Business
What is DeepSeek? And How Is It Upending A.I.?
Tech stocks tumbled. Giant companies like Meta and Nvidia faced a barrage of questions about their future. Tech executives took to social media to proclaim their fears.
And it was all because of a little-known Chinese artificial intelligence start-up called DeepSeek.
DeepSeek caused waves all over the world on Monday as one of its accomplishments — that it had created a very powerful A.I. model with far less money than many A.I. experts thought possible — raised a host of questions, including whether U.S. companies were even competitive in A.I. anymore.
DeepSeek is “AI’s Sputnik moment,” Marc Andreessen, a tech venture capitalist, posted on social media on Sunday.
How could a company that few people had heard of have such an effect?
What is DeepSeek?
DeepSeek is a start-up founded and owned by the Chinese stock trading firm High-Flyer. Its goal is to build A.I. technologies along the lines of OpenAI’s ChatGPT chatbot or Google’s Gemini. By 2021, DeepSeek had acquired thousands of computer chips from the U.S. chipmaker Nvidia, which are a fundamental part of any effort to create powerful A.I. systems.
In China, the start-up is known for grabbing young and talented A.I. researchers from top universities, promising high salaries and an opportunity to work on cutting-edge research projects. Both High-Flyer and DeepSeek are run by Liang Wenfeng, a Chinese entrepreneur.
Over the past few years, DeepSeek has released several large language models, which is the kind of technology that underpins chatbots like ChatGPT and Gemini. On Jan. 10, it released its first free chatbot app, which was based on a new model called DeepSeek-V3.
Why did the stock market react to it now?
When DeepSeek introduced its DeepSeek-V3 model the day after Christmas, it matched the abilities of the best chatbots from U.S. companies like OpenAI and Google. That alone would have been impressive.
But the team behind the new system also revealed a bigger step forward. In a research paper explaining how it built the technology, DeepSeek said it used only a fraction of the computer chips that leading A.I. companies relied on to train their systems.
The world’s top companies typically train their chatbots with supercomputers that use as many as 16,000 chips or more. DeepSeek’s engineers said they needed only about 2,000 Nvidia chips.
Why is that important?
Since late 2022, when OpenAI set off the A.I. boom, the prevailing notion had been that the most powerful A.I. systems could not be built without investing billions of dollars in specialized A.I. chips. That would mean that only the biggest tech companies — such as Microsoft, Google and Meta, all of which are based in the United States — could afford to build the leading technologies.
(The New York Times has sued OpenAI and its partner, Microsoft, claiming copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems. The two tech companies have denied the suit’s claims.)
But DeepSeek’s engineers said they needed only about $6 million in raw computing power to train their new system. That was roughly 10 times less than what Meta spent building its latest A.I. technology.
How did DeepSeek make its tech with fewer A.I. chips?
Top A.I. engineers in the United States say that DeepSeek’s research paper laid out clever and impressive ways of building A.I. technology with fewer chips.
In short, the startup’s engineers demonstrated a more efficient way of analyzing data using the chips. Leading A.I. systems learn their skills by pinpointing patterns in huge amounts of data, including text, images and sounds. DeepSeek described a way of spreading this data analysis across several specialized A.I. models — what researchers call a “mixture of experts” method — while minimizing the time lost by moving data from place to place.
Others have used similar methods before, but moving information between the models tended to reduce efficiency. DeepSeek did this in a way that allowed it to use less computing power.
“It has become very clear that other companies, not just someone like OpenAI, can build these kinds of systems,” said Tim Dettmers, a researcher at the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence in Seattle and a professor of computer science at Carnegie Mellon University who specializes in building efficient A.I. systems. “DeepSeek used methods that anyone can duplicate.”
DeepSeek’s research paper raised questions about whether big U.S. companies could maintain a significant lead in A.I. Many experts believe that A.I. technology will become a commodity, with many companies selling much the same product.
Is DeepSeek’s tech as good as systems from OpenAI and Google?
