Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 684

The new geography of technology leadership

For much of the past decade, the United States appeared unassailable in technology. Its world-leading universities, deep capital markets and ecosystem of entrepreneurial companies created a durable advantage across software, semiconductors and digital platforms. China, by contrast, was often viewed primarily as a manufacturing power: highly capable, but more dependent on imported technology and foreign intellectual property.

That distinction is becoming increasingly outdated.

The accelerated development of China’s technology sector has not been reflected in its stock market performance, and Chinese tech company valuations continue to lag their US peers, which have soared following an extended bull run. Regulatory uncertainty, geopolitical tensions and intense domestic competition have weighed on valuations and shareholder returns, even as China has significantly strengthened its technological capabilities.

Today, China has developed a technology ecosystem that is broader, deeper and more innovative than many international investors appreciate. From artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing to electric vehicles, batteries and semiconductors, Chinese companies are increasingly competing at the technological frontier. In some areas, China is not only competing, but is the clear global leader, with the country accounting for 59% of global robotics developments[1] and 75% of global EV manufacturing[2] last year.

What I find particularly interesting is that the US and China are actually moving in a similar direction. Both have decided that technological leadership matters enormously, and both are committing extraordinary amounts of capital and resources to AI, semiconductors and advanced technology. In China, AI infrastructure capex is expected to more than double this year, rising 103% to RMB 932 billion ($139 billion) following 33% growth in 2025.[3] What differs is how they are going about it. For investors, this matters because the opportunity is no longer simply about choosing between US and Chinese technology. Both markets are producing innovation, but through very different ecosystems, and increasingly with different sources of competitive advantage.

The US remains exceptionally strong in areas such as advanced semiconductor design, cloud computing, software and the development of frontier AI models. Its combination of capital, talent and entrepreneurship remains difficult to replicate.

China’s strengths are different. Its enormous domestic market, manufacturing depth and highly integrated supply chains allow new technologies to move rapidly from development to commercial deployment. In areas such as electric vehicles, batteries, renewable technology and increasingly AI, Chinese companies can innovate, manufacture and scale at remarkable speed.

The development of AI illustrates the contrast particularly well. The US has led much of the global investment in the most advanced models and computing infrastructure. China, facing tighter access to some leading-edge technologies, has been focusing on efficiency, domestic capability and the practical application of AI across its economy. That focus is helping create a more self-sufficient technology ecosystem, with Chinese companies investing across the semiconductor value chain, data infrastructure, AI models and applications. The result may not mirror the US technology sector, but that is precisely the point: two distinct models of technological development are emerging.

This is also not simply a China story. The same shift is visible elsewhere in emerging markets.

Some of the world’s most important technology companies sit in Korea and Taiwan, and they are where much of the AI infrastructure is physically made. Advanced foundry capacity and high bandwidth memory are genuine bottlenecks in the AI build, and the companies that control them have been the principal driver of strong emerging market returns since the start of 2025.

What interests me most is a change in the character of those businesses. Memory has historically been a commodity, priced on the spot market and prone to violent cycles. Increasingly, it is being sold under multi-year supply agreements, at price floors above the peak margins of the last cycle, while new capacity looks likely to remain constrained into 2028. That points to better and more visible earnings through the cycle than investors are used to.

Across these markets, the more interesting question is not which country leads, but which companies do. For a long time, the assumption was that China’s largest technology platforms would naturally lead the next phase of innovation. I don’t think that is a given anymore. Increasingly, capital and attention are moving towards AI-native companies, semiconductors and the infrastructure underpinning the next wave of technology, rather than automatically towards the large-cap incumbent platforms.

Identifying where innovation is happening is only half the task. The second half is what you are being asked to pay for it. US technology companies offer exposure to some of the world’s most profitable and innovative businesses, but in many cases those characteristics are already reflected in valuations. Elsewhere the picture is different. Years of regulatory uncertainty, geopolitical concerns and weak investor sentiment have left parts of the Chinese technology sector trading at lower valuations, while in Korea and Taiwan share prices do not yet obviously reflect the shift in earnings profile.

Lower valuations alone do not make an investment case. The more important question is whether the underlying businesses are improving and whether innovation is translating into sustainable earnings growth, which has traditionally led to equity returns. Increasingly, in selected areas of emerging market technology, we believe that is happening.

For investors, that changes the question we should be asking. It is no longer simply which companies dominate technology today. It is which companies, and which ecosystems, are best positioned to lead the next wave.

 

 

Varun Laijawalla is an Emerging Markets Equity Co-Portfolio Manager at Ninety One. Archie is a co-portfolio manager for the Emerging Markets Equity and Emerging Markets ex China Equity strategies in the 4Factor team at Ninety One.

This article is for general information only and should not be construed as advice. This information is believed to be reliable but may be inaccurate or incomplete. The views are those of the contributor at the time of publication and do not necessarily reflect those of Ninety One. Any opinions stated are honestly held but are not guaranteed and should not be relied upon.

 

  •   14 October 2026
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Engineers vs lawyers: the US-China divide that will shape this century

AI is more smoke and mirrors than a revolution

Welcome to the grey war

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Planning

Avoid unnecessary CGT with this estate planning clause

A simple estate plan can create a ticking time bomb. One overlooked clause can pit spouses against children, delay inheritances, and potentially leave a family facing an unexpected tax bill worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Exchange traded products

The hidden trade-off in fixed income ETFs

Some investment trade-offs are immediately visible. Others are embedded in the way a portfolio is constructed. Understanding the difference may explain why similar-looking investments can produce surprisingly different results.

Retirement

The mortgage free retirement is fading

What happens when a generation reaches retirement carrying obligations previous generations largely avoided? New research suggests we may need to rethink both how much we need in retirement and what life could look like.

Retirement

The key question to inspire a confident and purposeful retirement

Most people spend decades planning for retirement. Far fewer plan for what happens when they get there. The difference may explain why so many find the transition harder and less fulfilling than expected, despite careful preparation.

Latest from Morningstar

Making the case for a 'good enough' portfolio

Some investors spend years chasing the perfect strategy. Others choose a path that’s simply good enough and move on. Which approach is more likely to deliver both better outcomes and a happier financial life over the long run?

Investment strategies

Is the US market as expensive as CAPE says?

Many investing ideas survive for decades. But that does not make them right. A famous valuation measure implies that US shares are dangerously expensive, but the evidence may point to a very different conclusion.

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.