Plus, how to find new stocks to invest in.
This week’s episode of The Morning Filter was taped at the 2025 Morningstar Investment Conference. Dave Sekera and Susan Dziubinski discuss Dave’s process for finding new stock picks each week, including what screens he maintains and what data points he considers. They also cover how to tweak your stock allocation based on market valuations and review a few must-own core stocks.
Finally, they answer audience questions about Morningstar’s approach to valuing companies, how to invest during a period of geopolitical and policy uncertainty, and which companies stand to benefit most from artificial intelligence.
Episode highlights:
Tips for Generating New Stock Ideas
How to Tilt Your Stock Allocation
The Core Stocks Everyone Should Own
Top Ways to Invest in AI Today
Read about topics from this episode.
Register now to watch Dave’s comprehensive 3Q 2025 Outlook webinar on Thursday, July 10, at 11 am CT, 12 pm ET.
Insights from the 2025 Morningstar Investment Conference: 2025 Morningstar Investment Conference: How to Invest Today
Got a question for Dave? Send it to themorningfilter@morningstar.com.
Follow us on social media.
Dave Sekera on X: @MstarMarkets
Dave Sekera on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/davesekera
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MorningstarInc/
X: https://x.com/MorningstarInc
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/morningstar...
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/5161/
Viewers who’d like more information about any of the stocks Dave talked about today can visit Morningstar.com for more details. Read more from Susan Dziubinski and Dave Sekera.
Subscribe to The Morning Filter to get notified when we post. We’ll see you next Monday!
Susan Dziubinski: Hello, and welcome to a special edition of The Morning Filter podcast. I’m Susan Dziubinski with Morningstar. We’re taping this special episode from the Morningstar Investment Conference in Chicago in late June. And we’re glad to have everyone joining us today. As always, I’m joined today with Dave Sekera, who’s Chief US Market Strategist with Morningstar. And usually, Dave and I are chatting on a Monday morning from our respective home offices over a cup of coffee. Talking about what’s coming up in the market this week that we think investors should know about. Talk about some new Morningstar research. And then Dave usually gives people a few stock ideas for the week ahead.
But today, Dave and I are both here in person. We’re not used to that, so we’ll see how this goes. And we’re going to focus this episode specifically on how Dave finds new investment ideas. The Morningstar Investment Conference is largely about how to manage portfolios, come up with new ideas, in today’s market. So that’s what we’re going to talk about with Dave today. And again, I’m going to start off with some questions, and we hope to have some questions come in from our audience over the course of the podcast.
All right, Dave. So we’re going to start out with what seems to be our audience’s favorite part of The Morning Filter podcast each week, and that’s your weekly list of stock picks. So how do you come up with all these ideas, Dave?
David Sekera: Well, good afternoon, Susan. First of all, I am fully caffeinated after this morning here at the conference. Probably actually going to be a little overcaffeinated, so we’ll see how it goes here today. As far as coming up with stock picks every week, I would say it’s part art, part science. But of course, it’s always going to be based on the equity research at Morningstar, based on our valuations, our star ratings, and some of the other attributes that we look at when we’re thinking about which stocks would be overvalued, which stocks would be undervalued.
Now, every week, we always try and keep the same cadence. We always talk about, hey, what’s on the radar for the week ahead? Whatever we think could potentially be an important market catalyst, whether it might be earnings coming out from specific companies that are in the news, companies that maybe we have a very differentiated opinion on, what we think the value of that company is versus where it’s trading in the marketplace, different economic indicators that might be coming out, review what those are. We always highlight then in the second part of the show research that we think that’s been published by Morningstar that investors shouldn’t miss. Try and highlight some of the more meaningful, some of the more in-depth content that’s out on our website.
