The AI bubble is a 'rational bubble', says Mohamed El-Erian

요약 보기

AI 붐은 생산성 향상 잠재력이 커 경제에 긍정적이며 이는 합리적 버블이다. 소수 승자만 남고 일부 투자는 손실이 날 것. 금은 중앙은행·기관·투기세력의 달러 분산 수요로 계속 오를 것이며 5000달러도 가능하다고 봄. 비트코인은 펀더멘털이 금보다 뒤처져 변동성이 클 것. 사모신용 문제는 바퀴벌레 수준의 고립 사례로 금융안정을 위협하지 않는다고 평가.

다듬은 글

※ 자동 자막 원문(다듬기 전)

01. Joining us right now to take a look at the markets, Muhammad Alian's with us. Aliance is chief economic advisor. Uh Muhammad, it's nice to see you. I don't know if you were able to listen to the conversation we're having with uh Mr. Kaplan earlier about what's happening in private credit, but some of the issues that he he raised towards the end about sort of where our economy really is.

02. as we were discussing this this paper by Jason Ferman uh where we're looking at the AI boom being you know such a huge part of the economy and effectively saying if there was no AI boom and you took that out of the GDP numbers you'd be at basically flat what do you make of that and is that something that concerns you or is that a a feature not a bug there is no doubt that we are in an AIdriven economy and for good reason the promise of AI in terms of productivity gains is huge huge.

03. So if we didn't have AI, we wouldn't look as good as we we do now when we we wouldn't be outperforming the rest of the world. But we do have AI. So I'm not too worried that it's an AIdriven boom. What I would stress is this is a rational bubble that a lot of money is being thrown at different AI actors at the micro level because the promise is so huge.

04. That is a good thing. That's what distinguish us from the rest of the world because different AI companies are competing and excelling. However, at the end of the day, they're going to be just a few winners, a handful of winners, and therefore some of the investment will result in tears. But overall for the economy, this is good news.

05. It promises significant productivity gains. Okay, so that's the good news. explain valuations at the same time that we have gold rising at the levels we do then. Yeah. And the gold issue is very simple. The rest of the world while they trust US private sector they are worried about the dollar and you see this in the extent to which inflows into our markets from the rest of the world are hedged.

06. So the rest of the world says I want to go long US enterprise but I want to short the dollar. How do they diversify away from the dollar? They slowly buy gold. And if you look at the recent numbers, you have two drivers of gold prices, both of which are in play for a long time. You have central banks slowly moving from the dollar into gold slowly, and you have institutional investors increasing the allocation to gold in their model portfolio.

07. On top of that, you have speculators. So that means it's not going to be straight up, but it will continue to go up in my opinion. So gold goes up to what? And then and then how do you think about that in the context of Bitcoin? So first to what? It wouldn't surprise me if we see 5,000 this year. um Bitcoin, the pyramid I just described for gold of central banks, then of institutional and then of speculators.

08. For Bitcoin, as you heard Anthony say, it is still evolving, meaning that the speculation side is is much larger than for gold. And then the fundamental side is still smaller. So go so Bitcoin is going to be much more volatile. It will not have as yet the characteristics of gold. it needs to develop this fundamental holding which it is doing but it is way behind gold.

09. And then finally, Muhammad, I'm curious where you land on the private credit issue. Uh there's some people suggesting there's cracks in that and that therefore we need to be very mindful of those cracks. They could lead to other problems in the economy. Other people say, you know, private credit is effectively separated from the banking system.

10. The bank earnings have been uh pretty great. a lot of people excited about all the things happening in the markets right now. So, IPOs and and and pipelines for M&A banks should be uh sort of set. Are they? Um so, first in terms of financial stability, Andrew, um whether you call it cockroaches or ants, they're correct.

11. We've seen a few strains, we are going to see more, but they're not termites. I want to stress they're not eating away at the foundation of financial stability. These are isolated cases. They come in a period where people have stretched too far for returns. That's what happened when spreads compress.

12. It pushes certain people out the risk curve and they take on risks that they shouldn't. So I think of it as yes, there will be more cases. I think Jamie Diamond is correct, but it's not termite in terms of the system as a whole. Not only it's not a problem for natural stability, but actually it's good.

13. It's allowing certain companies to get financing they wouldn't get otherwise. And if you go to developing countries, if you see what's happening to credit in developing countries, that's a really good thing as well.