DeepSeek-V3 can answer questions, solve logic problems and write its own computer programs as effectively as anything already on the market, according to standard benchmark tests.
Just before DeepSeek released its technology, OpenAI had unveiled a new system, called OpenAI o3, which seemed more powerful than DeepSeek-V3. But OpenAI has not released this system to the wider public.
OpenAI o3 was designed to “reason” through problems involving math, science and computer programming. Many experts pointed out that DeepSeek had not built a reasoning model along these lines, which is seen as the future of A.I.
Then on Jan. 20, DeepSeek released its own reasoning model called DeepSeek R1, and it, too, impressed the experts. That eventually sent U.S. investors and others into a panic late last week and over the weekend as they realized the importance of DeepSeek’s new technology.
U.S. tech giants are building data centers with specialized A.I. chips. Does this still matter, given what DeepSeek has done?
Yes, it still matters.
Large numbers of A.I. chips can still help companies in many ways. With more chips, they can run more experiments as they explore new ways of building A.I. In other words, more chips can still give companies a technical and competitive advantage.
More chips will also be needed to operate the new breed of “reasoning” A.I. models, experts said. These require more computing power when people and businesses use them.
Hasn’t the United States limited the number of Nvidia chips sold to China?
Yes. To maintain the U.S. lead in the global A.I. race, the Biden administration had put in place rules limiting the number of powerful chips that could be sold to China and other rivals.
But the impressive performance of the DeepSeek model raised questions about the unintended consequences of the American government’s trade restrictions. The controls have forced researchers in China to get creative with a wide range of tools that are freely available on the internet.
Some experts continue to argue in favor of U.S. trade restrictions, saying that they were only recently put in place and that they will have a greater effect on China’s abilities to create A.I. as the years pass.
Does DeepSeek’s tech mean that China is now ahead of the United States in A.I.?
No. The world has not yet seen OpenAI’s o3 model, and its performance on standard benchmark tests was more impressive than anything else on the market. But experts are concerned that China is jumping ahead on open-source A.I. systems.
What exactly is open-source A.I.?
Like many other companies, DeepSeek has “open sourced” its latest A.I. system, which means that it has shared the underlying computer code with other businesses and researchers. This allows others to build and distribute their own products using the same technologies.
This is part of the reason DeepSeek and others in China have been able to build competitive A.I. systems so quickly and inexpensively.
In the A.I. world, open source first gathered steam in 2023 when Meta freely shared an A.I. system called Llama. At the time, many assumed that the open-source ecosystem would flourish only if companies like Meta — giant firms with huge data centers filled with specialized chips — continued to open source their technologies.
But DeepSeek and others have shown that this ecosystem can thrive in ways that extend beyond the American tech giants.
Why is that important?
Many experts have argued that the big U.S. companies should not open source their technologies because they could be used to spread disinformation or cause other serious harm. Some U.S. lawmakers have explored the possibility of preventing or throttling the practice.
But other experts have argued that if regulators stifle the progress of open-source technology in the United States, China will gain a significant edge. If the best open-source technologies come from China, these experts argue, U.S. researchers and companies will build their systems atop those technologies.
In the long run, that could put China at the heart of A.I. research and development, which could further accelerate its effort to build a wide range of A.I. technologies, including autonomous weapons and other military systems.
Business
Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk
new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey
February 27, 2026
Business
Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office
Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.
If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.
All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.
But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.
That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.
The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.
— Katie Martin, Financial Times
Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.
Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.
Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.
But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.
Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.
That hasn’t been the case for months.
”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”
Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.
Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.
It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.
Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”
Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”
Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.
Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.
“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”
I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.
To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.
Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.
The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.
It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.
That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.
Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.
Business
How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.
Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.
The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.
What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.
But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.
The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.
How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments
To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.
The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.
In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.
In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.
Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.
Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.
Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.
How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies
With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.
The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.
The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.
The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.
One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.
Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.
And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.
Methodology
Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology6 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making