AI Trade Faces Its First Real Structural Test as Global Tech Breaks Lower

The overnight session was not just about a weak open in U.S. futures. Gareth Soloway’s read on this morning’s My Trading Game Plan was that the market is beginning to test one of the most crowded trades of the past year: the artificial intelligence trade.

That does not mean AI is finished. It means the market is starting to separate the narrative from the price action.

The headline was simple: Asian markets were hit hard, U.S. tech futures were under pressure, and semiconductor names were leading the weakness. The more important signal was underneath the move. Gareth’s framework was that the AI trade is now facing pressure from two sides at once: technical exhaustion after a massive run, and a fundamental question around whether AI pricing power can justify the capital being spent on infrastructure.

That is the real shift. For months, the market treated AI leaders as if demand, margins, and earnings growth were almost untouchable. Today’s action forced a different question: what happens if the technology remains powerful, but the economics start to compress?

The AI Margin Question Is Now the Bigger Issue

Gareth spent time focusing on a risk that has been building beneath the surface: cheaper AI models coming out of China.

“I’ve started to talk about these AI models out of China that are so much cheaper to run,” Gareth said, noting that global companies are beginning to look at lower-cost alternatives. “And when you start to bring in this idea that prices are going to go down, this is where you start to say, wow, AI could be commoditized later on, meaning very little margin on it.”

That is the issue the market has to process.

The AI buildout has required enormous spending from U.S. hyperscalers and infrastructure companies. Data centers, chips, power demand, and compute capacity have all been priced as if the revenue opportunity on the other side would be large enough to support the investment. But if models such as Qwen, DeepSeek, Kimi, and other lower-cost alternatives pressure pricing, the return profile changes.

The market is not questioning whether AI matters. It is questioning whether the companies spending hundreds of billions of dollars can earn the margins investors have priced in.

That is why this selloff matters more than a normal pullback. The chart weakness is now lining up with a fundamental challenge to the story that carried the sector higher.

Asia Gave the First Warning Signal

The first major pressure point came from Asia.

The KOSPI dropped nearly 10% overnight, triggering circuit breakers and putting immediate pressure on global risk sentiment. Japan’s Nikkei also fell sharply, losing more than 5% in the session. Both markets have heavy exposure to the technology and semiconductor supply chain, which made the move especially important for Gareth’s read on the broader AI trade.

The key point was not just the size of the decline. It was the setup that came before it.

On the KOSPI chart, Gareth pointed to a classic momentum warning. Price continued making higher highs, but RSI was making lower highs.

“Were there warning signs? High pullback, higher high pullback, higher high pullback,” Gareth said while walking through the chart. “So all of this is an uptrend, but look at what the RSI was doing. High, lower high, lower high. This is a massive negative divergence.”

That is the kind of signal that matters when a market has already run hard. The index can still look strong on price alone, but momentum begins to weaken underneath. When that divergence resolves, the move lower can be fast because the buyers who chased the final push are sitting above very little support.

The Nikkei had a similar problem. After a massive advance from its 2025 lows, the index had created a large air pocket beneath price. That does not guarantee a collapse, but it does mean the first real break in momentum can travel quickly.

This is where Gareth’s framework was clear: the overnight damage was not random. The charts had been warning that the AI-linked global trade was stretched.

Semiconductors Are the Transmission Mechanism

The weakness in Asia immediately carried into U.S. technology futures. Nasdaq futures were down sharply before the open, and the market’s attention shifted to the U.S. semiconductor leaders.

Nvidia remains the most important chart in that group because it has become the sentiment anchor for the AI trade.

Gareth pointed out that Nvidia’s structure has started to change. The stock is no longer simply stair-stepping higher. It has begun to show lower highs and lower lows, and the current consolidation is taking the shape of a bear flag.

“High, lower high, lower high, low, lower low,” Gareth said while marking the chart. “All right, now what are you forming? You’re forming a bear flag.”

The broader chart also has the look of a larger distribution pattern, with elements of a double top and a head-and-shoulders structure. The neckline is the level that matters. If that breaks, it would not just be a problem for Nvidia. It would change the read on the entire AI leadership group because Nvidia has been the symbol of the trade.

Micron is another key test.

The stock has had a historic move, up nearly 287% since the March 31st low. That type of move creates a different earnings setup. When a stock runs that far into a report, expectations become the risk. A normal beat may not be enough if the market has already priced in perfection.

Gareth noted the premarket weakness and identified the $10.42 area as a gap-fill level that could produce a reaction. But the bigger point is not one intraday level. The bigger point is that Micron’s earnings now become a test of whether AI-linked chip demand can keep supporting extreme price action.

Intel and SanDisk were also under pressure, showing that the selling was not isolated to one name. The group is being repriced together, which is exactly what happens when a crowded theme starts to unwind.

Retail FOMO Is Still Part of the Market Psychology

Gareth also used the recent SpaceX public-access offering as a lesson in how retail participation often shows up late in a cycle.

SpaceX opened to public buyers around $150, creating strong retail interest. Since then, the trade has moved lower. Gareth’s point was not about SpaceX as a company. It was about who is usually selling when retail investors are rushing in.

“When retail is fomoing in, who do you think is selling to them?” Gareth said. “Do you think the biggest billionaire is like, oh yeah, SpaceX is going to go up to $500 a share, but let me sell my shares to retail because I want to give them a chance to make some money? Come on, logic.”

That is the lesson.

When public demand is driven by story, brand, and fear of missing out, it often creates liquidity for earlier investors. In Gareth’s framework, the $135 area becomes the level to watch because that is where institutions and earlier buyers may have more incentive to defend the chart. But the broader signal is psychological: when retail demand becomes aggressive after a huge private-market markup, traders need to think about who is on the other side of the trade.

That same logic applies to the AI trade. The story can still be strong while the risk-reward changes.

Rotation Is Starting to Matter

A broad tech selloff does not mean every chart is the same. Gareth also pointed to areas where capital may rotate if the most extended semiconductor names continue to come under pressure.

Microsoft stood out because it was showing relative strength despite the broader weakness in tech. The stock has already pulled back from its highs, and Gareth framed it as a name that could catch capital as money rotates away from the more overextended AI chip names. The level he highlighted on the upside was around $400.

Netflix also had a cleaner technical setup. The stock came into a major macro trendline built from prior pivot lows. Gareth’s point was that the first test of a long-term trendline often produces a meaningful reaction. That does not mean the bounce is guaranteed. It means the level is defined, and the market’s reaction there gives traders useful information.

Citigroup was the cleaner short-side watchpoint from the show. The stock has been pushing into upper-range trendline resistance near $150. That zone matters because it gives the chart a clear decision area. A rejection there would keep the resistance structure intact. A sustained move through it would change the read.

The common thread is that Gareth was not treating the market as one trade. He was separating the charts that are breaking from the charts that are approaching defined reaction zones.

Gold, Silver, Bitcoin, Oil, and Natural Gas Have Their Own Signals

The volatility was not limited to equities.

Gold remained in a short-term downtrend, with Gareth pointing to the $4,000 to $3,900 area as the first major support zone. That area matters because it represents the next defined place where buyers could step in after the recent weakness. Until price reaches support or shows a reversal signal, the near-term structure remains under pressure.

Silver is showing a similar pattern. The $56 area has been tested repeatedly, and repeated tests can weaken support over time. If that level gives way, Gareth’s next downside area sits near $54.

Bitcoin is also trading like a risk asset. Instead of acting as a safe haven during equity weakness, it is moving with broader risk sentiment. The key zone remains $59,000 to $60,000. A confirmed break below that area would open the door toward $50,000 because there is not much support between those levels.

Oil had a classic gap-and-fade reaction after geopolitical headlines, while natural gas remains choppy but continues to show a possible cup-and-handle structure. Neither chart was the main event of the show, but both remain part of the broader market map.

Government Reassurance Does Not Repair Market Structure

Another important part of Gareth’s framework was the danger of relying on political or government intervention to hold markets up.

He compared the current environment to periods when officials tried to calm markets during prior stress events. His point was that verbal support often has the opposite effect when the chart structure is already damaged.

“I traded through the financial crisis,” Gareth said. “President Bush came out and tried to reassure the markets multiple times. They went lower when he talked. It was almost a running joke during that collapse.”

He also pointed to the short-selling bans on banks during the financial crisis as an example of intervention failing to stop the underlying move.

The lesson is simple: when officials feel the need to defend the market, traders should pay attention to why that defense is needed in the first place. Policy headlines can create short-term rallies, but they do not erase broken structure, crowded positioning, or weakening momentum.

The chart still has to confirm.

Bottom Line

Gareth’s main read from this morning’s Game Plan was that the AI trade is facing its first real structural test.

The overnight selloff in Asia showed that the pressure is already global. The weakness in Nvidia, Micron, Intel, and SanDisk showed that the market is now testing the leadership group that carried the rally. The deeper issue is not just one bad session. It is whether the market is starting to price in lower AI margins, weaker pricing power, and technical exhaustion after a massive run.

The levels now matter more than the story.

For Nvidia, the neckline and bear-flag structure are the key tells. For Micron, earnings will test whether perfection is already priced in. For Bitcoin, $59,000 to $60,000 remains the line in the sand. For gold, $4,000 to $3,900 is the next major support zone. For Microsoft and Netflix, relative strength and trendline reactions will show whether capital is rotating or risk appetite is simply fading across the board.

This is not the point where traders need to predict every outcome. It is the point where the market is forcing confirmation.

If the AI leaders fail to reclaim structure, the correction can broaden. If key levels hold and buyers step in, the market can stabilize. Either way, the roadmap is the same: ignore the narrative, respect the levels, and let the charts show whether this is a reset or the start of a larger unwind.

Trading involves substantial risk. All content is for educational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice or recommendations to buy or sell any asset. Read full terms of service.