Citadel Securities: AI Bull Market Faces Dual Pressure from Policy Tightening and Regulatory Crackdown
0xBroomberg
Citadel Securities warns that markets are systematically underpricing new Fed Chair Warsh's resolve to push inflation back to 2%, while the AI rally confronts falling compute costs, unproven returns, and the politicization of AI — forcing a repricing of risk assets.
What exactly is the market underpricing about Warsh?
Nohshad Shah, Citadel Securities' head of EMEA fixed-income sales, argues in the firm's latest client note that despite a recent dip in oil prices, underlying U.S. inflation pressure remains elevated — not enough to weaken the case for further rate hikes.
This means → the "cooling" signal from cheaper oil is superficial. The Fed is watching core inflation stickiness, not headline energy prices.
In plain terms = oil getting cheaper does not mean the price problem is solved. The Fed looks one layer deeper.
Can investors still count on the "Fed rescue" playbook?
Shah argues that post-Covid markets developed a reflex: every slowdown or selloff became a cue to bet on a Fed rescue. But Warsh's recent signals show that high inflation now acts as a hard constraint on monetary policy.
The next phase's core question, he says, is not whether the Fed hikes once or twice more — it is whether investors will stop treating every oil dip or brief risk-asset pullback as a chance to re-bet on a bailout.
This means → if markets keep trading on "someone will catch us," the drawdown when the Fed actually stays put will be larger than expected.
Where exactly is the AI rally showing cracks?
Shah flags three deteriorating signals behind the AI-driven equity rally: compute prices falling steadily, enterprise AI spending growth slowing, and rising skepticism about AI return on investment.
In plain terms = cheaper compute signals oversupply; corporate spending is decelerating; and the evidence of profits hasn't caught up — when all three happen at once, valuations cannot hold.
This reflects a shift in what supports the AI trade: from "excitement over a tech breakthrough" to a demand for "hard proof of earnings" — proof that has not yet arrived.
Why is AI turning into a political issue?
Shah notes that a growing number of workers worry about AI-driven job losses, increased workplace surveillance, and companies using AI to commercialize employees' accumulated expertise.
"If the public concludes that AI is a deal where corporations capture the gains and workers bear the costs, the political winds could shift quickly," Shah writes.
This means → once AI carries the label "capital wins, labor loses," tighter regulation, higher compliance costs, and slower adoption follow — even if the technology itself keeps advancing, valuations may be suppressed.
How do these two pressure lines stack up for investors?
Shah's thesis boils down to one sentence: AI-sector valuations now face simultaneous challenges on two axes — policy (the Fed no longer backstops) and regulation (AI becomes politically charged).
This is not purely a technology or earnings problem. The macro environment and public sentiment are tightening at the same time.
In plain terms = the AI equity rally used to stand on two legs — "great tech + a friendly Fed." Both legs are now wobbling: monetary policy is no longer loose, and public attitudes toward AI are shifting from excitement to suspicion.
Content is for reference only, not financial advice.