Mr. Gattiker, stock markets are proving remarkably resilient despite numerous risks. Have investors become too complacent?

No, in general I see a great deal of skepticism. Of course, there are short-term moves higher. But the prevailing sentiment is often: We are experiencing a repeat of the technology boom around the turn of the millennium, and it will all end in tears. For many, the only question now seems to be how long it will take.

I consider this skepticism healthy. At the same time, we are seeing a rotation within the markets. There are excesses, but even there the weights are shifting. Overall, that is a healthy development.

So you do not expect the upswing to end any time soon?

I think it is very bold to make such forecasts already. We are experiencing an exceptionally compressed cycle. The introduction of the new technology is happening at enormous speed, and the willingness to invest is extraordinarily high. It is truly taking on dizzying dimensions.

"Right now, the development is healthy. The period from 2027 to 2028 could become interesting."

There is also a political factor: entrepreneurs in our network report that they see an investment window in the US that could close again if political conditions change. As a result, investments are being brought forward. Above all, the possibilities under the US One Big Beautiful Bill Act to write off investments in the first year are playing a role.

When does such an investment boom become dangerous?

As a rule, things go well as long as the acceleration is strong. The moment of truth often comes when growth tails off, in other words when it falls toward zero.

Applied to the current cycle, the period from 2027 to 2028 could be interesting: investments could then be at a high level, while the additional momentum fades. That is a projection, not a pinpoint forecast. One has to observe with an open mind what this phase brings.

What distinguishes today's situation from the technology boom around the turn of the millennium?

Skepticism is much more pronounced today. At the same time, we are dealing with something very big that can change a lot. Which companies will ultimately win, however, remains open. Some of the decisive winners may be overlooked, or may not even be listed on the stock market yet.

For me, the development is still healthy at the moment. But that does not mean the technology's long-term significance must be reflected immediately in the returns of all the companies involved.

Companies are investing huge sums in artificial intelligence. When do they have to show that these expenses are paying off?

Initial public offerings can serve as a yardstick for that. With the preparations, the prospectuses, and the figures, expectations become more concretely testable.

However, it would be too narrow to look only at the most prominent companies such as Nvidia or at possible IPO candidates. The question is also whether we are dealing with a technology like the railroad or electricity, which has an impact far beyond the companies directly involved.

Many investors lost their invested money in railroad companies from the mid-19th century and in utilities at the beginning of the 20th century. Even so, the value for the overall economic system was never in doubt. One must try to think beyond the immediate headlines.

Can we already estimate how strongly AI will change the economy?

We are dealing with a highly complex system. I would be cautious with forecasts. One has to look for confirmation and monitor the relevant variables.

"We may be living in the most efficient market there has ever been."

There were also enormous expectations and fears around earlier technological changes. Experience should make us careful about making very far-reaching predictions today.

Does this uncertainty make your work as a strategist more difficult?

Yes, because we have to systematically check where we stand. Which key data points indicate overheating? Which suggest a slowdown? In a sense, we are building an early warning system to track the development.

One example is memory chip prices and how they are changing. They can provide clues as to whether a bottleneck is worsening or gradually easing. This observation requires significantly more work.

Where can investors still find opportunities in this environment?

It becomes interesting where a development actually shows up in the business and is not just a hope. However, markets then react at breathtaking speed.

We may be living in the most efficient market there has ever been. Much is priced in very early on the stock market. That is why it is difficult to declare a major opportunity once it is clearly visible.

You see a broader economic shift behind the technology boom. Which one?

We are coming out of a decade shaped by deflationary concerns. The pandemic initially made it difficult to distinguish between crisis-related, structural, and cyclical developments.

By now, much suggests that we - and here I mean in particular the locomotive that is the US - have moved into an inflationary boom. Capital is becoming scarcer, and there is competition for it. And this is no longer only about AI: defense, infrastructure, new supply chains, and additional hedges against geopolitical risks also require investment.

This development has caught many people off guard. For a long time, the prevailing view was that we could end up in a Japan scenario with persistently weak momentum.

Read on the next page: Christian Gattiker on Switzerland's niche strategy