Goldman Sachs measured labor intensity and AI sensitivity to predict which companies will benefit most from productivity gains that haven't happened. Read that again. They ranked stocks based on improvements that don't exist.
This is financial analysis as horoscope. Your company is a Sagittarius with Gemini rising so when Mercury exits retrograde you'll fire 30% of your workforce and the stock goes up. Very scientific.
The methodology here deserves respect. Goldman compared how many humans a company employs against how much those humans could theoretically be replaced by software that theoretically works better than it currently does. Then they published a list. Then retail traders will buy the list.
Some poor bastard with a Robinhood account is reading this thinking he's early. He's about to dump his savings into whatever companies scored highest on Goldman's AI sensitivity index. He'll tell his wife they're investing in the future. She'll ask if he read the part where the gains aren't here yet. He'll say that's exactly why you buy now.
Meanwhile the Goldman analyst who wrote this is already short three of the names on his own list.
The beautiful part is the headline admits the thesis is wrong in the present tense but promises it'll be right eventually. That's not analysis. That's a parking validation that expired in 2019 but might work again if they change the logo.
Labor intensity times AI sensitivity equals which stocks go up. They made math out of vibes. They built a formula from two variables that can't be measured and won't matter until an unspecified future date when the technology actually does what the Powerpoint says it does.
But sure, let's all position our portfolios around productivity gains that Goldman's own headline confirms do not currently f*cking exist.
Photo by on Unsplash
Leave a Comment