Morgan Stanley estimates AI-related global debt issuance will hit $570 billion in 2026, with hyperscaler spending exceeding $1 trillion by 2027. Oracle’s crisis may be the first systemic warning sign.
The question Wall Street was reluctant to ask openly throughout 2024 and most of 2025 is now unavoidable: is the AI infrastructure buildout generating a debt burden that markets have not yet properly priced?

The numbers have become too large to dismiss as routine capital expenditure cycles. Morgan Stanley estimates that AI-related global debt issuance will more than double to nearly $570 billion in 2026, with aggregate hyperscaler capital expenditure projected to exceed $1 trillion by 2027. That figure encompasses spending by Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta, Oracle, and a growing constellation of second-tier infrastructure providers building the physical layer of the AI economy.

How the Debt Stack Has Built

The trajectory of Oracle’s balance sheet is instructive as a case study in the speed at which leverage can accumulate. In fiscal 2025, Oracle carried a net cash deficit of approximately $394 million after free cash flow. By the end of fiscal 2026, that had deteriorated to negative $23.7 billion in free cash flow, with long-term debt reaching approximately $124.7 billion. Capital expenditures of $55.7 billion in a single fiscal year represent a 162% increase from the prior year.

Oracle is not alone, though its position is the most stretched. The structural dynamic across the hyperscaler complex is that the companies investing most aggressively in AI data centre capacity are simultaneously facing competitive pressure on their existing software and cloud businesses from AI-native tools — creating a margin squeeze that occurs precisely when cash demands are highest.

Credit Default Swaps as an Early Warning System

One underappreciated signal in this cycle is the behaviour of credit default swaps. Fortune reported that Morgan Stanley’s Lisa Shalett flagged Oracle’s CDS widening as a potential early indicator of broader AI trade stress. CDS spreads — which function as insurance premiums against corporate default — had reached record levels for Oracle by early 2026, even before the most recent earnings-related stock decline.

The concern Shalett articulated was systemic rather than company-specific: “If people start getting worried about Oracle’s ability to pay, that’s gonna be an early indication to us that people are getting nervous.” For a company whose debt is included in major corporate bond indices, the widening of Oracle’s CDS spreads has implications not just for Oracle investors but for anyone holding investment-grade credit exposure broadly.

Bank of America Research described “the lack of clarity on hyperscaler borrowing” as “the key risk going into 2026” — a view validated by subsequent events as Oracle’s stock collapsed and CDS widened even further.

The OpenAI Nexus

A critical vulnerability embedded in the current AI infrastructure cycle is concentration around OpenAI as both the defining customer and the primary justification for hyperscaler spending. Oracle‘s remaining performance obligations are concentrated at least $300 billion in the OpenAI relationship. OpenAI itself is burning cash at what one analyst described as “an insane rate” and has committed to more than $1.4 trillion in total AI buildouts — a commitment that depends on the company’s own ability to sustain fundraising and ultimately generate revenue at scale.

The logical chain from that dependency is a concern articulated plainly by Melius Research: “It is hard to know if Oracle can stick to this capex plan if incremental business arises from the likes of OpenAI and Anthropic. Also, its competitors are unlikely to slow spending and could use Oracle’s spending moderation as the means to gain share.” The competitive dynamic creates a collective action problem: no single hyperscaler can slow down without ceding ground, yet the collective pace of spending is generating balance sheet stress across the sector.

Second-Order Vulnerabilities: Data Centre REITs and Chip Suppliers

The debt accumulation in hyperscaler balance sheets has second-order effects that are not captured in the headline AI capex numbers. Data centre real estate investment trusts — which provide the physical infrastructure that hyperscalers increasingly lease rather than own — have their own exposure to counterparty concentration and lease extension risk. Reports that Blue Owl, Oracle‘s primary data centre financing partner, declined to back the Michigan facility highlighted the fragility of the supporting ecosystem even when the primary tenant appears solvent.

Nvidia, whose chips underpin the entire AI buildout, has been insulated from these concerns by persistent demand that exceeds supply. But if even two or three hyperscalers simultaneously scaled back data centre spending in response to balance sheet pressures, the chip demand outlook would shift rapidly.

The Memory Shortage as Collateral Signal

CNBC reported in late June 2026 that “the memory shortage shaking Apple and Microsoft is an ‘existential crisis’ for smaller players” — a reminder that supply chain bottlenecks are not yet resolved, adding cost and execution risk to projects whose timelines are already being stretched. The combination of persistent demand exceeding supply, expensive debt financing, and uncertain monetisation schedules creates a financial engineering challenge that may prove harder to solve than the engineering challenges of building the data centres themselves.

