TL;DR
Get business pricing on tech for your team
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
Apollo chief economist Torsten Slok says measures of profit margins and revenue per worker for the S&P 493 show no evidence that AI has improved productivity outside major technology companies. The finding reflects an analysis of selected corporate metrics, not proof that no company has benefited or that AI has no future financial value.
Apollo Global Management chief economist Torsten Slok says financial indicators for large U.S. companies outside seven major technology firms show no clear payoff from artificial intelligence. In a recent note, he examined profit margins and revenue per worker among what he calls the S&P 493, concluding that both measures appear flat and offer no evidence of AI-driven productivity gains.
Slok’s S&P 493 grouping consists of the S&P 500 companies minus Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla. The comparison is intended to separate the largest technology companies from other major corporations, rather than to measure every business using AI. Slok says the indicators he reviewed have not shown gains among the remaining companies that would point to AI improving their financial performance.
“Despite massive investments and widespread hype around artificial intelligence, the technology has delivered zero financial payoff to corporate America outside of tech,” Slok wrote. That is his assessment of the evidence in the note: it should not be read as a company-by-company audit or as proof that no non-tech business has received any benefit. The source material does not provide a specific measurement period, dataset, or estimate of how much the companies have invested.
The note also addresses whether non-tech companies will eventually catch up with technology firms. Slok argues that converting access to AI into faster revenue growth or higher margins may be difficult because business decisions involve more than processing information. He cites accountability, trust and ethical trade-offs as factors that can affect organizational decisions and customer responses.
Why Corporate AI Returns Matter
The gap between AI investment and measurable financial returns matters to executives, workers and investors assessing whether current spending is producing business value. If the indicators Slok highlights remain flat, companies may face pressure to report where AI improves output, reduces costs or supports revenue, rather than relying on adoption figures or expectations about future gains.
The findings do not establish whether AI is useful. Profit margins and revenue per worker are broad measures that can change for many reasons, and AI-related effects may be difficult to isolate. Benefits could also be limited to particular tasks, departments or companies without appearing clearly in company-wide figures. Slok’s argument concerns demonstrated returns at the level he examined; it is not a conclusion about every use of the technology.
Deploying AI does not necessarily change how a business makes decisions or earns revenue. Companies may continue to rely on human judgment and organizational practices to apply the technology. The note does not quantify effects on employment, service quality or particular industries, so those consequences cannot be inferred from its conclusion.
Products Worth Considering
Bose QuietComfort Wireless Noise-Cancelling Over-Ear Headphones, Black
Amazon Kindle Paperwhite (12th Generation, 2024), 16 GB, 7-inch Display, Jade
DJI Osmo Pocket 4 Gimbal Camera Pro Kit, 18-Piece Bundle
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Slok Defines the S&P 493
The S&P 493 is Slok’s shorthand for the S&P 500 after removing seven prominent technology companies: Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla. The grouping compares firms that build or sell much of the technology with companies in other sectors that may use it. It is a selected comparison, not a separate official stock index.
Slok’s note comes amid corporate investment and public discussion of AI’s potential to raise productivity. The source report says other recent studies have also found that significant productivity gains have yet to emerge, but it does not identify those studies or provide their methods and results. The reference offers context for the debate but does not establish that all research reaches the same conclusion.
Slok distinguishes the ability to process information from the judgment involved in business decisions. He described AI as potentially “a great calculator,” while arguing that company decisions also depend on accountability, trust, culture and unwritten rules. This is his explanation for why improved technical capability may not translate directly into higher margins or revenue; the financial indicators he reports do not independently establish that explanation.
Limits of the Financial Evidence
The source material does not give the time period, underlying figures or calculation methods behind Slok’s comparison. It also does not specify how the analysis distinguishes AI’s influence from other factors affecting margins and revenue per worker. Without those details, readers cannot independently assess the scale of the observed patterns or how sensitive they are to the measures selected.
It is also unclear how widely the findings apply beyond the S&P 493, or whether particular non-tech companies or tasks have seen benefits that are not visible in aggregate figures. The note’s claim about “zero financial payoff” is Slok’s characterization of the results, not evidence that every company outside the technology sector has received no financial benefit. The source does not provide individual company examples or a forecast for when gains might appear.
Evidence Needed to Track Returns
Later company results may show whether productivity, revenue per worker or profit margins change as businesses continue to invest in and use AI. Slok’s note does not set out a follow-up date or forecast, and the source material does not describe a new study or scheduled corporate disclosures tied to its findings.
The reported conclusion is limited to the indicators and group Slok discusses. Further details about the analysis’s period, data and methodology would help readers assess the claim. Subsequent company reporting and research may provide additional evidence; whether AI produces broad financial gains outside technology remains unresolved.
Key Questions
What does Apollo economist Torsten Slok say about AI’s financial payoff?
Slok says profit margins and revenue per worker appear flat among the S&P 493, providing no evidence in those measures that AI has improved productivity.
What is the S&P 493?
It is Slok’s term for the S&P 500 minus seven large technology companies: Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla. It is a grouping used in his analysis, not a separate official index.
Does the report prove that no non-tech company benefits from AI?
No. The conclusion concerns broad financial indicators for a selected group of companies. It does not provide a company-by-company assessment or rule out benefits in specific businesses or tasks.
What information about Slok’s analysis is not provided?
The source material does not state the analysis’s measurement period, detailed dataset or calculation methods. It also does not quantify AI investment or show how its effects were separated from other influences on company finances.
Source: techcrunch.com
