Connect with us

Business

How sparsely populated Norway amassed $1.8 trillion

Published

on



Of all the world’s sovereign wealth funds, Norway’s is one of the most unusual. These giant, state-linked investment vehicles tend to pick and choose what assets they hold to manage risk, maximize returns and further national strategic interests. Not so with Norges Bank Investment Management, which largely tracks global indexes in order to generate an income from the country’s oil and gas revenues. 

Launched in the early 1990s to invest mostly in bonds, the fund has grown to become the largest of its kind by acquiring small equity stakes in thousands of companies across the world. 

With $1.8 trillion of assets, the fund now generates far more income for the Nordic country’s 5.6 million population than oil and gas production. There are growing concerns that the economy has become so dependent on the income from the fund that domestic industries are becoming less innovative and dynamic as a result.

There’s also been criticism of the fund’s passive approach to investing the nation’s wealth, which leaves it with few tools to adapt to the ebb and flow of global capital. This was underscored in April when it reported its biggest loss in six quarters amid the market turmoil unleashed by US President Donald Trump’s threatened trade tariffs. 

What’s special about Norway’s sovereign wealth fund?

The fund stands apart from many of its peers due to its strict investment rules. 

Firstly, it must always invest outside Norway — a rule designed to avert the risk of “Dutch disease,” where resource wealth can end up destabilizing the domestic economy by inflating the local currency and making it harder for other national industries to compete. 

Whereas wealth funds in many other nations act partly to stimulate domestic industries or invest strategically to enhance a country’s soft power abroad, NBIM has limited scope for active investing. The equity portion of the fund, which makes up 70% of the total, holds stakes in the 8,700 listed companies in 44 countries that comprise the FTSE Global All Cap index. As a result, it now owns about 1.5% of listed stocks worldwide. The fixed-income portion of the fund tracks Bloomberg Barclays indexes, with 70% allocated to government bonds and 30% to corporate securities.

Other wealth funds are freer to adjust their priorities and how they achieve them. The Abu Dhabi Investment Authority is increasingly focused on private equity and data-driven investing, while Mubadala Investment Co. plays a central role in diversifying the emirate’s economy through stakes in health care and finance. Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund is leading the kingdom’s Vision 2030 transformation plan, with major bets on mining, gaming and technology. Singapore’s GIC Pte is ramping up its US exposure and taking on more risk in private markets.

What are the origins of Norway’s wealth fund? 

Norway discovered significant oil and gas reserves in the North Sea in 1969, and today is western Europe’s largest producer of the fossil fuels. Anxious to avoid the instability, corruption and weak economic growth experienced in other resource-rich economies, the government imposed heavy taxes on the energy sector and placed strong regulatory controls on the industry. In 1990, after years of political debate, Norway’s parliament created the Petroleum Fund to ensure that oil revenues would benefit current and future generations. The first capital transfer to the fund was made in 1996. As it spread its investments across the world, it shifted gradually to explicitly supporting the national pension system, and was renamed the Government Pension Fund Global in 2006. The fund is managed by NBIM, the asset management arm of Norway’s central bank. 

How did Norway’s wealth fund get so big?

Early on, the fund was padded out with cash from oil taxes, licensing fees and profits from the state energy company. Initially limited to investing in bonds, its mandate expanded over time. Today, it’s the world’s biggest single owner of listed shares. 

The government can’t just grab what it wants from the fund. No more than 3% of its value can be diverted annually to the national budget, a rule intended to preserve the wealth for future generations. The rest is kept for new investments.  

When comparing its investment returns with those of other sovereign wealth funds, the Norwegian fund achieved a relatively average performance over the five years to 2023, returning 7.45%, according to research consultancy Global SWF. That’s less than Abu Dhabi fund Mubadala, at 10.1%, and China Investment Corporation, with 8.6%, but higher than the 4.5% return for Singapore’s Temasek and 5.2% for the Korean Investment Corporation. 

How has the Norwegian fund’s mandate evolved?

The fund has increased its investments in equities over time and added real estate and renewable energy infrastructure. It has also emphasized sustainability and responsible investing, with a growing focus on environmental, social and governance factors — an approach that’s not changed in response to the US Trump administration’s backlash against “woke capitalism.”

What are the Norwegian fund’s ethical investing principles? 

Since 2004, the fund has operated under ethical guidelines set by the finance ministry and approved by parliament. An independent Ethics Council oversees the guidelines, which prohibit investments in companies involved in “gross corruption” or serious violations of human and labor rights, or that contribute to severe environmental damage. They also exclude companies that produce certain weapons, such as nuclear arms and cluster bombs. 

Some 67 companies had been dropped from the fund by the end of 2024 due to their conduct. These included Indian firm Adani Ports, for its business with the armed forces of Myanmar, and the communications company Bezeq, for its activities in Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which are illegal under international law. A further 104 companies have been removed from the fund because of what they sell: The fund’s guidelines prohibit investments in the cannabis industry, tobacco and coal. It also avoids companies that are responsible for “unacceptable greenhouse gas emissions” — even though the fund itself is infused with income from the sale of fossil fuels.

Will the Norwegian wealth fund change its investing mandate? 

NBIM reported a 0.6% loss on its investments — equivalent to $40 billion — in the first three months of 2025. The market downturn has deepened since then in response to President Trump’s sweeping US tariffs, sparking a debate in Norway over how to protect the fund from a more unpredictable economic climate. About 40% of the fund’s equity holdings are in the US, and some Norwegian politicians say it should shift more investments to Europe so it’s less exposed to volatile US markets. US bonds made up 9% of the fund’s holdings at the end of 2024. Norway’s finance minister, former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, has said the fund remains committed to its long-term strategy while “continuing to assess risk management options.”

Norway’s conservative opposition has proposed revising the fund’s guidelines to allow it to buy shares in companies that make nuclear weapons. The current restriction precludes the fund from investing in much of the European arms industry, which is in line for a profit windfall as governments embark on the biggest rearmament since the Cold War in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Norway currently supplies about 30% of Europe’s gas, and some politicians have called for more cash transfers from the fund to support the government in Kyiv, arguing that Norway’s oil and gas industry has made massive profits from the European energy crisis that followed Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. 

The fund’s leadership has argued repeatedly for adding private equity to its investments, a call that the finance ministry has rejected, wary of the sector’s high fees and relative lack of transparency. The debate is ongoing.

What does Norway do with the wealth fund’s available profits?

Some of them go to support Norway’s extensive welfare system, which provides free education and health care, subsidized child care and generous sick leave. Norway ranks third on the UN’s global Human Development Index, after Iceland and Switzerland. In 2024, transfers from the fund accounted for roughly 20–25% of the national budget. The government has proposed to transfer 50 billion kroner ($4.85 billion) from the fund to support the government of Ukraine. 

What’s the fund’s impact on Norway and the world?

The fund has been a financial buffer that enabled the country to weather fluctuations in oil prices and the economy and maintain the country’s fiscal stability. 

The fund has furthered Norway’s soft power by promoting sustainable business practices worldwide. In June 2024, its managers voted against Tesla Inc. Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk’s record high compensation package of $56 billion that’s since risen in value and has been contested in court. The fund issues its voting intentions five days before the annual meetings of the companies it invests in, and opposed board recommendations in 5% of shareholder votes in 2024. 

Yet there’s a debate about how reliant Norway has become on the money generated by the fund. Critics say it’s making the country’s political leaders complacent and its population less productive. They point to data showing national productivity has worsened relative to other wealthy nations in the past two decades. The government is spending growing sums to subsidize sick leave for workers, and student test stores have been on a downward trend. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The rise of AI reasoning models comes with a big energy tradeoff

Published

on



Nearly all leading artificial intelligence developers are focused on building AI models that mimic the way humans reason, but new research shows these cutting-edge systems can be far more energy intensive, adding to concerns about AI’s strain on power grids.

AI reasoning models used 30 times more power on average to respond to 1,000 written prompts than alternatives without this reasoning capability or which had it disabled, according to a study released Thursday. The work was carried out by the AI Energy Score project, led by Hugging Face research scientist Sasha Luccioni and Salesforce Inc. head of AI sustainability Boris Gamazaychikov.

The researchers evaluated 40 open, freely available AI models, including software from OpenAI, Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Microsoft Corp. Some models were found to have a much wider disparity in energy consumption, including one from Chinese upstart DeepSeek. A slimmed-down version of DeepSeek’s R1 model used just 50 watt hours to respond to the prompts when reasoning was turned off, or about as much power as is needed to run a 50 watt lightbulb for an hour. With the reasoning feature enabled, the same model required 7,626 watt hours to complete the tasks.

The soaring energy needs of AI have increasingly come under scrutiny. As tech companies race to build more and bigger data centers to support AI, industry watchers have raised concerns about straining power grids and raising energy costs for consumers. A Bloomberg investigation in September found that wholesale electricity prices rose as much as 267% over the past five years in areas near data centers. There are also environmental drawbacks, as Microsoft, Google and Amazon.com Inc. have previously acknowledged the data center buildout could complicate their long-term climate objectives

More than a year ago, OpenAI released its first reasoning model, called o1. Where its prior software replied almost instantly to queries, o1 spent more time computing an answer before responding. Many other AI companies have since released similar systems, with the goal of solving more complex multistep problems for fields like science, math and coding.

Though reasoning systems have quickly become the industry norm for carrying out more complicated tasks, there has been little research into their energy demands. Much of the increase in power consumption is due to reasoning models generating much more text when responding, the researchers said. 

The new report aims to better understand how AI energy needs are evolving, Luccioni said. She also hopes it helps people better understand that there are different types of AI models suited to different actions. Not every query requires tapping the most computationally intensive AI reasoning systems.

“We should be smarter about the way that we use AI,” Luccioni said. “Choosing the right model for the right task is important.”

To test the difference in power use, the researchers ran all the models on the same computer hardware. They used the same prompts for each, ranging from simple questions — such as asking which team won the Super Bowl in a particular year — to more complex math problems. They also used a software tool called CodeCarbon to track how much energy was being consumed in real time.

The results varied considerably. The researchers found one of Microsoft’s Phi 4 reasoning models used 9,462 watt hours with reasoning turned on, compared with about 18 watt hours with it off. OpenAI’s largest gpt-oss model, meanwhile, had a less stark difference. It used 8,504 watt hours with reasoning on the most computationally intensive “high” setting and 5,313 watt hours with the setting turned down to “low.” 

OpenAI, Microsoft, Google and DeepSeek did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Google released internal research in August that estimated the median text prompt for its Gemini AI service used 0.24 watt-hours of energy, roughly equal to watching TV for less than nine seconds. Google said that figure was “substantially lower than many public estimates.” 

Much of the discussion about AI power consumption has focused on large-scale facilities set up to train artificial intelligence systems. Increasingly, however, tech firms are shifting more resources to inference, or the process of running AI systems after they’ve been trained. The push toward reasoning models is a big piece of that as these systems are more reliant on inference.

Recently, some tech leaders have acknowledged that AI’s power draw needs to be reckoned with. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said the industry must earn the “social permission to consume energy” for AI data centers in a November interview. To do that, he argued tech must use AI to do good and foster broad economic growth.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

SpaceX to offer insider shares at record-setting valuation

Published

on



SpaceX is preparing to sell insider shares in a transaction that would value Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite maker at a valuation higher than OpenAI’s record-setting $500 billion, people familiar with the matter said.

One of the people briefed on the deal said that the share price under discussion is higher than $400 apiece, which would value SpaceX at between $750 billion and $800 billion, though the details could change. 

The company’s latest tender offer was discussed by its board of directors on Thursday at SpaceX’s Starbase hub in Texas. If confirmed, it would make SpaceX once again the world’s most valuable closely held company, vaulting past the previous record of $500 billion that ChatGPT owner OpenAI set in October. Play Video

Preliminary scenarios included per-share prices that would have pushed SpaceX’s value at roughly $560 billion or higher, the people said. The details of the deal could change before it closes, a third person said. 

A representative for SpaceX didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The latest figure would be a substantial increase from the $212 a share set in July, when the company raised money and sold shares at a valuation of $400 billion.

The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times, citing unnamed people familiar with the matter, earlier reported that a deal would value SpaceX at $800 billion.

News of SpaceX’s valuation sent shares of EchoStar Corp., a satellite TV and wireless company, up as much as 18%. Last month, Echostar had agreed to sell spectrum licenses to SpaceX for $2.6 billion, adding to an earlier agreement to sell about $17 billion in wireless spectrum to Musk’s company.

Subscribe Now: The Business of Space newsletter covers NASA, key industry events and trends.

The world’s most prolific rocket launcher, SpaceX dominates the space industry with its Falcon 9 rocket that launches satellites and people to orbit.

SpaceX is also the industry leader in providing internet services from low-Earth orbit through Starlink, a system of more than 9,000 satellites that is far ahead of competitors including Amazon.com Inc.’s Amazon Leo.

SpaceX executives have repeatedly floated the idea of spinning off SpaceX’s Starlink business into a separate, publicly traded company — a concept President Gwynne Shotwell first suggested in 2020. 

However, Musk cast doubt on the prospect publicly over the years and Chief Financial Officer Bret Johnsen said in 2024 that a Starlink IPO would be something that would take place more likely “in the years to come.”

The Information, citing people familiar with the discussions, separately reported on Friday that SpaceX has told investors and financial institution representatives that it is aiming for an initial public offering for the entire company in the second half of next year.

A so-called tender or secondary offering, through which employees and some early shareholders can sell shares, provides investors in closely held companies such as SpaceX a way to generate liquidity.

SpaceX is working to develop its new Starship vehicle, advertised as the most powerful rocket ever developed to loft huge numbers of Starlink satellites as well as carry cargo and people to moon and, eventually, Mars.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

U.S. consumers are so strained they put more than $1B on BNPL during Black Friday and Cyber Monday

Published

on



Financially strained and cautious customers leaned heavily on buy now, pay later (BNPL) services over the holiday weekend.

Cyber Monday alone generated $1.03 billion (a 4.2% increase YoY) in online BNPL sales with most transactions happening on mobile devices, per Adobe Analytics. Overall, consumers spent $14.25 billion online on Cyber Monday. To put that into perspective, BNPL made up for more than 7.2% of total online sales on that day.

As for Black Friday, eMarketer reported $747.5 million in online sales using BNPL services with platforms like PayPal finding a 23% uptick in BNPL transactions.

Likewise, digital financial services company Zip reported 1.6 million transactions throughout 280,000 of its locations over the Black Friday and Cyber Monday weekend. Millennials (51%) accounted for a chunk of the sizable BNPL purchases, followed by Gen Z, Gen X, and baby boomers, per Zip.

The Adobe data showed that people using BNPL were most likely to spend on categories such as electronics, apparel, toys, and furniture, which is consistent with previous years. This trend also tracks with Zip’s findings that shoppers were primarily investing in tech, electronics, and fashion when using its services.

And while some may be surprised that shoppers are taking on more debt via BNPL (in this economy?!), analysts had already projected a strong shopping weekend. A Deloitte survey forecast that consumers would spend about $650 million over the Black Friday–Cyber Monday stretch—a 15% jump from 2023.

“US retailers leaned heavily on discounts this holiday season to drive online demand,” Vivek Pandya, lead analyst at Adobe Digital Insights, said in a statement. “Competitive and persistent deals throughout Cyber Week pushed consumers to shop earlier, creating an environment where Black Friday now challenges the dominance of Cyber Monday.”

This report was originally published by Retail Brew.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.