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 the S&P 493—S&P 500 companies excluding seven major technology firms—show no apparent improvement in profit margins or revenue per worker linked to AI. The finding is an assessment of those indicators, not proof that AI has produced no benefit at any company; the note’s methodology and the size of any effects were not detailed in the supplied report.
Apollo Global Management chief economist Torsten Slok says large U.S. companies outside the technology sector have yet to show an apparent financial return from artificial intelligence, citing flat profit margins and revenue per worker among what he calls the S&P 493. His assessment challenges expectations that corporate AI investment is already translating into measurable productivity or earnings gains, but the indicators do not establish that AI has produced no benefits at individual companies.
Slok’s recent note examines the S&P 493, his term for the S&P 500 after excluding Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla. According to the TechCrunch report on the note, he found that profit margins and revenue per worker appear flat for this group and said the data show no evidence that AI is improving productivity.
Slok summarized his conclusion by saying that, despite substantial investment and public attention, AI had delivered “zero financial payoff” to corporate America outside technology. That wording is his characterization of the trends he reviewed, rather than a company-by-company audit or a finding that every non-tech business has received no value from AI.
He also questioned whether non-tech firms will simply catch up with technology companies as AI tools become cheaper. Slok argued that businesses may struggle to turn increasingly accessible AI into higher revenue growth and wider profit margins. The report does not provide a quantified estimate of the investments made, a specific measurement period for the indicators, or a breakdown by industry.
The Gap Between AI Spending and Returns
The finding bears on a central question for business leaders and investors: whether spending on AI is producing measurable gains in company performance, rather than merely generating experimentation and adoption. If broad indicators remain flat, executives may face greater pressure to explain how AI projects affect costs, output, sales or margins.
It also cautions against treating rapid adoption or high investment as proof of a financial return. Revenue per worker and profit margins are broad company-level measures, and they may not capture every operational improvement. A tool could help workers complete particular tasks more quickly without changing a firm’s overall margins, especially if savings are reinvested, costs rise elsewhere or gains take time to appear.
For readers, the distinction is important: Slok’s analysis does not establish that AI is useless or that no business has benefited. It says the indicators cited in his note do not yet show a broad financial payoff among large non-tech companies. The question of how much value AI creates, for whom, and on what timeline remains open.
Products Worth Considering
LG UltraGear 27-Inch QHD OLED Gaming Monitor, 240Hz, 0.03ms, G-SYNC Compatible, FreeSync Premium Pro, HDMI 2.1
Bose TV Speaker (2nd Gen) Compact Soundbar with Bluetooth and HDMI Connectivity
Logitech MX Keys S Wireless Keyboard, Graphite
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Slok Defines the S&P 493
The S&P 493 is not a separate index named in the source material; it is Slok’s shorthand for the S&P 500 with seven major technology companies removed: Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla. Removing them focuses the comparison on companies beyond some of the firms most directly associated with developing or selling AI systems.
The distinction matters because technology companies can have different business models and direct exposure to AI products and infrastructure. Slok’s comparison therefore addresses whether the broader group of large corporations shows similar movement in the selected financial measures. The report supplies no additional index construction or industry-level figures.
TechCrunch also notes that other recent studies have found limited evidence of significant productivity gains from AI. The supplied account does not identify those studies or detail their methods, so they provide only general context here, not independent confirmation of Slok’s particular analysis.
Limits of the Financial Measures
The supplied report does not state the measurement period for profit margins and revenue per worker, explain how AI exposure was identified, or provide the note’s underlying data and calculations. It is therefore not possible from this account to assess how the analysis handles differences among industries, company size, investment timing or other factors affecting financial results.
Flat broad indicators also do not rule out specific productivity improvements at particular companies or in particular tasks. Nor does the report establish whether benefits may appear later, be offset by implementation costs, or be difficult to isolate from other business changes. Slok’s “zero financial payoff” formulation should be read as his conclusion about the aggregate evidence he cites, not a verified finding about every firm.
The source does not provide responses from the companies covered, an independent review of Apollo’s analysis, or figures that quantify AI spending against resulting returns. Those details would help readers judge the scale and reach of the conclusion.
Evidence Needed to Track Returns
The next useful evidence would include the full Apollo note, its data period and methodology, alongside comparable company-level or industry-level measures. Updated figures could show whether the reported flat trends persist, change as AI tools become more integrated, or differ across types of business.
Companies’ own disclosures may also clarify whether they can connect AI use to lower costs, higher output, revenue growth or margins. Until those details are available, Slok’s assessment is a warning about the absence of visible broad gains in the measures he cites, not a final accounting of AI’s financial effects.
Key Questions
What did the Apollo economist report?
Torsten Slok said profit margins and revenue per worker appear flat among the S&P 493, and he found no apparent evidence in those measures that AI has improved productivity.
What does “S&P 493” mean?
It is Slok’s term for the S&P 500 excluding Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla. It is used to focus his assessment on large companies outside those seven technology firms.
Does the report prove that AI has no value to non-tech companies?
No. It reports Slok’s conclusion about broad financial indicators. It does not show that every company or AI project has received no benefit, and it does not rule out gains that are difficult to measure or have not yet affected company-wide results.
What information about the analysis is not available?
The supplied report does not give the note’s measurement period, detailed methodology, underlying calculations or industry breakdown. Those omissions limit how precisely the conclusion can be evaluated.
Source: rss