So between those two, usually I try and come up with a topic or a theme that relates to the first two-thirds of the show and relate that to individual stock picks. So in the case of the beginning of earnings season, we might look for stocks that are trading either very high above or very far below our intrinsic valuation. Stocks where you could see a lot of movement in that stock price, depending on how those earnings come out, or maybe what kind of guidance that management might give during their conference call. For the end of earnings season, you’ll look for those stocks where we have a differentiated view from the marketplace, where our equity analyst team has updated their model, maybe we have maybe we haven’t changed our fair value based on that, but really some of the more meaningful movements that we’ve seen, but again always dialing it back into intrinsic valuation.
Away from earnings season, you might look for different topics or themes, anything that’s timely and topical in the marketplace, or maybe look amongst different sectors, that different sectors might be overvalued, undervalued. But again, always trying to come up with something thematic-oriented. Ideally, if we can layer it into what we talked about in the first part of the show, I think that makes it more interesting.
Dziubinski: Now, you mentioned intrinsic valuation, and of course, Morningstar’s fair value estimate is one of Morningstar’s pieces of proprietary IP. So, are there other particular parts of Morningstar’s IP that you tend to lean into when you’re trying to put together, like, what are those picks going to be for this week?
Sekera: Yeah, I mean, like anything else, everything always has a price. One of the first guys I worked for in the business. His name was Jimmy. The old Solomon Brothers trader was like, hey, Dave, just remember, everything’s always got a price. That is a large part of it, but I also look at some of the other attributes of that company and that stock and how it might impact the trading and the long-term investment potential in that individual company.
So again, always looking for companies that have long-term durable competitive advantages, stocks where we rate the company with a narrow economic moat, “narrow moat” meaning that we think that company has the ability to generate excess returns over invested capital for at least the next 10 years before it gets competed away, or ideally a wide-moat stock that might be undervalued. Again, with the wide moat, we’re looking at a stock that we think they can generate those excess returns for 20 years or more before they get competed away. So depending on what type of market environment you’re in, those are the stocks that I think over the long term, even in market turmoil, typically hold up better to the downside, and then they also still provide you with that upside potential. So the economic moat is certainly a big portion of what I’m looking for for individual stock ideas.
I also like to look at the uncertainty rating. So again, this is really a gauge as far as how well do we think that we can really forecast a company’s future free cash flow. So again, a company like Coca-Cola KO, consumer defensive sector, it’s going to be a stock with a low uncertainty rating. Even when the economy swings back and forth, there’s not going to be that much of a change in demand for Koch’s products over the long term. Whereas something maybe in the basic materials sector, like a commodities company, is going to have much higher uncertainty. You’re going to see a lot more vacillation in the stock price. And again, a much wider cone as far as how we think that we can model the company’s free cash flow. Or maybe some upstart companies or companies that might be on the rocks where we assign a very high rating or a very high uncertainty rating, which of course that means that if I’m going to recommend buying those stocks we want to get those at a really large or very significant margin of safety below the intrinsic valuation because again we want to have that cushion really just in case that stock does sell off or conversely as we update our research if we’re lowering our fair value I want to make sure that we’re buying it at that really large discount.
Dziubinski: So then those are sort of the Morningstar things you look at, and of course the analyst reports as well. What sort of non-Morningstar pieces of IP or data do you tend to consider before you’ll come out on The Morning Filter and recommend a stock? What’s your next cut of data?
Sekera: I actually try and take a look at the price action. So again, we’re not technical analysts. I’m not trying to read the charts. We’re not traders. I’m not trying to find something where I think there might be a reason that you’re going to see a quick selloff or a quick bump up that we want to be long or short the stock. But a lot of times when I’m looking at those charts, I’m really looking more at the longer-term trend to try and get an understanding of how that stock might be reacting to either news or other catalysts out there. So oftentimes, even like a wide-moat stock, there might be some reason that that company is underperforming in the short term. The stock might be selling off. In our view, we might think that the market is overreacting too much to the downside. But in a case like that, I also don’t want to be trying to catch the falling knife. So even though it may be a 4-star-rated stock, I’m going to take a look at the chart, and if the chart is telling me in the short term that there’s still too much downward momentum in the stock, that might be one where I might hold off on, maybe wait till it goes to 5-star territory before I would recommend that one to the show.
Conversely, when a stock has a lot of upward momentum, I’m looking at the charts, it was maybe a 4-star stock we’d recommended some time ago, it’s moved up into 3-star territory, which means we think it’s pretty fairly valued, but again, if it still has a lot of that upward momentum, I’m going to wait at least until it goes 2-star, maybe even let it run up higher in that 2-star category before we’d necessarily recommend selling that stock. So the price charts, again, I’m using them, I’m looking at them, but I’m not necessarily really basing a valuation decision on that.
Dziubinski: So are there certain screens, and I know the answer to this, but I’m going to ask it anyway, Dave. Are there certain screens that you tend to go back to, things that you sort of have on repeat for one reason or another?
Sekera: Yeah, I mean, there’s a lot of different tools on Morningstar.com and our other Morningstar platforms. So I do have screens that are already set up. So again, maybe a screen for 1- and 2-star-rated stocks with no economic moat, high or very high uncertainty ratings, or conversely, looking for different types of buy ideas, 4- and 5-star-rated stocks with wide or narrow economic moats, maybe low or medium uncertainty ratings. I also have different screens looking for different dividend idea picks, trying to find ideas where for investors who are more interested in getting that dividend income as opposed to maybe just purely upside capital appreciation, different screens looking for that. I’ll have screens based on sectors or maybe looking for different thematic ideas, whether maybe we’re looking at large-cap growth stocks or maybe small-cap value stocks. So a lot of those I have already set up, and depending on what ideas we might be looking for any one particular week, I’ll run through some of those.
Then again, I also just do other things, too, where I might look year to date, what stocks have appreciated the most, and how is that compared to our fair values? Have our fair values matched to the upside or are our fair values leading or lagging that change? Conversely, which stocks are down most year to date? Is the market maybe overreacting to some sort of news and now that’s giving us a new buy idea, or conversely maybe we’re bringing our fair value down faster than where the market is and that might indicate a good opportunity maybe to take some profit off the table, or sometimes your best loss is your first loss, and sometimes it’s better just to go ahead and take your bumps in the short term and move on to better situations.
Dziubinski: Now, one thing that we’ve talked about on the show a couple of times is one of your favorite sort of themes. And we don’t talk themes that often, but when we do, it’s often cybersecurity. So, maybe for people who haven’t listened to the show before and heard you talk about cybersecurity, tell us why that is sort of a theme you really like and why those are—the cyber stocks are—ones that you kind of watch pretty closely.
Sekera: Yeah, I mean, there’s a number of different attributes of the cybersecurity industry that personally I just find to be, one, very interesting. But two, when I look at it from kind of a fundamental point of view and think about cybersecurity, one of the aspects that I like about it is that it’s actually a pretty small percentage of an overall company’s IT budget. But yet, if a company succumbs to any kind of hacking or other cybersecurity attack, huge amounts of reputational risk. It’s an area that management, even if they need to cut costs elsewhere, is not going to be in an area that the company is going to be willing to try and cut costs. When I look at the growth dynamics of that industry, I think it’s very solid. I’m just looking at that industry as being like one of those areas that no matter what happens in the economy, no matter how things evolve with artificial intelligence and some of the other overall themes out there, you’re always going to need to be at the forefront on cybersecurity.
Dziubinski: Now, each month you put together a market outlook and you do a bigger market outlook every quarter, but you do one every month, too, and we always talk about that on the show, usually at the start of the month. You will often say, both in that report and on The Morning Filter, well, given the market and given these investment styles or given small cap versus large cap, I think you should maintain a market-weighting. Tell us what you mean when you say, I think you should maintain a market-weighting. It’s sort of clear maybe what overweighting might mean or underweighting might mean, but we don’t know what market-weighting always means.
Sekera: So I always take a holistic, bottom-up approach to how we value the market. When I’m thinking about the market valuation, we put together a composite of all the companies that we cover. It’s over 700 stocks that trade on US exchanges. We’ll put a composite together of the market capitalization where all of those stocks are currently trading in the marketplace. Then we’ll divide that by a composite of the intrinsic valuations as determined by our equity analyst team. That gives us that price/fair value ratio. If it’s above 1, it means on average the market is trading above a composite of our fair values. If it’s below 1, then it’s trading undervalued. Of course, the further it gets away from 1, the more overvalued, the more undervalued. That’s how I think about the market overall, which to me is a much different viewpoint than you’re going to hear from a lot of other market strategists.
Over the course of my career, I’ve always found a lot of strategists take more of that top-down approach. They have some way of calculating what they think S&P 500 earnings are going to be, some sort of model or algorithm. They then apply some sort of forward multiple to it. It always seems like they’re coming up saying, hey, the market’s 8% to 10% undervalued. It always feels to me like...
Dziubinski: Perennially, 8%.
Sekera: Exactly. It’s more goal-seeking to me than I think it is necessarily true valuation. So depending on where that value comes out, that helps guide me toward whether we think the market might be very far undervalued or very far away from the valuation. Then, I’ll look at a lot of the other macro dynamics that might be going on in the marketplace, what’s going on with interest rates, what’s going on with the Federal Reserve, what they’re doing with monetary policy. I’ll take into consideration our economic outlook. That helps inform that overall market view. When I’m thinking about a market-weight recommendation, it’s usually, the market’s going to be trading a couple percent above, a couple percent below that fair value, looking at more of a benign outlook as far as monetary policy, inflation, interest rates, and so forth.
When I think about that, really for personal investors or any investors overall, really it’s you should know what your own personal risk tolerances are. Have a view as far as what you’re expecting, what your investment goals are. Are you investing for retirement or is there a specific thing that you’re saving money up for? But based on that, you should determine how much of my portfolio do I want to have in equity? How much of it do I want to have in fixed income? And then you can now take those valuations and start slicing and dicing them into different sectors or by the Morningstar Style Box, and help look for different areas of the marketplace that we might think are more overvalued or more undervalued. Within that market weight, I still think you can now position your portfolio to take advantage of those areas. That we think the market is getting it wrong for whatever reason. So, even though we might be overweight a certain sector or might be underweight a different sector, I think at that point you still want to be at your targeted market-weight percentage for stocks overall.
So if you’re a 70/30 investor, 70% of your equity portfolio should be out there, but then you can slice and dice it. You might want to be overweight value, underweight growth, maybe a little overweight small caps, maybe have some additional sector exposure. It’s really that positioning that then helps you be able to outperform over time.
Dziubinski: Now, just to clarify, just because we think, Morningstar thinks, the market is fairly valued, that’s not necessarily a bad thing, right? Like, what are the assumptions, sort of those underlying assumptions that we’re sort of telling investors when we say the market’s fairly valued? That doesn’t mean it’s going to go to heck in a handbasket, right?
Sekera: Well, when I’m thinking about our valuation, it’s really based on that bottom-up view. For every company that we have an intrinsic valuation on within that discounted cash flow model, we also have our cost of equity, which is used within the weighted average cost of capital. When I’m thinking about a stock market, which is pretty fairly valued, I would expect that over the long term, you’d essentially earn kind of that cost of equity over time. Not to say that you might get a lot of vacillations, market might run up too far, might end up selling off too far. But if you’re able to buy and hold through the ups and downs of the marketplace as a long-term investor, you should be capturing those kind of market-rate returns for both capital appreciation and dividends.
Dziubinski: And speaking of dividends, before I forget, we don’t talk about dividend stocks specifically on The Morning Filter, though you will always talk about a given pick’s dividend yield. But you do a video twice a year with our colleague David Harrell, who’s the editor of Morningstar DividendInvestor. You just released the new video. People can find it on YouTube or on Morningstar.com. It is your 10 dividend stock picks for midyear. So I’ll plug that.
All right, so let’s talk a little bit about core stocks. You talk about them quite a bit on the show. You do have sort of, I would say, maybe a handful of companies, three or four companies that you’ve referred to on a semiregular basis on the show as “core” holdings. First of all, tell us what you mean by a “core” holding and then tell us what are a couple, a few of these companies that you view as such, and that really investors should always have on that watchlist and pick them up when they can at a discount?
Sekera: So when I think about a core holding, that’s really in relation to your overall portfolio. As we talked about before, you should have an idea what percent of your portfolio should be in equities, how much of it should be within fixed income. It also is going to depend on the level of sophistication, the level of interest that you have in buying individual stocks. So I think for most investors, you probably want to start off with the base portfolio that’s going to be in broadly diversified instruments, whether that’s mutual funds and ETFs. From there, you can then break it down into more specific asset classes and individual sectors. I think you want to have that base first.
Then on top of that, if you have the interest to do the research and the due diligence and investing in individual stocks, that’s when I think you start moving more into those core holdings. And these are going to be probably more the large-cap names, companies that have a wide economic moat, probably a medium depending on the sector maybe a high uncertainty rating, but these are the companies that I think that as an investor these are the ones you’re going to want to hold for the long term. So an example of that might be Microsoft MSFT. Exxon XOM is another one in the energy sector that we’ve talked about. Johnson & Johnson JNJ would be a third one, but again these are the type of stocks based on the long-term fundamentals of the company based on our analysis of their long-term durable competitive advantages, these are the stocks that I think can really start that base of the portfolio in individual stocks.
Then from there, if you want to have a little bit more interesting positions, maybe not necessarily speculative stocks, but then start looking for stocks that are trading at more undervalued levels, maybe a little bit more of a story stock where you’ve dug into it, you understand the risk dynamics and the story, you’re comfortable owning it, and then you can maybe build out your portfolio in individual stocks that way.
Dziubinski: Now, one more question, and then I’m going to see what our attendees here at the Morningstar conference are asking us. And again, if you are attending today and you would like to ask us a question, please email it to themorningfilter@morningstar.com. So, Dave, before we get to what the attendees here are asking us, you’ve talked in the show before, you’re not really a back-up-the-truck kind of guy when it comes to investing. We sort of joke about that, as we’re working on the show ahead of time. You’re not often a back-up-the-truck kind of guy. Talk a little bit about how you think about building a position in a name.
Sekera: Yeah, again, everyone has their own personal investing style, and mine is really layering in and layering out of positions. When I’m looking at a new stock that I think is interesting, it’s trading at a level that we think is a good place to start a position, first of all, within my entire portfolio, I’m gonna decide, well, how large of a position would I be willing to own in this one individual stock? How does it fit with the other stocks that I own? Let’s just say you decide I’d be willing to own a 3% position of my overall portfolio in the stock. Personally, I would probably start with a half size of that. Then, that gives you the ability that, if that stock, for whatever reason, just might be, the market overall is trading down. Maybe there’s something with that stock that the market just doesn’t like and it’s still selling off and you’re doing your due diligence and you’re still comfortable owning it. Gives you that ability to dollar-cost average and layer in to the downside. So buy that first half-size position, and then maybe what you want to do is pick a level that if the stock sells off will be when you kind of reevaluate, make sure that your investment thesis is still the same. But if it sells down, pick a level 10%, that’s maybe where you want to buy kind of that next quarter-size position. And again, then pick another spot to the downside where you’d be willing to kind of put on that full position in that individual stock so that we have dollar-cost averaged to the downside.
Now, conversely, to the upside, when that stock does start to work, I don’t want to sell it all at once either. That’s when I want to let momentum take its course. To me, one of the harder things about investing isn’t necessarily when to buy a stock. To me, sometimes the hardest part is deciding when to sell a stock. And I’d say more often than not, I always end up personally selling too early. When the stock starts getting into overvalued territory, I’m chomping at the bit. I want to take my profit off the table and lock it in, but if there’s still a lot of excess momentum to the upside, sometimes you want to let it run. Now, again, no one ever went broke taking a profit, so when it does move into that overvalued territory, you want to at least take some off the table, but again, let it run for a bit before you layer out the rest of your position.
Dziubinski: So let’s talk a bit about then how you determine when something is really overvalued using Morningstar’s ratings. So, I think we’ve heard from viewers before who have asked like, well, it’s 3 stars. What do I do? What would you say to that typically, Dave? Just an arbitrary company at 3 stars.
Sekera: Yeah, so again, 3 stars just means that over time, we expect that you will get a market-adjusted rate of return, which is probably going to be pretty close to the cost of equity that we have in our weighted average cost of capital in our discounted cash flow model. But I think it’s also important to know, when you think about our star ratings, our star ratings are actually a risk-adjusted rating. Going back to our earlier discussion about our uncertainty rating that goes from low up to very high, there’s also an extreme category, which we use for specific situations. But thinking about that cone of uncertainty, the more volatile the stock, you want to make sure that you are going to have a greater margin of safety to the downside before you start buying that stock. So a company that has a low uncertainty, you don’t need to see that stock deviate that far from its long-term intrinsic valuation before it moves to a 2-star or down to a 4-star rated stock. Whereas with a company that’s going to be rated with a very high uncertainty, we’ll let it run up to the upside a lot farther before it becomes a 2-star-rated stock. Conversely, we want an even greater margin of safety to the downside below intrinsic valuation before it becomes a 4-star or 5-star. So again, that star rating is a risk-adjusted rating at the end of the day.
Dziubinski: All right. Let’s take a question from our audience here at the Morningstar conference. Dave, from my use of Morningstar research, it appears that Morningstar’s analysts’ price targets can sometimes be more conservative than that of Wall Street analysts. Is that because Morningstar is taking into consideration risk management, which you did mention?
Sekera: Well, first of all, I’m not actually sure that’s necessarily true. We’re not measuring our fair value estimates versus what a consensus estimate may be by the Street. We’re really sticking to our own long-term intrinsic valuation based on our discounted cash flow model. Now, a lot of people on the Street don’t necessarily do the work that you really should do in order to come up with that intrinsic valuation. A lot of other analysts might use P/E multiples or forward P/E multiples, which are really just kind of a shorthand way of trying to guesstimate what you think the value of a stock is. We don’t use P/E multiples in our valuation methodology at all. I think there’s more drawbacks than positive attributes about using P/E multiples.
But again, I think what’s really much more important, trying to understand where we have a differentiated view from where it’s trading in the marketplace, reading through the research published by our equity analysts, really understanding what is it that’s causing the market to view that value different than what our value is? That to me is where it really helps lead investors toward those areas that we’re seeing that margin of safety, that we’re looking for those undervalued opportunities.
Dziubinski: All right. Another question. With so much uncertainty around policies in Washington, how can anyone invest in a company with confidence, especially when companies are even withholding their own forecasts?
Sekera: Well, it’s always an uncertain environment.
Dziubinski: Investing is uncertain, right?
Sekera: Exactly. So like anything else, “you pays your monies, you take your chances.” Not to really be quite that flippant, but again, there’s always going to be some sort of catalyst out there that the market is going to have to understand what that may do to the valuation of the market overall, to individual stocks, individual sectors, and so forth. So to me, that really helps really prove the point as far as trying to buy stocks that are trading at that margin of safety. So again, Washington, D.C., is what it is. Whether it’s this administration, other administrations in the past, there’s always going to be a difference in what that administration is trying to do with their policies, how those policies may impact the market, how it may impact sectors, individual stocks over time. But again, I think that It’s always going to be that way, and that is just part of the inherent nature of investing, but that’s also why in equity investing that you’ll get higher longer-term returns over maybe investing in fixed income where you’ve got a stated rate of return on an individual bond.
