合伙人,Apollo主题投资负责人
人工智能与软件行业周期的下一阶段
罗伯特·比滕库尔
Robert Bittencourt
合伙人,Apollo主题投资主管
软件市场近期波动加剧,生成式AI的快速发展促使投资者重新评估其持久性
最初对AI生产力工具的热情已演变为对软件行业收入模式、竞争前景和长期盈利潜力的更深层次重新评估。在一个软件边际成本崩溃、竞争威胁似乎一夜之间涌现的世界里,这种重新评估至关重要。
这种重新评估之所以重要,是因为软件领域在公开市场和私募市场吸引了大量投资资本。在此背景下,值得退一步说明Apollo目前如何看待软件周期,以及这一转变可能对投资者意味着什么。
长期软件操作法正面临考验
在我们看来,人工智能并不会取代软件,而是会使其应用呈数量级扩张。尽管这种扩张听起来无疑是积极的,但它打破了传统SaaS模式赖以生存的确定性。
近二十年来,企业软件行业享受着极为稳定的运营和融资环境。该行业可预测的经常性收入结构、持续的增长以及强劲的自由现金流转换,支撑了高估值和资本结构,包括在赞助商支持的交易中广泛使用杠杆和实物支付特性。然而,人工智能削弱了这些假设。随着软件生产边际成本的骤降,定价权更难维持,边际利润率受到压缩,客户行为变得不那么可预测。人工智能不仅仅是功能升级,它是一个拥有资本渠道、能力不断提升、应用范围迅速扩大的新竞争对手。
因此,历史操作法正面临压力。许多软件企业正从高速增长过渡到中速增长,同时竞争强度不断加大。回顾性的收入趋势依然健康,但市场越来越关注前瞻性的持久性。关键问题不是软件昨天赚了多少,而是在竞争更加激烈的环境中,这些收益的韧性如何。
这一动态类似于科技领域的先前平台转变。iPhone于2007,推出,黑莓的利润在2011,达到顶峰,而该公司直到2016才退出智能手机市场。这一转变历时近十年(1)。智能手机需求并未消失,但随着平台的发展,行业领导地位发生了变化。现在,未能适应变化的软件老牌企业也面临着类似的风险,即使这种干扰并非迫在眉睫。
分化将定义周期的下一阶段
AI不会对所有软件产生同等影响。会有赢家,也会有输家。我们预计,分化将成为下一阶段的显著特征。
拥有关键任务型用例、专有数据、高转换成本以及在企业的系统中深度嵌入的业务,可能更有能力捍卫其市场地位。在许多情况下,AI可以通过提高效率、扩展功能或加强客户粘性来强化其价值主张。相比之下,通用型SaaS产品,尤其是差异化有限且严重依赖按席位定价的点解决方案,可能面临更大的颠覆风险。
在这一环境中,管理质量也成为一个关键的差异化因素。曾经需要多年才能完成的转型正在压缩,缩短了现有企业的应对窗口,并提高了不作为的代价。适应性、速度以及在不确定性中持续投资的意愿,比过往的成功更为重要。假设一切照旧的团队不太可能跟上步伐。为了保持相关性,企业软件公司必须在AI上进行大量投资,无论是内部开发还是通过并购,因为IT预算正从传统软件转移。这可能对利润率造成额外压力,尽管有效应对这一转型的公司可能更有能力随着时间的推移实现更好的增长。
估值重定价反映的是不确定性,而非基本面恶化
近期软件板块的估值回调正反映了这一认知转变。公开市场软件股的估值倍数已大幅压缩,许多情况下较疫情前水平下降过半。
这一重定价并非由需求崩溃所驱动。企业软件支出依然稳健,近期财报也基本符合市场一致预期。相反,市场正在对未来增长、利润率及竞争地位方面的更大不确定性进行折价。该行业并未受损,但曾支撑高估值倍数的确定性正在消退。尽管与人工智能相关的收入机会真实存在,但在已披露的业绩中尚未实质体现。目前,影响主要体现在投资者的资本配置决策上,而非收入增长中。
这一调整的影响将在不同公司的资本结构中体现不均。软件繁荣期的大部分融资发生在贷款市场,而在再融资和长期盈利能力面临不确定性的背景下,贷款价格已有所下调。与此同时,我们预计大部分损失将归于股权而非优先债务,尤其是对于那些仍保持正现金流但难以维持先前增长预期或估值倍数的企业。对信贷投资者而言,我们认为结构、优先级别及下行保护比以往任何时候都更为重要。
结论
软件并未崩溃,但曾经定义它的确定性正受到考验。AI代表着一场深刻的平台变革,它将推动分化、重新定价风险,并奖励适应性。对投资者而言,我们认为挑战不在于把握转折时机,而在于将投资组合从脆弱的确定性转向持久的优势。
除非另有说明,本材料中的所有信息截至2月13日,2026年。
完整英文原文
Robert Bittencourt
Partner, Head of Apollo Thematic Investing
Robert Bittencourt
Partner, Head of Apollo Thematic Investing
Software markets have experienced heightened volatility in recent weeks as rapid advances in generative AI have forced investors to reassess the durability of l
What began as enthusiasm around AI productivity tools has evolved into a deeper reassessment of the software industry’s revenue model, competitive outlook, and long-term earnings potential in a world where the marginal cost of software is collapsing, and competitive threats are seemingly emerging overnight.
