The 'Weakness' of Bitcoin Signals a Changing of the Guard in 2026—The AI Market Shifts Toward 'Power' and the 'Real Economy'
"Is 2026 the year the AI market enters its 'next phase'?" In Episode 40 of 'The Real Eisman Playbook,' host Steve Eisman invites tech bull Dan Ives (Wedbush) and macro/technical expert Chris Verrone (Strategas) to summarize the 'narrative volatility' of 2025 and discuss the winning strategies for 2026. The program focuses on two main themes: 1) the time lag in AI capital (CAPEX to monetization), and 2) the baton pass from 'speculation to reality' signaled by the 'weakness of Bitcoin.'
1. Even if 'AI demand is real,' what investors fear is the 'delay in monetization.'
Ives repeatedly asserts that AI is still in the 'early stages of the demand cycle.' While he speaks with enthusiasm about the '12-to-1 supply-demand ratio for NVIDIA chips' on the ground, the biggest concern on the investor side is something else—namely, "when will monetization happen?".
In his words, while CAPEX continues to pile up, the fear is that "if monetization is delayed to the point where investors raise the 'white flag' (stop spending), the AI bubble narrative could become a 'self-fulfilling prophecy.'" This is where the discussion begins.
1-1. Moving from 'AI means AI stocks' to selecting winners and 'fakes.'
The program also features the sharp observation that "saying AI 30 times on an earnings call doesn't make you an AI company." As the AI theme persists, the polarization between 'pure winners' (infrastructure, data, implementation capability) and 'AI-flavored' companies (those that just talk about it) will intensify—this framework seems likely to be a prerequisite for picking individual stocks in 2026.
2. The core of AI 2.0 is 'power' and 'resources'—the 'war on the ground.'
Eisman provides a sharp example: the story of a data center in California that is "finished but cannot be connected because there isn't enough power." In other words, while AI can be accelerated by software, infrastructure (power, transmission, generation) is subject to physical constraints.
Ives agrees, stating clearly that the biggest constraint is energy. He draws a parallel between the AI race and an "energy-side arms race," noting in particular that "nuclear power takes time, but it is unavoidable."
2-1. There isn't just one reason for the rise in commodities. But 'AI-driven' factors are increasing.
Verrone explains the rise in commodities through multiple factors, such as "business cycles," "geopolitics and resource nationalism," and "declining dollar value," while also presenting the interpretation of demand for AI 2.0 (power, metals, resources). The strength of the discussion is its realism: "You can't narrow it down to one reason. Stocks are a blunt instrument." That is precisely why it leads to the proposal that in 2026, one should broaden their perspective not just to AI itself, but to the "materials, power, and equipment that make AI possible."
3. The keyword for 2026 is 'speculation to reality': Bitcoin's weakness is the 'signal.'
Verrone's 2026 forecast is clear.
"The first half of 2026 will be a baton pass from speculative (high-beta) assets to 'real things.'" Specifically, areas closer to the "real economy," such as transportation, regional banks, housing, chemicals, and commodities. What is interesting is that
he cites the sluggishness of Bitcoin as a sign of this rotation."Toward 'real assets' with carry (yield)" and "away from Bitcoin, which has no carry"—this contrast explains the shift in investor sentiment in a nutshell.
3-1. However, he is not saying that 'tech is over.'
This is a point that is easy to misinterpret. Verrone is talking about the "diversification of the lead role." Meanwhile, Ives remains bullish, saying "tech stocks could still see gains of over 20%." In other words, the conclusion of the program is closer to the idea that it is not a binary choice between tech or the real economy, but that the AI wave will become 'two-tiered.'
Upper tier: AI core (cloud, data, implementation, security)
Lower tier: AI byproducts (power, resources, equipment, industrial efficiency)
4. Oracle is the test case for the 'narrative': Which is right, stocks or bonds?
The highlight of the second half of the program is the discussion on Oracle. Ives argues that "Oracle is not a hyperscaler, but it will gain a huge opportunity as a recipient of AI data center demand," clashing head-on with the skeptics' doubt: "Can OpenAI pay its bills?"
Here, Eisman adds a supplementary point regarding CDS (Credit Default Swaps). While the fact that Oracle's debt 'looks like junk grade' is fueling anxiety, the CDS market has thin liquidity, meaning spreads can move easily even with small amounts—in other words, it is dangerous to immediately conclude that 'the bond market is collectively rejecting Oracle,' is the summary.
The lesson this part demonstrates is simple: 'Hold narratives lightly.' The summary of 2025, that 'common sense' can flip in a matter of months, is brought home here.
5. The '2026 Roadmap' remaining after watching: What should investors check?
If you want to translate this program into 'action,' you can narrow it down to three checklist items.
Speed of AI monetization: Whether corporate revenue and gross profit can keep up with the increase in CAPEX (if they lag, adjustments will occur).
Power and resource bottlenecks: What determines AI growth rates may end up being 'supply constraints' rather than model performance.
Signs of rotation: The relative strength of Bitcoin's weakness, commodities, regional banks, and transportation will tell us the 'next protagonist'.
2026 will not be the year the AI dream collapses, but rather the year AI lands in reality (power, resources, implementation, and industrial efficiency)—Episode 40 was an installment that depicted that 'way of landing' from both tech and macro perspectives.
