"The Big Short" Burry and Legendary Investor Jones Warn in Unison: AI Frenzy Reminiscent of Pre-Crash 2000

marsbitОпубликовано 2026-05-11Обновлено 2026-05-11

Введение

Michael Burry, famous for predicting the U.S. housing market crash, warns that the current stock market obsession with artificial intelligence resembles the final stages of the dot-com bubble. In a recent post, Burry noted that financial media is dominated by AI talk, and markets no longer react logically to economic data like jobs reports or consumer sentiment. Instead, stocks are rising simply because they have been rising, driven by a widely accepted two-letter narrative—AI—akin to late 1999 and early 2000. He compared the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index's sharp rally to the period just before the March 2000 tech crash. Similarly, legendary macro trader Paul Tudor Jones compared the AI-driven rally to the pre-dot-com bubble era of 1999, suggesting the bull market might have another year or two to run. However, he cautioned that if valuations continue to expand—potentially pushing the stock market capitalization to GDP ratio to 300-350%—a severe and dramatic correction would eventually follow. Both investors highlight the exuberant, speculative fervor around AI stocks, drawing parallels to past market manias preceding significant downturns.

Source: JIN10 Data

Michael Burry, the "Big Short" investor famed for predicting the U.S. housing market collapse, has issued a warning that the current stock market's obsession with artificial intelligence is beginning to resemble the final stages before the dot-com bubble burst.

Burry wrote in an article published last Friday on the Substack platform that he had been listening to financial TV and radio programs during a long drive and felt "everyone talks endlessly about AI, nothing else is discussed all day."

This investor, best known for his successful bet against the U.S. housing market, stated that the stock market is no longer reacting in a logical, substantive way to economic data such as jobs reports or consumer confidence.

Last Friday, the S&P 500 hit a record high as traders focused more on the slightly better-than-expected April nonfarm payrolls report rather than the record low consumer confidence index.

But Burry wrote that stocks aren't rising or falling because of employment or consumer confidence. "They rise in straight lines because they have been rising in straight lines, powered by nothing more than a two-letter thesis everyone thinks they understand... It feels just like the last months of the 1999–2000 bubble."

Burry compared the recent trend of the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index (SOX) to the run-up before the tech stock crash in March 2000. The index rose more than 10% last week, bringing its year-to-date gain for 2026 to 65%.

Burry's remarks come as investors have poured money into AI-related stocks over the past two years, driving major U.S. stock indices to repeated record highs. Semiconductor companies and giant tech stocks related to AI infrastructure and software have led this rally, with the hype over generative AI fueling sharp valuation increases.

Legendary macro trader Paul Tudor Jones, founder and chief investment officer of Tudor Investment Corporation, also compared the current AI-driven surge to the period before the internet bubble burst, though he believes this bull market may still have room to run.

Jones told CNBC's "Squawk Box" that the current environment feels like 1999—about a year before tech stocks peaked in early 2000—and he estimates the rally could possibly continue for another year or two.

At the same time, Jones also warned that if valuations continue to balloon, the eventual correction could be very sharp.

Jones said to imagine the stock market rising another 40%, then the ratio of market capitalization to GDP could reach a staggering 300% or even 350%. "Everyone knows in their heart of hearts, there will be some sort of eye-popping adjustment at that point."

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat warning did Michael Burry issue regarding the current stock market's obsession with AI?

AMichael Burry warned that the stock market's current obsession with artificial intelligence is beginning to resemble the final stages before the dot-com bubble burst.

QAccording to Michael Burry, what are stocks no longer reacting to in a logical way?

AMichael Burry stated that stocks are no longer reacting logically or substantively to economic data such as jobs reports or consumer confidence.

QWhat index did Michael Burry compare to illustrate his point about the AI rally's similarity to the tech bubble?

AMichael Burry compared the recent performance of the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index (SOX) to its surge prior to the tech stock crash in March 2000.

QHow does Paul Tudor Jones describe the current market environment and its potential timeline?

APaul Tudor Jones described the current environment as feeling like 1999—about a year before the 2000 peak—and estimated the rally might have another one to two years to run.

QWhat potential scenario did Paul Tudor Jones outline that could lead to a 'stunning' market correction?

APaul Tudor Jones warned that if stock valuations continue to inflate, with the market potentially rising another 40%, the ratio of market capitalization to GDP could reach an astounding 300% or 350%, which would inevitably lead to a 'stunning' correction.