This reassessment matters because of the quantum of investment capital that the software space has attracted across both public and private markets. Against this backdrop, it is worth stepping back to explain how Apollo is thinking about the software cycle today and what this shift can imply for investors.
A Long-Running Software Playbook is Being Tested
In our view, AI does not replace software. It proliferates its use, potentially by an order of magnitude. While that expansion sounds unequivocally positive, it disrupts the certainty that underpinned the traditional SaaS model.
For nearly two decades, enterprise software enjoyed a remarkably stable operating and financing environment. The industry’s predictable, recurring revenue profile, consistent growth, and strong free cash flow conversion supported aggressive valuations and capital structures, including widespread use of leverage and payment-in-kind features in sponsor-backed transactions. However, AI weakens those assumptions. As the marginal cost of software production collapses, pricing power becomes harder to sustain, incremental margins compress, and customer behavior becomes less predictable. AI is not simply a feature upgrade. It is a new competitor with access to capital, improving capabilities, and a rapidly widening scope of application.
As a result, the historical playbook is under pressure. Many software businesses are transitioning from very high growth to more moderate growth while competitive intensity is increasing. Backward-looking revenue trends remain healthy, but markets are increasingly focused on forward-looking durability. The key question is not what software earned yesterday, but how resilient those earnings will be in a more contested landscape.
This dynamic resembles prior platform shifts in technology. The iPhone launched in 2007, BlackBerry’s profits peaked in 2011, and the company did not exit the smartphone market until 2016. The transition unfolded over nearly a decade(1). Smartphone demand did not disappear, but industry leadership changed as the platform evolved. A similar risk now confronts software incumbents that fail to adapt, even if the disruption is not immediate.
Dispersion Will Define the Next Phase of the Cycle
AI will not affect all software equally. There will be winners and there will be losers. We expect that dispersion will be the defining feature of the next phase.
Businesses with mission-critical use cases, proprietary data, high switching costs, and deeply embedded roles within enterprise systems are likely better positioned to defend their franchises. In many cases, AI can strengthen their value proposition by enhancing efficiency, expanding functionality, or reinforcing customer lock-in. By contrast, generic SaaS products, especially point solutions, with limited differentiation and heavy reliance on seat-based pricing likely face greater disruption risk.
Management quality also becomes a critical differentiator in this environment. Transitions that once unfolded over years are compressing, narrowing the response window for incumbents and raising the cost of inaction. Adaptability, speed, and a willingness to invest through uncertainty matter more than historical success. Teams that assume business as usual are unlikely to keep pace. To remain relevant, enterprise software companies must invest heavily in AI, either organically or through M&A, as IT budgets shift away from legacy software. This could create incremental pressure on margins, although companies that effectively navigate the transition may be better positioned for improved growth over time.
Valuations are Repricing Uncertainty, Not Deterioration
The recent correction in software valuations reflects this shift in perception. Multiples across public software markets have compressed meaningfully, in many cases falling by more than half from pre-pandemic levels.
This repricing has not been driven by collapsing demand. Enterprise software spending remains resilient, and recent earnings have largely met consensus expectations. Instead, markets are discounting greater uncertainty around future growth, margins, and competitive positioning. The sector is not broken, but the certainty that once justified premium valuations is fading. While AI-related revenue opportunities are real, they have yet to materialize meaningfully in reported results. For now, the impact is showing up in investors’ capital allocation decisions rather than in revenue growth.
The impacts from this adjustment will be felt unevenly across companies’ capital structures. Much of the software boom was financed in the loan market, and loans have repriced lower amid uncertainty around refinancing and long-term earnings power. At the same time, we expect the majority of losses to accrue to equity rather than senior debt, particularly for businesses that remain cash-flow positive but struggle to sustain prior growth expectations or valuation multiples. For credit investors, we believe structure, seniority, and downside protection matter more than ever.
Conclusion
Software is not broken, but the certainty that once defined it is being tested. AI represents a profound platform shift that will drive dispersion, reprice risk, and reward adaptability. For investors, we believe the challenge is not timing the turn, but positioning portfolios away from fragile certainty and toward durable advantage.
All information contained in this material is as of February 13th, 2026 unless otherwise indicated.
机构免责声明
预览 PDF
正在载入文档……
关键论点
- AI将软件使用量扩大一个数量级,但削弱定价能力和利润率稳定性。
- 软件估值已显著压缩,许多情况下倍数较疫情前水平下降超过一半。
- 分化将是下一阶段的特征:关键任务、数据丰富的在位者优于通用点解决方案。
- 管理层的适应性和投资AI的意愿是关键差异化因素。
- 信贷投资者应优先考虑结构和优先级,因为股权吸收大部分损失。
- 重估源于不确定性,而非需求崩溃;盈利符合预期。
风险
- AI采用速度可能慢于或快于预期,影响颠覆时间表。
- 如果竞争压力加剧超预期,软件盈利可能恶化。
- 如果再融资条件恶化,信贷市场违约率可能上升。
- 如果不确定性持续,估值倍数可能继续压缩。