Investors have been asking whether the artificial intelligence boom has already tipped into mania, but one influential market thinker argues the classic conditions for a true bubble are not fully in place. In his view, the missing ingredient could arrive if OpenAI goes public, turning a powerful narrative into a flood of new stock that tests how deep the enthusiasm really runs. I see that tension, between rational optimism and speculative excess, as the key to understanding where markets stand right now.
The stakes are not abstract. AI leaders are racing to commercialize breakthroughs, equity indexes are setting records, and policymakers are watching for signs that exuberance is detaching from fundamentals. Whether the eventual OpenAI IPO becomes a pressure valve or a spark will shape not only tech valuations but also how comfortably ordinary savers can stay invested in this cycle.
The economist who says the bubble is not here yet
Owen Lamont has spent years studying how markets lose touch with reality, which is why his current stance carries weight. He is a portfolio manager at Acadian Asset Management a former University of Chicago finance professor, and he argues that today’s AI-driven rally does not yet meet his own definition of a bubble. In his framework, there are four conditions that tend to appear together when markets go off the rails, and at the moment he sees only three of them in place. Prices are rich, stories about transformative technology are everywhere, and speculative behavior is visible, but he believes the final stage, a surge of new stock issuance, has not arrived.
Lamont’s view is not a dismissal of risk, it is a warning about what comes next. He points out that in past episodes, from railroads to early oil exploration, investors poured capital into promising technologies and often ended up funding too much capacity. Many new technologies have resulted in overbuilding, with too many railroads and too many oil wells, even when the underlying innovations were real. In his telling, AI could follow a similar arc, where the technology changes the world but latecomer investors still lose money if they buy into the story at the wrong point in the cycle.
The “four horsemen” of a bubble and why issuance matters
To understand why Lamont is fixated on new stock supply, it helps to unpack his four-part checklist. He looks for extreme valuations, a compelling narrative, widespread speculative behavior, and a wave of issuance that lets insiders cash out into public enthusiasm. In his reading of history, it is that last piece, the flood of new shares, that often marks the point where a boom turns into a bust. Earlier in this cycle, there was plenty of froth in SPACs and meme stocks, but he notes that Issuance and the other three conditions have not yet lined up in the way they did at previous peaks.
That is why he keeps returning to the idea of a trigger. In his framework, a marquee listing that soaks up investor demand could be the moment when the final horseman rides in. He is explicit that the missing ingredient is a major IPO that tests whether buyers are still willing to pay ever higher prices for AI exposure. Until that happens, he sees a heated but not yet fully unhinged market, one where disciplined investors can still distinguish between durable cash flows and pure story stocks.
OpenAI’s IPO plans and the race with Anthropic
Against that backdrop, the prospect of OpenAI going public takes on outsized significance. The company is reportedly preparing for an IPO, with coverage describing how OpenAI Plans 2026 IPO Amid Competitive Pressures as rivals close the gap. One report notes that Phemex News is even using the moment to promote a campaign where users can Trade ACU and other tokens to share 30,000 USD, a reminder of how quickly financial marketing latches onto big tech milestones. Separate reporting says OpenAI reportedly plans to launch its IPO in the fourth quarter of 2026, with PANews highlighting that timeline while stressing that the information does not constitute investment advice.
The competitive context is just as important as the calendar. OpenAI has revealed plans for an IPO in Q4 2026 as the race with Anthropic intensifies, and that rivalry is pushing both companies to scale infrastructure and product offerings at a rapid clip. The same report notes that OpenAI targets year end IPO as rivalry with Anthropic intensifies, and that the listing could help break a broader IPO drought according to the WSJ. If Lamont is right that a surge of issuance is the missing ingredient for a full-blown bubble, then a blockbuster OpenAI deal, arriving just as competition peaks, could be the moment when private valuations finally collide with public market discipline.
Markets at record highs and the psychology of investors
Lamont’s caution is sharpened by where indexes already stand. As he spoke from his office in Boston, the S&P 500 breached 7,000 for the first time, a psychological milestone that would normally make even hardened bulls pause. To Lamont, the fact that such a round number failed to dissuade buyers underscores how powerful the AI story has become. He has seen this movie before, recalling how students at the University of Chicago once insisted that the dot-com era was different, only to change their minds after the crash.
That is why he frames the potential OpenAI listing as a kind of referendum on investor psychology. In his telling, the market is not yet in a bubble, but it is primed for one if a wave of high profile offerings meets uncritical demand. One AOL summary of his comments even leans into the drama, noting that the situation invites investors to Cue the OpenAI IPO as the possible final trigger. I read that as both a warning and a challenge: if buyers treat the deal as a must own at any price, it will confirm that the fourth condition in his framework has arrived.
Why some see an AI bubble already and what that means for OpenAI
Not everyone shares Lamont’s patience. Torsten Sløk, chief economist at Apollo, has warned that the AI bubble is even worse than the 1999 dot-com episode, citing a poll of investors and executives who already see valuations as stretched. In his view, concentration in a handful of mega cap names, combined with aggressive expectations for AI-driven earnings, has created a fragile setup that could unwind quickly if growth disappoints. Where Lamont emphasizes the missing issuance, Sløk argues that the existing price action and sentiment are enough to qualify as a bubble in their own right.
For OpenAI, that divergence in expert opinion raises the stakes of going public. If Lamont is correct, the company’s IPO could be the moment when a not yet bubble becomes one, as insiders sell into peak enthusiasm. If Sløk is closer to the mark, the bubble is already inflated, and an OpenAI listing would arrive late in the game, potentially exposing new shareholders to sharp downside if the cycle turns. Either way, the offering will not happen in a vacuum. It will land in a market where a top economist at Acadian Asset Management and a leading voice at Apollo are effectively debating whether investors are about to cross the line from exuberance into self delusion.
More From TheDailyOverview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
Grant Mercer covers market dynamics, business trends, and the economic forces driving growth across industries. His analysis connects macro movements with real-world implications for investors, entrepreneurs, and professionals. Through his work at The Daily Overview, Grant helps readers understand how markets function and where opportunities may emerge.
