Macro on Korea Invest Insights

The Big Tech Financing Relay: AI Capex Has Not Been Cut, And The Memory Bottleneck Looks Stronger

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 21:45:00 +0900

This is a follow-up to the late-July Big Tech earnings-call memory-thesis preview, the Micron FY3Q26 review, the 2027 semiconductor consensus-payability work, and the AI data-center capex bottleneck series.

TL;DR

The Big Tech financing relay says one thing clearly: AI infrastructure capex has not been cut. If anything, it has outgrown the old assumption that elite hyperscalers could fund everything internally.

Top hyperscaler 2026 capex guidance now sits around $695bn to $750bn. That compares with about $410bn in 2025 and about $245bn in 2024, implying roughly three consecutive years of 60% plus growth. The more important change is funding mix. The path has moved from internal cash to bonds, multi-currency bonds, off-balance-sheet structures, and now equity issuance.

For memory, the implication is cleaner than for hyperscaler equities. Microsoft has tied roughly $25bn of its 2026 capex to component-price inflation. Meta has cited component pricing, especially memory, as one reason for higher 2026 capex. Amazon has also warned about component and memory-cost pressure. The buyers are absorbing the price burden. Memory suppliers receive it.

The public-equity read-through is therefore not “own hyperscalers simply because they are spending.” It is more specific: watch the memory and HBM bottleneck nodes that can turn that spending into ASP, margin, and long-term contract visibility.

The Financing Timeline

Timing	Issuer	Type	Size	Interpretation
2025-10-30	Meta	Bonds	$30bn	Long-term AI and data-center funding
2025-11	Amazon	Bonds	about $15bn	First major return to US dollar bonds in years
2025-11	Alphabet	Bonds	about $17.5bn	Pre-funding AI infrastructure
2026-02	Alphabet	Bonds	about $32bn	Multi-currency deal including a 100-year tech bond
2026-02	Oracle	Debt-led funding	$25bn	Part of a larger cloud-infrastructure funding plan
2026-03-10/11	Amazon	Bonds	about $54bn	Dollar plus euro record-scale funding
2026-04-30	Meta	Bonds	$25bn	Issued just after Q1 results and higher capex guide
2026-05-12	Amazon	CHF bonds	CHF 2.82bn	Currency diversification
2026-06-01/03	Alphabet	Equity	$84.75bn	The decisive signal: dilution accepted for AI compute
2026-07-07	Amazon	Reported bond launch	$25bn plus	Reported eight-tranche US IG deal. Final terms not yet confirmed

The July 7 Amazon deal should not be mixed with the March record financing. As of publication, the final July 7 size, tranche spreads, new-issue concession and order book were not confirmed in public sources. It is therefore treated as a reported latest financing step, not a fully settled fact.

Capex Is Still Rising

Company	2026E capex	YoY	Key point
Amazon	about $200bn	about +50%	AWS, custom chips and data-center buildout
Microsoft	about $190bn	+61%	Roughly $25bn attributed to component-price inflation
Alphabet	$180bn to $190bn	about 2x	2027 expected to rise substantially again
Meta	$125bn to $145bn	about 2x	Memory and component pricing cited as pressure points
Oracle	volatile	high	Cloud buildout is highly capital-intensive
Top 5	$695bn to $750bn	about +67%	Versus about $410bn in 2025 and $245bn in 2024

The absolute dollar amount is still rising. The risk is the second derivative: even if 2027 capex reaches $1tn, the growth rate will likely slow from the 2025-2026 pace. That matters more for hyperscaler equity multiples than for memory suppliers. If memory keeps taking a larger share of the server bill of materials, memory revenue can still grow faster than total capex.

Why Funding Mix Matters

The escalation path is visible:

Internal cash.
Straight bonds.
Multi-currency bonds.
SPVs, private credit and off-balance-sheet structures.
Equity issuance.

Alphabet’s June 2026 equity raise is the key tell. This is not a weak company. It is one of the strongest cash-flow machines in the world. If it chooses dilution to fund AI compute, the capital intensity of the AI buildout has moved beyond the old internal-cash model.

Microsoft looks different. Its visible public benchmark funding has been less aggressive than Alphabet’s or Amazon’s, which may point to stronger internal funding capacity rather than lower AI capex ambition.

The Memory Read-Through

The key change is not simply that memory prices are up. It is that hyperscalers are not cutting demand in response. They are increasing budgets, signing long-term contracts and raising capital.

Signal	Memory implication
Microsoft component-inflation comment	More dollars are needed for similar capacity
Meta memory-price comment	Memory is moving the whole capex budget
Amazon component-cost warning	Costs are higher, but capex continues
Micron SCAs	Customers are locking in long-term supply
HBM4/HBM4E transition	Higher value per accelerator and more wafer intensity

This is why hyperscaler equities and memory suppliers should be separated. Hyperscalers bear the cost, FCF drag and payback risk. Memory suppliers receive the pricing and allocation benefit.

Public Equity Checklist

For Samsung Electronics, the questions are DS core profit, HBM4/HBM4E customer qualification, 3Q DRAM and NAND pricing, and the scale of foundry/System LSI losses.

For SK Hynix, the questions are HBM4 long-term contract structure, 2027 allocation, and whether US-listed access through the SKHY ADR broadens the investor base without distorting common-share pricing.

For Micron, the question is whether the SCA structure becomes the benchmark for how investors value memory-cycle durability.

For hyperscalers, the clean stance is more cautious: demand is real, but FCF, debt, dilution and payback period risk are also real.

Scenarios

Scenario	Condition	Memory read-through
Bull	Amazon order book strong, late-July calls maintain or lift 2027 capex, memory costs remain absorbed	HBM and server DRAM pricing durability strengthens
Base	2026 capex maintained, 2027 growth continues but slows, memory-price increases moderate	Memory thesis remains intact but stock reactions stay selective
Bear	Capex guides cut, payback concerns rise, component inflation causes deployment delays	ASP thesis weakens until contract pricing is confirmed
Structural damage	Customers reduce memory content per server, HBM contract prices fall, bond demand weakens	Memory thesis needs full re-underwriting

Final View

The Big Tech financing relay confirms that AI infrastructure demand remains real. But it is not a simple hyperscaler-equity bullish signal. The more precise read-through is that memory is one of the bottlenecks taking a larger share of AI infrastructure dollars.

The next tests are the final terms of Amazon’s July 7 deal, the late-July Big Tech calls, Samsung’s July 30 earnings call, SK Hynix’s 2Q call, and 3Q/4Q memory contract-price data.

Sources

H1 2026 Review: AI Infrastructure Bottlenecks Broadened, but the Market Did Not

Tue, 30 Jun 2026 22:35:00 +0900

Related context This is a half-year follow-up to Samsung 2Q26 preview, Micron FY3Q26 earnings, the NVIDIA elasticity framework for Samsung and SK Hynix, how hard it was to beat the KOSPI benchmark, the KOSPI 60-day disparity framework, the Real Money Flow framework, and the AI supercycle midgame note.

TL;DR

H1 2026 looked like a broad risk-on period from the index level. Under the surface, it was much narrower. Korea was a KOSPI megacap crowding market. The U.S. was an AI infrastructure market where leadership moved from megacap AI platforms into memory, storage, servers, semiconductor equipment and power. Neither market was a broad “everything went up” market.

The headline Korean index was extraordinary. KOSPI rose from 4,214.17 on December 30, 2025 to 8,476.48 on June 30, 2026, up 101.1%. KOSDAQ fell from 925.47 to 916.18, down 1.0%. Across roughly 2,700 Korean stocks, 856 rose and 1,788 fell. The median stock return was -12.6%. The index doubled, but the average stock was in a weak market.

The U.S. story was also more specific than the index suggests. The S&P 500 gained 9.2% and Nasdaq gained 11.1%, but the real story was AI infrastructure bottlenecks. SanDisk, Micron, Western Digital, Dell, Marvell, ARM, Applied Materials and Lam Research were much stronger than NVIDIA. The market was buying the places where the AI factory actually bottlenecks.

The H2 strategy is not simply “find cheap stocks.” The better rule is to buy proven bottlenecks with real revenue and contracts on pullbacks. Option-like equipment, gaming and biotech event names should be sized smaller. Continuous-revenue bottlenecks in memory, eSSD, MLCC, substrates, power, shipbuilding, defense and large biotech platforms deserve more attention.

One-Line Conclusion

H1 was risk-on, but it was not broad. Korea was dominated by Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix crowding, while the U.S. rewarded the physical bottlenecks beneath AI compute. H2 is about separating recurring-revenue bottlenecks from option-like stories and leveraged flow risk.

0. Data Basis and Reconciliation

The data basis is:

Area	Basis
Korea indices and stocks	June 30, 2026 close
U.S. indices and stocks	June 29, 2026 close
Korea flows	KR local DB, Kiwoom amount basis
U.S. stock returns	US local DB and yfinance adjusted close
Secondary inputs	Naver Finance, local screeners and session flow analysis

Some figures differ slightly by dataset and reference date. For example, the final KOSPI return is +101.1% using the June 30 close, while some local basket snapshots show +96.7%, and the June 23 interim review showed +90.4%. U.S. AI stock returns also differ depending on adjusted-close treatment and vendor handling.

This post reconciles those differences as follows.

Data type	How it is used
June 30 Korea close	Main H1 performance benchmark
June 29 U.S. close	Main U.S. H1 performance benchmark
June 23 interim snapshot	Supporting evidence for breadth and buyer structure
Adjusted-close versus local DB differences	Used directionally when conclusions are unchanged
Less-verified single figures	Treated as H2 watch items, not as core proof

The point is not false precision. The conclusion is stable: indices were strong, breadth was weak, and AI infrastructure returns moved from GPUs into memory, storage, servers, equipment and power.

1. Index Performance: KOSPI Doubled, KOSDAQ Fell

Market	Basis	H1 return
KOSPI	4,214.17 on 2025-12-30 to 8,476.48 on 2026-06-30	+101.1%
KOSDAQ	925.47 to 916.18	-1.0%
S&P 500	2025-12-31 to 2026-06-29	+9.2%
Nasdaq	2025-12-31 to 2026-06-29	+11.1%
Russell 2000	2025-12-31 to 2026-06-29	+21.3%
SMH semiconductor ETF	2025-12-31 to 2026-06-29	+75.5%
SOXX semiconductor ETF	2025-12-31 to 2026-06-29	+104.2%

At the index level, Korea was spectacular. KOSPI doubled in six months. But KOSDAQ fell. Within the same Korean market, large-cap AI infrastructure and growth stocks lived in different worlds.

The U.S. index story also understates the internal rotation. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq were up around low double digits, while semiconductor ETFs were up far more. SOXX gained 104.2%, close to the KOSPI’s gain, showing how concentrated the global AI hardware trade became.

2. Korea: The Index Doubled, the Median Stock Fell

Item	Value
Observed Korean stocks	roughly 2,700
H1 advancers	856
H1 decliners	1,788
Median stock return	-12.6%
KOSPI H1 return	+101.1%
KOSDAQ H1 return	-1.0%

This is an unusual combination. The index was in a historic bull market, while the median stock was weak. That is why the lived investor experience was so different from the index headline.

The main H1 leaders were:

Stock	H1 return
Samsung Electro-Mechanics	+756%
Jusung Engineering	+626%
SK Square	+361%
SK Hynix	+307%
Jeju Semiconductor	+294%
Daeduck Electronics	+226%
Simmtech	+201%
Samsung Electronics	+179%

The Korean market’s structure was:

Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix
→ Samsung Electro-Mechanics, MLCC and FC-BGA
→ substrates, PCB and semi equipment
→ power equipment, industrials and some financials

KOSDAQ, many biotech names, platforms and parts of secondary batteries lagged. Korea was strong, but most Korean stocks were not.

3. Korea Was Not a Foreign-Buying Market

YTD flow data on the local Kiwoom amount basis:

Investor group	YTD cumulative
Foreigners	-KRW 142T
Institutions	+KRW 45T
Retail	+KRW 77.7T
Financial investment	+KRW 75.4T
Investment trusts	-KRW 1.7T
Private funds	-KRW 3.8T
Pension funds and others	-KRW 7.0T

The key point is that Korea was not a simple foreign-buying market. Foreigners sold Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix heavily. Domestic retail, financial investment accounts and institutions absorbed the flow.

Stock	YTD return	Foreign cumulative flow
Samsung Electronics	around +160%	-KRW 72.6T
SK Hynix	around +291%	-KRW 57.1T
SK Square	around +333%	-KRW 7.6T
Samsung Electronics preferred	around +125%	-KRW 3.2T

Foreigners sold the core megacaps while those stocks rallied. That is not a normal foreign-led rally. It was a domestic absorption market.

Foreigners did not sell everything. They rotated into select bottlenecks and global-fund-friendly assets such as Samsung Electro-Mechanics, Doosan Enerbility, Samsung SDI, FADU, Hanwha Ocean and Sanil Electric. The right description is not “foreigners bought Korea.” It is “foreigners sold the largest memory megacaps, domestic liquidity absorbed them, and foreigners reallocated into select second-layer bottlenecks.”

4. The Hidden Buyer Was Financial Investment, Not Long-Only Real Money

Institutional buying was not the same as long-only accumulation. The strongest institutional subcategory was financial investment, not investment trusts, private funds or pension funds.

Flow category	Interpretation
Financial investment	ETF, derivatives, program and rebalance-linked flow
Investment trusts	More likely to represent long-only fund demand, but weak in H1
Private funds	Mixed thematic, long-short and event-driven flow, but weak cumulatively
Pension funds and others	Long-term real money, but net selling in H1
Retail	Key absorber of megacap AI infrastructure flow and leverage

This matters. Real money can sustain a trend. Financial-investment and program flow can be powerful, but it is more vulnerable to futures expiry, ETF caps, derivative positioning and leverage mechanics.

H1 Korea was both a fundamental rerating market and a derivatives/ETF market. Confusing the two leads to repeated mistakes.

5. KOSDAQ Lacked Buyers, Not Stories

KOSDAQ had plenty of stories: biotech, robotics, CPO, SOCAMM, semiconductor equipment, gaming and AI software. The index still lagged because the buyer base was weak.

The June 23 interim snapshot was already clear:

Index	YTD	From high
KOSPI	+90.4%	-10.0%
KOSDAQ	-5.7%	-27.3%

The final June 30 structure was the same: KOSPI +101.1%, KOSDAQ -1.0%.

KOSDAQ struggled because:

Retail capital was tied up absorbing Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix and large AI infrastructure names.
Institutional real money did not buy KOSDAQ broadly.
Foreign buying was narrow, focused on names such as FADU, Jeju Semiconductor and Simmtech.
Rates and FX pressure weighed on biotech and unprofitable growth multiples.

The condition for KOSDAQ recovery is:

KOSDAQ recovery =
retail capital returning
+ institutional real-money buying
+ Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix moving sideways rather than falling
+ KOSDAQ earnings revisions stabilizing

If Samsung and SK Hynix crash, money does not automatically rotate into KOSDAQ. Risk-off comes first. The best environment for KOSDAQ is not megacap collapse. It is megacap consolidation.

6. The U.S. Market Was Not Just NVIDIA

The real U.S. signal was not “AI went up.” It was:

The physical bottlenecks after the GPU outperformed the GPU leader.

Representative H1 return ranges:

Stock	H1 return range
SanDisk	+645-764%
Micron	+263-301%
Western Digital	+247-279%
Intel	+235-257%
Dell	+224-232%
Marvell	+211-227%
ARM	+200-214%
Applied Materials	+171%
AMD	+152%
Lam Research	+141%

Big Tech was mixed:

Stock	H1 return
Google	+13%
Amazon	+4%
Apple	+4%
NVIDIA	+3-5%
Broadcom	+7%
Meta	-15%
Microsoft	-22% to -23%
Oracle	-25%
Palantir	-31%

The market bought the points where the AI factory bottlenecks:

GPU
→ HBM and DRAM
→ eSSD and storage
→ servers and racks
→ optical and interconnect
→ semiconductor equipment
→ power and cooling

This is directly relevant to Korea. HBM maps to Samsung and SK Hynix. eSSD and NAND map to Samsung, FADU and Jeju Semiconductor. MLCC and FC-BGA map to Samsung Electro-Mechanics and substrate names. Power maps to Doosan Enerbility and electrical equipment. Equipment maps to HPSP, TES, VM and Jusung.

7. Macro Was Not a Pure Tailwind

Asset or indicator	H1 move
Dollar index	+3.1%
USD/KRW	+7.9%
U.S. 10-year yield	4.16% to 4.39%
WTI oil	+24.1%
Gold	-6.8%
Bitcoin	-33.2%

This was not a clean multiple-expansion macro environment. The dollar rose, the won weakened, U.S. yields rose and oil rose. Gold and Bitcoin fell.

Stocks rose anyway because the AI infrastructure earnings cycle overwhelmed macro pressure. That is important for H2. If rates, the dollar and oil all rise together again, the most crowded bottleneck stocks can suffer multiple compression even if demand remains strong.

The realistic risk is:

AI demand stays strong
+ earnings remain good
+ rates, dollar and oil remain firm
+ valuation and leveraged flows crack first

That is the same stock-elasticity problem discussed in the NVIDIA/Samsung/SK Hynix framework.

8. Non-Consensus Truth 1: Leadership Moved From Compute to Memory

The first non-consensus point is U.S. AI leadership. NVIDIA is still the center of AI. But incremental stock performance moved into Micron, SanDisk, Western Digital, Dell, Marvell and ARM.

That does not mean compute no longer matters. It means the marginal return moved down the stack.

Question	Meaning
Is this company a cost item in AI capex?	It can be pressured when customers optimize costs.
Is this company a bottleneck item in AI capex?	It can reprice if customers need supply.
Is this company only a narrative?	It is vulnerable during catalyst gaps.

Cost items get pressured. Bottlenecks rerate. Narratives require timing discipline.

9. Non-Consensus Truth 2: The Real Top Came Before the Index High

Breadth weakened before the index did. The June index high was driven by Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix and a small set of AI infrastructure names. KOSDAQ and the median stock had already weakened earlier.

Weak median stock
+ weak KOSDAQ
+ strong KOSPI memory megacaps
= index high and weak lived market at the same time

For H2, the key indicators are breadth, ADR, KOSDAQ/KOSPI relative strength, megacap memory trading-value share, and KOSDAQ retail/institutional joint buying.

10. Non-Consensus Truth 3: Multiples Moved Before Fundamentals Fully Arrived

Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron and Samsung Electro-Mechanics all had strong fundamentals. But stock returns moved faster than near-term earnings. The market changed the multiple.

Old frame:
memory = commodity cycle = peak-earnings discount

H1 frame:
memory = AI infrastructure bottleneck = supply shortage plus contract premium

The H2 risk is not just bad earnings. It is good earnings with lower multiples if the market starts treating memory as commodity again. Investors should watch EPS revision speed, beat magnitude and FY2027 visibility, not just the next quarterly beat.

11. Non-Consensus Truth 4: Leverage Plumbing Amplified Tail Risk

Korean memory megacaps were affected not only by fundamentals, but also by leverage plumbing: 2x and 3x Samsung/SK Hynix ETFs listed offshore, domestic leverage and inverse products, futures and program flow.

Simplified upside loop:

stock up
→ leveraged ETF rebalancing buy
→ futures and program support
→ more megacap upside
→ more momentum capital

Downside loop:

stock down
→ leveraged ETF rebalancing sell
→ futures and program pressure
→ retail margin and forced-selling risk
→ larger drawdown

Korea can therefore move more violently than Micron even when the fundamental direction is similar.

12. Non-Consensus Truth 5: Supply Moved From Strong Hands to Weaker Hands

The important question is not only who sold. It is who bought.

H1 saw foreigners and some institutional accounts reduce exposure in memory megacaps while retail and financial-investment accounts absorbed the flow.

Positive read	Negative read
Domestic liquidity is strong	Shares may have moved into weaker leveraged hands
KOSPI held despite foreign selling	Forced-selling risk rises if margin unwinds
Large-cap buyer base widened	It may also represent distribution from better-informed accounts

H2 monitoring should combine foreign cash flow, retail margin, deposits, ETF balances, and program flow.

13. Non-Consensus Truth 6: Foreigners Bought Globally Explainable Korean Assets

Foreigners did not buy every Korean theme. The stocks they bought were globally explainable.

Stock	YTD foreign net buying
Samsung Electro-Mechanics	+KRW 2.28T
Doosan Enerbility	+KRW 1.71T
Celltrion	+KRW 1.52T
Samsung SDI	+KRW 1.33T
Doosan	+KRW 1.11T
APR	+KRW 1.08T
Hyundai Rotem	+KRW 0.85T
LG Energy Solution	+KRW 0.85T
FADU	+KRW 0.80T
Hanwha Ocean	+KRW 0.76T

Common features:

power, nuclear, shipbuilding and defense
global quality industrials
large battery names
large biotech platforms
direct AI infrastructure bottlenecks

For H2, foreign long-only capital is more likely to buy assets it can explain in an investment committee than obscure small-cap stories.

14. Non-Consensus Truth 7: Revenue Pattern Beat Company Quality

In H1, the quality of the revenue pattern mattered more than abstract company quality.

Weak revenue-pattern names:

Type	Weakness
Equipment	Order gaps can create earnings gaps.
Gaming	Revenue visibility breaks around launch cycles.
Biotech event stocks	Trial and licensing gaps create narrative gaps.
Some robotics and AI software	Expectations move before revenue.

Strong revenue-pattern names:

Type	Strength
Memory	Pricing and volume improved together.
eSSD and storage	AI server storage bottleneck rerating.
MLCC and substrates	Server and package bottlenecks.
Power equipment	Data-center power demand plus policy capital.
Shipbuilding	Long backlog visibility.
Defense	Export backlog and government budgets.
Large biotech platforms	Contracts, production and platform value are explainable.

The H2 rule is simple:

Size option-like names smaller. Size recurring-revenue bottlenecks larger.

15. Bonus Hypothesis: Korea Became a Leveraged U.S. AI Proxy

Korea’s market identity changed in H1. Historically, Samsung and SK Hynix were proxies for EM, China and global IT inventory cycles. In H1 2026, the linkage to U.S. AI capex became much stronger.

Session analysis suggested a stronger relationship between U.S. prior-day AI/semi moves and Korea next-day memory megacaps, including an interim correlation estimate of 0.42. That figure needs formal revalidation, but the price action is consistent with the direction.

The issue is diversification. If Korea behaves like a leveraged U.S. AI capex proxy, domestic buffers weaken when the global AI factor cools.

Another watch item is capex. Session analysis classified large SK Hynix capex commitment as a peak-confidence checkpoint. The exact amount and scope should be rechecked against filings before it becomes a core argument. But historically, peak capex announcements often arrive when demand looks strongest.

Key H2 capex questions:

Question	Meaning
Are customer contracts supporting capex?	Lowers supply-glut risk.
Does capex impair FCF?	Earnings can look good while cash flow weakens.
Does supply arrive near demand peak?	Raises 2027 cycle risk.
Is capex HBM and AI-memory focused?	Must be separated from commodity DRAM oversupply risk.

16. H2 Checklist

Checkpoint	Why it matters
Samsung 2Q26 Core OP	Core profit power matters more than reported headline OP.
SK Hynix 2Q and 3Q HBM allocation	Determines whether the crowded winner can reaccelerate.
Micron FY4Q26 guide delivery	Tests whether U.S. AI memory premium can persist.
DRAM and NAND pricing	Confirms margin defense beyond HBM.
KOSDAQ retail and institutional buying	Needed for KOSDAQ recovery.
Financial-investment and program flow	Real plumbing behind megacap volatility.
USD/KRW, U.S. 10-year yields and oil	Put a ceiling on AI bottleneck multiples.
AI capex contracts and FCF	Shows whether demand is paid for by cash flow, not just narrative.

17. H2 Strategy

Area	Strategy
AI infrastructure core	Keep exposure, but buy pullbacks rather than chasing.
Memory megacaps	Samsung is the unreflected-alpha candidate. SK Hynix is the reacceleration candidate after pullbacks.
HBM lower-stack bottlenecks	Buy only where orders, margins and customer qualification are visible.
KOSDAQ	Do not buy the whole index first. Start with semiconductor equipment, test and profitable growth names.
Option-like equipment, gaming and biotech	Smaller sizing due to catalyst-gap risk.
Global quality cyclicals	Continue to monitor shipbuilding, defense, power, nuclear and large biotech platforms.

The H2 strategy in one sentence:

Keep AI infrastructure core exposure, reduce option-like positions, and shift toward recurring-revenue bottlenecks and Korean quality cyclicals that global capital can explain.

18. Final View

The crowd may remember H1 2026 as the best Korea/semiconductor supercycle year. That is not wrong. KOSPI doubled and memory, substrates, equipment and power leaders exploded.

But the more important story is:

leadership became extremely narrow
multiples moved before fundamentals fully arrived
foreigners sold the core megacaps while domestic liquidity absorbed them
financial-investment and ETF/program flows amplified the market
KOSDAQ lacked buyers, not stories
U.S. AI leadership moved from GPU into memory, storage, servers and power

The H2 question is not only “how much more upside is left?” The better questions are:

Does stock elasticity remain positive even after strong earnings?
Can domestic liquidity keep absorbing foreign selling?
Do KOSDAQ buyers return?
Do AI bottlenecks convert from narrative into revenue and contracts?

H1 was risk-on, but it was not broad. It was a compressed leadership market. H2 requires more precision: real bottlenecks over cheap stocks, recurring revenue over one-off catalysts, and Core OP plus FCF over headline earnings.

Data Note

Korea data: KR local DB, Kiwoom investor flow data and Naver Finance support as of the June 30, 2026 close.
U.S. data: US local DB and yfinance adjusted close as of the June 29, 2026 close.
Interim snapshots: June 23 KOSPI/KOSDAQ relative performance and session flow analysis.
U.S. June 30 regular-session results are not included.
Less-verified capex single figures are treated as H2 monitoring items rather than core proof.

Disclaimer: For research and information purposes only. Not investment advice. Names cited are for analytical illustration; readers should perform their own due diligence and consult licensed advisors before any investment decision.