Dziubinski: OK, Dave, well, this attendee obviously didn’t go to your keynote this morning. Dave, what’s your take on AI today? Dave’s keynote was about AI. What’s the best way to invest in AI today? Is it all about Nvidia still?
Sekera: No, it’s not all about Nvidia NVDA. When I’m thinking about artificial intelligence today, it actually reminds me a lot of investing back in the mid-1990s. At that point in time, the internet was being built out. A lot of the hardware companies, the Ciscos CSCO of the world, the stock just kept going up and up and up. Everyone needed their routers and their switches in order to build the backbone of the internet. At that point, we could see some of the early use cases for the internet. Everyone kind of understood, wow, this is going to revolutionize the economy, revolutionize business going forward. But at the same point in time, no one really knew exactly how that was going to pan out over the next 10, 20, 30 years. I think to some degree, we’re in that same kind of environment today.
As far as Nvidia goes, yes, great company, wide economic moat. I believe it’s a 3-star-rated stock last time I looked. So again, I think it’s fairly valued at this point in time, but there are other hardware companies that have differentiated equipment that we think will be long-term beneficiaries of AI. Maybe like Taiwan Semi TSM, last time I looked it was rated 4 stars, another wide economic moat company. They’re the ones that actually manufacture the chipsets that are designed by Nvidia. They have the most expertise. They’ve got the technological prowess for developing and manufacturing of the highest end of all of these chips. That’s another area that we think will be a beneficiary over time.
Now, of course, with all these chips, you have to network them all together. But not only that, but you can even put like AI accelerators on top of those chipsets to even get greater efficiency. A company like Marvell MRVL, 4-star-rated stock with a narrow economic moat, is one that we think will actually benefit from both of those as well.
Now moving on to AI, we’re also looking at which of these companies are actually building out the platforms both for their own use as well as hosting some of their clients use as well. So some of the companies there that we’ve been following would be like Alphabet GOOGL, 4-star-rated stock, Microsoft, like we had mentioned earlier, but even companies like Meta META that’s able to take generative AI and use that, and we’re already seeing it being able to use, to build individual personalized advertising and marketing that their clients can use on the different Meta websites.
And then lastly, for AI, and I think this is the part that the market is really just starting to shift its focus to, is I think everyone generally kind of understands the growth patterns for the hardware, and that’s kind of baked into most of the prices today. Those with the scale and the distribution network, the Microsofts, the Amazons AMZN of the world, we have a pretty good understanding of that. I think what the market is really looking now are—OK, who can take artificial intelligence, layer that in, and increase the economic value of their existing products and services so that they can drive additional top line growth, improve customer retention? Those are going to be the companies that will be truly like the really big winners over the next 10, 20, 30 years.
One example I used earlier today, in 1997, Amazon went public, had a $500 million market cap, which seemed like a lot of money back in 1997. But who thought an online book retailer would grow to the point that now today it’s worth $2.3 trillion, one of the largest of the mega-cap companies globally today. So I think that’s how you need to conceptualize what AI might be over the long term. So really, I think it’s now trying to identify which of these companies are going to take AI, incorporate it into their own existing business and services, who can utilize it within their own business processes, again, which companies can utilize it to be able to generate long-term operating margin expansion. Those that you can identify, those are the ones that the market is really trying to unsurface right now.
Dziubinski: All right, Dave. Well, we are about to get kicked out of our big, beautiful podcast booth here at the Morningstar Investment Conference, but I could talk to you all day. So anyway, great to see you in person. Always a great conversation.
Sekera: Thank you, Susan. This was a lot of fun doing this in person. We’ll have to do it again next year.
Dziubinski: Yeah. So, Dave and I hope you will join us next week for The Morning Filter at 9 a.m. Eastern, 8 a.m. Central. In the meantime, please like this video, subscribe, and have a great week.