Voya Views: AI and the Tech Market Reset
SVP, Head of Responsible Investment and Thematic Research
Head of Global Technology
Senior Portfolio Manager, Large/Mid Cap Growth Equities
As AI shakes up tech business models. Voya’s equity PMs break down what’s real, what’s overblown, and where disruption is creating new investment opportunities.
Voya Views: AI and the Tech Market Reset
Highlights
- AI-driven volatility has shifted market focus from last year’s enthusiasm to near-term disruption risk, especially across software, cybersecurity, and professional services.
- New model capabilities (including recent announcements from Anthropic) have pressured software growth expectations, raising questions about the durability of many SaaS business models.
- Legacy software and lower value-add, service-heavy offerings appear most vulnerable to automation; beneficiaries include AI infrastructure, silicon providers, and firms with high-value proprietary data.
- The team sees a disconnect between fundamentals and stock prices, noting enterprise adoption tends to be slower than consumer adoption—creating potential mispricings to exploit.
- We favor “deep moat” companies and are seeing opportunities in infrastructure software, while being more cautious toward application software areas viewed as higher risk from AI disruption.
- Outside tech, early AI adopters such as call centers and parts of financial services may see margin expansion from productivity gains; longer term, automation could boost manufacturing, industrial, and logistics efficiency.
Transcript
Laura Kane: Hi, I’m Laura Kane with Voya Investment Management, and today I’m joined by Erik Swords and Leigh Todd, two of our senior equity portfolio managers, to talk about AI disruption. This year, we’ve seen AI continue to dominate equity markets. But unlike last year, where unbridled enthusiasm pushed markets higher, this year we’re seeing fears about AI disruption cause significant volatility in certain sectors like cybersecurity, software, and professional services.
Let’s start with what really sparked fears about AI disruption and where the market sits today.
Leigh Todd: We had a lot of announcements in January and February, particularly related to Anthropic’s new capabilities that are really disrupting software development and software use cases. What we saw beginning in 2026 was pressure from these AI developments negatively impacting software business models and software growth projections.
Laura Kane: Erik, you have broad responsibility for global technology. When you look across your coverage, which areas are you most concerned about, and where do you see potential winners?
Erik Swords: On the vulnerability side, legacy software is potentially most ripe for disruption. Many of these companies rely on manual efforts in the services they provide—things that can be automated. Generally, it’s those lower value-added services where we see the most potential disruption.
On the flip side, there are beneficiaries. We’re seeing that clearly in the market. Areas like infrastructure, silicon providers, and companies with valuable data are high priorities in the current spending environment. These are the inputs that feed the AI engine and help move it forward.
Laura Kane: It sounds like some of the fears around automation are real. That said, other parts of technology have stronger moats and should be able to weather the storm. How are you seeing fundamentals play out?
Erik Swords: There’s been a meaningful disconnect between stock performance and underlying fundamentals. Because of that, we’ve been finding ways to exploit that divergence. One thing people lose sight of is that we’re talking about enterprise-oriented businesses. Enterprises adopt technology much more slowly than consumers. What’s happening on the consumer side tends to filter into the enterprise later, and that’s not necessarily what drives stock performance in the near term.
Laura Kane: Leigh, we’ve been hearing the term “SaaS-pocalypse.” Can you walk us through what that means and whether investors should really be worried?
Leigh Todd: AI disruption is forcing CIOs to rethink spending. The concern around software is really about the duration of growth prospects. While disruption may take longer than many expect, the key question is what the longer-term growth profile looks like for many software companies.
Laura Kane: When you think about the portfolio, are you making changes, or are you sticking with your long-term assumptions about technology and AI disruption?
Erik Swords: There’s been significant market dislocation. During periods like this, we usually try to upgrade the portfolio. We’re looking for companies that are winners—those with deep moats and fundamental domain expertise in areas we believe will remain attractive over time. Some of these companies have been caught in the broader software and technology selloff. We think a number of opportunities will emerge over the coming quarters as AI continues to ripple through other areas of the market, and we’re looking to take advantage of those opportunities when we can.
Laura Kane: Leigh, are you seeing the same dynamic?
Leigh Todd: Yes. We entered 2026 already underweight software. Given the significant pullback we’ve seen early this year, we’ve added opportunistically to infrastructure software names where we believe they’re gaining share of enterprise IT budgets, particularly as companies focus on data migration and digital transformation. We’re leaning more into infrastructure software and continuing to lean away from application software, which we believe is more exposed to growth disruption from AI.
Laura Kane: Erik, it sounds like there are areas where fundamentals still look strong and the market may have sold off too much out of fear. Can you give an example?
Erik Swords: Cybersecurity is one area we’ve been focused on recently. There’s been a significant disconnect between fundamentals and stock performance. As we move toward a more technology-driven future, the need for cybersecurity capabilities will only increase. Over the past few months, many of these companies have performed well fundamentally, yet valuations in some cases have been cut in half due to market concerns about future disruption. We’re using that dislocation as an opportunity to upgrade the portfolio where we have strong conviction in long-term fundamentals. That said, there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to understanding where AI will disrupt. Unfortunately, cybersecurity companies have been caught in the crosshairs for now, but we see that as an opportunity going forward.
Leigh Todd: Another important consideration is how AI enables enterprises to save costs and improve productivity. As companies adopt new AI tools, they can generate more revenue with lower costs, creating margin expansion opportunities. We’re leaning into companies—both inside and outside the technology sector—that are adopting AI to become more efficient and productive, and to improve their growth prospects over time.
Laura Kane: Are there any sectors that are particularly ahead of the curve in adopting AI tools?
Leigh Todd: Companies with call center exposure are seeing significant efficiency gains, including in consumer-facing and financial services areas. AI is allowing them to respond to customer and client needs more predictably and effectively. We’re also seeing broad investment in AI across financial services. Looking ahead, automation may drive further gains, including more effective robotic systems. In manufacturing, industrials, and storage, we see the potential for significant productivity improvements as more advanced automation tools are adopted.
Laura Kane: Thank you both for the conversation today. You’ve helped put investor fears in context, and it sounds like compelling opportunities are emerging amid the volatility.
A note about risk: The principal risks are generally those attributable to investing in stocks and related derivative instruments. Holdings are subject to market, issuer, and other risks, and their values may fluctuate. Market risk is the risk that securities or other instruments may decline in value due to factors affecting the securities markets or particular industries. Issuer risk is the risk that the value of a security or instrument may decline for reasons specific to the issuer, such as changes in its financial condition. Smaller companies may be more susceptible to price swings than larger companies, as they typically have fewer resources and more limited products, and many are dependent on a few key managers. Artificial intelligence (AI) may pose inherent risks, including but not limited to: issues with data privacy, intellectual property, consumer protection, and anti-discrimination laws; ethics and transparency concerns; information security issues; the potential for unfair bias and discrimination; quality and accuracy of inputs and outputs; technical failures and potential misuse. Users of AI-based technology and tools should take these risks into consideration prior to use of the technology.
