X Close

America’s great bull run is over

The US market now looks like last season’s fashion. Credit: Getty

The US market now looks like last season’s fashion. Credit: Getty

21 April 2025 - 1:00pm

What a difference a few months makes. Wall Street rang in 2025 with a rapturous chorus, convinced that the tax-cutting, deregulating Trump administration would keep the stock market on the record roll it’s been on for years. In January, the average year-end target the big financial houses set for the S&P 500 stood at over 6,500, which would have made for another 11% gain in share values this year. At that rate, America’s wealth would double every six or seven years.

Now, less than four months later, they’ve downgraded that average to just over 6,000 — a 14% rise from where things currently stand, but still a trifling 2% rise for the year.

Main Street investors haven’t yet received the memos, or have simply chosen to ignore the expert opinion. While foreign funds and institutional investors are selling or holding, retail investors are eagerly buying the dips, seemingly trusting the administration’s narrative that the market decline is temporary and will rebound once the President’s tariffs take effect.

That dichotomy tees up a potential clash later this year. Either Wall Street gets this wrong, the market bounces back amid an American renaissance, and the shift of emphasis away from Wall Street to Main Street, which has become a recent leitmotif of the administration’s messaging is real. Or, the experts are right, the MAGA faithful get their fingers burned, and the pitchforks come back out.

Intuitively, one would tend to trust those who make their living off predicting the stock market’s movements to have taken the time to carefully assess the possibilities. But given that the dramatic change in their predictions and the very wide range of them — the targets range from less than 4,500 to as high as 7,000 — the old adage that expert prediction is no more accurate than a dart-throwing monkey has seldom seemed more true. On the face of it, this seems little more than guesswork.

And to a considerable degree, it is. Much now depends on the President’s decisions — from tariffs and court rulings to his stance on the Fed and antitrust enforcement. The targets, then, carry little weight.

They’re still useful, though, because they reflect the present state of gloom among institutional investors, some of which seem justified. The euphoria of the early new year was always questionable. The American boom of the last decade had been driven by a huge run-up in debt, which had created an unsustainable situation. Then early in the new year DeepSeek punctured the myth of “American exceptionalism” that had powered recent surges in the Magnificent Seven tech stocks. Having driven the US market to soaring heights last year, as it sucked in investment from around the world, the Magnificent Seven have now fallen sharply, down by an average of a fifth since the new year.

In contrast Europe and China, which had been in a slump until this year, have suddenly switched to the sort of aggressive fiscal stimulus recently seen in America. With American exceptionalism fading and new enthusiasm for other markets, the US now looks like last season’s fashion. So wherever the market ends up this year, the one safe bet would probably be that the great American bull market of the last 15 years is now over. The big opportunities lie elsewhere.


John Rapley is an author and academic who divides his time between London, Johannesburg and Ottawa. His books include Why Empires Fall: Rome, America and the Future of the West (with Peter Heather, Penguin, 2023) and Twilight of the Money Gods: Economics as a Religion (Simon & Schuster, 2017).

jarapley

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

1 July 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam