Last November, I wrote that the dividend factor had become something of a mirage. Investors were increasingly observing that high dividend yields alone were not a reliable source of excess returns. Much of what appeared to be dividend outperformance was actually exposure to value, quality, and disciplined capital allocation according to our work.

Six months later, the conversation has already evolved.

Today, the issue is no longer whether dividends matter. The issue is whether markets care about cash flow at all.

There is an irony developing in today’s market. The very companies once criticized for hoarding cash are now being rewarded for doing exactly that. Rather than returning capital to shareholders, many of the market’s largest companies are redirecting cash toward artificial intelligence infrastructure, data centers, semiconductor capacity, and computational scale. Investors have largely embraced this shift, rewarding companies that prioritize reinvestment over distribution.

The result is a market environment where dividends have become increasingly scarce. The dividend yield on the S&P 500 sits only modestly above historic lows despite record corporate profitability and strong free cash flow generation. At the same time, dividend-oriented strategies have struggled to keep pace with broader market indices as capital has flowed toward companies perceived to be leaders in the AI race.

This is not simply a story about dividends falling out of favor. It is a story about the market repricing the value of present cash flow.

Part of the explanation lies in the shrinking compensation investors receive for taking equity risk. The difference between the earnings yield of the S&P 500 and the yield available on long-term Treasury securities, also known as the equity risk premium, has narrowed to levels rarely seen outside periods of elevated investor optimism.

In practical terms, investors are accepting relatively little additional expected return for owning stocks rather than government bonds.

When risk premiums compress, markets naturally become more dependent on future growth assumptions. Investors become willing to pay increasingly higher prices for earnings that may not materialize for many years. Immediate cash generation becomes less important than the possibility of future dominance.

The artificial intelligence investment cycle has amplified this dynamic.

Today,  many of the companies, we consider to be the market’s most highly valued, are not being rewarded primarily for what they earn today. Rather, they are being rewarded for what investors believe they may control tomorrow. As a result, cash that might once have supported dividends, share repurchases, or balance-sheet strengthening is increasingly being redirected toward AI-related capital expenditures.

Recent reports suggest that US corporations are committing hundreds of billions of dollars toward data-center construction, custom silicon development, cloud infrastructure, power generation, and AI model training. In prior market cycles, excess cash frequently found its way back to shareholders. In this cycle, a growing share is being reinvested into what many companies view as a once-in-a-generation technological opportunity.

Ironically, this shift may reinforce one of the central arguments behind dividend investing.

The traditional appeal of dividends was never solely about income. Dividends represented discipline. Management teams that consistently returned capital to shareholders were often forced to be more selective in their investment decisions. Capital allocation choices faced greater scrutiny because excess cash could not simply accumulate on the balance sheet.

Investors appear willing to relax that discipline. Markets are encouraging management teams to spend aggressively because the perceived cost of underinvesting in artificial intelligence is extraordinarily high. For many executives, the greater risk is not spending too much but spending too little.

This creates a fascinating divide in modern equity markets.

For years, investors framed markets through the lens of growth versus value. Increasingly, however, a different distinction may be emerging: self-funded growth versus capital-intensive growth.

Companies with durable free cash flow generation and strong balance sheets can pursue significant AI investments while maintaining financial flexibility and shareholder return programs. Others may find themselves forced to choose between investing for competitiveness and returning capital to investors.

That distinction matters because artificial intelligence is not simply another software cycle. It is rapidly becoming one of the largest corporate capital spending initiatives in modern history.

This dynamic also helps explain why dividend-oriented strategies have struggled despite an environment that might otherwise favor income-producing assets. The market is currently placing a premium on future opportunity rather than present cash flow. Investors are rewarding participation in AI-related investment themes and showing a greater willingness to overlook the near-term reduction in shareholder distributions that often accompanies those investments.

History suggests caution whenever markets become overly dismissive of cash flow discipline. The late 1990s offer a useful comparison. During the height of the dot-com era, many cash-generative businesses lagged dramatically as investors focused on growth potential rather than current profitability. Eventually, however, markets began to reexamine valuation, cash generation, and return on capital.

The lesson was not that innovation lacked value. Rather, it was that valuation and capital allocation ultimately mattered as well.

That perspective feels increasingly relevant today.

This does not mean that today’s AI leaders are destined to disappoint. Many possess extraordinary competitive advantages, profitability, and scale. Nor does it mean investors should abandon growth-oriented investments. It does suggest, however, that investors should distinguish between productive reinvestment and indiscriminate spending. Not every dollar devoted to artificial intelligence will generate attractive long-term returns.

The strongest businesses are not necessarily those paying the highest dividend today. They are often the businesses capable of investing in future growth opportunities while simultaneously maintaining financial flexibility and returning excess capital when appropriate.

As we look toward the second half of 2026 and beyond, one question stands out.

If equity risk premiums remain compressed and investors continue to reward distant growth over present cash flow, current market leadership may persist. However, if economic growth moderates, financing costs remain elevated, or AI investments generate more uneven outcomes than currently expected, investors may once again place greater emphasis on cash generation, balance-sheet strength, and capital allocation discipline.

The broader lesson is not that dividends are obsolete. Rather, the market is redefining what it values in an era dominated by artificial intelligence. Cash flow still matters. The question is whether investors are being adequately compensated for ignoring it.

Sources: The Wall Street Journal

Authored by J. Keith Buchanan

For more news, information, and analysis, visit the ETF Strategist Content Hub.

This report has been prepared for informational purposes only. It may include content generated or assisted by artificial intelligence (AI) tools. While the information presented is based on sources believed to be reliable, it should not be construed as personalized investment advice, considered a recommendation or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security or strategy. Strategy Holdings, Attributions and/or Sectors mentioned are as of the date indicated, subject to change, and should not be relied upon as current. This does not constitute legal or professional advice and is not tailored to the investment needs of any specific investor. Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any certain level of skill or training. Due to rapidly changing market conditions and the complexity of investment decisions, supplemental information may be required to make informed investment decisions, based on your individual investment objectives and suitability specifications. Investors should seek tailored advice and should understand that statements regarding future prospects of the financial market may not be realized, as past performance does not guarantee and/or is not indicative of future results. Content may not be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in whole or in part by any means without written permission from Globalt. Regarding permission, as well as to receive a copy of Globalt’s Form ADV Part 2 and Part 3, contact Globalt’s Chief Compliance Officer, 3200 Windy Hill Road SE, Suite 1550E, Atlanta GA 30339. You can obtain more information about Globalt Investments and its advisers via the Internet at adviserinfo.sec.gov, sponsored by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The opinions and some comments contained herein reflect the judgment of the author, as of the date noted.

Globalt Investments LLC (“Globalt” or the “Firm”) was founded in 1990. It has been registered with the SEC as an Investment Adviser pursuant to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 since 1991. Effective October 1, 2023, Globalt is a limited liability company owned by the employees and succeeding the “Globalt Investments” which had been a separately identifiable division of Synovus Trust Co. N.A. (its former affiliate since 2002). Globalt is no longer affiliated with Synovus. Globalt’s registration with the SEC does not imply any level of skill or training and should not be mistaken for an endorsement.