BlackRock Report: Investors Shifting from Big Tech to Energy & Infrastructure

On a recent weekday morning, a facilities manager at a large commercial complex mentioned that electricity contracts were being renegotiated again, even though the building’s occupancy had not changed. The conversation drifted briefly to data centers, grid pressure, and long-term power costs before moving on. Small operational discussions like this increasingly mirror larger shifts taking place in global capital markets.

STRICT FINANCIAL NEWSROOM REPORTING

The shift reflects not a sudden loss of confidence in technology, but a broader reassessment of where durable returns may emerge under changing macroeconomic conditions.

Global investors are recalibrating portfolio strategies as capital begins to move away from large technology companies.

The shift is increasingly favoring energy producers and infrastructure assets, according to a january 2026 BlackRock investment survey.

The report, released amid elevated equity valuations and tightening financial conditions, highlights a reassessment of where returns linked to artificial intelligence, digitization, and economic resilience are most likely to materialize over the coming cycle.

The findings matter because BlackRock manages more than $9 trillion in assets globally, and its surveys often reflect positioning decisions by pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, insurers, and large institutional allocators. A shift in preferences at this level can influence equity market leadership, bond issuance patterns, cross-border investment flows, and government policy priorities tied to energy security and infrastructure spending.

Changing Market Leadership After a Decade of Tech Dominance

This transition marks a potential inflection point after years of concentrated equity leadership. For more than ten years, large-cap technology firms have dominated global equity returns.

Low interest rates following the 2008 financial crisis supported high-growth valuations, while cloud computing, smartphones, and platform-based business models drove earnings expansion. From 2015 to 2024, U.S. technology stocks significantly outperformed broader market indices, with the Nasdaq Composite delivering cumulative returns far exceeding those of energy and industrial sectors.

However, the macroeconomic environment that supported this dominance has shifted. Global inflation surged in 2021 and 2022, prompting central banks to raise policy rates at the fastest pace in decades. While inflation has moderated in several advanced economies, borrowing costs remain structurally higher than in the pre-pandemic period.

This has changed the relative attractiveness of capital-intensive sectors and assets with stable cash flows. Energy and infrastructure, long viewed as cyclical or defensive, have re-entered the strategic spotlight as investors reassess long-term demand drivers rather than short-term growth multiples.

Macro Data Reshaping Investor Assumptions

Recent macroeconomic data underscores why this reassessment is occurring. In the United States, consumer price inflation has slowed from its 2022 peak of 9.1% to around 4.2% in late 2025, but remains above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target.

In the United States, consumer price inflation has slowed from its 2022 peak but remains above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target. Eurozone inflation has also moderated, though energy prices remain a key source of volatility. Bond yields reflect this uncertainty, with U.S. 10-year Treasury yields staying elevated compared with the ultra-low levels of the late 2010s.

At the same time, global electricity demand continues to rise. According to data from international energy agencies, power consumption linked to data centers, artificial intelligence workloads, and electrification trends is growing faster than overall GDP in several regions. 

Commodity markets reflect this pressure, with natural gas, uranium, copper, and critical minerals drawing renewed investor interest due to their role in power generation and grid expansion.

Currency markets have also reacted to divergent energy exposures. Economies with strong energy export capacity have seen more stable trade balances, while energy importers remain sensitive to price swings and supply disruptions.

Timeline Leading to the BlackRock Survey Findings

The shift highlighted in the BlackRock report did not emerge in isolation. Over the past year, several developments converged. 

Equity markets reached record or near-record highs, driven largely by a narrow group of technology stocks tied to artificial intelligence themes. Valuation metrics for some large technology firms reached levels that prompted debate among institutional investors about sustainability.

Simultaneously, governments across North America, Europe, and parts of Asia announced large-scale infrastructure programs focused on grid modernization, renewable energy integration, and transport networks. These programs were often framed as both economic stimulus and strategic investments in energy security.

Rising geopolitical tensions also played a role. Disruptions to global energy supply chains over recent years highlighted vulnerabilities in fuel sourcing, grid resilience, and logistics infrastructure. Investors began factoring geopolitical risk more explicitly into asset allocation decisions.

Institutional Statements and Policy Context

Central banks and international financial institutions have repeatedly emphasized the investment implications of these trends. The International Monetary Fund has noted that infrastructure gaps and energy transition costs could shape global growth trajectories for decades. 

The World Bank has highlighted the need for trillions of dollars in annual investment to meet energy transition and development goals.

Finance ministries in advanced economies have echoed similar themes, pointing to public-private partnerships as a mechanism to mobilize capital into power generation, transmission networks, and digital infrastructure. These policy signals provide a supportive backdrop for institutional investors seeking long-duration assets with predictable cash flows.

BlackRock’s report aligns with this broader policy environment by identifying energy providers and infrastructure operators as critical beneficiaries of structural demand rather than short-term market cycles.

Market and Investor Reactions

Financial markets have responded unevenly to the emerging narrative. While technology stocks remain influential, relative performance gaps have narrowed in some regions as energy equities and infrastructure-linked firms attract fresh inflows. Listed utilities, grid equipment manufacturers, and energy services companies have seen increased analyst coverage and investor engagement.

In fixed income markets, infrastructure-related project bonds and energy transition-linked debt instruments have gained attention from long-term investors seeking inflation protection and stable yields. 

