Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance
I wanted to take a moment after this week, as the market continues to show signs of weakness, to revisit what is increasingly coming into focus as a potential strategy heading into next year.
Most of my regular readers know that roughly two months ago, I laid out my expectation that the AI bubble could begin to unravel within the following six to ten months. Since then, we’ve started to see some meaningful cracks emerge, with selling pressure spreading across some of the market’s most speculative and heavily favored names. I’ve supplemented that prediction along the way in pieces like Two Decades Of Mass Financial Delusion Ends Now and The Easy Money Fairy Tale Is About To End Violently.
In my market dashboard review heading into Q4, I also began outlining how I might position myself heading into 2027, assuming the market continues along its current trajectory
In that piece, and in a subsequent article focused specifically on old-school blue chips, I argued that we could be approaching a meaningful rotation away from speculative growth and technology stocks and back toward defensive, established businesses with reliable cash flows, reasonable valuations, and, in many cases, attractive dividends. Boring shit, right? That’s how it goes sometimes…
My thinking was that as investors begin to reassess risk, particularly if the AI trade continues to unwind, capital could increasingly seek refuge in the types of boring, dependable businesses that have spent much of the last several years being overlooked.
And we’re already beginning to see some evidence of that. Across several recent articles, I highlighted individual names that I believed could hold up relatively well in a more difficult market environment. Over the last couple of weeks, a number of those stocks have already begun materially outperforming the broader market as selling pressure has intensified elsewhere.
While a couple of weeks certainly doesn’t establish a lasting trend, the early relative strength is consistent with the broader rotation I’ve been anticipating heading into the new year.
I think it’s worth revisiting some of those names and sectors individually and considering what their recent price action might be telling us about where capital is beginning to move.
In my October 9 article, “Hated In 2026, But Worth Watching In 2027,” I highlighted Verizon (VZ) and AT&T (T) as potential defensive opportunities heading into next year, arguing that their depressed valuations, substantial free cash flow, recurring subscription revenues and attractive dividend yields could make them beneficiaries of a broader rotation away from speculative growth and AI stocks.
Both companies provide essential services with relatively predictable demand, and I argued that investors may be underestimating their ability to generate respectable returns even with modest growth. I also suggested that the market was overreacting to the competitive threat posed by SpaceX, potentially creating an opportunity to buy established, cash-generating businesses at attractive valuations, particularly if interest rates stabilize or decline. Since then, they have ducked the S&P’s decline:
While this could change before the end of the year, as I noted days ago I’m increasingly inclined to position myself more defensively heading into 2027, emphasizing valuation, free cash flow, dividends, strong balance sheets and businesses that don’t require speculative growth assumptions to justify their share prices.
While some of the sectors I remain bullish on over the long term, such as nuclear energy, have pulled back alongside the broader market, several of the more defensive themes and established blue-chip names I’ve highlighted have largely outperformed.
Other “boring” ideas I highlighted here have generally sidestepped the tech selloff over the last month, consistent with my broader thesis that investors may be beginning to rotate away from speculative growth and toward more established businesses, dependable cash flows and defensive assets. Even cybersecurity as a niche is outperforming tech, as I wrote about a couple weeks ago, noting it had underperformed tech over the last 3 years.
I suggested then that cybersecurity could be poised for a longer-term period of outperformance as investors begin to recognize that it is evolving from a traditional technology expense into a critical component of national security infrastructure. With the Pentagon increasingly looking to enlist private cybersecurity companies in offensive cyber operations, and AI making digital threats more sophisticated, I argued that these businesses could eventually become as strategically important as traditional defense contractors.
While I acknowledged that cybersecurity stocks would likely get caught up in any broader technology selloff, I also suggested that such a pullback could create an attractive opportunity to accumulate exposure to an industry whose importance, government involvement and long-term spending needs are likely to grow substantially regardless of how quickly the AI boom comes to fruition.
I continue to believe the AI trade is vulnerable to a significant unwind, potentially exacerbated by rising borrowing costs, credit market stress and a broader reassessment of equity valuations. Against that backdrop, I’m becoming more interested in “boring” stocks like telecommunications, consumer staples, tangible assets, select international equities and bonds, while remaining bullish over the longer term on precious metals, gold miners, biotechnology, nuclear energy and emerging markets.
Ultimately, I suspect 2027 could reward patience, discipline, income and fundamental value far more than the speculative momentum that has dominated markets in recent years. And if a serious selloff eventually forces another round of monetary intervention, I want to be positioned to capitalize on that opportunity as well.
To me, the important development isn’t simply that a handful of defensive stocks are outperforming technology. It’s that investors may finally be reconsidering what they’re willing to pay for growth versus actual earnings and cash flow.
Consider the disparity: when I highlighted Verizon earlier this month, it was trading at roughly 9x forward earnings, yielding more than 6%, and guiding toward approximately $22 billion in annual free cash flow. AT&T was projecting at least $18 billion. Compare that with an AI infrastructure boom increasingly dependent on enormous capital expenditures, borrowed money and profits that may not materialize for years.
With the 10-year Treasury yield recently above 5%, the cost of capital is becoming impossible to ignore, as I noted about 20 days ago the recent TLT bottom around $77: You Have To Like Bonds Here…Right?
The distinction between companies generating billions in cash and those consuming billions in pursuit of speculative growth could become one of the defining investment themes of 2027.
And the broader market has already been showing signs of deterioration beneath the surface. As Reuters reported on October 12, more than 40% of S&P 500 constituents were down for the year despite the index gaining roughly 14%. The median stock was up just 4%, and fewer than half of the index’s constituents were trading above their 200-day moving averages.
That’s hardly the picture of a healthy, broad-based bull market. None of this guarantees that the AI bubble bursts on my timetable, or that defensive stocks won’t get dragged lower in a genuine liquidation. But it reinforces why I’m increasingly favoring valuation, dividends, liquidity and strong balance sheets over speculative promises. If 2027 brings the reckoning I suspect it might, I want to own businesses that can survive it, have the cash to take advantage of it, and be ready to buy quality assets when everyone else is running for the exits.
QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and very often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning, meaning if I’m long I could sell or if I’m short I could cover at any time. Positions can change immediately. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning.
I also may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and own things I’m bearish on. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions.
I cannot guarantee the accuracy of any or all facts and figures included in this article though I made an effort to get them right. I have been wrong before and will be wrong again, and encourage you to always double check, do your own research and speak to a licensed financial professional, which I am not.
Contributor posts, guest posts and curated posts have been hand selected by me, but have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author or reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.
Since 2026, I have been making an attempt to no longer actively trade as much as I once did (read my story here). In an attempt to lead a healthier lifestyle, I’ve also excluded myself from most fantasy sports, sports betting, online and in-person casinos and prediction markets.
My goal is for my investing/saving to be done by recurring contributions mostly to sector ETFs and a few select equities, trusted third parties who oversee my accounts, and advisors. Such advisors or funds, through individual equities, options, index funds, mutual funds, ETFs, or other securities, may have positions in, exposure to, or holdings of names mentioned herein that I know nothing about. Basically, it is possible I could own, have exposure to, or not own anything, at any point.
You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. Again, I get shit wrong a lot, both in the market and in life, but am trying my best. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier. Hence, I am a writer. I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. Many times I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Thanks, you’ve been a great crowd and don’t forget to tip your servers.
Tyler Durden
Sat, 10/24/2026 – 12:35