The AI infrastructure cycle is not necessarily a bubble in the sense of zero underlying demand — the use cases are real and adoption is accelerating. But the debt structure being used to finance it, and the concentration of risk around a small number of foundational relationships, has introduced systemic vulnerabilities that markets are only beginning to price.

The World Bank projects global growth at 2.5% in 2026, the weakest since the pandemic, as the US-Iran conflict drives energy price spikes, inflation, and tighter monetary policy worldwide.The World Bank’s mid-2026 baseline carries a number that markets have had to absorb slowly: global GDP growth of 2.5% this year — the weakest since the pandemic — and the culprit is clear.

The World Bank’s latest Global Economic Prospects report identifies the US-Iran conflict that began in late February 2026 as the central shock reshaping the international economic outlook. Energy prices have risen sharply, inflation has re-accelerated across multiple continents, and central banks that had been on the verge of easing cycles have instead begun signalling hikes. The combination has compressed household incomes, widened fiscal deficits, and created a global policy dilemma — fight inflation or protect growth — that has no clean answer.

The Anatomy of the Slowdown

Emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) face what the World Bank characterises as their weakest per capita income growth since the pandemic era. Growth is projected to decelerate across all EMDE regions in 2026, with the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan, and Pakistan bearing the worst damage given direct exposure to the conflict, higher energy import costs, and disrupted shipping. South Asia remains the fastest-growing EMDE region but has nonetheless seen forecasts revised downward.

The mechanism of transmission is threefold. Direct energy price exposure drives headline inflation and suppresses real consumer spending. Disruptions to Strait of Hormuz shipping — which handles roughly 20% of global oil trade — have compressed supply chains and added a risk premium to shipping costs more broadly. And the expectation of prolonged tighter monetary policy has pushed sovereign borrowing costs higher for indebted developing economies.

The Rio Times Global Economy Briefing captured the daily rhythm of the uncertainty: “Whether the US-Iran ceasefire holds. Renewed strikes would push oil higher and add to the inflation problem the Fed is already confronting.” As of the week of June 28, markets remained on edge about the durability of the ceasefire following reports of Iranian targeting of US military assets, which temporarily pushed Brent crude higher and triggered a brief equity sell-off before the market recovered.

Advanced Economies: Slow But Not Collapsing

Advanced nations face a different but related challenge: growth that was already below trend has been further dragged by energy costs and the policy response to inflation. Deloitte’s 2026 Global Economic Outlook noted that after years of disruptive US trade policy, the global trading system has partially reorganised — with numerous bilateral trade deals struck between non-US countries as an alternative to the US-centric framework.

France is projecting GDP growth of just 0.9% in 2026, according to Banque de France, with the contribution of net exports turning negative. Germany and Japan face their own exposure to the China Shock 2.0, as Chinese high-tech exports crowd into categories where both countries previously held competitive advantage. The US itself is navigating a narrowing current account deficit that reflects weaker domestic demand rather than export strength — an ambiguous signal that the Federal Reserve has explicitly flagged as complicating its rate decisions.

Fiscal Pressure and the Poverty Gap

One consequence of the conflict-driven slowdown that policy discussions often underweigh is the distributional impact on the world’s poorest economies. Low-income countries are projected to grow at 5.4% in 2026 — 0.3 percentage points below prior forecasts — as energy import costs consume fiscal space that would otherwise go to infrastructure, healthcare, and education. The World Bank projects that gains in per capita income, averaging 2.7% annually through 2027–28, will be “insufficient to significantly reduce poverty” given the breadth of the setback.

Fiscal pressures will limit governments’ ability to reduce food insecurity and create jobs — a combination the World Bank regards as a medium-term political risk as well as a humanitarian one. A newly identified Ebola outbreak in a low-income economy adds a further downside tail to the forecast.

The 2027 Recovery Thesis

The World Bank’s forward guidance is that a recovery should materialise in 2027–28, driven by an assumed decline in energy prices as supply adjusts and the conflict’s acute phase passes, and a rebound in global trade activity. That recovery is explicitly conditional on the ceasefire holding and conflict not escalating to involve Gulf oil infrastructure more directly. Recoveries are projected across all EMDE regions in 2027–28, but the pace will depend heavily on policy buffers — many of which were depleted fighting the post-pandemic inflation.

The upside scenario, acknowledged in the World Bank report, involves broader AI adoption lifting productivity and economic activity. Estimates of the productivity impact of AI vary “widely,” and the report notes that different scenarios “could lead to markedly different growth paths.” The AI tailwind is real but front-loaded in advanced economies, and access to the technology in lower-income countries remains constrained by infrastructure gaps and digital divides.