Private markets have also reflected this trend, with infrastructure funds reporting strong fundraising activity compared with certain segments of venture capital.

Regulators have monitored these flows closely, particularly where infrastructure assets intersect with national security considerations or regulated utility frameworks.

Expert Analysis of the Underlying Drivers

Economists and market strategists point to several interconnected drivers behind the shift. One is the changing cost of capital. Higher interest rates penalize long-duration growth assets more than businesses with near-term cash generation. Energy and infrastructure often fall into the latter category.

Another driver is demand certainty. While technology adoption can be cyclical and subject to rapid competitive shifts, electricity demand, grid usage, and transport infrastructure needs are tied to fundamental economic activity. This makes revenue projections more resilient under a range of economic scenarios.

Analysts also distinguish between correlation and causation in recent market movements. While artificial intelligence investment has boosted technology earnings, it has simultaneously increased power consumption and infrastructure strain, indirectly benefiting energy providers.

Implications for Businesses and Consumers

For businesses, the reallocation of capital could influence access to financing. Energy producers and infrastructure developers may find funding conditions improving as institutional appetite grows. 

Technology firms, particularly those outside the largest market leaders, could face more scrutiny regarding profitability and capital efficiency.

Consumers may experience indirect effects. Increased investment in energy infrastructure can improve grid reliability and support electrification, but it can also lead to higher utility bills if costs are passed through. Infrastructure upgrades may enhance service quality but often require long planning and regulatory approval cycles.

The distributional impact will vary by region, depending on regulatory frameworks, energy mix, and public policy choices.

Geopolitical and Policy Dimensions

Energy and infrastructure are inherently geopolitical. Control over energy supply chains, grid resilience, and transport corridors influences national security and diplomatic leverage. As private capital becomes more involved, governments may tighten oversight of foreign investment in strategic assets.

Trade policy also intersects with these trends. Tariffs, subsidies, and local content requirements can affect project economics and investor returns. 

The global competition for critical minerals adds another layer of complexity, as countries seek to secure supplies essential for power generation and storage technologies.

International Comparisons

Similar shifts have occurred in previous cycles. In the early 2000s, rising commodity demand drove capital into energy and materials following the technology bubble. More recently, post-pandemic recovery efforts emphasized infrastructure spending as a growth engine.

What differentiates the current cycle is the integration of digital demand with physical assets. 

Unlike earlier commodity booms, today’s energy investment is closely linked to data, networks, and automation rather than purely industrial expansion.

Assessing Short-Term and Long-Term Risks

In the short term, risks include execution challenges, regulatory delays, and cost overruns in large infrastructure projects. Energy markets remain exposed to price volatility driven by weather events, geopolitical tensions, and supply disruptions.

Over the long term, technological change poses both opportunity and risk. Advances in energy efficiency, storage, or alternative power sources could alter demand assumptions. Policy shifts, particularly around climate targets and carbon pricing, may also reshape asset valuations.

Investors must balance these uncertainties against the perceived stability of infrastructure-linked cash flows.

Public Perception and Social Considerations

Public opinion toward energy and infrastructure investment is mixed. While there is broad support for reliable power and modern transport systems, concerns persist around environmental impact, land use, and affordability. 

Community engagement and regulatory transparency will influence project timelines and investor confidence. Social acceptance can therefore become a material factor in determining returns, particularly for long-lived assets.

Forward-Looking Scenarios

Looking ahead, several scenarios are plausible. A sustained rotation could see energy and infrastructure become core portfolio allocations rather than tactical positions. Alternatively, a sharp economic slowdown could temporarily reduce capital spending, delaying projects and affecting returns.

A third scenario involves renewed technology leadership if productivity gains from artificial intelligence translate into broader economic growth without proportionate increases in energy costs. Each outcome depends on macro conditions, policy choices, and technological progress.

Final Analytical Synthesis

The BlackRock report captures a moment of reassessment rather than a definitive end to technology leadership. It reflects how investors are integrating higher interest rates, energy demand, and geopolitical risk into long-term allocation decisions. 

Whether the shift proves durable will depend on how effectively energy and infrastructure investments deliver stable returns in a more complex global economic environment.

The shift’s durability depends on energy and infrastructure investments delivering stable returns amid a complex global economy.

Frequently Asked Questions 

Why are investors reducing exposure to big technology stocks?

Higher interest rates and elevated valuations have prompted reassessment of long-term risk-adjusted returns.

Why are energy and infrastructure attracting more capital now?

Rising power demand, grid investment needs, and stable cash flows support their long-term appeal.

Does this mean technology investment is declining globally?

No. Capital is being rebalanced, not eliminated, with greater focus on profitability and efficiency.

How does artificial intelligence influence energy investment?

AI workloads significantly increase electricity consumption, benefiting power generation and grid assets.

Are government policies supporting this shift?

Yes. Infrastructure spending plans and energy security policies align with investor interest.

What risks do energy and infrastructure investors face?

Regulatory delays, cost overruns, commodity price volatility, and policy changes remain key risks.

Will consumers feel the impact of increased infrastructure investment?

Potentially, through improved reliability and services, but also through pricing adjustments in some regions.

Is this shift visible outside the United States?

Yes. Similar patterns are emerging in Europe and parts of Asia, reflecting global structural trends.