Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 606

History tells us that markets are at a high-risk juncture

"For historians each event is unique. Economics, however, maintains that forces in society and nature behave in repetitive ways."
- Charles Kindleberger, Manias, Panics, and Crashes

It’s been around 20 years since I last read Kindleberger’s classic book. But with the 25th anniversary of the dot.com bubble last month (March 10), I thought I’d dust it off. We are, after all, in another bubbly environment. And while every bubble is unique in its form and duration, as Kindelberger notes, each has common characteristics. 

To be honest, the book was a tougher read than I remember. I ended up skimming a lot of it. It was packed with every crisis, panic and mini-panic you could imagine, including the obscure Kipper und Wipperzeit episode. 

This occurred just prior to the Thirty Years War, which broke out in 1618. It wasn’t a unique crisis. It was a story of currency debasement, a story as old as money itself. 

This is what makes the book a powerful read. Each crisis is different, but at its core is the same range of human emotions. What you’re seeing today is just the latest episode of humanity mixed with a torrent of money. 

While there is a huge amount of information crammed into Manias, Panics, and Crashes, the gold is in chapter two. It provides a framework for the rest of the book. Titled ‘Anatomy of a Typical Crisis’, it starts with the crisis model of the late Hyman Minsky. Kindleberger writes (with my emphasis): 

"Although Minsky was a monetary theorist rather than an economic historian, his model lends itself effectively to the interpretation of economic and financial history ‘According to Minsky, events leading up to a crisis start with a ‘displacement’, some exogenous, outside shock to the macroeconomic system. The nature of this displacement varies from one speculative boom to another. It may be the outbreak or end of a war, a bumper harvest or crop failure, the widespread adoption of an invention with pervasive effects – canals, railroads, the automobile – some political event or surprising financial success, or a debt conversion that precipitously lowers interest rates. 

But whatever the source of displacement, if it is sufficiently large and pervasive, it will alter the economic outlook by changing profit opportunities in at least one important sector of the economy. 

If the new opportunities dominate those that lose, investment and production pick up. A boom is underway. ‘In Minsky’s model, the boom is fed by an expansion of bank credit that enlarges the total money supply." 

Kindleberger’s book was originally published in 1978. At that time, the world of ‘tech’ didn’t really exist as we know it. Personal computers were only just being invented. 

But in this era, the ‘widespread adoption of an invention with pervasive effects’ is all about technology. The internet was an example of a displacement. And we know how that turned out. 

According to Kindleberger, "Each day’s events produce some changes in outlook, but few are significant enough to quality as displacements." 

Displacement and euphoria 

Artificial intelligence (AI) clearly qualifies as a modern-day displacement. You can see this in the charts below. 

On 30 November 2022, ChatGPT came into the world. It was the first publicly available (and free) AI tool. It was the start of a mania. For evidence, look no further than Nvidia’s share price… 


Figure 1: Nvidia share price chart. Source: Optuma 

From the release date of ChatGPT to the recent peak, Nvidia’s share price soared by around 830%. In the previous year, Nvidia’s stock price had declined around 70% from the peak of the post-Covid monetary boom in late 2021. 

ChatGPT, and AI in general, was the ‘displacement’ that stopped the bear market in its tracks. It allowed investor imagination to run wild. 

Investment in chip technology and production ramped up…a boom got underway. 

However, this boom didn’t follow the classic Minsky model. It wasn’t fuelled by an ‘expansion of bank credit’. 

Not exactly, anyway. 

As I’ll show you later in this article, the US Federal Reserve and Government, rather than private banks, provided ample liquidity to fuel the bubble. 

Flush with cash from this liquidity surge and enjoying years of network effect dominance, the major tech companies went on an AI spending spree. Retained earnings and internal cashflows, rather than bank credit, fuelled this investment boom.

This is what makes this bubble unique. The huge investment in AI infrastructure didn’t come with destabilising bank debt. Therefore, the argument went, it wasn’t really a bubble. Moreover, the earnings were real. Therefore…again…not a bubble. 

But one of the characteristics of bubbles and manias is the ability of investors to rationalise them at the time. As Kindleberger says, "forces in society and nature behave in repetitive ways". Somehow, this time is always different. 

Historically, bubbles always have different characteristics. But at their core, they’re all the same.

When it’s a ‘widespread adoption of a new innovation’, like AI, the bubble represents a belief in something so new and profound that its possibilities and applications are endless. 

In other words, the bubble is in investors’ imaginations. Because the innovation is unique and groundbreaking, its imagined benefits are unlimited. 

It’s not just about Nvidia. You see it in the other ‘Magnificent 7’ stocks that are closely connected to AI too. Take a look at Meta…up around 560% at the peak from November 2022… 


Figure 2: Meta share price. Source: Optuma 

Or Microsoft, up 90% at the peak… 


Figure 3: Microsoft share price. Source: Optuma 

Or Alphabet aka Google…up 110%: 


Figure 4: Alphabet share price. Source: Optuma 

Or Amazon…up 160%: 


Figure 5: Amazon share price. Source: Optuma 

These are very large companies up significantly in just two years. 

But, the argument goes, this isn’t a bubble because the earnings are there to support these higher prices. 

