Infundly Weekly Briefing — 31 July 2026
- Sheridan Admans
- 5 days ago
- 4 min read
This week's Infundly Weekly Briefing explores the growing challenge of identifying hidden concentration within investment portfolios. The featured research examines how AI-driven earnings, emerging-market implementation risks, pension fund allocations, thematic investing and long-term asset-allocation trends can create exposures that are less diversified than they first appear. Together, the papers reinforce the importance of looking beyond portfolio labels to assess the underlying drivers of returns, governance, implementation quality and operational resilience, helping professional fund selectors make more robust due-diligence and portfolio-construction decisions.
What changed: J.P. Morgan’s equity teams have raised profit forecasts again as AI-related capital expenditure spreads beyond technology into industrials, energy and capital markets. However, they estimate that AI spending and higher oil prices account for almost three-quarters of expected US profit growth in 2026.
Worth reading because: It challenges the idea that headline earnings breadth necessarily means diversified economic exposure. Fund selectors should examine how much of a manager’s growth outlook depends on the same AI investment cycle, while testing whether positions labelled “AI losers” represent genuine long-term value or structurally impaired businesses.
What changed: MSCI’s latest analysis finds that developed-market return dispersion is driven mainly by industry and style factors, whereas country effects remain dominant in emerging and frontier markets. Its 2026 accessibility review also shows widening differences across foreign exchange, settlement, stock lending and short-selling infrastructure.
Worth reading because: This has direct implications for manager evaluation. Emerging- and frontier-market performance should not be assessed using a developed-market lens: country selection, trading access, custody, liquidity and implementation skill can matter more than conventional style attribution. MSCI estimates that some frontier-market trading and shorting costs are several times those in developed markets.
What changed: The FCA has published a baseline view of approximately £468 billion held across workplace pension default arrangements. Around 85% is invested outside the UK, while unlisted private-market exposure remains approximately 5%. Several providers expect to increase private-market and UK allocations during 2026 and 2027.
Worth reading because: The most useful finding is not the allocation itself but the reporting problem underneath it. Providers used inconsistent asset-class definitions and UK/non-UK classifications, highlighting how apparently comparable allocation data can conceal methodological differences. This should inform due diligence on default funds, private-market exposure and forthcoming Value for Money reporting.
What changed: The IMF now frames AI as a financial-stability issue rather than simply an operational or productivity theme. It highlights synchronized trading, common model dependencies, faster transmission of shocks, cyber risk and limited regulatory visibility into how AI is being deployed.
Worth reading because: This adds a systemic dimension to manager AI due diligence. Selectors should ask not only whether AI improves research efficiency, but whether models rely on common data, produce correlated signals, create hidden concentration or weaken human challenge when markets move quickly.
What changed: The study constructs a holdings-based measure of thematic concentration using companies’ regulatory filings. It finds that highly concentrated thematic funds generated stronger risk-adjusted returns, with the apparent advantage arising from stock selection rather than successful timing of themes.
Worth reading because: The paper offers a more rigorous way to distinguish genuine thematic expertise from broad exposure to a fashionable narrative. Its findings support examining whether a manager’s knowledge is company-specific and repeatable, rather than assuming that either thematic concentration or diversification is inherently superior.
What changed: The BIS documents a long-term movement by pension funds away from direct fixed-income holdings and towards pooled funds, foreign assets and alternatives. Lower domestic government-bond yields appear to have contributed to declining bond allocations.
Worth reading because: This helps explain how prolonged yield conditions have reshaped institutional portfolios and created additional layers of manager, liquidity and valuation risk. It is especially relevant when assessing whether allocations to alternatives represent a deliberate diversification decision or a legacy response to previously unattractive bond yields.
Infundly takeaway
This week’s central theme is hidden concentration. Equity earnings may appear broad while remaining dependent on AI capital expenditure; emerging-market labels can conceal material country and implementation risks; pension allocation statistics depend heavily on inconsistent classifications; and AI systems may cause different investors to converge on similar signals.
For fund selectors, diversification should therefore be tested through underlying return drivers, operational dependencies and portfolio behaviour, not inferred from the number of holdings, regions, asset classes or technologies represented.
Important information
This material is intended for professional advisers, regulated firms, discretionary managers, institutional investors and other professional investment decision-makers. It is not intended for retail clients and should not be relied upon by retail investors.
This material is provided for informational and professional research purposes only. It reflects general market observations and Infundly’s analysis at the time of writing, unless otherwise stated. It does not constitute investment advice, a personal recommendation, investment management, arranging activity, or an invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity.
Infundly is a trading name of AdmansPraxis Limited. Infundly is not authorised or regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and does not provide personal financial advice.
References to individual funds explain their characteristics and the questions they raise for professional due diligence. Inclusion within the Fund Discovery process does not constitute a recommendation, product endorsement or conclusion that a fund is appropriate for any portfolio. Regulated firms and professional users remain responsible for their own research, due diligence, product approval, suitability assessments and client outcomes.
The views, figures and data included are based on information available at the time of writing and sources believed to be reliable, but their accuracy, completeness and timeliness are not guaranteed. Markets, funds, personnel and circumstances can change without notice. The value of investments may fall as well as rise and capital is at risk. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results.
Third-party links and external material are provided for professional reference and convenience only. Their inclusion does not constitute endorsement by Infundly. This material must not be copied, redistributed or made available to retail clients without Infundly’s prior permission and, where appropriate, review and approval by the regulated firm responsible for the communication.
