Outrageous Predictions
Die Grüne Revolution der Schweiz: 30 Milliarden Franken-Initiative bis 2050
Katrin Wagner
Head of Investment Content Switzerland
Chief Investment Strategist
The AI selloff is no longer confined to a single corner of tech. The market is increasingly pricing dispersion and separating likely AI beneficiaries from businesses where AI could compress margins or automate away fee pools.
So far, the pressure has been most visible in:
That widening “who gets disrupted?” narrative is what’s driving rotation, and it helps explain why parts of Asia are holding up better, given their heavier exposure to upstream AI infrastructure rather than downstream service models.
Markets rarely abandon a transformative theme overnight. What they do abandon is the most crowded expression of that theme when the narrative shifts from excitement to scrutiny.
The latest leg of the AI selloff has broadened beyond a handful of high-flying tech names into pockets of the market that look most exposed to AI-driven business model disruption — particularly software and select service industries.
At the same time, that fear is showing up as a surprising tailwind for parts of Asia.
A cleaner way to frame the current rotation is:
The US market has the deepest concentration in the downstream layers—where AI’s promise is enormous, but so is the monetisation and disruption debate:
In other words, the market is asking whether AI expands the pie or forces the winners to give the pie away to customers.
Asia’s exposure is more upstream—the infrastructure that has to be built regardless of which applications dominate:
When the market worries about AI disrupting business models, downstream feels it first. When the focus shifts to what must be built either way, upstream often behaves differently.

Source: Bloomberg
This is where the “Asia as diversifier” story becomes investable rather than theoretical.
Korea and Taiwan are the cleanest expression of upstream AI buildout. They tend to respond to:
These markets can be resilient when infrastructure demand is strong, but they’re also cyclical and can swing when global tech sentiment turns.
Japan adds something different, and arguably more interesting in this phase of the narrative. Japan can capture AI upside through adoption and implementation rather than pure “app-layer disruption”:
That doesn’t mean Japan has no disruption risk. It means the near-term equity story is more often AI as a productivity catalyst than AI as an existential pricing threat.
A credible diversification pitch includes the risks.
Asia’s equity indices have become increasingly top-heavy.
What this means: “Buying Asia” can unintentionally become “buying a handful of chip names.” Diversification improves when the portfolio has multiple drivers, not simply a different postcode.
Even if Asia is less exposed to certain AI-disrupted service models, it can still be hit through:
The excerpt itself notes that some Asia-listed software and IT services names fell alongside US peers during the selloff.
Upstream beneficiaries can enjoy pricing power — until they don’t. Memory pricing, foundry utilisation and capex cycles can turn quickly.
Bottom line: Asia can diversify the type of AI exposure, not eliminate AI exposure.
The most useful way to think about Asia in this AI selloff is not as a bet that “Asia wins.”
It’s a recognition that Asia’s role in the AI ecosystem, and the region’s broader equity composition, can provide diversification by driver at a moment when the US market is repricing concentrated leadership.
If the AI trade is moving from hype to selectivity, Asia is one place where selectivity can be expressed — but with eyes open to concentration and cycle risk.