China’s May 2026 data shows high-tech manufacturing up 15.1% while property investment fell 16.2%. How Beijing’s export-led gamble is reshaping global supply chains.

The National Bureau of Statistics’ May 2026 release confirmed what economists had begun calling China’s “industrial divergence.” Scale-above industrial value-added output grew 4.5% year-on-year in May, accelerating 0.4 percentage points from April, with high-tech manufacturing surging 15.1%. The semiconductor sector was the standout: domestic output jumped 87% from the prior year, while China’s exports of semiconductors were up 110% from a year earlier, exports of mobile phones climbed 44%, and automatic data-processing machines rose 66%.

The Export Engine Running at Full Throttle

China‘s May exports (denominated in US dollars) were up 19.6% from a year earlier — the second biggest monthly increase since January 2022. The first two months of 2026 had registered an extraordinary 39.6% gain. Over all of 2025, China recorded a trade surplus exceeding $1.2 trillion — the largest ever posted by any country — as manufactured goods, particularly in advanced technology categories, poured into global markets.

The strength carries a double driver. First, the global AI boom has generated extraordinary demand for semiconductors and related hardware, where China‘s manufacturing base has rapidly scaled. Second, as domestic demand softened, manufacturers redirected capacity toward export markets. Gary Ng, senior Asia Pacific economist at Natixis, characterised this as the operative dynamic: “China’s exports have decelerated as the Iran war starts to affect global demand and supply chains,” though he noted the moderation was from record levels.

China’s economy in mid-2026 resembles a dual exposure photograph — one frame showing a technology powerhouse outpacing global rivals, the other depicting a property market in structural retreat that is slowly draining household wealth.

Goldman Sachs had projected 5–6% annual growth in China’s exports and raised its 2026 real GDP forecast to 4.8% — above both IMF projections and Bloomberg consensus. That upgrade rested on the observation that Chinese exports demonstrated resilience even against elevated US tariffs that hit 100% in April 2025 before settling at 30% in May following a bilateral agreement. Chinese exports of chips, semiconductors, autos, and auto parts continued to expand despite the tariff headwinds.

The Property Hole That Will Not Close

The other side of the ledger is less encouraging. In the first five months of 2026, fixed-asset investment fell 4.1% year-on-year — the steepest decline since May 2020. Within that, property investment dropped 16.2%. Given that roughly two-thirds of Chinese household wealth is held in real estate, the wealth destruction is persistent and consequential. Consumers saving to restore depleted balance sheets rather than spending is the logical response — and it explains why domestic retail demand has been chronically soft despite headline economic growth of 5% in 2025.

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Nick Marro captured the strategic bet underlying Beijing’s trajectory: “There’s a strong emphasis on doubling down on manufacturing and ensuring that China’s competitive positioning in global supply chains remains sticky.” China‘s 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030), approved in late 2025, explicitly prioritises advanced manufacturing, semiconductors, AI, renewable energy, and digital infrastructure — doubling down on supply-side transformation rather than demand-side stimulus.

The Global Spillover: China Shock 2.0

The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission flagged a “14 percent surge in China Shock 2.0,” noting that developing markets are bearing the brunt of an export deluge driven by China’s market distortions. Unlike the original China Shock of the 2000s — which displaced labour-intensive, low-value manufacturing in rich economies — China Shock 2.0 is crowding out high-tech, high-value manufacturing in Europe and Japan. Goldman Sachs estimates that for every 1 percentage point of export-driven boost to Chinese GDP, other economies may see a 0.1 to 0.3 percentage point drag, with tech-intensive producers facing acute pressure.

Meanwhile, China’s voracious appetite for advanced chips it cannot yet manufacture domestically has produced a paradox: China imported a record $135 billion in semiconductors in the most recent quarter as AI investment accelerates. The country remains dependent on foreign-made advanced logic chips dominated by ASML, creating a structural vulnerability that its Five-Year Plan is designed to remedy — but may not resolve within this decade.

The Endgame of the Xi Gamble

The Economist captured the existential dimension of Beijing‘s strategy by quoting Johns Hopkins University‘s Yuen Yuen: “At no time in modern history has a large country gone all in on investment in high-end technology while also navigating a slowing economy and a local-government debt crisis.” Xi Jinping’s wager is that the technology-driven growth model scales faster than the old property-and-construction model collapses. The data through mid-2026 suggest the race is closer than Beijing’s official narrative acknowledges.

China’s GDP growth target for 2026 is the lowest since 1991 at 4.5–5%. Meeting it will depend on whether AI and green technology exports can sustain momentum against an Iran-related global slowdown that is already beginning to weigh on overall demand. The outcome will shape global trade balances, supply chain geography, and the AI chip economy for the next decade.