Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2606.01575

Boom, Bubble, or Buildout? A Multi-Method Evaluation of Whether Artificial Intelligence Is in an Ongoing Financial Bubble

Qianan Wang·Zen Chen
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) investment has revived a recurrent question in financial economics: are AI-related assets experiencing a bubble, or is the market capitaliz- ing a durable general-purpose technology? This paper develops a hybrid review and diagnostic framework for evaluating whether AI is in an ongoing financial bubble as of May 2026. The analysis begins from asset-pricing foundations in state prices, stochastic discount factors, martingale valuation, and pricing kernels, then connects these foundations to rational bubbles, behavioral bubbles, technology manias, and modern econometric bubble-detection methods. Current evidence shows both genuine fundamentals and bubble-like fragilities. On the fundamental side, realized revenue growth, enterprise adoption, and productivity evidence support a nontrivial share of AI valuations. On the fragile side, capital expenditure has accelerated faster than observed monetization in some layers, private- market valuations are concentrated in a small number of firms, and investor narratives often capitalize future productivity gains before they have appeared in cash flows. The paper proposes a five-pillar diagnostic framework that combines fundamental valuation, residual-exuberance tests, SADF/GSADF explosive-root procedures, LPPL/HLPPL price-pattern diagnostics, sen- timent and issuance measures, and capex-payback analysis. The central conclusion is that AI is best understood as a real technological revolution with localized bubble dynamics rather than as either a pure speculative mania or a bubble-free productivity miracle.

Explore related subjects

q-fin.MF

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Qianan Wang, Zen Chen. 2026-06-01. Boom, Bubble, or Buildout? A Multi-Method Evaluation of Whether Artificial Intelligence Is in an Ongoing Financial Bubble. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.01575

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Variance-Optimal Hedging in the Rough Hawkes--Heston Model

We study variance-optimal stock hedging and the convergence of approximate strategies in the rough Hawkes--Heston model. Starting from the model's affine conditional transform and the affine Volterra jump framework, we obtain semi-explicit hedges for European calls and a representation of the minimum quadratic error through the Galtchouk--Kunita--Watanabe projection. Our main approximation result keeps the original stock, variance driver, and information flow fixed while regularizing the kernel used to evaluate the hedge. To handle singular memory and common marked jumps, we construct the approximate holdings from histories available before trading and preserve the conditional transform's random modulus envelope. Riccati--Volterra stability and weighted truncation then yield convergence in the original stock's trading norm on compact Fourier intervals. For calls, a joint choice of kernel regularization and Fourier cutoff gives convergence of the initial capitals and strategies, uniform-in-time square-mean convergence of continuous-time gains, and convergence of the terminal mean-square error to the variance-optimal value. A numerical experiment with shifted fractional kernels illustrates the construction on common original-market paths.

q-fin.MF↗
arXiv2026

Numeraire Invariance of Entropy-Projected Martingale Measures

Let \(P\) be a fixed physical law and let \(Q\) be an equivalent martingale measure selected from the martingale-measure set associated with a chosen numeraire. A change of numeraire maps \(Q\) to \(T_LQ\), where \(d(T_LQ)=L\,dQ\) and \(L\) is the terminal likelihood ratio. The forward relative-entropy projection minimizing \(D_{\mathrm{KL}}(P\Vert Q)\) commutes with this transform because its objective changes only by the constant \(-E_P\log L\). The minimal entropy martingale measure (MEMM) orientation \(D_{\mathrm{KL}}(Q\Vert P)\) does not have this property, and a trinomial counterexample shows that independently recomputed MEMMs need not be likelihood compatible. We make two economic consequences explicit. First, the two entropy orientations are precisely the \(Q\)-dependent terms in the classical convex-dual objectives for logarithmic and exponential utility, respectively. Second, likelihood compatibility is equivalent to equality of the pricing functionals obtained in the two numeraires. Hence the forward selectors value every integrable claim consistently across numeraires, whereas the two MEMMs in the counterexample assign different prices to a nonreplicable digital claim. We also prove a finite-state class-level characterization: uniform invariance over the elementary one-period likelihood-ratio families forces a smooth convex \(f\)-divergence to be logarithmic, up to scaling and affine equivalence. Finally, in finite-state markets, the forward projection exists under the usual strictly positive feasible-point condition; its density \(dP/dQ^*\) is attainable log-optimal terminal wealth, and the minimum forward entropy equals maximal expected log growth.

q-fin.MF↗
arXiv2026

The Delta of a Variance Swap

We define the variance swap delta as the sensitivity of the price of variance to a change in underlying price. We use Carr-Madan spanning formulas to analyze this sensitivity when the implied volatility smile curve may depend on the underlying price. We show that the variance swap total delta is zero for the class of smile curves that are pure functions of (log) moneyness, which goes against the empirical observation that variance is up when the market is down. We propose a simple modification of the smile to correct this issue.

q-fin.MF↗