubble, capital is chasing AI, not the other way around—AI has captured roughly half of venture capital dollars this year1 — and spending is anchored in physical infrastructure like chips, electrical equipment and data centers.

2. AI revenue momentum

Whereas early internet firms built first and monetised later, AI is monetising as it builds. Hyperscalers are already generating returns through increased cloud demand and productivity gains in coding, advertising and enterprise tools. The model developers have more nascent business models, but with 99% of US market share in global LLMs2,  revenues are growing. Meanwhile, more businesses are beginning to integrate AI. KPMG’s latest AI Survey shows average AI investment by companies rising 14% from 1Q 2025 to USD 130 million, supported by visible productivity and profitability gains from AI use cases.3

3. Demand outpacing supply

Any wave of heavy capital investment runs the risk of overbuilding. Large overcapacity in the fibre-optic network at the peak of the dot-com era, for example, took many years to absorb. In contrast, data centre vacancy rates are currently at record lows.4 Demand for computing power continues to far outpace supply—more data has been created in the last three years than in all of history,5 and AI workloads are growing significantly.

AI infrastructure is running near full capacity, unlike the idle fiber-optic networks of the early 2000s

Lessons from history

Some caution around AI is warranted. The scale of spending is enormous, the pace unprecedented and some assumptions around return on investment (ROI), such as the useful lives of assets, remain open questions. History reminds us that enthusiasm can run ahead of reality.

However, today’s players have far strong financial foundations than those of the dot-com era, while the monetisation of AI is already underway and the risk of overbuilding seems limited in the near term. As this story unfolds, we believe investors should be selective and use active management to help separate transformative winners from bubbly valuations.

1 Source: Pitchbook, as of 31 August 2025.
2 Source: Statcounter.
3 Source: KPMG AI Quarterly Pulse Survey, September 2025.
4 According to CBRE, the vacancy rate in North America's data center markets has reached a record low of 1.6% in 1H 2025.
5 Source: IDC, as of 31 May 2024.
  • UK
  • Global