¿Está el sistema de precios en la economía impulsada por IA en una situación normal?

The AI-driven economy of 2025 is a paradox of optimism and fragility. On one hand, artificial intelligence has become a cornerstone of economic growth, with nearly 30% of the S&P 500 now tied to AI-related ventures. Vanguard projects a 2.25% U.S. economic growth rate for 2026, fueled by AI's transformative potential in labor markets and productivity. Yet, beneath this veneer of progress lies a market psychology increasingly shaped by behavioral biases and structural vulnerabilities. The question is no longer whether AI will reshape the economy, but whether the current market is pricing in a return to normalcy-or if it is instead amplifying the risks of a misaligned reality.

Market Psychology: The Illusion of Normalcy

Investor sentiment in 2025 is driven by a potent mix of fear of missing out (FOMO) and confirmation bias. The rapid ascent of AI stocks has created a self-reinforcing cycle: optimism about AI's potential validates current valuations, which in turn fuels further optimism. This dynamic mirrors the dot-com bubble of 2000, where speculative fervor overshadowed financial fundamentals. Behavioral economics studies highlight how AI-powered investment platforms exacerbate this trend by reducing information asymmetry for retail investors, enabling broader participation but also homogenizing trading behavior during market disruptions according to research.

Central to this psychology is the perception of "normalcy"-a belief that AI's integration into the economy is a linear, risk-free process. However, this assumption ignores the structural shifts reshaping risk perception. For instance, the top 10 S&P 500 companies now account for 30% of the index's market capitalization, with many being AI-centric firms. Such concentration creates systemic fragility: a correction in these stocks could trigger cascading effects across sectors. Yet, market participants often treat these risks as isolated, failing to account for the interconnectedness of AI infrastructure and supply chains.

Structural Shifts: Concentration, Debt, and Infrastructure Strains

The financial fundamentals of AI companies further complicate the narrative of normalcy. While firms like Meta, Oracle, and Nvidia lead the charge, their profitability remains elusive. Oracle's debt-to-equity ratio of 7.2x as of May 2024 underscores the capital intensity of AI infrastructure, where massive compute resources and data-center expansions strain balance sheets. These companies are betting on long-term returns, but the gap between revenue generation and profitability raises concerns about sustainability.

Structural economic changes also amplify risks. The U.S. government's "Liberation Day" tariffs, implemented in August 2025, have added geopolitical uncertainty, complicating the Federal Reserve's efforts to balance inflation and employment. Meanwhile, AI-driven productivity gains are reshaping labor markets, creating a "low-hire, low-fire" environment where automation displaces junior roles without triggering mass layoffs. This shift has not translated into broad-based economic resilience; instead, it has concentrated gains in capital-intensive sectors while leaving traditional industries vulnerable.

Central Bank Caution and the Role of Governance

Central banks are acutely aware of these risks. While AI enhances efficiency in areas like market monitoring and anomaly detection, institutions such as the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) are cautious about its potential to amplify volatility. The ECB's innovation sandboxes and MAS's Project MindForge reflect a strategic emphasis on governance frameworks that balance innovation with stability. Similarly, the Reserve Bank of India's FREE-AI framework underscores the global consensus that AI must be harnessed within ethical and regulatory boundaries.

However, these efforts face limitations. AI models struggle to interpret unprecedented market scenarios, raising concerns about their reliability during crises. Cybersecurity threats, too, remain a wildcard: a breach involving central bank reserves could trigger both operational and political fallout according to analysis. For now, central banks are adopting a "wait and see" approach, with modest rate cuts projected for 2026 as they monitor inflation and labor-market dynamics.

Investment Implications: Diversification as a Hedge

Given these dynamics, investors must recalibrate their strategies. Vanguard and other institutions advocate for diversification, emphasizing high-quality U.S. fixed income, value-oriented equities, and non-U.S. developed markets as more compelling risk-return profiles compared to large-cap tech stocks. Behavioral economics studies reinforce this view, noting that AI-driven analytics can counteract irrational investor behavior by promoting long-term, diversified strategies.

Yet, diversification alone is insufficient. Investors must also grapple with the psychological biases that distort risk perception. Overconfidence in AI's infallibility, for instance, may lead to underestimating the likelihood of a market correction. Similarly, loss aversion could trigger panic selling during downturns, exacerbating volatility. The key lies in integrating behavioral insights into portfolio construction-a practice gaining traction as asset managers leverage machine learning to detect and mitigate investor biases according to research.

Conclusion: Balancing Innovation and Caution

The AI-driven economy of 2025 is neither a bubble nor a utopia. It is a complex system where innovation and risk coexist. While AI has unlocked new frontiers in productivity and efficiency, the market's current pricing appears to assume a return to normalcy-a belief that may not align with the structural realities of concentration, debt, and governance challenges. For investors, the path forward requires a nuanced approach: embracing AI's potential while hedging against its unintended consequences. As central banks and institutions refine their governance frameworks, the ultimate test will be whether the market can reconcile its optimism with the sobering demands of long-term sustainability.