But maybe the bubble is in the earnings? Maybe the displacement caused by the emergence of AI led to a one-off investment boom that has momentarily inflated a select group of companies’ earnings? 

From 2022 to 2026 (forecast) Nvidia’s earnings per share are expected to increase more than 1000%. Meta’s by around 240%... Microsoft’s by more than 50%... Alphabet’s by 125%... And Amazon’s by around 550%. 

Maybe these earnings are sustainable. But Kindleberger’s study of history and Minsky’s model suggest we need to be critical of such a view. 

In Minsky’s model, euphoria follows displacement. While you haven’t seen euphoria in the broader market, you can certainly see it in the share price charts above. 

You’ve also seen it in ‘quality’ stocks. This is the ‘sneaky bubble’ that joined the bubble in tech and AI. Costco Wholesale is just one example. This US$400 billion company trades on 50x earnings! Several Aussie stocks also benefited from this ‘quality’ premium. 


Figure 6: Costco share price. Source: Optuma 

Distress 

But let’s get back to Kindleberger. After euphoria comes distress. Distress is brought about by changing expectations. Arguably, this is where we are now. Kindleberger writes (with my emphasis): 

"Expectations in the real world may change slowly or rapidly, and different groups may wake up to the realization – sometimes at different rates and sometimes all at once – that the future will be different from the past. The period of distress may be drawn out over weeks, months, even years, or it may be concentrated into a few days. But a change in expectations from a state of confidence to one lacking confidence in the future is central."

I think it’s fair to say that the first quarter of 2025 can best be summarised by the term ‘changing expectations.’ 

There are two key events behind these changing expectations. The first is DeepSeek. This is the Chinese AI start-up that rivals ChatGPT and other Western LLM’s (large language models). It’s open-source and supposedly much cheaper run. Its release in January 2025 sent shockwaves through the industry. 

Nvidia’s share price plunged 17% on the news. DeepSeek was the catalyst for changing expectations towards AI-related companies. 

The election of Donald Trump is the other event behind ‘changing expectations’. This is more than just AI or tech-related. 

The market initially welcomed Trump’s election. But it’s become clear he’s not bluffing with tariffs. His attempts to engineer a renaissance of the US manufacturing sector and restore jobs to the working and middle classes are spooking markets. 

This is not the environment where one of the most expensive stock markets in history will thrive. The market, both here and in the US, has gone from a state of confidence at the start of the year to one of uncertainty now. As Kindleberger says, ‘a change in expectations from a state of confidence to one lacking confidence in the future is central.’ 

In his, or Minsky’s model, this change of expectations brings about a period of distress. Here again, Kindleberger’s study of history is instructive: 

"Financial distress for an economy also has a prospective rather than an actual significance and implies financial adjustments or disturbances ahead. It is a lull before a possible storm, rather than the havoc in its wake."

He continues (with my emphasis)… 

"Causes of distress are difficult to disentangle from symptoms, but they include demands on the capital market for cash when cash is tight, sharply rising interest rates in some segment or all of the capital market, balance of payments deficits, rising bankruptcies, the end of price increases in commodities, securities, land buildings, or whatever else may have been the object of speculation.

The end of a period of rising prices leads to distress if investors or speculators have become used to rising prices and the paper profits implicit in them. Of course, it is difficult—many would say impossible—to distinguish in advance a pause in a continued upward movement from a topping out that presages a downturn. Uncertainty on this score is itself a cause of distress."

Putting it all together

Okay…let’s back up a bit and put all this together. 

We’ve had the displacement of AI and the release of ChatGPT in November 2022. It reversed a bear market and resulted in an extended period of euphoria. 

However, the euphoria wasn’t widespread. It centred around tech and AI-related companies and industries, as well as ‘quality’ stocks. In a throwback to the ‘Nifty Fifty stocks of the 1970s, these are high-quality earners that investors believed you could pay any price for. 

But the emergence of a Chinese AI competitor and the real Trump agenda have changed investor expectations. We’ve now moved into the distress stage. As Kindleberger states, ‘the period of distress may be drawn out over weeks, months, even years.’ History isn’t clear about how a period of ‘distress’ resolves itself. 

Kindleberger writes: 

"The essence of financial distress is loss of confidence. What comes next—a slow recovery of belief in the future as various aspects of the economy are corrected, a collapse of prices, panic, bank runs, or a rush to get out of illiquid assets and into money?

If there is no panic…financial distress may gradually subside."

And… 

"When financial distress is followed by a crash or panic, there is no standard interval. It may be a matter of weeks or of years."

In other words, history is frustratingly vague about informing us as to what comes next. 

Understanding this point is crucial. Otherwise, it’s easy to let confirmation bias take over. If you’re bearish, you’re going to expect panic and a crash. If you’re bullish, you’ll hope things resolve themselves without too much damage. 

But understand…no one knows how this will play out. What we do know is that history tells us that we’re in a high-risk environment. We’ve had the displacement, the euphoria, and now, the distress. 

 

Greg Canavan is the Editorial Director of Fat Tail Investment Research.

 

  •   9 April 2025
  • 3
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Facebook, Google need new business model

Why the four tech giants are not expensive

AI economic scenarios: revolutionary growth, or recessionary bubble?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.