Похожее

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

On the night of February 9th, GitHub suffered a major outage caused by a simple configuration change—reducing a cache refresh interval from 12 to 2 hours—that triggered a cascade of failures. This was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern. In early 2026, GitHub experienced at least 8 major incidents, failing to meet its promised 99.9% availability. These outages stemmed from structural issues: explosive growth in load, tight service coupling, and insufficient protection against abnormal traffic. This unprecedented load is driven by AI Agents. In 2025, GitHub handled ~1 billion commits. By 2026, weekly commits reached 275 million, projecting to ~14 billion for the year—a 14x increase. AI tools like Claude Code now contribute 4.5% of all public repository commits, with weekly submissions surging 25x in just three months. AI-generated pull requests jumped from 4 million to 17 million per month in half a year. Unlike human developers, AI Agents work continuously, generating commits at a scale that overwhelms infrastructure designed for human rhythms. The surge also shattered GitHub's business model. Copilot's flat-rate pricing, based on assisting human developers, became unsustainable as Agentic AI sessions consumed resources worth hundreds of dollars for a few dollars in fees. In response, GitHub imposed usage limits and, by June 1st, shifted to a pay-per-use "AI Credits" system. Facing this new reality, GitHub realized a 10x scaling plan was insufficient. It announced a need to *redesign* its architecture for 30x current scale—decoupling services, adding fault isolation, and improving change management to prevent cascading failures. Other platforms like Stripe and AWS are facing similar challenges with AI Agents. Fundamentally, GitHub is transitioning from a human collaboration platform to an "exhaust pipe" for automated AI workflows. Its detailed post-mortem reports aim to maintain trust during this turbulent rebuild. The February outage was not just a technical glitch, but a signal of the software industry's entry into a new, AI-driven era.

marsbit11 мин. назад

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

marsbit11 мин. назад

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbit18 мин. назад

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbit18 мин. назад

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

AI Bubble: Where It Really Is and Who's Swimming Naked This analysis dissects the AI industry not as a single entity but as a five-layer pyramid, arguing that bubbles are concentrated in specific tiers, not uniformly distributed. **Key Distinction from the 2000 Dot-com Bubble:** Unlike 2000, where companies had stock prices before revenue, today's leading AI players have massive, contract-backed revenue driving their valuations. Core infrastructure demand is real, with every GPU running at full capacity for paying customers. **The Five-Layer Pyramid & Bubble Assessment:** * **L0 (Fab/Manufacturing) & Top L4 (Leading AI Apps): NO BUBBLE.** Companies like TSMC, NVIDIA, major cloud providers (Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon), and top AI labs have real revenues and orders. Supply is tightly constrained by TSMC's disciplined capacity control and physical limits like power/land for data centers, preventing a supply glut. * **L1 (Memory): BATTLEGROUND.** Sky-high HBM margins could signal a new structural cycle or a classic "boom before bust." The oligopoly of three major players may enforce supply discipline, making this a high-stakes bet. * **L2 (Interconnect/Optical Modules): BUBBLE TERRITORY.** Companies like Lumentum and AAOI have seen stock surges (4-10x) far outpacing revenue growth. This hardware segment has lower physical barriers to expansion than fabs, allowing speculation. It mirrors the 2000 bubble's epicenter—optics. * **L3 (Infrastructure/"GPU Landlords"): VULNERABLE.** GPU leasing companies profit from the current compute shortage but own no long-term moat. Their business model relies on a temporary bottleneck that will ease as big tech expands and new tech (e.g., potential space-based data centers) emerges. * **L4 Long Tail (VC-backed Startups): STRONG BUBBLE SIGNALS.** VC funding concentration in AI is twice that of the 1999 peak. Many startups with little revenue use the valuation logic of successful giants to justify their own, creating high risk of a "valuation crunch" when funding dries up. **Critical Risks to Monitor:** 1. **GPU Depreciation & Accounting:** Companies extending the assumed useful life of GPUs artificially boost profits. The true economic life depends on future generational leaps from NVIDIA. 2. **"GPU Credit" & Off-Balance-Sheet Leverage:** Emerging structures where shell companies borrow to buy GPUs and lease them out (with chipmakers sometimes investing) move debt off major balance sheets. This echoes the "vendor financing" of 2000 and the securitization risks of 2008, though currently small-scale. 3. **TSMC Abandoning Caution:** If the primary supply bottleneck (TSMC's conservative capacity planning) breaks, runaway supply could trigger a bust. 4. **Algorithmic Efficiency Breakthrough:** A major leap in software efficiency could drastically reduce the need for raw compute hardware, undermining the investment thesis. **Conclusion:** The AI boom is expensive and has frothy areas, but its core is underpinned by real demand and physical supply constraints. The bubble risk is layered: most present in optical components, GPU leasing, and the long-tail startup ecosystem, while the foundational chip manufacturing and leading application layers remain relatively solid—for now.

marsbit30 мин. назад

Where the AI Bubble Really Is: Which Layer of Players Are Naked

marsbit30 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы

Популярные статьи

Неделя обучения по популярным токенам (2): 2026 может стать годом приложений реального времени, сектор AI продолжает оставаться в тренде

2025 год — год институциональных инвесторов, в будущем он будет доминировать в приложениях реального времени.

1.8k просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2025.12.16Обновлено 2025.12.16

Неделя обучения по популярным токенам (2): 2026 может стать годом приложений реального времени, сектор AI продолжает оставаться в тренде

Обсуждения

Добро пожаловать в Сообщество HTX. Здесь вы сможете быть в курсе последних новостей о развитии платформы и получить доступ к профессиональной аналитической информации о рынке. Мнения пользователей о цене на AI (AI) представлены ниже.

活动图片