Skip to main content
logo
  • Insights
    Overview

    Liquidity Insights

    • Liquidity Insights Overview
    • Global Liquidity Investment Outlook
    • Tokenization
    • Case Studies
    • Partnership with fintechs
    • ESG Resources for Liquidity Investors
    • Leveraging the Power of Cash Segmentation
    • Cash Investment Policy Statement

    Market Insights

    • Market Insights Overview
    • Eye on the Market
    • Guide to the Markets

    Portfolio Insights

    • Portfolio Insights Overview
    • Currency
    • Fixed Income
    • Long-Term Capital Market Assumptions
    • Strategic Investment Advisory Group
  • Resources
    Overview
    • MORGAN MONEY
    • Global Liquidity Investment Academy
  • About us
    Overview
    • Our Leadership Team
    • Diversity, Opportunity & Inclusion
  • Contact us
  • LIQUIDITY INVESTORS
    • INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS
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
On the Minds of Investors

Why are AI labs raising red flags regarding AI safety?

GS
Gabriela Santos

Chief Market Strategist for the Americas

SA
Stephanie Aliaga

Global Market Strategist

Published: 17/09/2026
When it comes to regulation itself, it’s too early to tell what it looks like in practice.

In Brief

  • AI safety and regulation are moving to the forefront, with industry leaders calling for a slowdown in model development due to genuine safety, financial, and political motivations.
  • A shift from model training to inference could slow capex growth for AI hardware, but may benefit labs’ economics and broaden AI adoption across industries.
  • Market volatility around AI is increasing, with performance diverging between builders and adopters; investors should focus on resilient, diversified portfolios as the theme evolves.

Over this past weekend, the rhetoric around the dangers of artificial intelligence (AI) models reached a crescendo. Anthropic’s chief executive, Dario Amodei, published an essay entitled “We Must Pace the Frontier” calling on the industry to slow the rate of model capability improvement to focus on safety. Within a day, the chief executives of OpenAI, Google DeepMind and xAI had spoken in agreement—a rare united front after years of intense competition over model capabilities. This follows a summer-long increase in public unease over AI and an uptick in model training incidents and warnings1. For investors, there are a few useful questions worth exploring amidst the ever-more-frequent volatility around the AI buildout: 1) what’s behind these sudden calls for a slowdown, 2) what’s the impact on projections of AI-related capex spending, 3) how can different areas of the market react, and 4) how should portfolios be positioned.

1. Why are the AI labs focusing on safety—many things can be true at once

a) Genuine safety concerns given rapid model development: Labs have discussed the possibility that systems become powerful enough to be difficult to control and pose a threat to human safety (or cause significant financial harm) for years. Recently, alarm bells rang after a July incident in which a swarm of agents running inside an OpenAI safety test appeared to have coordinated on their own, broken out of their sandbox, and hacked into another company (Hugging Face)’s systems (without being asked)2.

b) Financial motivations given upcoming IPOs: Some have suggested that with public listings on the horizon, the labs have reason to slow things down and improve their financial metrics. This includes by shifting the focus onto model inference over training (where the economics are better) and quantifying any potential liabilities in the event of safety incidents.

c ) Political motivations given souring public opinion: Data centers are drawing significant public (bipartisan) opposition, with a recent Gallup survey showing that 80% of U.S. adults support AI safety rules over faster development. Local proposals for AI regulation are growing with 1,561 AI-related bills introduced in U.S. state legislatures so far this year3 . AI regulation looks like a question of when, not if, and there may be an advantage to the model labs in proposing the rules themselves, and potentially stifling competition (especially from open-weight Chinese models and smaller players). 

2. What a slower frontier means for the pace of capex—training vs. inference

Current consensus estimates point to hyperscalers spending nearly USD 800billion on capex this year and over USD 1trillion next year. This spending has been hugely beneficial to the “picks and shovels” of the AI buildout, including semiconductors, hardware, and power, which are seeing explosive earnings and returns so far this year. As a result, one of the most important questions for all investors is what will happen to these lofty capex assumptions?

The reality is that most AI compute is no longer spent on training models: Inference (the work of running models that already exist) is expected to account for roughly two-thirds of AI compute this year, up from about a third in 20234.  A slower race to the frontier could shift the mix toward inference further, slowing related capex. Training is the marginal buyer of the newest and most expensive AI hardware systems, so certain “picks and shovels” names could see a deceleration in orders.

However, zooming out a bit: the pace of capex is going to be determined by broader AI adoption across the economy. In this case, a faster shift towards inference may actually be beneficial as it can improve the unit economics for the AI labs. The economics for inference have always been more clearly beneficial for the AI labs than training as it increases the commercial life of each model generation and raises the return on investment of those models. As a result, AI labs can focus more on the cost and practical applications of models.

When it comes to regulation itself, it’s too early to tell what it looks like in practice. Such policies could impact the contours of the AI race but are unlikely to derail AI adoption altogether.

3. How markets are reacting—builders vs. adopters

On Monday, semiconductor stocks fell 6%, but the AI theme as a whole was not for sale, with cybersecurity, software and hyperscaler names all faring better. While assumptions for certain “picks and shovels” may need to be tweaked, hyperscalers could see the opposite effect, with some relief around the magnitude of their capex spend and the related pressure on free cash flow. Additionally, software companies could benefit from a renewed focus on adoption, and a slower frontier lowers the risk that the next release could absorb what they have built on top of it.

4. What this means for portfolios—AI theme is not a monolith

Even the most bullish investors on AI still need to think really carefully about portfolio construction. This includes position sizing, concentration, leverage, and quality. As shown by July’s momentum unwind – and the current volatility episode – market indigestion related to the AI development, buildout, adoption, and regulation is a feature not a bug of the AI secular theme (and is becoming more frequent). The winners and losers are in a state of flux even amidst a still robust AI demand environment.

For investors, this is a reminder of the need to build resilient portfolios that have diversification within and away from the theme. True diversification from the “AI theme” is becoming harder to find – but includes government bonds, gold, and real assets (core real estate and infrastructure). 

1 Last week, an ex-Anthropic employee warned that the labs are gambling with safety, and another researcher shared that his own odds of AI killing all humans were above 10%, stoking public concern further.
 2 OpenAI, "The Hugging Face incident and the road ahead," 2026. 
3 Per MultiState. The 2026 figure is year to date and covers 45 states. MultiState defines AI-related bills broadly, including generative AI, deepfakes, algorithmic accountability, AI in hiring, autonomous vehicles and study task forces.
4 Deloitte, TMT Predictions 2026, "Why AI's next phase will likely demand more computational power, not less." Gartner separately puts 55% of AI infrastructure spending on inference in 2026, rising above 65% by 2029. 
 
 
37788b9e-b05d-11f1-8f92-9d8cb8bfdd98
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER on Artificial Intelligence (AI): This media contains AI generated or enhanced contents, including but not limited to the image, voice, and spoken contents of JPMorgan Asset Management representatives. These elements have been created or modified using AI technology and do not represent an actual recorded appearance/presence or live presentation by the individual. The representations, translations, and avatars in this media may not accurately reflect real individuals, events, or languages. This media is intended for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as a sole source for decision-making.
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Economy
  • Markets
  • Technology
J.P. Morgan Asset Management

  • Investment stewardship
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookie policy
  • Sitemap
J.P. Morgan

  • J.P. Morgan
  • JPMorgan Chase
  • Chase

READ IMPORTANT LEGAL INFORMATION. CLICK HERE >

The value of investments may go down as well as up and investors may not get back the full amount invested.

Copyright 2026 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved.