Connect with us

Markets

The Economic Impact of COVID-19, According to Business Leaders

Published

on

The Economic Impact of COVID-19, According to Global Business Leaders

Can I share this graphic?
Yes. Visualizations are free to share and post in their original form across the web—even for publishers. Please link back to this page and attribute Visual Capitalist.
When do I need a license?
Licenses are required for some commercial uses, translations, or layout modifications. You can even whitelabel our visualizations. Explore your options.
Interested in this piece?
Click here to license this visualization.

The Economic Impact of COVID-19: Positives and Negatives

The global pandemic has disrupted business activities worldwide. But COVID-19’s economic impact has varied across regions, and the consequences have been largely dependent on a region’s economic position.

Using survey data from the World Economic Forum’s 20th Global Competitiveness Report, this graphic showcases the economic impact of COVID-19 worldwide. This year’s survey was conducted between February and July 2020 and includes responses from 11,866 business executives across 126 economies.

As you’ll see, the data was collected with the specific focus of contrasting the pandemic’s effects on developing economies compared to advanced economies.

Top Negative Impacts of COVID-19

By comparing business leaders’ responses in 2020 to their answers over the last three years, some clear trends have emerged.

In advanced economies, the top negative economic impact of COVID-19 has been a decline in competition, followed by reduced collaboration between companies and a growing challenge in finding and hiring skilled workers:

RankFactor% Change (2020 vs. 3-Yr Avg)
1Competition in network services-2.9%
2Collaboration between
companies
-2.6%
3Competition
in professional services
-2.3%
4Competition in retail services-1.8%
5Ease of finding skilled employees-1.5%

What’s driving this reduced competition in advanced economies?

One factor could be the increased use of online platforms. Ecommerce is heavily dominated by a select number of retailers. Because of this, bigger retailers like Amazon have seen massive boosts in their online sales, while many smaller brick-and-mortar businesses have been struggling.

While negative impacts on advanced economies are centered around market concentration and talent gaps, developing countries have faced different problems this year, like increased crime and governance issues:

RankFactor% Change (2020 vs. 3-Yr Avg)
1Business costs of crime and violence-2.5%
2Judicial
independence
-2.4%
3Organized crime-1.2%
4Extent of market dominance-0.6%
5Public trust of politicians-0.4%

It’s important to note that in the 2018 and 2019 surveys, organized crime and business costs related to crime and violence were trending downward. Because of this, the World Economic Forum suggests that we consider this year’s increase in these areas as as a temporary COVID-induced setback rather than a long-term issue.

Top Positive Impacts of COVID-19

Despite the struggles brought on by COVID-19, the pandemic has also triggered positive change. In fact, business leaders perceived more positive developments this year than negative ones.

In advanced economies, the top positive impacts were government responsiveness to change, followed by internal collaboration within companies:

RankFactor% Change (2020 vs. 3-Yr Avg)
1Government's responsiveness to change8.2%
2Collaboration within a company4.6%
3Venture capital availability4.4%
4Social safety net protection4.2%
5Soundness of banks4.0%

Interestingly, internal collaboration improved while external collaboration got worse. This is likely because companies had to adapt to changing work environments, while also learning how to collaborate with one another through remote working.

Internal collaboration didn’t just improve in advanced economies. In fact, developing economies experienced several of the top positive impacts that advanced economies saw as well:

RankFactor % Change (2020 vs. 3-Yr Avg)
1Collaboration within a company6.9%
2Government's responsiveness to change6.8%
3Efficiency of train transport services5.9%
4Venture capital availability5.9%
5Country capacity to attract talent5.8%

While perceptions on official responsiveness to change increased, public trust in politicians decreased slightly. This indicates that, while government responses to COVID-19 may have been received well in developing economies, overall feelings towards political leaders did not waiver.

How Have Countries Stayed Strong During the Pandemic?

While the impacts of COVID-19 varied between advanced and developing economies, business leaders across the board identified some common features that helped countries remain resilient:

  1. Economic digitization and digital skills
    Social distancing has been a key response to the pandemic. Because of this, countries that were set up for remote work have fared better than others. Netherlands, New Zealand, and Finland are a few examples.
  2. Safety nets and financial soundness
    Countries with established support systems for companies and citizens were in a better position to keep their economies afloat. Denmark and Norway provided much-needed support to their households, while Taiwan and the U.S. were able to aid businesses thanks to strong financial systems.
  3. Governance and planning
    Balancing health priorities with economic and fiscal policies was a delicate dance this year. Countries that provided relatively stable political frameworks were Singapore, Luxembourg, Austria, and the United Arab Emirates.
  4. Healthcare system and R&D
    A strong healthcare system meant widespread access to health services needed during the pandemic, as well as established public health protocols. Japan, Spain, and Taiwan were good examples of this.

Will these key features of competitiveness remain effective measures of a strong economy in 2021, or will our benchmarks for success evolve post-pandemic?

Click for Comments

Markets

3 Reasons Why AI Enthusiasm Differs from the Dot-Com Bubble

Valuations are much lower than they were during the dot-com bubble, but what else sets the current AI enthusiasm apart?

Published

on

Two bubbles sized according to the forward p/e ratio of the Nasdaq 100 Index during the dot-com bubble (60.1X) and the current AI Enthusiasm (26.4x).

Published

on

The following content is sponsored by New York Life Investments

3 Reasons Why AI Enthusiasm Differs from the Dot-Com Bubble

Artificial intelligence, like the internet during the dot-com bubble, is getting a lot of attention these days. In the second quarter of 2023, 177 S&P 500 companies mentioned “AI” during their earnings call, nearly triple the five-year average.

Not only that, companies that mentioned “AI” saw their stock price rise 13.3% from December 2022 to September 2023, compared to 1.5% for those that didn’t.

In this graphic from New York Life Investments, we look at current market conditions to find out if AI could be the next dot-com bubble.

Comparing the Dot-Com Bubble to Today

In the late 1990s, frenzied optimism for internet-related stocks led to a rapid rise in valuations and an eventual market crash in the early 2000s. By the time the market hit rock bottom, the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 Index had dropped 82% from its peak.

The growing enthusiasm for AI has some concerned that it could be the next dot-com bubble. But here are three reasons that the current environment is different.

1. Valuations Are Lower

Stock valuations are much lower than they were at the peak of the dot-com bubble. For example, the forward price-to-earnings ratio of the Nasdaq 100 is significantly lower than it was in 2000.

DateForward P/E Ratio
March 200060.1x
November 202326.4x

Source: CNBC, Barron’s

Lower valuations are an indication that investors are putting more emphasis on earnings and stocks are less at risk of being overvalued.

2. Investors Are More Hesitant

During the dot-com bubble, flows to equity funds increased by 76% from 1999 to 2000.

YearCombined ETF and Mutual Fund Flows to Equity Funds
1997$231B
1998$163B
1999$200B
2000$352B
2001$63B
2002$14B

In contrast, equity fund flows have been negative in 2022 and 2023.

YearCombined ETF and Mutual Fund Flows to Equity Funds
2021$295B
2022-$54B
2023*-$137B

Source: Investment Company Institute
*2023 data is from January to September.

Based on fund flows, investors appear hesitant of stocks, rather than overly exuberant.

3. Companies Are More Established

Leading up to the internet bubble, the number of technology IPOs increased substantially.

YearNumber of Technology IPOsMedian Age
19971748
19981137
19993704
20002615
2001249
2002209

Many of these companies were relatively new and, at the peak of the bubble in 2000, only 14% of them were profitable.

In recent years, there have been far fewer tech IPOs as companies wait for more positive market conditions. And those that have gone public, the median age is much higher.

YearNumber of Technology IPOsMedian Age
20204812
202112612
2022615

Ultimately, many of the companies benefitting from AI are established companies that are already publicly traded. New, unproven companies are much less common in public markets.

Navigating Modern Tech Amid Dot-Com Bubble Worries

Valuations, equity flows, and the shortage of tech IPOs all suggest that AI isn’t shaping up to be the next dot-com bubble.

However, risk is still present in the market. For instance, only 33% of tech companies that went public in 2022 were profitable. Investors can help manage their risk by keeping a diversified portfolio rather than choosing individual stocks.

Visual Capitalist Logo

Explore more insights from New York Life Investments.

Click for Comments

You may also like

Subscribe

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Popular